Slashdot Mirror
How A Professional Poker Player Conned a Casino Out of $9.6 Million (washingtonpost.com)
Phil Ivey is a professional poker player who's won ten World Series of Poker bracelets -- but he's also got a new game. An anonymous reader write:
In 2012, Ivey requested that the Borgata casino let him play baccarat with an assistant named Cheng Yin Sun while using a specific brand of playing cards -- purple Gemaco Borgata playing cards -- and an automatic shuffler. He then proceeded to win $9.6 million over four visits. The pair would rotate certain cards 180 degrees, which allowed them to recognize those cards the next time they passed through the deck. (They were exploiting a minute lack of a symmetry in the pattern on the backs of the cards...)
But last month a U.S. district judge ruled that Ivey and his partner had a "mutual obligation" to the casino, in which their "primary obligation" was to not use cards whose values would be known to them -- and ordered them to return the $9.6 million [PDF]. "What this ruling says is a player is prohibited from combining his skill and intellect and visual acuity to beat the casino at its own game," Ivey's attorney told the AP, adding that the judge's ruling will be appealed.
The judge also ruled Ivey had to return the money he later won playing craps with his winnings from the baccarat game -- though the judge denied the casino's request for restitution over the additional $250,000 worth of goods and services they'd "comped" Ivey during his stay.
But last month a U.S. district judge ruled that Ivey and his partner had a "mutual obligation" to the casino, in which their "primary obligation" was to not use cards whose values would be known to them -- and ordered them to return the $9.6 million [PDF]. "What this ruling says is a player is prohibited from combining his skill and intellect and visual acuity to beat the casino at its own game," Ivey's attorney told the AP, adding that the judge's ruling will be appealed.
The judge also ruled Ivey had to return the money he later won playing craps with his winnings from the baccarat game -- though the judge denied the casino's request for restitution over the additional $250,000 worth of goods and services they'd "comped" Ivey during his stay.
They are not rigged. It's a tax on those with poor reasoning skills. Twenty some odd years ago I worked as a dealer in a casino. One night this really drunk guy swore the big six wheel was being stopped by the carpeted box under the table. Security handed him the box and kicked him out the front door.
When you play baccarat, you are playing against other customers, never the Casino's money.
Did the casino return the money to the other PLAYERS he cheated?
Or did they simply keep the ill-gotten gains?
Also, he deserved to keep the money he won in other games. That was bull. Money is fungible, he made those bets and won.
incorrect, there are multiple variants of Baccarat including ones where you are playing against the house
The house doesn't cheat. It plays by a set of rules that mathematically work out in its favor. It tells you this up front. The closest thing the house does to cheating is having a house limit.
The slots are rigged. They appear "random". They are not. They are programmed to show a near-jackpot for every loss. This tricks the human brain into thinking they are doing better than they are. If they literally displayed a random result, they'd be legit. But the outcome is statistically determined, and the losses are deliberately rigged to show a near-jackpot to trick people into playing more.
If casinos weren't cheating, they'd actually display random results for every win and loss. They don't. They are cheating, and they know it. They cheat as much as allowed by law. That it's legal cheating doesn't make it non-cheating.
Learn to love Alaska