Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

How A Professional Poker Player Conned a Casino Out of $9.6 Million (washingtonpost.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the marking-the-cards dept.

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.

23 of 406 comments (clear)

  1. Remember kids! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Only the casinos are allowed to cheat you out of your money!

    1. Re:Remember kids! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Only the casinos are allowed to cheat you out of your money!

      That's exactly it though, the local government grants an exception to the casino allowing it to run rigged games of chance in return for a portion of the profits.

      The only winning move is not to play.

    2. Re:Remember kids! by Sarten-X · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It depends on your definition of "winning".

      If you are entertained by playing games of chance, the small percentage the house takes is your bill for the night's entertainment. Everybody knows the deal going in.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    3. Re:Remember kids! by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Only the casinos are allowed to cheat you out of your money!

      How exactly are the casinos cheating?

      The odds are certainly in their favor, as any reasonable person knows. They don't have to cheat to make lots of money.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    4. Re:Remember kids! by retchdog · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "they harass or physically threaten them."

      i suspect that they first ask them to leave, and after that formally evict them, and inform them that they are trespassing. maybe they skip the asking nicely part; that's okay.

      but if the silly gits still don't leave, well, yeah, willful trespassers are often treated poorly. this is hardly unique to casinos; i've seen more than a few slashdotters commenting in gleeful terms about how they'd not hesitate to shotgun anyone trespassing on their property.

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    5. Re: Remember kids! by AK+Marc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Nope. It's actually rigged. Watch the slots. They'll almost always "stop" one away from a big win. They are programmed to win a certain amount of the time, but being one away from a big win counts as a 100% loss to the count, while counting as a "win" in the human brain.

      They exploit human weakness in a deliberate manner to harm those that play the games. That's "rigged" even if it doesn't explicitly change the payout numbers.

      --
      Learn to love Alaska
    6. Re: Remember kids! by valdezjuan · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The casinos know who has problems, just like they know they tamper with the air to make people feel more euphoric, not to mention the carpets and the very layout is designed to confuse you and keep you in.

    7. Re:Remember kids! by TapeCutter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Turnabout is fair play.

      Two wrongs don't make a right. Marked cards are cheating, period. He knew it was cheating and is only sorry he got caught.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  2. He cheated OTHER players by gurps_npc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    1. Re: He cheated OTHER players by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He also got a green light from the casino on all the things he requested. I can't understand the judge's logic in this at all. They should have just denied his request knowing he was asking for these things to gain an advantage. They gambled that his requests would give him no advantage and they lost, but yet cry foul after the fact. A

    2. Re: He cheated OTHER players by ClickOnThis · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He also got a green light from the casino on all the things he requested. I can't understand the judge's logic in this at all. They should have just denied his request knowing he was asking for these things to gain an advantage. They gambled that his requests would give him no advantage and they lost, but yet cry foul after the fact. A

      As TFA explains, some baccarat players have may superstitions. The casinos have no problem indulging such superstitions when, on their face, they don't appear to impart an advantage to the player. The fact that the casino didn't notice what these players were doing until later is irrelevant. The players cheated. The judge made the right decision in finding with the casino.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    3. Re: He cheated OTHER players by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The players cheated.

      They did not mark any cards, they noticed a flaw that could be used as a mark. No rule of the casino was broken, they're nullifying it because state law says the presence of marked cards means the game is not lawfully played and thus void regardless of whose fault that is. But this means that all games played with this deck should be declared void, every win and every loss. Otherwise you're saying the casino can write the values on the back of the card, they win it was a fair game but you win and they call foul. So I'm actually with Ivey on this one, he's played with the same deck under the same rules as other players but they're cancelling just his games because he won. That's not a legally sound reasoning.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re: He cheated OTHER players by AK+Marc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Casino played with marked cards. He just noticed and used that to his advantage. If the house marks the cards, is it illegal to read the marks?

      --
      Learn to love Alaska
    5. Re: He cheated OTHER players by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No rule of the casino was broken, they're nullifying it because state law says the presence of marked cards means the game is not lawfully played and thus void regardless of whose fault that is.

      Exactly. A lot of people posting here are missing the legal reasoning of the ruling, which is NOT based on the fact that these two guys acted fraudulently, but rather the fact that the game was VOID from the start because it did not conform to the rules for LEGAL gambling and gaming under state law.

      But there's something very odd about using that reasoning in this case, because the casino explicitly agreed to the terms of these guys -- including offering a specific card deck, instructing the dealer to turn cards based on player's instructions, instructing the dealer NOT to disturb card rotation prior to reshuffles, etc. That all is suspicious enough, and casinos generally do NOT allow players to dictate that many rules to avoid PRECISELY these kinds of problems. I'd imagine the only reason they allowed it in this case is because they hoped to sucker more money out of a high profile gambler. Unfortunately, their strategy of offering a MODIFIED GAME failed when it was they who were suckered out of money.

      But why does the fault then fall only on the players? From the ruling conclusion:

      As we previously found, by their own design, Ivey and Sun played games at Borgata that violated important provisions of the CCA and thereby breached their agreement with the casino. They must disgorge the benefit they received as a direct result of the breached contract

      Yes, "Ivey and Sun played games" but the casino offered the marked deck and agreed to numerous manipulations that ultimately modified the odds. If this was indeed an "illegal game" under state law, why is the casino not culpable, at least for negligence for failing to adhere to reasonable gaming standards and thereby offering illegal gaming? If a private person ran a flawed game like this, they'd likely end up fined or even in prison. And likely any money transferred during illegal gaming would be confiscated.

      I'm fine if the casino wants to argue that it engaged in offering an illegal game, but by doing so, they should submit to being punished according to provisions for offering illegal gaming in their state (including government confiscation of winnings). But if they don't want to argue they were engaging in illegal gaming by THEMSELVES offering marked cards, etc., then they'll likely just have to admit they were fools and just live with banning these people from their casino in the future, rather than recovering money. Or, they could actually prove the defendants committed FRAUD in some way to void the contract. (And maybe there is enough evidence to support that; I don't know. But it's not the legal reasoning used here.) The way the case was decided is not very consistent legally.

  3. I get this... by Ecuador · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ok, I get this particular instance, it is sort of "cheating", but I still cannot get over how you are somehow not allowed to USE YOUR BRAIN to count cards in order to win in a casino. Yes, I know it is not illegal to count cards (I mean how would someone go around proving it beyond reasonable doubt), but casinos (except in NJ) are allowed to ban players who can win, which is mostly the same thing.
    Anyway, I try not to think about it too much (to avoid having my brain explode), and I just enjoy going to Las Vegas, with the inexpensive luxurious hotels, nice buffets, shows etc and before I leave I try to do my part sustaining the system by dropping a quarter in a slot machine ;)

    --
    Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
    1. Re:I get this... by dbIII · · Score: 4, Insightful

      but I still cannot get over how you are somehow not allowed to USE YOUR BRAIN to count cards in order to win in a casino

      Sadly the rule "only the house is allowed to get ahead because they pay shitloads in taxes and you rubes don't" is enforced by the governments that get money this way. Breaking that rule by using your brain to take advantage of an edge case violates that rule.
      Unfair, but deep down did you every really think it was supposed to be fair?

  4. Fake news != Flawed news by ClickOnThis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The term "fake news" has been thrown about -- and misapplied -- far too freely of late.

    Fake news is a deliberate fiction on the part of the writer, with an intent to deceive.

    It is not the same as a news story reported in good faith, but with errors.

    And BTW, it doesn't matter that it was the dealer who was rotating the cards, not the players. The players tricked the dealer into rotating them so as to change the odds of the game. You can't do that.

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    1. Re:Fake news != Flawed news by thewolfkin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The term "fake news" has been thrown about -- and misapplied -- far too freely of late.

      Fake news is a deliberate fiction on the part of the writer, with an intent to deceive.

      It is not the same as a news story reported in good faith, but with errors.

      And BTW, it doesn't matter that it was the dealer who was rotating the cards, not the players. The players tricked the dealer into rotating them so as to change the odds of the game. You can't do that.

      Actually you can it's quite common in the game for players to have superstitions like this. Rotating certain cards for some mystical/superstitious benefit. The players asked the Casino if they could use this special brand of cards and the Casino agreed. The players asked the Casino if they could rotate the cards and they agreed. The casino got played. They didn't trick anyone, the casino shouldn't have agreed to that brand of cards being used without verifying that they were symmetrical.

      They assumed no one could tell the cards apart and that's on them.

      --
      Just another second banana
  5. Its not cheating by drnb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Remember kids! Only the casinos are allowed to cheat you out of your money!

    Its not cheating you out of anything when you ignore the fact that the statistical probabilities are against you. As my statistics 101 professor explained (literally, he used casino games examples all the time) you are either:

    (1) Paying the "I didn't pay attention in math class" tax.
    or
    (2) Paying someone else to play cards with you.

  6. Mutual Obligation by PPH · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't understand exactly how they violated any 'mutual obligation'. Ivey and Cheng made certain requests of the casino about how they would like to play. The casino agreed to their terms. Granted, Ivey and Cheng had some knowledge that the casino was not privy to, specifically the asymmetrical pattern on the cards. But this was something that the casino should have known (casinos provide the cards). Ivey and Cheng made no attempt to conceal anything from the casino.

    If I engaged in some game with an opponent and I had a better understanding of the mechanics and probabilities than they did, would I be cheating? Would I be under some obligation to explain a playing or betting system that I had developed to my competition?

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  7. FFS, I know exactly what was done... by DeafDumbBlind · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I get how edge sorting (the name of the technique used) works. It's been a known advantage play move for decades and explanation of this exploit has been in print both in advantage play (Abram's casino tactics book) and casino game protection literature(Steve Forte's book). Shame on paid casino managers/executives for not being aware of it.

    It's not illegal to use marked cards if neither you nor a compatriot marked the cards. Look up the case law if you don't believe me. If someone accidentally bends a corner of a card, you don't have to pretend not to notice; you can legally use that info as long as you didn't do it yourself and the guy didn't do it for your benefit.

    I've made the point in other posts, but it's the casino's responsibility to protect their games. The casino provided the cards, the casino trained dealer rotated the cards thus allowing edge sorting to be used, the pit personnel and surveillance observed this, and had no problems with it. Ivy and his partner never touched the cards and didn't alter the cards in any way. This was a social engineering attack on a casino's greed and incompetence, but it was not cheating.

    This was a horrible decision by the judge.

     

    --


    Jesus used to be my co-pilot, but we crashed in the mountains and I had to eat him.
  8. They agreed to the cards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The Casino agreed to the cards, so this forms part of the rules. This agreement was also up front, a choice both sides were free to agree or not and the Casino agreed it.

    Reversing this decision is cheating for the Casino.

    1. Re:They agreed to the cards by gravewax · · Score: 4, Insightful

      actually no because there is an overarching agreement that both parties are bound too which cannot be changed through agreements between the players and casino and those are the gaming regulations (Casino Control Act) which explicitly forbid the use of marked cards which Ivey has tricked the Casino into using and hence by doing so made the game invalid/illegal. Love to see Casino's get screwed but seems reversing it is the right decision as Ivey broke the gaming regulations by cheating.