Phil Ivey Loses Crockfords Cheating Case

Professional poker player Phil Ivey has lost a lawsuit wherein he was sued by the Crockfords Casino of cheating the casino out of £7.7 million thanks to a card flaw.

Ivey originally won the money while playing Punto Banco at Crockfords in 2012, exploiting a flaw in the playing cards to tell what cards were coming up. The technique, called edge sorting, was the center issue of the lawsuit, as the casino claimed it was not a legitimate gambling strategy. The casino caught on and seized the £7.7 million that Ivey was originally awarded and Ivey filed suit against them.

The case was originally settled in the casino's favor in 2016 and Ivey appealed the case. This time five justices unanimously ruled against him, noting that the poker pro had interfered with the way that the casino typically plays the game by using deception and dishonesty. Ivey noted that he never touched the cards, instead telling the casino that he was superstitious and requested that they rotate the cards, which he then identified using the edge sorting technique. This constituted cheating according to the court.

Speaking about the case Crockfords attorney Stephen Parkinson said, "This is one of the most significant decisions in criminal law in a generation. The concept of dishonesty is central to a whole range of offences, including fraud. For 35 years, juries have been told that defendants will only be guilty if the conduct complained of was dishonest by the standards of ordinary, reasonable and honest people, and also that they must have realised that ordinary, honest people would regard their behaviour as dishonest."

"The supreme court has now said that this second limb of the test does not represent the law and that directions based upon it ought no longer to be given by the courts."

About the author

5 replies • Last post

Comments

bgsharpe
Forum Angel
sharpe's picture
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Joined: 4 Nov 2014
Posts: 6426
Thanks given: 2977
Thanks received: 896
25 October 2017 - 6:11pm
#1

Well the casino needs a new cards obviously.
I wonder what the consequences would have for Ivey, to return the winnings those 7.7$ in winnings would be enough I think, in the end that wasn't a crime before that court decision.

auCL-Ed
StaffStaff
CL-Ed's picture
Location: Sydney
Joined: 7 Sep 2007
Posts: 8462
Thanks given: 4549
Thanks received: 3933
25 October 2017 - 10:23pm
#2

One thing I think is key to this is that I am pretty sure I remember reading that he and his partner either supplied their own cards or asked the casino to use a specific brand of cards, and they agreed. Really they should be compelled to pay him just for being stupid enough to accept his demands. There is no doubt it was a premeditated attempt to deceive the casino into giving him an advantage. Whether you agree that is "cheating" vs advantage play as Ivey claims is up for debate I suppose.

sharpe

Always play it safe! Consult our list of rogue casinos and warnings before depositing at a new casino.
Post in our forums to earn CLchips which can be used to buy real prizes in our CLchips shop.

bgsharpe
Forum Angel
sharpe's picture
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Joined: 4 Nov 2014
Posts: 6426
Thanks given: 2977
Thanks received: 896
26 October 2017 - 6:24pm
#3

Good explanation Ed, I think the casino wanted some free advertising as they agreed to the Ivey's demands, he's famous after all, even more so now...

auCL-Ed
StaffStaff
CL-Ed's picture
Location: Sydney
Joined: 7 Sep 2007
Posts: 8462
Thanks given: 4549
Thanks received: 3933
27 October 2017 - 5:53am
#4

I am sure they were just thinking of the money and the stakes he was going to wager. I'm just trying to understand their thought process: here is one of the world's best poker players wanting to play baccarat, but only if they use the cards he likes, and then he starts telling them to rotate the cards as he plays "for luck". At what point do they start being suspicious? It must have been pretty obvious something was up. Maybe they knew all along and figured they would never pay him if he won, so they were just freerolling on his buy-in.

sharpe

Always play it safe! Consult our list of rogue casinos and warnings before depositing at a new casino.
Post in our forums to earn CLchips which can be used to buy real prizes in our CLchips shop.

bgsharpe
Forum Angel
sharpe's picture
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Joined: 4 Nov 2014
Posts: 6426
Thanks given: 2977
Thanks received: 896
27 October 2017 - 10:10am
#5

Yeah, that's one of the possibilities, but could they've been just foolish enough to think famous poker player couldn't cheat at all, in the end 7.7$ mill is maybe too much to let go even if you're over confident you''ll get those funds back.
Not a bad publicity either.