Phil Ivey allegedly cheated to win £7.8mln - Page 2

the article says the told the dealer they were very supersticious

"the cards were flawed because of a mistake during the cutting process at an overseas manufacturing plant.

Crucially, it meant their geometric pattern was not symmetrical, though this would not have been noticeable to the untrained eye"



I don't know punto banco game, but just being not symmetrical doesn't let you know what the card is, it wont help you win at Hold'em for example.
It helps you for things like locating a card but for this all the deck must be facing one way except the card you are looking for.

so, i dont understand how ivey could have cheated just with a not symmetrical deck

lol @ lawyer rake

On May 15 2013 21:46 Jelle wrote: the article says the told the dealer they were very supersticious

Phil has seemed pretty superstitious from the cash games I've watched of him, so it's not that unbelievable

So the fact that he won that money with someone who's allegedly a cheater does not make anyone suspicious just a little bit ?

On May 21 2013 17:15 Ad wrote: So the fact that he won that money with someone who's allegedly a cheater does not make anyone suspicious just a little bit ?

Isn't Phil Ivey then an alleged cheater because he won that money with smeone who is allegedly a cheater?

Circular logic works because circular logic works because circular logic works -

(I know this is not literally an example of circular logic but come on...)

On May 22 2013 14:20 taco wrote: Show nested quote + On May 21 2013 17:15 Ad wrote: So the fact that he won that money with someone who's allegedly a cheater does not make anyone suspicious just a little bit ? Isn't Phil Ivey then an alleged cheater because he won that money with smeone who is allegedly a cheater? Circular logic works because circular logic works because circular logic works - (I know this is not literally an example of circular logic but come on...)

There is nothing circular about that logic what are you smoking

I don't know why this hasn't been said, or said to greater effect.
If he cheated, it's fucking awesome that Ivey could get away with it (seems like he will), and I wouldn't be surprised if I was somehow making more money on the side finding ways to beat table games than poker.

On May 22 2013 14:20 taco wrote: Show nested quote + On May 21 2013 17:15 Ad wrote: So the fact that he won that money with someone who's allegedly a cheater does not make anyone suspicious just a little bit ? Isn't Phil Ivey then an alleged cheater because he won that money with smeone who is allegedly a cheater?

No. He is innocent until proven guilty.However I just wonder after all that has happened, why does the poker community put so much trust in these tv poker celebrities.

If it was your job at that casino to make sure would you not investigate because "OMG he's Phil Ivy" ?

Either way I dont see how did he cheat even if he did that. Its the casino's mistake Ivey just used the opportunity. Next time fix your shit before letting highrollers play

and how they gonna prove that deck was flawed they got super camera tapes where u can see card flaws? i doubt that.

On May 22 2013 17:32 KoeBawlt wrote: There is nothing circular about that logic what are you smoking

Someone is an alleged cheater for perhaps winning something with an alleged cheater
and then someone is "suspicious" (and alleged for cheating) for winning something with the alleged cheater, who was alleged of cheating for winning something with someone who was an alleged cheater....

This can go on forever until someone says "Wait why the hell is that suspect enough to call someone a cheater?"

On May 23 2013 00:16 Spitfiree wrote: Either way I dont see how did he cheat even if he did that. Its the casino's mistake Ivey just used the opportunity. Next time fix your shit before letting highrollers play

Except that he (she / they) "allegedly" told the dealer to rotate some cards on purpose because of "superstition". Come on, really?

so cheating is terrible, but if its phil ivey, its okay, because he's phil ivey.

seems like the casino withheld payment and was content to keep everything private, but now both sides are going to sling mud at each other while paying their lawyers.

If someone opens a business and you find a way to legally exploit their business model to make a profit that's their fault, not yours.

All that remains to be seen is if this is actually true and if so is it actually legal...

On May 26 2013 05:50 ThereBePoker wrote: If someone opens a business and you find a way to legally exploit their business model to make a profit that's their fault, not yours. All that remains to be seen is if this is actually true and if so is it actually legal...

If you realize the cameras in the convenience store dont cover certain areas, do you steal?

no one wants to be cheated

On May 26 2013 05:50 ThereBePoker wrote: If someone opens a business and you find a way to legally exploit their business model to make a profit that's their fault, not yours. All that remains to be seen is if this is actually true and if so is it actually legal...

+ Show Spoiler +