Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Famed poker pro with ‘remarkable’ $9.6M scheme has to pay it back

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 213 posts

Re: Famed poker pro with ‘remarkable’ $9.6M scheme has to pay it back

#111

Post by brianwawok »

mattmaroon wrote: post #91
lordnacho wrote: post #80

The casino operators need to think about the law of large numbers. If you have an edge, what you want is for a bunch of little guys to bet against you. Your certainty of winning against a million little bets is enormous, if you have an edge. And you do, because those games are made that way. What you don't want to do is bet a few big bets. You might be smarter than me at guessing the outcome of an election, or a coin…

The casinos more than understand this. They can tell you the break down between whales and average gamblers. The problem is there's a really uneven distribution. They probably get 50% of the wagers from 1% of the gamblers. But they still have enough whales that they rarely have a losing day.

I think he overestimates the whale size.

If indeed a whale was betting 100 million on black or red at roulette, and the total bankroll of the casino was 500 million.. it would be very easy for the casino to go under.

But if the max bet on a spin of roulette is 1 million dollars, and the casino has 1 billion dollar bankroll.. you can do the math of the odds of a whale busting the casino. Hint: It does not look good

Re: Famed poker pro with ‘remarkable’ $9.6M scheme has to pay it back

#112

Post by jordonias »

IshKebab wrote: post #60

This is a classic magic trick as old as this hills isn't it? You sort a deck of cards so that the backs are all oriented one way (the pattern on the back is usually not exactly in the centre), and then you rotate the chosen card 180 degrees so you can relocate it even after shuffling. I don't know the name of the trick but I learnt it as a child.

edge sorting

Re: Famed poker pro with ‘remarkable’ $9.6M scheme has to pay it back

#113

Post by zild3d »

ceejay wrote: post #73

It's beyond belief that people spend money to gamble at casinos. It's one thing to know with 100% certainty that the house has the odds in their favor. But an entirely different beast to know that AND know that if you do find ways to win the casinos will still do everything in their power to prevent you from taking home the winnings.

> It's beyond belief that people spend money to gamble at casinos.

You're looking at it wrong then. 1) Going to the casino isn't looked at as a profitable job, it's entertainment. You can pay to see a concert, go to a bar, or in this case (maybe) pay to have some excitement 2) Free rooms are very common 3) Free drinks are standard

Instead of going to a bar and paying $8/drink, the drinks are free while you are gambling. That alone makes it "beyond belief" that anyone would go to a bar no?

Re: Famed poker pro with ‘remarkable’ $9.6M scheme has to pay it back

#114

Post by Steeeve »

gremlinsinc wrote: post #23
techsupporter wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know what part of the law it supposedly broke, but it seems like the judge believes that the player in the casino has a legal obligation to be a sucker. I went and had a go at the New Jersey Casino Control Act and I believe that the judge is saying that Ivey violated 5:12-114(2), which states: "It shall be unlawful for any person playing any licensed gambling game knowingly to use bogus or counterfeit chips…

wouldn't that same law then negate any and ALL winnings the casino has ever had from Baccarat, because anyone who has ever lost could come forward and counter sue them for breach of the same contract and there'd be no way to prove one way or the other, they'd have to nullify out all past/present games. I think it's best not to set a legal precedent, and for the casino to take their hit, and tighten up security of the…

It would negate winnings from games using those specific cards where some of the cards were specifically rotated.

Re: Famed poker pro with ‘remarkable’ $9.6M scheme has to pay it back

#115

Post by nathanvanfleet »

So essentially one of them cracked and admitted it? Or they bragged to someone? I can't understand how they would have otherwise found out about the scheme. It seems as if they just kept tight lipped about it, stuck to their requests being a superstition, they would be fine.

Re: Famed poker pro with ‘remarkable’ $9.6M scheme has to pay it back

#116

Post by wehadfun »

jlebrech wrote: post #65

you could exploit max bet if they allowed it. you start at $1 and if you lose you double your bet, and when you win you reset your bet back to $1.

I think the best way play $1 if you win play $1 if louse play $1 and enjoy the free drinks and conversation with your buddies.

Re: Famed poker pro with ‘remarkable’ $9.6M scheme has to pay it back

#117

Post by recursive »

harryh wrote: post #87
benmmurphy wrote: post #68

Were these cards used to run other games in the casino? Is the casino now going to take steps to refund all the players that partook in games with these marked cards?

Given that these cards could only give the player an advantage and never the house your proposal doesn't make any sense.

The rule is about using marked cards, not granting an advantage.

Re: Famed poker pro with ‘remarkable’ $9.6M scheme has to pay it back

#118

Post by lordnacho »

pc86 wrote: post #110
lordnacho wrote: post #80

The casino operators need to think about the law of large numbers. If you have an edge, what you want is for a bunch of little guys to bet against you. Your certainty of winning against a million little bets is enormous, if you have an edge. And you do, because those games are made that way. What you don't want to do is bet a few big bets. You might be smarter than me at guessing the outcome of an election, or a coin…

If it's that easy then you should be able to make quite a bit of money in that industry.

But if you have the probability/gambling side down, your problem isn't that.

Your issue is how to spend less on marketing and entertainment than what you get from winnings, because there's competing casinos as well.

I suspect what's happened is there's some guy in the casino who actually does know how the numbers work, they just get overruled by an eager manager who is optimizing a different schedule.

Re: Famed poker pro with ‘remarkable’ $9.6M scheme has to pay it back

#119

Post by plafl »

mattmaroon wrote: post #88
codedokode wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if Ivey would lost the game, could he request to get his money back because the game was "unlawful"?

No. The casino doesn't know the cards are "marked".

Probably, but we really don't know

Re: Famed poker pro with ‘remarkable’ $9.6M scheme has to pay it back

#120

Post by segmondy »

Hopefully he has his assets protected and can file for bankruptcy. Worse than having to pay back his winning, which he probably has paid some taxes on and spent some. He's probably ruined and most places will not allow him to play at their tables. How he is ever going to make back the money to play?
Post reply on HN