...what Crockfords casino in London says is true, and I think it is.
Phil Ivey is now suing Crockfords to force them to pay him the $12 million he won playing baccarat with a superhot foxy companion. Of course he had to sue. If he didn´t, it would almost be an admission of guilt.
Crockfords says that the cards used in the baccarat game were defective and that their values could be read from flaws on the backs of the cards when they were face-down...and, more importantly, Ivey and his pretty lady companion knew it.
According to Crockfords, Ivey entered the casino, quickly got stuck for 800 hundred grand, then went on a multiple-play $13 million winning streak over a period of two days. They became suspicious when Ivey made some peculiar requests during his play. The first thing that bugged them (and it would bug me too) is Ivey's asking that the dealers hold the cards on the felt, in some cases lifting them in the air, before he made his bets. That would correspond with Ivey able to read the card markings on the backs of the cards. If the dealers dealt the game normally, it would not have mattered if the cards were defected or marked as the dealers hands and the card shoe would have protected them until well after Ivey and his gal-pal made their bets.
The second self-incriminating action by Ivey was his insistence that the casino keep re-using the same baccarat cards after each shuffle. Casinos all across the world now trash the six or eight decks used in a baccarat shoe after every shoe to protect themselves against the now epidemic baccarat false-shuffling cheat scams as well as other baccarat scams. Ivey's insistence that the casino re-use cards is more evidence that these cards were marked by factory defect.
So, you may wonder, why would Phil Ivey, international poker star with rock star status, and extremely wealthy, want to involve himself in a casino cheat scam such as this? Well, my answer to this would simply be: Why would Donald Trump want to build another building or casino? Get it? There never is enough money in the world for these guys.
I have been asked how Ivey would have gotten in contact with someone supplying defective cards to the casino. Did someone contact him? Or did Phil Ivey himself design and orchestrate this huge casino cheat scam?
Well, that one I cannot answer; I simply don't know, but the possibilities are endless. The only things I am sure about is that Phil Ivey knew those cards were defective, thus effectively marked, and Crockfords casino personnel did not know this. I am convinced that no one working for the casino was involved.
Anything that convinces me of Ivey's guilt is that Crockfords simply refused to pay Ivey's winnings, only cashing out his original gambling stake. i mean, the last thing any casino in the world wants, let alone a posh British Londonian gaming club, is to be branded a casino that does not pay its big winners. So they really have to have the goods on Ivey, a hugely popular poker star who will surely have tons of sympathy from the majority of people reading about this story.
So what will become of all this?
It will simply go away. Ivey will either drop his lawsuit, or more probably the UK courts will drop it for him. No way is Ivey getting paid, and I'm pretty certain that Phil Ivey is now a major casino cheat...
One more thing: I think I know who his lovely casino-cheating sidekick is; I once worked with her mother if I am right!
And as I understand it, she has already been involved in two other incidents where high-rolling winning gamblers were refused payment in London casinos.