Later this week, the United Kingdom’s Supreme Court will hear the case of Phil Ivey vs Crockfords. More specifically, the court will rule on whether it is possible to be an “honest cheat”.
The Phil Ivey vs Crockfords saga has been ongoing for a number of years.
It was 2012 when Ivey and an associate, Cheng Yin Sun, won roughly 7.7 million pounds playing Punto Banco at London’s Crockfords Judi Online.
After an investigation, Crockfords determined that Ivey had used “edge sorting” to win and that they would not be returning Ivey’s winnings. A lawsuit from Ivey followed and the two sides have been involved in litigation ever since.
The news went from bad to worse for Ivey, as the Borgata in Atlantic City heard about the Crockfords situation and determined that Ivey had also won a significant amount of money from them ($9.6 million) using edge sorting. They eventually launched a lawsuit to get their money returned.
An appeals court ruled in 2016 that although Ivey had legitimately believed that he was not cheating, edge sorting was still not a “legitimate strategy”. After the appeals court made their ruling, Ivey openly wondered “how you can have honest cheating”.
This is what the Supreme Court will attempt to determine later this week in the UK.
An unfavorable ruling for Ivey would obviously be a very big blow for him financially, as he stands to lose roughly $20 million if the Crockfords and Borgata cases end up going against him, plus the untold amounts of money that he has likely spent on legal fees.