Is Edge Sorting legal?

Edge sorting is a technique used by Phil Ivey in baccarat that saw him win £7.7 million British pounds in a London casino that ultimately decided not to pay him, and this casino successfully defended themselves from legal action brought by Phil ivey.

The controversial baccarat play took place at Crockfords Casino in London in 2012. Mr Ivey relied on edge sorting, which involves spotting subtle flaws in the patterns on the back of playing cards. These flaws occur during the manufacturing process, resulting in asymmetrical designs. Ivey, with the help of an accomplice, Cheung Yin “Kelly” Sun, convinced the casino to use a specific brand of cards and rotate certain cards during play under the guise of superstition. This allowed them to identify high-value cards and gain an edge over the house.

The process by which he gained an edge on the house was interesting. In baccarat, if you know the first card to be drawn at the start of each game you can gain a 5.5% edge against the casino if you bet player when you know the first drawn card will be a 7, 8 or 9, and if you bet banker where you know the first card will not be a 7,8 or 9.

Ivey was using the same set of cards over and over and he rotated the 7, 8 and 9 cards so they were in the down position, and he left all other cards in the up position. As he had an edge sorting specialist with him, the edge sorter was able to identify if the card was up or down. So at the start of each game, the edge sorter knew that if the card was in the down position, it must be a 7, 8 or 9, and that Ivey should bet on player, and that if it was in the up position he should bet on banker.

While edge sorting doesn’t involve physically altering cards or using devices, the casino refused to pay out Ivey’s winnings on the basis that his actions violated the principle of fair play. The case escalated to the UK High Court, where the central legal question was whether edge sorting constituted cheating.

The court ruled against Ivey, stating that while he hadn’t acted dishonestly in a criminal sense, he had breached the casino’s rules by manipulating the game to his advantage. The judge emphasized that Ivey’s conduct undermined the spirit of the game, rendering his actions unlawful under civil law. The UK Supreme Court upheld this decision in 2017, cementing the principle that exploiting a game through skillful observation can still amount to cheating if it contravenes the casino’s intended fairness.

Ivey, who is regarded as an absolute legend in the gambling world, has consistently maintained that he used skill, not cheating, to win. The case remains a landmark in gambling law, illustrating how exploiting vulnerabilities in a game can straddle the line between legal advantage and unlawful manipulation. While we personally think that Ivey was cheated out of a substantial sum of money by the legal interpretation used in his case, we respect that this is the interpretation that is likely to be applied by courts both internationally and within the UK for the foreseeable future.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *