Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubbleblower
@dgi Nobody is actually accused of cheating.
How are you so sure that is the reason for not paying the money?
I don't know of any other means in which a gambling establishment is allow to not honor the action or bets they take.
They can deny your bets, they can cut you off at any time, they can ban you, they can refuse to take your action...
but they CANNOT take your action and then REFUSE to pay you without evidence that you cheated.
If I were playing at Bellagio, and winning. And then, Bellagio discovers that I'm a serial killer pedophile cheating racist nazi cannibal... that doesn't give them the magical ability to not pay me what i've won in that session unless they have proof that I cheated that session.
Sure, they can cut me off, ban me, etc. But they would be obligated by the law to pay me for my action and the bets they took.
I must be missing something because I know of no other reason why a casino can withhold funds with all the facts we know of...
Either Phil Ivey cheated or he didn't. And the evidence and logic says that he DID NOT cheat.... So, my position is that Crockfords is trying to weasel out of paying him and eventually they will lose in court...