Instead of the WSOP stopping and resuming in November, this year it was different. The series concluded in July with Scott Blumstein crowned winner. It was the third largest event in its history with 7221 entrants. Like other events, this was spread over several days or “flights”. The final nine who came out millionaires from the tournament battled it out for supremacy.
The field was half amateurs with little or no earnings playing poker and the other half poker pros with millions in previous earnings. This shows flexibility of poker that anyone can win from anywhere. It’s not restricted by experience or other factors.
Scott Blumstein pulled it off this time around. In the process, he gets his first bracelet and $8.15 million dollars. He was the youngest player at the table at 25. His previous largest cash was almost $200000 in the Borgota Summer Poker Open July 2016.
The final hand of the game came in a pair of deuces with the deuce appearing on the river. When everyone thought Ott would win with an ace, seven combo the deuce sent everyone in disbelief. Blumstein took the title with a deuce!
The top winners for the tournament were:
1 Scott Blumstein $8,150,000
2 Daniel Ott $4,700,000
3 Benjamin Pollak $3,500,000
4 John Hesp $2,600,000
5 Antoine Saout $2,000,000
6 Bryan Piccioli $1,675,000
7 Damian Salas $1,425,000
8 Jack Sinclair $1,200,000
9 Ben Lamb $1,000,000
Poker Hall of Fame Inducts Phil Ivey and David Ulliott
The Poker Hall of Fame inducted Phil Ivey and David Ulliott. The other potential members included David Chui, Matt Savage, Mori Eskandani, Max Pescatori, Ted Forrest, Mike Matusow and Thor Hansen.
Ivey, with 10 bracelets and over 23 million in live poker earnings was eligible after turning 40. In a written statement he felt honored to be included and recognized he was lucky to be able to make a living playing poker. He also said he’s just as passionate about the game now as when he started.
David Ulliott is a lesser known British poker pro who died in 2015 from cancer.
In order to be considered players must be 40 or older, played in major competitions for high stakes, earn the respect of their peers. You don’t have to be a poker player to be inducted though for those who aren’t players, they must contribute to the growth of the game with positive results.
Phil Ivey wins an appeal on the edge sorting case by the United Kingdom Supreme Court. In November, the court ruled against him in the case where he was unable to collect nearly 8 million GBP in casino winnings from the Crockford casino. He maintains his innocence and stated he was merely using “edge sorting”. Edge Sorting is a form of sorting the cards giving the player and edge based on the design on the back of the cards giving a small player advantage. The appeal will give him more time to present his case.
Many people have speculated the reason the court gave the first decision to the Crockford and other casinos that since joined in not paying Ivey or requesting their money back is the close relation between the tax roll the casinos provide to the local governments and the casinos. If the casino loses money, it closes and there goes many local jobs. A loss that big could cripple even the largest of casinos. It would almost be impossible to break that bond. Ivey used what is called edge sorting.
Edge sorting requires paying attention to the cards and noticing the design. These are only on certain makers of cards. To play using edge sorting, you have to notice the patterns on the cards and have high and low cards seperated. There are edge irregularities in many decks of cards. When the edge sorting player sees this they ask the croupier to turn the card around so the long edges are different. Usually this is done with 6, 7, 8, and 9. This process works best in high low games. As the game continues, the edge sorting players can decide to bet based on the knowledge of a high or low card. Call the makers of the cards in this case. Many casinos have since chosen card makers whose design makes it impossible to detect.
“Last November’s Court of Appeal ruling made no sense to me. The original trial judge ruled that I was not dishonest and none of the three Appeal Court judges disagreed, and yet the decision went against me by a majority of 2 to 1,” said Ivey, in a statement released by his legal team.
He went on to say, “I am so pleased that the Supreme Court has granted me permission to fight for what I genuinely believe is the right thing to do in my circumstances, and for the entire gaming industry. I look forward to the Supreme Court reversing the decision against me.”
Ivey has two at the same time. One is at the Mayfair Casino in London and the other at the Borgata in Atlantic City. Both cases involve millions of dollars. The amazing thing is these casinos invited him to play in the first place. This is not only a Phil Ivey case. There was a winner in New York who won a jackpot at slots only to be told it was a machine malfunction. Similarly, the jackpot winner will have to pursue the case in court, but they probably don’t have the deep pockets of Phil Ivey. And this has probably happened and the public doesn’t always find out.
The Borgata case is also not over. The court ruled Ivey had to pay back the $10.1 million he won playing Baccarat from the Borgata in 2012. That ruling has also moved on to appeal. It will be important to take notice of the results. If a casino can get away with not paying winners does it make sense for the general public give them hard earned money?
Daniel Negreanu feels Phil Ivey owes him alot. Like he taught him everything he knows. There’s a story where he slapped Phil Ivey twice after a night of partying.