John Brennan

Staff Writer, @BergenBrennan

How did professional poker player Phil Ivey and playing partner Cheng Yin Sun manage to beat the house at Borgata to the tune of $10 million in baccarat over the course of four visits in 2012? Credit the impeccable eyesight of Sun, who noticed some tiny imperfections on the backs of one playing card manufacturer's playing cards that no one else seems to be able to detect.

Borgata's attorneys explained the scheme in detail in their initial court filing in the lawsuit seeking to reclaim the money in 2014:



"The backs of casino playing cards generally contain a repeating diamond or geometrical pattern. If the cards are not cut symmetrically during the manufacturing process, the two long edges of the cards will not be identical. In other words, one edge will have more of the geometrical pattern than the other.

COURTS:Poker pro Phil Ivey ordered to pay Borgata $10M

BIG BETS:How Phil Ivey won $10M at Borgata in 117 hours

BLOG:Phil Ivey isn't the only gambler who beat the house – but not the courts

IT'S A GAMBLE: How to play baccarat



"During play, Ivey and Sun used the accommodations they requested from Borgata to 'turn' strategically important cards so that they could be distinguished from all other cards in the deck. The dealer would first lift the card so that Sun could see its value before it was flipped over all the way and placed on the table. If Sun told the dealer 'Hao' (pronounced 'how'), which translates to English as 'good card,' he was instructed to continue to flip the card over so that the orientation of the long edges of the card would stay on the same side when flipped.



"In other words, the right edge of the card as seen by Sun before the card was turned all the way over would still be the right edge of the card as she looked at when it was laid face up on the table. If Sun told the dealer 'Buhao' (pronounced 'boohow'), which translates into English as 'bad card,' he was instructed to flip the card side to side, so that the long edges would be reversed when flipped.



"In other words, the right edge of the card as seen by Sun before the card was turned all the way over would now be the left edge of the card as she looked at it when it was laid face up on the table. By telling the dealer 'good card' or 'bad card' in Mandarin, the dealer would place the cards on the table so that when the cards were cleared and put in the used card holder, the leading edges of the strategically important cards could be distinguished from the leading edges of the other cards in the deck.



"Upon information and belief Ivey and Sun 'turned' the cards with values of 6, 7, 8, and 9, so that they could be distinguished from all other cards in the deck. The process of 'edge sorting' all the cards in the decks took more than one shoe.





"Ivey and Sun knew that if an automatic card shuffler was used, the edges of the cards would remain facing in the same direction after they were shuffled.



"Conversely, Ivey and Sun knew that if the cards were shuffled by hand, the dealer would turn part of the deck, rendering their attempts to 'turn' the strategically important cards useless. Keeping the edges of the cards facing the same direction is the reason Ivey requested the use of an automatic card shuffler. Ivey also knew that if the same cards were not reused for each shoe, there would be no benefit to 'edge sorting.' That is why Ivey requested that the same cards be reused for each shoe.



"The leading edge of the first card in the shoe is visible before the cards are dealt. Once the 'edge sorting' was completed, Ivey and Sun were able to see the leading edge of the first card in the shoe before it was dealt, giving them 'first card knowledge.'



"If the first card in the shoe was turned, that meant a strategically important card was being dealt to the 'player' hand, and Ivey would bet accordingly. If the first card in the shoe was not 'turned,' that meant that a less advantageous card was being dealt to the 'player' hand, and Ivey would again bet accordingly.



"This 'first card knowledge' changed the overall odds of the game from an approximate 1.06% house advantage to an approximately 6.765% advantage for Ivey.



"Ivey began each playing session with bets well below the maximum bet. Ivey bet below the maximum bet until he and Sun had completed 'edge sorting' all the cards in the shoe. Once all the cards in the shoe were'“edge sorted,' Ivey 'flatlined' at the maximum bet; i.e. he bet the maximum amount on every hand.



"A review of Ivey’s betting pattern shows that once the cards were 'edge sorted,' when he bet on 'player,' the first card dealt was significantly more likely to be a strategically important card. Conversely, once the cards were 'edge sorted,' when Ivey bet on 'banker,' the first card dealt was significantly more likely to be a strategically unimportant card."