This page used to retell celebrity gambling anecdotes: a lifetime ban, a two-million-dollar night, a quote nobody could source. None of it was verifiable, so it has been replaced with the cases that left public records — court judgments and regulator decisions — because those show how high-stakes play really works.
Edge sorting, and why two courts called it cheating
In 2012 a professional player won large sums at punto banco by edge sorting: reading tiny asymmetries in the pattern on the backs of cards, then asking for specific cards to be rotated under the cover of superstition. The casino refused to pay. The dispute went to court in England and in New Jersey, and both sides of the Atlantic ruled against the player — the English case, Ivey v Genting Casinos, reached the Supreme Court in 2017.
The reasoning is the useful part. The player did not touch the cards or mark them, and his requests were granted by the house. The courts still found that steering the game this way defeated the premise both sides were playing on, which made it cheating in law even without deception in the ordinary sense.
What the cases show about getting paid
Three lessons survive from the documented disputes, and none of them involve fame:
- A win is not final until it is paid. Both judgments concerned money the casino held back after the session, which is the normal order of events in a large win.
- The house decides what counts as a legitimate advantage. Card counting is not a crime in most places, yet casinos exclude counters freely; edge sorting went further and was found unlawful.
- Written records decide the outcome. In both cases the facts came from surveillance and table logs, not recollection — which is why an ordinary player should keep their own transaction and round records.
Casino credit and comps: the part that is documented
High-stakes play usually runs on credit rather than cash. A marker is a short-term credit instrument, legally enforceable, and unpaid markers have been pursued through the courts as debts — which is the plainest refutation of «the house always lets the stars off». Comps, meanwhile, are calculated: they are a percentage of theoretical loss, estimated from average bet, hours played and house edge, so a suite is a rebate on expected losses, not a gift.
Regulators have also tightened the funding side for everyone. Britain banned gambling on credit cards in April 2020, which removed the most common route to gambling with money a player does not have.
| Mechanism | What it really is | Who carries the risk |
|---|---|---|
| Marker | Enforceable short-term credit | The player — it is a debt |
| Comps | Rebate on theoretical loss | The house prices it in advance |
| Credit cards | Banned for gambling in Britain since 2020 | Previously the player |
| Edge sorting | Ruled unlawful in England and New Jersey | The player, after the fact |
Frequently asked questions
Did the edge sorting player keep the money?
No. The casinos withheld payment and the courts in England and New Jersey both ruled against him, so the winnings were never paid out.
Is card counting illegal?
Generally no, but casinos are private businesses and may exclude a player for any lawful reason. Edge sorting was a different matter: it was held to be cheating.
Are casino comps free?
No. A comp is a share of theoretical loss, calculated from average bet, time played and the house edge. It is a rebate on expected losses.
Why were credit cards banned for gambling in Britain?
To stop play funded by borrowing. The ban took effect in April 2020 and applies to online and most offline gambling.
Primary reading: the Ivey v Genting Casinos judgment and the credit-card ban announcement.
Related reading: where the games came from, what the industry claims about itself, the skill element, stated honestly and the design that keeps sessions going.
