Share this

Wizard Recommends

Last Updated: February 9, 2017

Easy Street Sports vs. Cory1111

Introduction

I first became aware of the dispute of cory1111 against Easy Street Sports (ESS) when somebody posted about it on my Wizard of Vegas site. SBR Forum has a lengthy forum thread about it, in which the complainant contributes.

Executive Summary of the Case

Here are the facts of the case, as I understand them. If any of this is incorrect, I welcome correction.

  • Cory1111 won $46,000 playing video poker at ESS.
  • ESS, which uses DGS software, is not honoring said winnings because they believe the player's speed and accuracy of play is not humanly possible, suggesting the use of a bot, which is against casino rules, and that the player's three royal flushes in 8,762 hands suggest some kind of cheating.
  • ESS offered to fly Cory to Costa Rica to take a lie detector test and to demonstrate his playing speed. The player offered to demonstrate his playing speed, but he refused to take the lie detector test.
  • It has been suggested that the player is a bonus abuser. However, I understand the player played about 400x his $250 deposit + $250 bonus. The requirement is 25x only.
  • A mystery expert from theRXforum.com offered a verdict in ESS's favor, which ESS was happy to accept, of course. Out of respect for copyright, I won't reprint the decision of ESS's expert. However, it can be found at therxforum.com .

My Response to the Verdict

Here is my point-by-point response to the six bullet points in the report.

  1. The report notes the player played 8,762 hands in 499 minutes. That is a rate of 1,053 hands per hour. I asked Bob Dancer, who is with little doubt the foremost video poker expert and player in the world, about this. Here is his response:

    1000 h.p.h. is attainable by a few players. Perfect play over eight hours is attainable by fewer players. Most experts make some mistakes. If you're looking at possible — the answer is yes. If you're looking at likely, the answer is no. Could I do it? Perhaps 1 test in 5 — while I'd make a mistake or two the other four times.

    The ESS expert says this rate of play is a "statistical impossibility." Unlikely, yes. A statistical impossibility, definitely not.

    Regarding the allegation that the player played perfectly, it is my understanding that the play history, at least the one available to the public, does not contain any information on the specific cards. If ESS is going to allege perfect play, I think they should release a hand history, including the cards, to prove it.

    Finally, I don't see why a totally a legitimate casinos prohibits bots anyway, except in live poker. Surely any casino game has a house advantage, and is thus profitable for the casino, so bots should be welcomed. If the reason is to foil bonus abusers, the bonus policy is flawed to begin with.

  2. I don't have a comment on this, since it isn't being used as a reason to refuse payment.
  3. The report claims the player did not pause after hitting a royal, which would seem a normal reaction. Nor did he seem to know any details of the royals he hit. There are a number of possible explanations for this.

    • Cory was playing so fast that he didn't notice he got a royal at the time it happened.
    • He is an experienced video poker player who has hit many royals before and doesn't get as excited as he once did.
    • Cory told me by Email that ESS questioned him about his last royal a week and a half after it happened. When they asked how he got it he didn't understand that they meant how many cards did you draw to the royal. Instead, he joked back, "I was dealt it." Personally, I don't remember the details of royals I hit 10 days after the fact either.
  4. The expert says it is "statistically impossible" to get three royal flushes in 8,762 hands. Let's assume the same 1 in 40,000 chance he assumes, which is a good approximation. The expected number of royals in 8,762 hands is 0.2191. Using the Poisson distribution, the probability of exactly three royals in 8,762 hands is e-.2191 ? 0.21913 / 3! = 0.001407, or 1 in 710.

    In my opinion, all credibility of this witness is lost on this point. A 1 in 710 chance is not "statistically impossible." To at least partially hinge their case on this reason brings shame to ESS, in my opinion.

    Furthermore, it is my understanding that the player actually played 22,000 hands at ESS. The probability of 3 royals in 22,000 hands is 1 in 64, definitely not "statistically impossible." It seems that ESS cherry picked only the 8,862 hands in the sessions where Cory hit a royal.

  5. Here the expert is saying that 1.3 seconds of each average 3.4 seconds per hand was spent drawing the hand. I'd prefer to actually play the game myself or see a video before commenting on this.
  6. So now the expert alleges that the player played to "overwhelm the RNG and provide favorable odds to the 'player.'" Come again? I didn't know that random number generators would get tired at a rate of play of one hand every 3.4 seconds and start passing out royals in frustration. Sorry, I have been programming computers for 30 years and have never heard of such RNG fatigue.
Finally, I've never heard of an expert testimony where the so-called expert's name was not disclosed.

My Suggestion

Bob Dancer and I have been communicating about this dispute, as you can see from his quote above. As the leading expert and player on video poker, I suggested that Bob avail himself to personally conduct an assessment of the player's speed and skill level. He agreed.

Cory has already accepted the challenge as long as the conditions are similar to those at ESS. I have asked ESS for comment about this page but have not received a reply. Should ESS be willing to come to the bargaining table I am willing to temporarily remove the blacklisting until the matter can be better resolved.

Blacklisting

I posted a warning 18 days before blacklisting EasyStreet, offering them a chance to address my concerns and to mediate in a solution. After never hearing from them, they were added to the blacklist on April 25, 2011.

DGS Systems

As far as I know, software provider DGS Systems has remained silent on the matter. That is their prerogative. However, I can't help but recall that when Heroes casino stiffed a player of a large win in keno that Galewind, their software provider, was so embarrassed they paid the player themselves and discontinued doing business with Heroes. It would warm my heart to see that happen in this case.

For more details on the case against ESS, please see this video and case summary by Justin7 of Sportsbookreview.com.


Written by: Michael Shackleford

Wizard Recommends