Is there a set of people between “Casino might have a point and certainly it’s their right to pursue the issue in court” and “Ivey found a loophole in your system, suck it up you cry babies.”?
I don't know, but it's likely they also freerolled him. As in, they decided not to pay him if he won, but let him keep winning in case he lost. He could easily have lost a few million, his edge wasn't that big.
I think they're the sleaze.
Anyway the matter is settled, not in Ivey's favor. The fact that Ivey isn't in prison should settle the debate over the legality of what he did.
FWIW, I take the "Casino might have a point and certainly it's their right to pursue the issue in court" position and I agree with both of mod's comments - it's the courts' job to rule against the casino in cases like this.
