How was your experience?

You need to check the captcha*
message icon

Thanks for your feedback!

EasyStreet steals from casino winner, TheRX rules in sportsbook’s favor






How the casino dispute began
On March 15th, SBR reported that a casino winner was accused of using robot software. EasyStreet told SBR that a player who won $46,000 in its casino, playing video poker game "Jacks or Better", was under investigation for suspicion of foul play.

EasyStreet accuses player of rapid play
EasyStreet claimed that 'cory1111' (the player's forum handle) played 5,848 hands in 326 minutes. EasyStreet suggested that only a robot could play with perfect strategy for that length of time. Based on EasyStreet's statement, much of the initial public debate centered around the feasibility of playing for 5.5 hours consecutively at a high rate of speed with no mistakes.

When portions of the play log were finally shared, EasyStreet's statements were contradicted. The logs showed that play occurred from 9:03 A.M. to 5:58 P.M., and contained over three hours of breaks. EasyStreet never shared the full session hand history, which could show whether the player used perfect strategy throughout, something the player denies.

Royal Flushes
Cory hit three royal flushes during his time playing at the EasyStreet casino, helping increase his balance to $46,000. EasyStreet claimed that Cory failed to pause after hitting two of these royal flushes, arguing that a human would have stopped momentarily to celebrate their win. In fact, SBR has learned that Cory did pause after hitting the royal flushes, and stopped playing entirely after a losing hand.

The RX Forum's role as official arbitrator
Shortly after SBR requested that EasyStreet produce the entire hand history, EasyStreet withdrew from discussions with SBR and stated that the matter would be turned over to the RX Forum to arbitrate.

The RX Forum is a sports betting portal that EasyStreet pays to advertise with. The decision prompted some public outrage, as the perception was the The RX would fail to exercise neutrality in hearing the dispute.

On Tuesday, March 22nd, the managing director of the RX Forum, Marty Jenson, wrote Cory an email stating that he was being banned from the RX message-board. The transcript reads as follows:




Marty Jenson: Hello Cory,

My name is Marty Jensen, I am the managing director of The Rx. I have been following along your allegations against EasyStreet, and have noted that not only have you not answered Wil's questions below, you have omitted significant important information from the start. In particular, you neglected to mention to Wil that only a few weeks ago you won at getting 2 Royal Flushes during your sessions there.

I am going to ask Wil to ban you permanently at The Rx, as I believe you have wasted enough of our time.


Cory was not able to comment in any of the public discussions held at TheRX forum due to his account restriction.  After assuming the role of arbitrator, TheRX forum's head moderator, 'Wilheim' posted a series of unproven accusations against the player, in what appeared to be an attempt to sway public opinion.




March 24th, 2011:


The RX Forum's 'Wilheim': Upon investigation we discovered he is connected directly to 34 different accounts all closed for fraudulent activity spread among 21 offshore books. There are possibly more but our investigation felt these were sufficient to show what type of player Cory1111 is. Many of you complain about the amount of documentation that books require now when you ask for withdrawals. Players like Cory1111 are part of why that is necessary.


None of the above claims were ever proven, despite Cory's denial. The statement, even if proven true, had no bearing on the dispute. The reason that Cory's past had no bearing on this dispute is that his deposits were all cash transactions, hence, there was no possibility for him to make a charge-back.

TheRX forum requests the player to take polygraph test in Costa Rica
On March 24th, 2011, The RX forum made public an offer for Cory to fly to Costa Rica to take a polygraph to prove that he did not use robot software in EasyStreet's casino. The RX forum stipulated that if Cory passed the polygraph test, he would be escorted to the offices of Digital Gaming solutions, the casino software creator, to duplicate a similar session.


The RX Forum's 'Wilheim': First you will need to take a polygraph conducted by an accredited professional polygraph purveyor. The polygraph will only address your play at Easystreet during the session in which you hit your Royals, no questions about your past will be used against as far as this polygraph goes, Easystreet simply wants to get at the truth and nothing else whatever it is. I am sure they actually hope you pass so they can in good conscience pay you.


No one is out to incriminate you in anyway, I imagine some sort of legal agreement can be furnished to that effect. The only thing that matters is you demonstrating your claim that you can play DGS' 5 card draw video poker game with the speed and acumen displayed during the on-line sessions in which you hit your 3 Royals at the Easystreet Casino.

Should you pass the the polygraph then an appointment will be set up shortly after (maybe the next day) to proceed to the offices of DGS for the video poker demonstration. You will be asked to come relatively close to the approximately 18 hands of perfect strategy on a 5 card draw video poker game per minute for a little more than five hours


Polygraph tests are not admissible in a court of law as evidence. SBR mediator and attorney Justin7 explains why polygraph tests are unreliable in his video breakdown. Finally, the second half of the RX's public offer, that the player duplicate a 5 hour session of speedy play, misstated the player's session duration in the same way EasyStreet Sports misstated it.

In addition, on March 25th, 2011, the RX Forum made statements which would indicate that it was not already in possession of the game-play, thus, it could not accurately make any determinations on the length of Cory's sessions.


The RX Forum's 'Wilheim': The investigation took went in two directions the first and most important was the actual play as indicated by the hand history, which I am hoping to post on this forum today but am waiting for the software company that designed the game to furnish the history to both EZ St and myself. That is in process as I type this, both EZ St and myself (along with SBR who I agreed to send a copy of the document to as soon as it is available to me) are waiting on

It became clear that, without even having access to the complete session history, that The RX could not rightfully demand that the player duplicate the (unknown) speed or acumen of those sessions. EasyStreet ultimately never publicly shared the hand history, so the claim of "perfect play" was never able to be substantiated or refuted.


The RX rules in favor of EasyStreet, citing the opinion of an unnamed expert
On April 5th, 2011, The RX posted an "expert's opinion" on the dispute. The RX declined to name the expert, thus, his or her credentials could never be verified. The farce became more obvious to the public as several glaring mathematically incorrect statements were attributed to the nameless expert. The full RX report, plus SBR Justin7's point-by-point analysis can be found in this SBRforum EasyStreet thread.


Digital Gaming SolutionsDigital Gaming Solutions, the well-known industry casino software maker, would not provide official comment to SBR due to its licensee confidentiality agreement.




DGS Representative: DGS has a confidentiality agreement with any casino using our software. DGS does not comment on player-casino disputes unless the casino waives that confidentiality, and specifically allows DGS to discuss details of a player's play.

Despite declining to go on the record, a number of sources, including the player himself envoked the name of DGS owner Chris Davis. Mr. Davis reportedly stated that no abnormalities were found from reviewing the player's sessions. EasyStreet has not publicly addressed DGS' findings.

The EasyStreet player made 10 deposits over a two-week period, exclusively playing video poker. EasyStreet had ample time to profile the player and decide whether or not to accept his action. Only when the player recorded a $46,000 profit in its casino did EasyStreet decide that his play violated house rules.

Due to EasyStreet's inability to justify the winnings confiscation, the rating of D has been imposed. EasyStreet is one half-mark away from the scam SBR Sportsbook blacklist.