The Limits of Poker Etiquette: London Court Upholds Hippodrome Casino Ban Over Cash Game Dispute

The Central London County Court has delivered a definitive ruling on a unique poker dispute, reaffirming the right of private casinos to manage their clientele. Dr. Mortaza Sahibzada, who sought £100,000 in damages after being banned from the Hippodrome Casino in Leicester Square, had his claims firmly dismissed by Judge Andrew Holmes. 

The legal battle highlighted the ongoing tension between legal, disciplined poker strategies and the overarching rules of venue conduct, ultimately proving to be a highly expensive endeavor for the plaintiff.

The dispute traces back to September 2023, when Sahibzada was officially barred from the popular London poker room. He argued that the ban was an unfair retaliation against his highly disciplined cash game strategy.

Sahibzada informed the court that he deliberately played short sessions, opting to stand up and leave the table as soon as he won approximately £75. By refusing to give his opponents an opportunity to win their chips back, he utilized what the poker world refers to as a "hit and run" strategy. 

While widely disliked by regular players who value table atmosphere and sustained action, the tactic is entirely within the rules of the game. Sahibzada stated that the disciplined approach was highly effective, claiming it generated more than £2,000 a month in profit.

Despite the player's claims, the Hippodrome Casino argued that the ban was not simply about his chip-cashing habits.

The casino’s barrister, Harry Stratton, told the court that the suspension of Sahibzada’s membership was heavily influenced by several unpleasant interactions with the venue's staff. Furthermore, the casino noted that they had logged concerns regarding potential problem gambling. In addition to challenging the ban itself, the court heard that Sahibzada had raised serious allegations against the venue, including race discrimination and breach of contract.

Ultimately, Judge Holmes found no merit in the plaintiff's arguments, stating that the claim failed to disclose clear grounds for a lawsuit. The judge ruled that no obvious breach of contract had occurred and affirmed that the Hippodrome maintains the right to choose who is permitted to use its services.

Adding insult to injury, the dismissal came with a hefty financial penalty. Sahibzada was ordered to pay the Hippodrome's legal costs, totaling just over £11,000.

While players remain free to leave a cash game table whenever they please, the ruling serves as a stark warning. Winning chips and leaving abruptly is one thing, but if a player's overall presence and behavior become a problem for the room's staff or atmosphere, operators have the full backing of the law to show them the door.