Power Of Ten

What is Power Of Ten?

Personally, the journey at Calvinayre.com has been about the great people I’ve been lucky enough to work with. It’s a rare thing in the world to be able to find great people to work with. I want to thank two former bosses who encouraged me to chase my passions in this industry. AD, a former Calvinayre.com editor and T2 who took a chance on me as well.

I don’t know what I’m going to be doing next, but I know I want to stay in the casino industry. It’s an industry I always come back to and love.

Reach out anytime for a laugh, talk shop or share ideas. I can be found on Linkedin, Twitter, Facebook and Muckrack.

How to play Power Of Ten

Many players use a fixed cash-out target, such as 1.5x or 2x, and exit automatically every round. This removes emotion from the decision and keeps losses predictable.

The outcome of each round is determined by a provably fair system, which means every result can be independently verified. This transparency is part of why the format caught on so quickly.

As with any game, the house edge is real and the mathematics always favours the operator over time. Treat crash games as short bursts of entertainment rather than a strategy for steady income.

What is Power Of Ten?

George Hasselback is done with Imperial Pacific International (IPI). The attorney has been representing the controversial and incompetent casino operator as it defended itself in a lawsuit filed by Fox Financial, as well as others, but has now washed his hands and stepped away. He had filed a request to withdraw from representing the company on February 12, and a judge granted his petition yesterday. Magistrate Judge Heather Kennedy agreed with Hasselback in his assertion that continued representation would put him in an ethical conundrum.

Judge Kennedy explained in her ruling, “The court finds that Hasselback’s statements that continued representation in this matter would cause him to violate several ethical obligations trigger mandatory withdrawal under Model Rule 1.16(a) and is sufficient for granting his motion.” She added, “Hasselback need not be required to provide details, beyond his written motion, to establish that mandatory withdrawal is warranted,” and stated that requiring him “to specify the basis for his mandatory withdrawal could create the untenable situation of an attorney having to choose between his obligation of candor to the court and his obligation to maintain his client’s confidences.”

Unfortunately, because of that attorney-client privilege, it is difficult to know what types of ethical dilemmas Hasselback is facing. However, it’s likely just the mere hint at issues will be enough for IPI to find itself, once again, being more closely scrutinized. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, given gaming regulators’ reluctance to hold the company accountable for its actions.