Borgata Wants Their $10.1 Million from Phil Ivey

AcooltartA

AcooltartA

Rock Star
Joined
Jan 11, 2017
Total posts
144
I'm sure Ivey will fight this as long as possible. I personally don't think he did anything wrong. As a professional gambler he is always looking for an edge (just like casinos are always trying to have the edge). Its not like he brought his own cards to play with or was working in conjunction with the dealer. These were the casino's cards. The responsibility falls on the casino to inspect their cards to make sure they meet quality or the correct specifications for that particular casino.
 
Shells

Shells

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Total posts
15,815
Awards
14
This will likely be hung up in the court system for some time - I see it already.
 
jmateuspoker

jmateuspoker

Rock Star
Joined
Oct 20, 2014
Total posts
347
BORGATA

Well it seems to me that the casino is trying to recover money from a good player

Maybe not if indeed it is just the process, but I think a casino always has more power than any player for more profitable than it is.

So I understand what being abusive Borgata wants twist to this question is not justified and prescribe

Sorry if poorly understood the story but my opinion is to protect the poker player

:jd4:mateuspoker
 
fingers182005

fingers182005

Rock Star
Joined
Mar 28, 2007
Total posts
217
i dont know i kind of think its b.s that they want ivey to pay it back its like saying you cannot win at our casino you cannot beat the house and when you do we want it back.. now i understand he used edge sorting but it says the card manufacturers are responsible for this defect and now ivey has to pay for it sounds like the casino is scamming him
 
Shells

Shells

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Total posts
15,815
Awards
14
i dont know i kind of think its b.s that they want ivey to pay it back its like saying you cannot win at our casino you cannot beat the house and when you do we want it back.. now i understand he used edge sorting but it says the card manufacturers are responsible for this defect and now ivey has to pay for it sounds like the casino is scamming him


If I'm reading the article correctly, it seems Borgata already won the judgment from Ivey, but have yet to see any money from him since there is an appeal, which will delay the judgment. Borgata just wants their money now, I guess.
 
Kanetuck

Kanetuck

Legend
Joined
Jun 28, 2018
Total posts
1,321
Awards
15
At first glance, I was thinking the casino should be held entirely responsible for not checking their cards. However, the act of having the dealers turn high cards 180 degrees is cheating. If I am reading this correctly, the pattern on the back of the cards was closer to one edge than the other. So, the only way there is an advantage is if the dealer cooperates and turns only certain cards 180 degrees. So, if my understanding of the situation is correct, he should absolutely have to pay. At first I was thinking he just noticed certain cards had marks on them. So, I was thinking that the only mistake he made was having the dealers turn the cards 180. But then I realized that this guy is way too smart for that. The only way the edge marking would work would be collusion with the dealers.
 
fingers182005

fingers182005

Rock Star
Joined
Mar 28, 2007
Total posts
217
At first glance, I was thinking the casino should be held entirely responsible for not checking their cards. However, the act of having the dealers turn high cards 180 degrees is cheating. If I am reading this correctly, the pattern on the back of the cards was closer to one edge than the other. So, the only way there is an advantage is if the dealer cooperates and turns only certain cards 180 degrees. So, if my understanding of the situation is correct, he should absolutely have to pay. At first I was thinking he just noticed certain cards had marks on them. So, I was thinking that the only mistake he made was having the dealers turn the cards 180. But then I realized that this guy is way too smart for that. The only way the edge marking would work would be collusion with the dealers.
that makes a lot of sense. actually should hold the dealers responsible and yea how did they never notice the marks on the cards? seems like they made the mistake on their own!
 
Psyanide14

Psyanide14

Legend
Joined
Jul 15, 2018
Total posts
1,072
I was reading about this earlier and I think Ivey is in the right. If he had marked the cards or caused the defect in some way then he should be held responsible. If he just noticed the issue and used it to his advantage then good for him. The house always has an edge but when the tables get turned, they want to sue. If they want to sue someone, they should sue the card manufacturer ( which they did and got $27 lol) or whoever was in charge of that game at the casino to not notice the issue. Blaming a player for winning is sour grapes to me.
 
SouthparkSith

SouthparkSith

Visionary
Joined
Apr 3, 2005
Total posts
741
Awards
4
:icon_tong:icon_tong:icon_tong:icon_tong
So yes you're reading it correctly. However there was no collusion Phil and his buddy actually made stipulations to the casino that the casinos agreed to. They agreed to these stipulations because Ivey and his buddy agreed to out X amount of cash in play on there casino floor if the casino agreed to their terms. Some of those terms included
Using the same deck of cards for the duration of their stay.
Dealer turn requests (I.E.) 180 rotation.
The dealer could only change the direction of the cards if the two players requested it.
The casino agree to all this. I don't see how they have a leg to stand on. Phil Ivey did this a several casinos Google it and then see what you think? It's a good read.
 
madjek

madjek

Rock Star
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Total posts
233
i think the judge is way off on the ruling to begin with. Saying that phil used something to his advantage to help him win, therefore was cheating, is ridiculous. there is no rule about using something to give you an advantage, the casino is free to not allow you to play if they think you are , ie card counting in bj, but its not illegal. the casino almost always has advantage but God forbid you take advantage of something to beat the odds. How the casino didn't realize he was seeing something, asking for cards to be turned, is beyond me. I don't get this at all. As far as when he pays, I don't see borgata getting there money for awhile, imo shouldn't be ever.
 
gon4iypes

gon4iypes

Visionary
Joined
Nov 6, 2014
Total posts
775
Awards
2
Typical.....casino wants it all their own way
 
Kanetuck

Kanetuck

Legend
Joined
Jun 28, 2018
Total posts
1,321
Awards
15
So yes you're reading it correctly. However there was no collusion Phil and his buddy actually made stipulations to the casino that the casinos agreed to. They agreed to these stipulations because Ivey and his buddy agreed to out X amount of cash in play on there casino floor if the casino agreed to their terms. Some of those terms included
Using the same deck of cards for the duration of their stay.
Dealer turn requests (I.E.) 180 rotation.
The dealer could only change the direction of the cards if the two players requested it.
The casino agree to all this. I don't see how they have a leg to stand on. Phil Ivey did this a several casinos Google it and then see what you think? It's a good read.
Ok, so I googled it. I am still not sure that the casinos made an agreement in order to get them to play. It sounded more to me that all casinos give high rollers perks. The dealer fell for the "those are my lucky cards routine," and the casino paid for it. If Ivey doesn't get greedy and spaces his winnings out, he might still be making money off of them.
 
Top