Ivey Being sued by Borgata

[IamGreek]

Very interesting.

http://www.njlawjournal.com/id=12026...20140311150944

[Dan Druff]

Wow, so he did this at the Borgata, too, and now they're suing him to get the money back.

They must have figured it out after the Crockfords situation.

I am on Ivey's side on this one, though. The article says he "cheated" a casino out of $9.6 million. No, he didn't. He noticed a flaw in the cards and used it to his advantage. Part of any casino card game involves using all information available to you, provided you don't utilize outside devices or casino insiders. Ivey simply used his eyes and a companion to help convince the casino to turn the cards a different way. That is not cheating. That is advantage play.

If Ivey loses this suit, it spells bad news for any advantage players, as they can be accused of "cheating" if they simply use their heads to exploit previously unknown edges in casino games.

Borgata has more of a reasonable suit against the playing card company, however, as their providing of a defective product caused this vulnerability in the game to exist.

[shortbuspoker]

I agree with Druff. This is 100% on the dealers for not recognizing that the cards were flawed when they brought them into the game and the pit boss for not shutting the game down at least momentarily if they suspected something was up. Ivey did nothing "illegal".

[Steve-O]

To play devil's advocate:

If you go into a bank and the teller accidentally gives you $10,000 instead of $10 do you keep it?

If you notice an ATM machine is malfunctioning and spitting out money do you get to keep it?

Theoretically, in both cases it should be up to the bank and ATM machine owner to make sure things are working properly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the charges seem applicable: "breach of contract, fraud, conversion, unjust enrichment, civil conspiracy and racketeering" It's not as if he was playing and recognized the flaw. this was premeditated, evidenced by the woman and his growing history.

A similar edge sorting case was won by the casino btw.

It's a very interesting case that I don't find clear-cut at all

[shortbuspoker]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the charges seem applicable: "breach of contract, fraud, conversion, unjust enrichment, civil conspiracy and racketeering" It's not as if he was playing and recognized the flaw. this was premeditated, evidenced by the woman and his growing history.

A similar edge sorting case was won by the casino btw.

It's a very interesting case that I don't find clear-cut at all

I see what you're saying from a moral standpoint and I understand that the casino hates losing in such a fashion, but in my mind it shouldn't be illegal. If the player, in this case Phil Ivey, played no part whatsoever in the flaws occurring or marking the cards then they have done nothing wrong. If a casino chose the ban this player like a BJ card counter then so be it but they should not be trying to prosecute someone for the results of their own incompetence as either the dealer, the pit boss, or the surveillance team should catch these types of things.

[BeerAndPoker]

Any casino edge you can find as long as it don't require you to use any sort of "device" is fair game imo. If the casino leaves themselves vulnerable because of something on the back of the cards or whatever it might be that wasn't placed that way from the player then they need to suck it up, fix the problem, and eat the money they are out.

Any casino can tell a player not to play there anymore for whatever reason refusing a guy like Ivey action but they shouldn't be able to collect on a lawsuit or withhold paying him for their own leaks.

[nunbeater]

To play devil's advocate:

If you go into a bank and the teller accidentally gives you $10,000 instead of $10 do you keep it?

If you notice an ATM machine is malfunctioning and spitting out money do you get to keep it?

Theoretically, in both cases it should be up to the bank and ATM machine owner to make sure things are working properly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the charges seem applicable: "breach of contract, fraud, conversion, unjust enrichment, civil conspiracy and racketeering" It's not as if he was playing and recognized the flaw. this was premeditated, evidenced by the woman and his growing history.

A similar edge sorting case was won by the casino btw.

It's a very interesting case that I don't find clear-cut at all

Your examples don't really apply since if you withdraw and keep money that the bank accidentally credits to your account you can and will get in some deep shit. Banks can choose to prosecute you if you don't pay up and you will probably get a fine on top of it.

[RileyG]

And I highly doubt that there is any video proof of the Borgata's claims unless they suspected something was amiss at the time. Most tapes are only keep for 30 days, UNLESS something is suspect and they burn a few copies off and save the possible evidence for a later date.
-

Added: Now if a person or persons acted in concert with a person or persons inside a playing card company to design said flaws, and had a listing of orders, deliveries made of certain card designs, then there may be something to this and more...

[stankmouth]

banks can "choose to prosecute you" for an error that they made??? I find this a little hard to belive...u cannot be criminally prosecuted for being immoral, unfortunately...But I highly doubt if a bank fucks up ,and you choose not to mention said error you can be prosecuted...but im no lawyer.

To play devil's advocate:

If you go into a bank and the teller accidentally gives you $10,000 instead of $10 do you keep it?

If you notice an ATM machine is malfunctioning and spitting out money do you get to keep it?

Theoretically, in both cases it should be up to the bank and ATM machine owner to make sure things are working properly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the charges seem applicable: "breach of contract, fraud, conversion, unjust enrichment, civil conspiracy and racketeering" It's not as if he was playing and recognized the flaw. this was premeditated, evidenced by the woman and his growing history.

A similar edge sorting case was won by the casino btw.

It's a very interesting case that I don't find clear-cut at all

Your examples don't really apply since if you withdraw and keep money that the bank accidentally credits to your account you can and will get in some deep shit. Banks can choose to prosecute you if you don't pay up and you will probably get a fine on top of it.

[Shizzmoney]

To play devil's advocate:

If you go into a bank and the teller accidentally gives you $10,000 instead of $10 do you keep it?

It's actually illegal to keep it.

http://www.bankrate.com/brm/news/sav...nk_errora1.asp

I'm not sure about NJ law when it comes to cheating at a casino, never mind the rules on the books on taking advantage of a house-created flaw (I know casinos do have the right to 86 anyone for anything at anytime).

It should be gentleman's rules........but lobbyists and lawyers don't abide by those.

[shortbuspoker]

Here's a report on the motion to dismiss filed by Ivey's lawyers. I honestly think that the judge may take a good long look at their assertion that the Borgata allowed him to keep playing in hopes that he would lose it all back and only decided to sue when he didn't.

http://www.cardplayer.com/poker-news...of-sheer-skill

Phil Ivey, who just won his 10th career WSOP bracelet last month, has responded to the Borgata’s $9.6 million lawsuit against him by trying to get the case dismissed. Ivey’s legal team filed a motion on Wednesday, saying that the poker pro didn’t cheat while playing high-stakes mini-baccarat in 2012, but instead used skill to take the house for bundles of money.

“Each and every penny of [Ivey’s] winnings was the result of sheer skill,” his lawyers wrote in the scathing 23-page motion. They said that in no way was Ivey’s method of “edge sorting” illegal. “Plantiff alleges that Ivey’s exquisite power of discernment somehow transforms his play into cheating and swindling,” Ivey’s camp shot back in response to the 58-page complaint.

Ivey and a partner were accused of being able to spot manufacturing defects in the back of playing cards to gain an edge over the house and take the joint for more than $9 million. The casino eventually went after Ivey for the money he won, saying it was won illegally. The casino said it violates New Jersey gaming rules—implying it’s harmful to the casino industry in Atlantic City.

Lawyers for Ivey argued that the Borgata’s “complaint is…nothing more than an attempt to justify its own negligence, motivated by its subjective intent to take as much money from Phil Ivey as it could during his specially arranged and agreed visits” to the casino.

At no point did Ivey or his female companion touch the cards or any other gaming equipment, the motion to dismiss said. Lawyer’s for the defendants said that any casino employee could have noticed the asymmetrical patterns in the cards that gave Ivey the 6.765-percent edge.

Ivey’s lawyers also said that a six-month statute of limitations has passed.

Borgata “voluntarily chose to grant every single request because it wagered defendant Ivey would lose his multi-million dollar deposits and hopefully more. Plantiff only now alleges that its own game was illegal because it lost that wager,” the motion added. In other words, Ivey’s legal team claimed the casino wouldn’t have cried foul if the edge sorting didn’t result in Ivey winning.

Atlantic City is stuck in crisis mode, as two casinos there have closed this year so far, and a third could soon be on the way. Casino revenues have been declining since 2006.

The Borgata vs. Phil Ivey saga is especially dramatic considering it’s the town in which the now-legendary gambler got his first taste of casino gambling during the mid-1990s.

[MumblesBadly]

To play devil's advocate:

If you go into a bank and the teller accidentally gives you $10,000 instead of $10 do you keep it?

If you notice an ATM machine is malfunctioning and spitting out money do you get to keep it?

Theoretically, in both cases it should be up to the bank and ATM machine owner to make sure things are working properly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the charges seem applicable: "breach of contract, fraud, conversion, unjust enrichment, civil conspiracy and racketeering" It's not as if he was playing and recognized the flaw. this was premeditated, evidenced by the woman and his growing history.

A similar edge sorting case was won by the casino btw.

It's a very interesting case that I don't find clear-cut at all

Whether an activity is premeditated or spur-off-the-moment only affects the *severity* of the underlying crime, not whether the activity is criminal. Case in point is premeditated murder (1st degree) versus a crime-of-passion murder (2nd degree). Similarly, if I spent months studying and planning to count cards at a casino versus picking it up on the fly while playing wouldn't make counting cards illegal in the first case but legal in the second if there is no law against counting cards.

[MumblesBadly]

To play devil's advocate:

If you go into a bank and the teller accidentally gives you $10,000 instead of $10 do you keep it?

If you notice an ATM machine is malfunctioning and spitting out money do you get to keep it?

Theoretically, in both cases it should be up to the bank and ATM machine owner to make sure things are working properly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the charges seem applicable: "breach of contract, fraud, conversion, unjust enrichment, civil conspiracy and racketeering" It's not as if he was playing and recognized the flaw. this was premeditated, evidenced by the woman and his growing history.

A similar edge sorting case was won by the casino btw.

It's a very interesting case that I don't find clear-cut at all

These seem like terms that are made to inflate the severity of what Ivey did. Why couldn't they simply claim that the contract was null-and-void because the two parties did not have a "meeting of the minds" about the game they were playing? Meaning, the casino thought it was playing as the "house" in punto banco, while in fact they were playing the "house" in "Edge-sorting punto banco", which has very different theoretical odds than the game they *thought* they were playing. On that basis, the casino would be in the right to have denied Ivey his winnings.

Of course, this wouldn't have the emotional appeal of calling Ivey a "cheater", which then allows all of the elements of inflating the claims against him to make him out to be a fraudster. Why do I say this? Because people making business deals can lie about the intent of why they want to enter into a contract. But because Ivey got them to voluntarily change how they administered the game, which resulted in the casino offering a *different* theoretical game of chance than it *thought* it was offering, it had no obligation to honor paying Ivey his "winnings".

[TheXFactor]

Judge: Poker pro Ivey, pal broke gambling rules in $10 million win
http://lasvegassun.com/news/2016/oct...paign=mostRead

By shifting the odds in their favor, they violated the New Jersey Casino Control Act, the judge ruled. He threw out allegations by the Borgata that the pair had committed fraud, and the casino now has 20 days to outline the damages it says it suffered.

"Borgata and Ivey had the same goal when they entered into their arrangement: to profit at the other's expense," the judge wrote. "Trust is a misplaced sentiment in this context."

So what happens if Ivey doesn't pay back the $10 million?
I seriously doubt he would pay them back that kind of money.
It might be best if he never returns to Las Vegas, just stay in Macau, the Philippines and Mexico.

Will MGM resorts which owns the Borgata ban him from every resort they own and rename "Ivey's Room" to "Hellmuth's Room"?





Phil Ivey is currently endorsing Daily Fantasy Sports platform "Rosters" (iTeam Network) which is owned by Daniel Negreanu's agent Brian Balsbaugh.

[Gookieheimowitz]

BUMP

https://www.cardplayer.com/poker-new...n-borgata-case

[Dan Druff]

Yeah, he's pretty screwed.

Almost every decision has gone against him.

I do wonder what tangible assets he has. Can they find assets they can immediately put claims against? Or will Ivey hide all of his money, rent everything, and claim to be broke/backed?

I do feel bad for Ivey here because he got screwed. He was not cheating, but rather engaging in advantage play. The casino was also freerolling him. Had he lost, they wouldn't have refunded the money.

His argument that losing the $10 million will cause "irreparable damage" to his poker career is stupid, though. That was $10 million he wouldn't have had in the first place if he hadn't played there, so is he arguing that he'd be broke now, if not for that one Borgata session? I doubt that's true.

[snowtracks]

Yeah, he's pretty screwed.

Almost every decision has gone against him.

I do wonder what tangible assets he has. Can they find assets they can immediately put claims against? Or will Ivey hide all of his money, rent everything, and claim to be broke/backed?

I do feel bad for Ivey here because he got screwed. He was not cheating, but rather engaging in advantage play. The casino was also freerolling him. Had he lost, they wouldn't have refunded the money.

His argument that losing the $10 million will cause "irreparable damage" to his poker career is stupid, though. That was $10 million he wouldn't have had in the first place if he hadn't played there, so is he arguing that he'd be broke now, if not for that one Borgata session? I doubt that's true.

Druff do you think Ivey paid taxes on the $10 million?

[duped_samaritan]

The most fucked up thing about this whole thing is that included in that $10 million judgment is the money he won from a craps session after Baccarat. You know if he went and dumped $5 million at craps table they would still sue him for entire Baccarat win.

I wonder how all this would have played out if Ivey just said "I wasn't edge sorting" instead of admitting everything.

[Dan Druff]

Yeah, he's pretty screwed.

Almost every decision has gone against him.

I do wonder what tangible assets he has. Can they find assets they can immediately put claims against? Or will Ivey hide all of his money, rent everything, and claim to be broke/backed?

I do feel bad for Ivey here because he got screwed. He was not cheating, but rather engaging in advantage play. The casino was also freerolling him. Had he lost, they wouldn't have refunded the money.

His argument that losing the $10 million will cause "irreparable damage" to his poker career is stupid, though. That was $10 million he wouldn't have had in the first place if he hadn't played there, so is he arguing that he'd be broke now, if not for that one Borgata session? I doubt that's true.

Druff do you think Ivey paid taxes on the $10 million?

Good question.

If he could show the IRS an overall gambling "loss" for that calendar year, he wouldn't have had to pay taxes on it.

If he did pay taxes, I don't think he could get them back. He could only use this loss against his 2018 income -- and only if he actually pays Borgata.

This is because the winnings occurred in 2012, and the 2012 tax return cannot be amended at this point.

[Dan Druff]

Borgata trying to find Ivey's assets in order to grab the $10 million.

https://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/sh...-for-Phil-Ivey