Phil Ivy being sued for "cheating" w/ defective cards

[John B.]

http://www.phillymag.com/news/2014/04/14/borgata-poker-star-phil-ivey-cheated-edge-sorting/

Check the article for more info. I find it interesting.

[DarkDerp]

That lawsuit is gonna go nowhere. "he asked us to use our purple cards" is a pretty lame accusation.

[Card Player]

http://www.phillymag.com/news/2014/04/14/borgata-poker-star-phil-ivey-cheated-edge-sorting/

Check the article for more info. I find it interesting.

Phil has done this before in London. When he exploited the design flaw, it was 11 million and the casino would not cash him out.

http://m.thestar.com/#!/news/redirect/c929c304c88e817047dbad1787f33e1d

Its the casinos fault. The casino chooses what decks they use and how well the cards are scrutinized for defects during pre-game inspection. I don't think the casino has a very good case.

[BiggerDee]

I was wondering when this was going to hit the boards. I wonder if Gemaco will take a hit sime everyone keeps saying that their cards were "flawed". I just can't believe that Phil and his companion kept asking for so many things to be done to the cards (Flip them a certain way, we'll come back but only if you use the exact same decks, and don't shuffle them overnight, et cetera) and they didn't think that something was up. It's an odd case.

[Lee Asher]

...(Flip them a certain way, we'll come back but only if you use the exact same decks, and don't shuffle them overnight, et cetera) and they didn't think that something was up. It's an odd case.

It's not uncommon for high-rollers to request different terms than what regular players abide by. When you have a big bank roll - anything goes! In the end, it's the casino prerogative to abide.

I'm no lawyer, but I believe the real question we should be asking is ... Did the dealer knowingly collude with Mr. Ivey? Taking advantage of the house due to a flaw is one thing, but colluding with an employee is another.

[Sher143]

Hasn't Gemaco been accused in the past for something similar? It involved the Golden Nugget and Gemaco decks that were allegedly pre-shuffled.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/golden-nugget-casino-suing-gamblers-won-15-million/story?id=17050411

[Don Boyer]

Hasn't Gemaco been accused in the past for something similar? It involved the Golden Nugget and Gemaco decks that were allegedly pre-shuffled.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/golden-nugget-casino-suing-gamblers-won-15-million/story?id=17050411

In that case, the casino was trying to argue that NJ law insists that the odds be "fair" - if casino odds were FAIR, there'd be no casinos!  Casinos always have an edge, which varies from game to game.

It sounds more to me like the casino should have been certain those decks were indeed preshuffled.  They were lazy.  Gemaco can be held at fault, but not the gamblers, though that won't stop the casino from trying to nail them as well.

I'd be curious to know the end result of that case.

As for this case - it's the casino's own damn fault for using that back pattern on their decks!  You can again fault Gemaco for selling faulty decks, but that type of design is prone to that type of cut - they simply shouldn't have used it.

[BiggerDee]

Missed opportunities...These cards are cheat-proof: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1757194073/brite-neon-deck?ref=live

If they looked at them too long, trying to figure out an advantage/misprint/et cetera, the players retinas would burst into flames.  Casinos missed out on these.



While I understand that high rollers can and do make these requests, that doesn't mean that the casino couldn't take special notice and scrutinize their actions more carefully. Big bankrolls and high stakes have the potential for more elaborate schemes and gerater losses for the casino, especially when all of these requests come in conjunction with a winning streak that is favoring the player. I don't know much about casinos and have never been to one, but that would make me take extra looks. Although, they may have suspected something then but without any proof, they couldn't make any accusations. Maybe they discovered the card issue later and went back and put the pieces together after the fact. Lee, you are 100% correct...I also think that a big key would be possible dealer involvment as well.