Borgata Casino Lawsuit

MillyOfLeValley

Webmeister
webmeister
Seems like Phil Iveys been doing this for a while.


He pulled the same deal at Crockfords and admitted to it.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.



Now every casino hes won big at has gone back and probably have high level investigative teams scanning through cctv footage to see if he worked the same system at their casino.
 

osulle

Well-Known Member
CAG
mm1
mm4
I have no pity for the guy.
 

miso

Meister Member
MM
I was never a big fan of Ivey (Greenstein all the way :thumbsup:), but they should probably make a deal.
And ban him forever.

So he is playing with his Rain Man sidekick and taking his advice. It is a scam, but they sholdn`t let him
play, or at least change the decks. If edge sorting is illegal in Atlantic City, good luck proving it.
It`s been two years now, so I guess it`s not that easy.
 

osulle

Well-Known Member
CAG
mm1
mm4
I was never a big fan of Ivey (Greenstein all the way :thumbsup:), but they should probably make a deal.
And ban him forever.

So he is playing with his Rain Man sidekick and taking his advice. It is a scam, but they sholdn`t let him
play, or at least change the decks. If edge sorting is illegal in Atlantic City, good luck proving it.
It`s been two years now, so I guess it`s not that easy.
I agree on banning him. If he gets banned from one casino wouldn't he be banned at all brick and mortar casinos? If so his career would be over I guess.
 

miso

Meister Member
MM
I agree on banning him. If he gets banned from one casino wouldn't he be banned at all brick and mortar casinos? If so his career would be over I guess.
Yeah, that`s another thing, you will never see casinos complaining about him playing craps.

That was the main thing I didn`t like about him, he could win WSOP event, and then lose 1 million
at craps. So basically taking most of the buyins and just throw them away, disrespecting the players IMO.

Casinos need him, but don`t know if they can ban him from a specific game. You know, like,
"Come on Phil, we told you NO baccarat, back to craps."
 

SkBurner

Newbie member
PABnonaccred
Not only does the casino operate the game with cards that can in effect be 'marked' (but not by the player I add) and then allows the player to put them in his preferred order by rotating them in the deck, wtf? :confused:

Also it mentions in the report on the Genting casino in London that the casino was aware of this flaw in the cards but didn't check the deck before using them in the game??? Were they hoping he'd lose even with the advantage? Stakes were £150k per hand which the casino agreed to raise above their normal table maximum.

Something doesn't add up here.
 

Googobucs

Meister Member
Based on the limited information in this story it seems like they should be suing the card makers not the player. I don't see anything illegal about what he did. In baccarat you make your bet before the cards are dealt from the shoe, so he would not have even been able to see the printing flaw on the next cards until after his bet and the cards were in play.

This is an advantage for black jack because you can hit or stand and see the dealer whole card, but baccarat has set rules to determine when a card is dealt. The player makes no decisions.
There has to be more to the story.
 

SkBurner

Newbie member
PABnonaccred
Based on the limited information in this story it seems like they should be suing the card makers not the player. I don't see anything illegal about what he did. In baccarat you make your bet before the cards are dealt from the shoe, so he would not have even been able to see the printing flaw on the next cards until after his bet and the cards were in play.

This is an advantage for black jack because you can hit or stand and see the dealer whole card, but baccarat has set rules to determine when a card is dealt. The player makes no decisions.
There has to be more to the story.
I think the court case in the high court in London will be very interesting and hopefully we will get some more information as to what took place. They denied him £7.8m in winnings based on this flaw.
 

osulle

Well-Known Member
CAG
mm1
mm4
Yes, there was a flaw in the deck but he went in there with the intention of cheating. The casino did the right thing IMHO (Crockfords). It's the same thing as malfunction voids all play.

On the other hand, the Borgata should have spotted this during the play and not until after he did it to another casino. I am not a card player and I admit I know nothing about cards (except solitaire:D) but surely, somebody must have wondered why he was making all the requests to turn specific cards? From my little understanding of the scam it seems obvious that he was edge sorting.

I would think regardless to how the whole saga plays out Ivey’s reputation has taken a beating and he may not be welcome in many brick and mortar casinos in the future.
 

SkBurner

Newbie member
PABnonaccred
Yes, there was a flaw in the deck but he went in there with the intention of cheating. The casino did the right thing IMHO (Crockfords). It's the same thing as malfunction voids all play.

On the other hand, the Borgata should have spotted this during the play and not until after he did it to another casino. I am not a card player and I admit I know nothing about cards (except solitaire:D) but surely, somebody must have wondered why he was making all the requests to turn specific cards? From my little understanding of the scam it seems obvious that he was edge sorting.

I would think regardless to how the whole saga plays out Ivey’s reputation has taken a beating and he may not be welcome in many brick and mortar casinos in the future.
I agree with your assessment in that he went into the casino in order to exploit a flaw, not to chance his luck as you or I would. He knew exactly what he was doing and took an 'expert eye' in with him to arrange the cards in a way that he could benefit from. How he would benefit from it I have no idea as Googobucs points out it would be very difficult to do in this game as bets are made before seeing the cards and no player decision is made at all during the hand.

Very strange how this played out from what has been reported.
 

osulle

Well-Known Member
CAG
mm1
mm4
I agree with your assessment in that he went into the casino in order to exploit a flaw, not to chance his luck as you or I would. He knew exactly what he was doing and took an 'expert eye' in with him to arrange the cards in a way that he could benefit from. How he would benefit from it I have no idea as Googobucs points out it would be very difficult to do in this game as bets are made before seeing the cards and no player decision is made at all during the hand.

Very strange how this played out from what has been reported.
From what I understand he kept asking the dealer to change the deck until they came up with the deck with the flaw. Then he had the dealer turn the cards a certain way so he knew which cards were the good ones when they came out of the shoe. He also insisted that the cards be dealt from the shoe and not by hand. So he may not have known what all the cards were coming out of the deck but he knew the important ones. I think this is cheating but I am sure others consider it to be advantage playing. Again it will be interesting to see what the court finds both in the UK with Ivey's lawsuit against Crockfords and in the US with Borgata's suit against Ivey. This could get complicated.
 

nisosbar

Ueber Meister
PABnonaccred
I believe that in New Jersey, casinos are prohibited from banning players arbitrarily.
 
Top