So, i lose 50k pot to lusardi and then win a 10k pot and he paid me with counterfeits, i benefited from the fake chips? If i didnt play a hand with him but he dumps 500k to my neighbor, i benefited?

Sounds as dumb as believing I deal cocaine bc i have a hundred dollar bill in my pocket with residue on it. Introducing fake chips is neg ev for all non cheating player regardless if they end up in your stack.

cool, I'll let you bring in the fake chips, take the jail time, and let us get the freeroll

This idea that a refund is a dangerous precedent for poker is dumb imo

Its only dangerous if the casinos use this as a reason to double the rake or something similar.

Borgata has been one of the better places on rake over the years but they inch it up every year.

The more scary part is casinos already with close to 20 percent rake on 500 buy ins. Your almost reaching a point in those where the rake is too high for people to profit.

But realistically, it should be viewed as the first cheating scandal to cancel a major tournament out of many many run.

Why not make him pay the money in restitution
Good solution

Rake should be lower as buy in goes up! And it should NOT increase year over year. I think 10% is reasonable but 20% is way over the line.

I agree though, maximum punishment for all involved would be the best precedent to set! In don't believe Lusardi is alone but all involved should be made an example that cheating is not tolerated.

In the old days word would have already spread about how Lusardi was filled with lead and everyone would have flushed any fake chips still left in their possession.

Enough with the flourescent chip comments. Those weren't the fakes!

Ya, probably not too many people in the tourney played on a table with fake chips. They were less than 1 percent of the chips and only introduced by a few people at most.

The shiny chips most people had were the new 5k chips. I thought they were kind of weird but basically the same weight as the old ones just more silvery and shinier.

Basically, they were very new but definitely not fakes. The newer chips were mostly given to reentry players i think.

Besides playing against him if the chips are in your stack you benefited from someone else getting the chips and giving them to you. That's the only situation you don't benefit. After he's busted you benefited essentially by him giving you the chips to have. You really have no concept on this situation and just like protecting borgata when they screwed up big time.

It seems logical that it might be taking a while due to investigative concerns, and if the investigation were over, or close to locked up, some announcement might have been made by now.

It would obviously take longer the more people there are involved. We have mostly speculated about other players, but there could be dealers or staff involved, as well.

As opposed to making everyone else just having to settle with losing all their buyins to a tainted tournement. Also the fact that this was going on for over 2 days until Borgata finally took action.

I understand that this was a huge field and it's tough for Borgata to control all aspects of the event however we were all investing a significant amount of money into this tourney and at the least we should expect a level playing field non inclusive of individual skillset, luck, etc.

Maybe a stupid reply from me here but ok.

Get all the players back, and replay hand by hand (which is not that hard since you only play 12hand/h) with 10 players a table this should work out. Sue the players who cheated & they are forced to play out chip/chop between the top 27-not including the cheaters)

I never said the chip I saw was fluorescent chief.

relax, slugger

Grunching, is the PPA involved in this on some level?

Shiny, new whatever. Those weren't the fakes..... Chief.

I definitely do not understand your contradictory statements about the magical benefits of winning counterfeit chips.

Most, if not all, of the tournaments I play, no one gives you chips. If i have to put chips at risk in a pot that i paid for against a bigger stack because he is adding counterfeit chips, i do not see how I benefit from getting his chips any more than winning paid for chips.

Lets do this like a 6th grader:

1. Give me the facts.
2. Explain why they are important to your thought process.
3. Tell me what conclusions you draw from these facts.

You keep saying i am protecting the Borgata. I am not, but i also have no knowledge of any act or omission so aggregious that they should be compensating the bustouts millions of dollars because some scumbag cheated and was caught. I also believe the 27 remaining players should not be punished to compensate the day one bustouts seeking a windfall recovery because of the cheating. I do not think it is fair or reasonable to give the remaining 27, 27th place money and give rebates to everyone else.

Unless you change from your historical behavior, I doubt you will respond with anything but your conclusionary statements that are tainted by your self interest in receiving a windfall recovery. Surprise me, please.

Why have none of the graphically talented posters ITT taken the opportunity to use this image of Lusardi as Palpatine, aka Darth Sidius?
http://www.pokernews.com/live-report...hips.75521.htm

It simply must be done.

lol I bet Tiffany is really proud of Lusardi.


"i did it for youuuu babe!"

A little help Zom

Are the final 27 entitled to more money then 28 or 29 is the guy in 27th place getting a fair cut with a chip chop when he could of went on to win. Where as the man in 3rd gets tilted and loses. The final 27 are benefiting from extra chips because there's 800,000 chips that shouldn't be there. They benefited by lusardi
putting them into play.

Are you assuming its a zero-sum game between bust outs and final 27 ?

If so, what lead you to believe that ?

1. Because the payouts made already are impossible/impractical to claw back. Second, by doing so they create another 400 potential claims.
2. No viable negligence theories against the Borgata given the known facts. Proximate cause problems and available legal defenses make defending the case cost effective for defendant.
3. A diverse group of potential plaintiffs with small damage claims from multiple states are difficult to manage. It may have to be a collective action vs a class action
4. No other source to pay damages i.e. No insurance covers this loss. Other defendant(s) are deadbeats.
5. Rake of 300k could be returned but i consider that coming out of borgs pocket. But why would they if it doesn't resolve all the claims?

When you enter poker tournaments at Borgota, is it required to show ID or a players card before being able to play? Or can anyone just pay and play and just verbally give them a John Smith name? (Of course someone could use a fake ID but just curious as to what is required)

Just players card.