Isn't the pleading a public document - viewable by anyone who cares to go to the court and read it? Why would copying it here be an issue?

I for one would like to read it, and would appreciate a link at least. If I have to pay for PACER - it isn't worth it, though.

How can we find this?

Thank you.

Lee

Since the casino seems to be admitting supplying flawed cards I presume they are actively seeking out all players who lost $$ at the tables using these flawed cards and will be re-inbursing any losses.........

I imagine that if it's publicly available, a poker journalist will post it.

All Casino needed to do was split the cards in half, and turn one half before putting them in the auto shuffler, and the edge sorting would not have worked.

Casino gets self-owned and blames player.

The debate ITT over the type of deck sorting was likely wrong.

As a manager at a major casino that has dealt baccarat to Mr. Ivey, and uses GEMACO cards, I can tell you with 100% knowledge, that GEMACO has had problems with incorrectly cut cards.

Not in a way that makes all 52 the same, but in a way that makes certain value cards different than others. In our case, the 7,8,9s had a slightly different cut than the 2-6s. It since been corrected.

I'm not saying there isn't some value to the other method that was more widely accepted by this thread. It is really hard for me to imagine that a player would be able to sit and request that every 8 or 9 be turned a certain way without raising red flags, and that the cards would stay turned the proper way the entire time through all the shuffles and dealer bobbles and discard rack miscues. Let's not forget that the draw card gets placed perpendicularly to the others and dealers will pick these up in a variety of ways.

It is much easier for me to believe that he was taking advantage of the differently cut cards that I have personally experienced from GEMACO.

I'm not saying I know for sure about this Borgata case, but this is the consensus I've been given from the people I know that came from Borgata and Genting that still have contacts.

If this is the case... Doesnt this make him less guilty? In this case he isnt manipulating the cards to gain an advantage. He is simply using his keen observational skills to gain an advantage.

Does anyone know how this played out?

unshuffled cards

Seems like Gemaco should be held 100% responsible.

Superstition is a HUGE part of baccarat. People will bend the cards, peel them back slowly before exposing them, rip them among other things. Granted, this is all after the dealer has dealt the cards to the player.

I wouldn't consider the personell clueless, unless they try and pull this off at a mini-baccarat table which they don't let you get touchy / feely with the cards becauase the limits are so low.

If it's not edge sorting that Ivey was doing then why insist on an auto shuffler being used.

If the casino can't routinely change out a $1 deck of cards that are used at multi-million dollar table, they deserve to lose.

The complaint against Ivey does not allege the automatic shuffle machines are illegal at all. Rather, it seems clear the contention of the Borgata is that Ivey specifically "requested" the use of the machines in a game of chance. He then used his knowledge of the operation and function of the machine and combined it with a manipulation of the cards to alter the odds of the game in his favor. It is that specific conduct that the Borgata claims made the shuffle machines a cheating device. Think of a car as a car, but if you use the car to ram somebody the car becomes a deadly weapon. Does that determination make all cars deadly weapons, or is the specific use of the car to accomplish something other than its intended purpose make that one car a deadly weapon?

Also, please consider he and his companion "lied" to the casino when they said the shuffle machine and the card manipulations were being done because of "superstitions" they had. Unquestionably the requests were made to alter the odds in the game at hand to Ivey's benefit.

For me, I believe this is a clear violation of gaming laws. I do not believe most people here that currently believe Ivey's conduct is legal or even acceptable would feel the same if it was the house that knew what the first card out was going to be and used that knowledge to burn or discard it if it was a card that minimized the house odds of winning.

One of the significant advantages of gambling in a licensed and regulated casino is that games are supposed to be on the square for everybody, customer and casino. The casino takes the best of it for sure, but they will tell you that upfront. It is no secret the casinos do not want to gamble. Most are very happy to take the profits they earn with their built in edge.

Can someone cite the gaming statute that says edge sorting is prohibited?

....same place where it mentions Card Counting in Black Jack I would presume

Here is one, but I am sure there are many regulations that would outlaw Ivey's scheme.

5:12-113 Swindling and cheating; penalties
a. A person is guilty of swindling and cheating if the person purposely or knowingly by any trick or sleight of hand performance or by a fraud or fraudulent scheme, cards, dice or device, for himself or herself or for another, wins or attempts to win money or property or a representative of either or reduces a losing wager or attempts to reduce a losing wager in connection to casino gaming.

Here is a statute that would prohibit the casino from operating a game wherein the cards have been "placed in a condition, or operated in a manner, the result of which tends to deceive..." I am sure there is similar statute prohibiting the same conduct by a customer. But, I don't have time to look fro it right now!

5:12-115 Cheating games and devices in a licensed casino; penalty
a. It shall be unlawful:
(1) Knowingly to conduct, carry on, operate, deal or allow to be conducted, carried on, operated or dealt any cheating or thieving game or device; or
(2) Knowingly to deal, conduct, carry on, operate or expose for play any game or games played with cards, dice or any mechanical device, or any combination of games or devices, which have in any manner been marked or tampered with, or placed in a condition, or operated in a manner, the result of which tends to deceive the public or tends to alter the normal random selection of characteristics or the normal chance of the game which could determine or alter the result of the game.

Card counting is NOT illegal in Nevada or New Jersey. It is considered an advantage and people that card count are advantage players. In Nevada casinos use their right to exclude basically anybody for any or no reason from their private property to remove card counters from their games.

"Atlantic City casinos in the State of New Jersey are forbidden from barring card counters as a result of a New Jersey Supreme Court decision. In 1979 Ken Uston, a Blackjack Hall of Fame inductee, filed a lawsuit against an Atlantic City casino, claiming that casinos did not have the right to bar skilled players. The New Jersey Supreme Court agreed,[21] ruling that "the state's control of Atlantic City's casinos is so complete that only the New Jersey Casino Control Commission has the power to make rules to exclude skillful players." As of 2011, New Jersey Casino Control Commission has not promulgated a regulation to the contrary. Accordingly, Atlantic City casinos are not allowed to bar card counters. In response to Uston's legal victory, Atlantic City casinos began adding decks, moving up shuffle points, and introducing other player-unfriendly rules to further decrease a skilled player's potential advantage."(from Wikipedia)

The story is getting a lot of attention from various media sources.

In fact, a link to the AP story has been on Drudge for at least the last few hours.

Looks like people have more specifics now... a few recent articles:

More tantalizing details on the Borgata v Phil Ivey fraud claim

Famed poker star Phil Ivey sued by Borgata for almost $10 million over alleged playing card scam

Borgata Sues Phil Ivey, Companion and Card Maker over Alleged Edge-Sorting Scheme

Did Ivey bring his own deck ?

No

Did the employees or the Pit Boss have the option to not set the cards as Mr Ivey asked ?

Yes

Did the casino know about Edge sorting as an advantage play prior to Mr Ivey sitting down ?

I don't know this for certain but I suspect that they knew of the advantage.

I mean lol bad for the casino. They can't possibly win in court, if he was cheating why hasn't the state of New Jersey arrested him for cheating ?

This is LOL bad

How safe do you feel at the borgata knowing that for the second time in a year they have been swaglefoosed.

Once by phony tournament chips, that players had point out

Once by Ivey and the edge sorting crew.

I think the surveillance and security teams should have some open positions soon.

X 1000

I hope Ivey counter sues and gets what he is owed plus damages against this scummy freerolling company

lol at the casino agreeing to this, they deserve to lose their $

Had Ivey been at the table by himself making those requests himself, it would have tipped off the casino that he was using the advantage and they would have stopped giving in to his requests. The fact that he brought in a companion to make the requests for him proves that he knew of the card issue before he even sat down.

I can see where they can ban him for life and I can see where it is worth it for them to try to recover the funds. They probably won't recover them, because it is similar to card counting in BJ, but they certainly have gotten the word out to every other casino to be more careful in the future.

Are there any NJ laws against teams sitting at a table using methods that would give one of the team members better odds against the house?

Is this the same Chinese woman that accompanied him to Crockford's and spotted the flawed cards there? In this article she's referred to as 'Kelly'.

I don't see where the Borg has a leg to stand on. Ivey didn't do anything wrong but use his soul-reading ability to play the game. If he'd busted out for, say, $1.5M, the Borg isn't going to come to him and say "Hey, Phil, we used an automatic shuffler in that game and that's not right. Here's your $1.5M back. And say "Hi" to Sun for me". Freaking free-roll. Where are the pit bosses while this is going on? The don't have three people watching EVERYTHING when hundreds of thousands are on the table? If there're dealing procedures that went awry, how did they let it go on for so long?

Ivey didn't mark the cards himself. He only figured out how to exploit the situation (a situation provided completely by the bank) for the win. Not once, but on multiple occasions. I don't look at Ivey and see a cheat. I look at him and see
THE STONE COLD NUTS.

I loved the HSP clip embedded earlier, btw. This is probably what they were laughing at.