That's his job, and he is paid very well to do it.

Don't forget all the guys who busted out that never even sniffed a fake chip, they're probably sending the most tweets - at least if this thread is any indication.

I love when I read comments from people who feel that players from day 1a or 1b shouldn't be considered for refunds. Fact- this tournament was compromised. Fact- this tournament was cancelled. I could give many reasons why a player in day 1a or 1b should be refunded but one that sticks out is any player who played those days and bagged chips at the end of the day, he may have an average stack for that day but would be below average compared to the average chips on days when chips were entered by cheating. Thus compromising the outcome. Players heve won tournaments with a chip and a chair. Starting out with an average of 10k less on day 2 for those players can be the difference.

Please share as no one else has articulated a good reason......

cool, so give us all details on how, when, where every single fake chip made it into the tourney

See pipes, your complete lack of logic is embarrassing.....you think this is the standard required, all details on every fake chip?

Damn, you seem so sure certain people were unaffected. Thus I assumed you had this information.

With the known facts, people were certainly unaffected. Your refusal to acknowledge this is as stupid as your belief that some else has to prove every detail of every fake chip to conclude that a group of bustouts were not effected by the cheating.

Ok, give me the details. We haven't been given much actually. Just one guy has been arrested. So one guy brought in a whole rack of chips? When and how did he do this? A lot of questions unanswered in this canceled tourney.

If this is easy and it was just one guy and it's clear who was affected and who was not then what is the holdup here?

There is no proof he played more than one day one, other than one poster claiming he did. So at least one day one or maybe two would not have been compromised by lusardi, the only known cheat. No evidence of any other cheaters is known and no one else was found to have fakes in their possession. Players busted out never playing against lusardi and before he played day one.

What proof do you have that everyone was affected or that the cancellation of the tournament was compromised to justify paying these bustouts? We know the answer is nothing as you continue to avoid answering.

This is just a broken record anyways. A guy claims he has multiple reasons to pay the bustouts, lets hear from him. We already know pipes and co have not been able to provide any reasoning.

This is interesting, I'm supposed to be out there investigating? Sorry for the holdup doods, I'll get out there and join the DGE and the Borgata.

Link me up to reported details that Lusardi acted alone

Link me up to reported details that he acted with another player.

Tourney was canceled due to it being compromised. I'm expecting them to provide full details on what exactly happened in their tainted tournament.

But you are probably misinterpreting my position. It's actually quite simple, really.

Tourney was canceled due to it being compromised. If no details or other information is reported then my expectation would be that all players should be refunded.

But if detailed information comes out with proof that Lusardi acted alone and details how he got almost a full rack of chips himself then it's fine that certain days are not refunded.

Of course, Borgata is a business and can always just to go above and beyond what is mandated to help preserve their goodwill. And we are free to comment on their decisions regarding this situation.

None of this is rocket science imo

There's no point in argue with jjjou. He refuses to listen to anyone and take their opinions into account. He loves borgata thinks they did right and should not take any fall for a cheating scandal.

As has been stated, the tournament was compromised and subsequently cancelled; ergo, refunding EVERYONE is in fact the only logical outcome.


Does that make it fair or just for everyone involved? More than likely not but to assume that the final 27 deserve a higher standard of compensation seems unreasonable.

You appear to suggest that everyone who has already cashed should receive more money than everyone in the final 27.

guy playing small stakes tourney at Borgata today told me he talked to Tab and Borgata is expecting their "new" chips soon, with some sort of added security feature. maybe this is old news and sorry don't have any concrete, verifiable details. i'm kind of surprised if Borgata has invested in better chips that they have not gotten this info out there, let the poker players know that they are trying to improve tournament security. or perhaps, conversely, they don't want to make a big deal about new chips (i.e. admitting culpability for chipgate because of the chips they had)

More importantly they should invest in a surveillance grid that can be installed and removed as needed for each event in the events center.

The wsop does this every year. Its a big upfront expense but after the initial purchase the only expense is installing and dismantling it.

They said he hid the chips in the bathrooms. They could not install cameras there and it's too easy to palm a chip or two and keep dropping them onto your stack while shuffling them. The only thing they could so here would be to count players chips before they are moved or a table is broken. It would be dealers job to keep track. write down a new coming stack note at first arrival and when a player leaves along with counting during breaks or colorups. It would be obvious if there was chip dumping when ever the table breaks and the counts were added up

If the chip totals were confirmed by the dealer before bagging and the bagged chip totals were reconciled at the end of each day this would never have gotten to the point that it did. Basic accounting. The total bagged amount should equal the total entries times the starting stacks. Yes there could be a margin of error for a color up mistake but not hundreds of thousands which was the case. Not reconciling the bagged chips at the end of the day is just lazy. Ten minutes with a calculator. If this were done day 2 would have never happened never mind day 3 etc.

The other day ones have to be refunded if any of the day ones are refunded. The reason is you don't know every player who was or was not affected on Lusardi's day one. If you refund any one of those unaffected players their buyin or portion of it, the players of the other day ones have a lawsuit ready to file.

You are correct in that you don't know which of the players on Lusardi's Day 1 were affected, so you refund them all.

However, assuming it can be proven that Lusardi acted alone, you DO know that the first-day bustouts on the previous Day 1s were unaffected. So no refunds would be necessary for them.

I can only assume you can't determine pot odds in a hand. You just don't understand mathematics. Statistically any player from any day1 that chips were not introduced by a cheater put those players who bagged chips at a disadvantage because there chip average would be lower than that of a day where cheaters introduced bad chips. This is so simple I now know why players play bad cards on g
ut feelings.

Many day 1a and 1b players busted out on day 2