Though the Gaming Commission wrote the ruling, it could not have been more favorable for the Borgata had they written it themselves. There are many lawyers well versed in gambling law. Finding a judge who is equally up to speed may be more difficult.

If I were in the final 27, I'd go with a class action suit that seeks an even chop of about $53K per player. I don't think Borgata would see it in its best interest to fight it very hard. It would probably move quickly into the settlement phase. The alternative would be extended negative publicity for them along with the real possibility of losing the case anyway.

Are you an attorney?

+1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000

Interestingly when the shoe is on the other foot and Borgata feels cheated by Phil Ivey taking MILLIONS from them in baccarat, out comes the lawsuit against Ivey. Maybe this casino should understand how it feels to the little guys who came to support the 1st event, spent money on transportation, food, hotels, expenses +buy-ins.

Do you think some of them feel cheated by this stupid ruling???

But in reality who's going to be pissed off other than the few big stacks remaining and the ones who busted on days (or part days) that were supposedly unaffected and aren't being reimbursed?

You know what gets me is that they still got over 1000 people to come down and play that 1st event after all the stuff that happened in January WITHOUT A RESOLUTION 3 MONTHS LATER!!! That's the problem though, there are not too many quality east coast venues to play poker so the vast majority of people just say **** it.

As I mentioned earlier, that 1st event got worse and worse each time it ran, from awful dealers, chaotic lines all over the place, faster 30 minute structures so more people would reenter - I could go on but what's the point??? People might not realize this but 2 years ago that same event started with 50 minute levels 1-10 and 60 minutes 11-20 and 75 minutes after that(25,000 starting chips). Now it is 30 minutes all of day 1, levels 1-16, 40 minutes levels 17-20, etc... and these guys still flock there like it's the best tournament ever and bragging about how many shells they will have to fire!!!

It's a shame that with a 1st place of over $320,000, the most any of these guys can take is a measly $19,000 after outlasting thousands of players. I mean, Borgata could have taken the last 27 players and had a nice freeroll tournament to apologize and give the players a chance to earn some extra money that they were THIS CLOSE to getting.

All in all just a sad ending to an overall depressing scene at the Borgata in January.

Unfortunately, 99% of the poker players don't think like you sir, as evident by the turnout for Borgata's recent same opening event.

This a terrible ruling for poker in many ways. How can you refund all these people at the cost of those that never busted?

Because Borgata would rather "gamble" and accommodate the masses. In their eyes, who cares if 27 people stop playing there right??? If 3000 players decide to stop playing there that would be a different story.

Then again, poker players aren't really the best at "grouping together" and fighting for a cause so even if Borgata decided not to refund anyone anything, they would probably still be packed come tournament time and that's a sad truth unfortunately.

Just asking if this is feasible (although appreciate that there might be logistical issues)

Would it not be possible for the Borgata to refund all the $560 buy-ins to the 2,143 players who were "impacted" by Lusardi and then re-convene the 27 players to finish off the event with the original prize money still available and paid for by the Borgata?

they can do whatever they want in this regard i assume. they chose not to, i guess. obviously, since people circumstances change re-convening everyone might not be the best idea, i suppose they could have payed more to the final 27 out of their own pocket.

personally, i think less to refunds and more to the final 27 would have been more fair, but i'm still going to be cashing my check when i get it.

Uhhhhh, "canceled" is actually the preferred spelling. Given all the anti-grammatical, misspelled crap in this thread, the majority of which is barely elementary school level writing, you choose to shoot yourself in the foot on a misfire?

I wasn't going to post until I read everything since this afternoon, but this was just too ironic to pass up. My God, how the standards have fallen decade by decade. It's so embarrassing for the country.

OK, here are my comments on the ruling: It seems to be reasonably fair, and well thought out - largely along the lines of what I anticipated. I did expect that there would be a slowly increasing payout according to stack size for the final 27, but instead they chose to pay everyone the same. I can't really argue against that, however, since (a) the larger issue was dealt with: ensuring that all the affected players who busted out receive refunds, and (b) the nominal final 27 are making out pretty well compared to other players who are just as deserving.

Now, I understand why some in the final 27 would be unhappy, but it's all based on an illusion. It sucks for them, but the fact is that we don't really know the true final 27, and the nominal final 27 are all holding dirty chips in their stacks. Although they didn't knowingly do anything wrong, they're still the lucky beneficiaries of the fake chips, whereas many unknown players could have been there, but were busted out because of the cheating. If anything, one could make the argument that many of the lucky final 27 were unfairly advantaged in this settlement, and I think that would be correct. All in all, it seems like a reasonable balance.

I feel badly for the final 27, but they were victims of a cruel illusion in a compromised tournament. It must be tough to feel like you've finally made it, only to discover that it's all a sham, and that any one of hundreds of other players could be in your shoes if the tournament hadn't been compromised. Given time, I hope and trust that members of the final 27 will be able to step back and see the situation with more objectivity, and realize that in fact they may have been the lucky ones. I apologize to those of you who are reading this now, with steam coming out of your ears! But in time, I think you will come to agree.

One thing that I absolutely love: The unaffected players, those who deserve nothing, are actually getting nothing. That seems simple and obvious, but in a world where loudness and entitlement seem to win more often than not, it's refreshing to see logic and fairness prevail for once. Good job, DGE and Borgata, for not caving to the hordes of opportunistic profiteers.

I expected to see a lot of anger and outrage here, and it's just the way I thought it would be. I hope that in a few days, people can try to look at the bigger picture, step back and recognize that this is actually a very reasonable attempt at a fair settlement.

on the bold...exactly how I feel. yes it sucks for them but I don't think they deserve any more than the final 50 or 100 or more. just so happens that was when the tourney was stopped. Take the 20k and move on. I know I would feel different if I was one of the 27 but I'm not. I'm getting a refund that I didn't even want but since they are mailing checks I will donate it to charity.

I don't know how they managed to piss me off, but they did. They had to dodge rain drops to do it. I played 1B and only lasted two hours, so I didn't feel like I had to have a refund. I felt that the final 27 deserved to have the full amount remaining paid out, preferably with some portion via chip chop or ICM. If they gave refunds over and above that, great, and I thought it would be a wise PR move.

I will call the hotline, but based on the criteria, I don't think I qualify based on where I played. This means that everyone who gets a refund got to freeroll for 19K or a smaller cash already paid out. In addition, with them confirming that Lusardi played on Day 1A and 1B, the event was compromised before I entered because fake chips were already in play. If he entered 1B and 1C and they didn't refund 1A, I could see that. However, in my opinion if you are refunding anybody from the point he entered forward you need to refund everyone who was in the tournament in any location at that point, and NOT at the expense of the 27.

Now, if nobody was getting refunds and the 27 were being properly taken care of, I wouldn't have an issue with it. But given that some refunds were given, I feel that I got screwed, because other players effectively had a freeroll in this tournament that I and many others paid for. Again, obviously the majority of the 27 got screwed too.

To top it off there's nothing in there about even attempting to get back the money that Lusardi made, including the chip leader bonus. Now I get that he may have blown it all on coke, hookers, lodging and gambling. However, they should be going after it and regardless, the ~8K or whatever should be disbursed in some way, shape or form whether they can recoup it or not.

If you gave the poker playing community all of the relevant information and told us to come up with the worst possible solution short of refunds for all and stiff the final 27, this would be just about the nut low.

As far as basically not finding the Borgata responsible for what went down at all, I think their many changes in procedures are pretty strong evidence that they were negligent in some ways. If they just went out and bought RFID chips or chips that light up under a black light or whatever they got, I could see that claim. Their procedures were fine and they are getting cutting edge chips to avoid this happening. However, if you asked any regular poker player who played that event, we could all list several easy, low-tech ways to better run and secure the tournament. Thus, they were negligent - they failed to take steps a reasonable person would take to secure the event.

Last, but perhaps most importantly, is it really possible that Lusardi was acting alone?

Fact: At least 800,000 in 5K chips were in play. That's 160 chips, or 8 stacks.. That's the Press of Atlantic City number - there were a few different numbers floating around, I think that was the low one, so I'll go with that.

Fact: They found about 2.7M more in the pipes at Harrahs. That's 27 stacks.

Are we supposed to actually believe that one player introduced eight stacks of chips over the course of a few days of play all by himself, and nobody else cheated? If this is the case, I believe the Borgata and/or DGE should release some evidence of how he got that many chips in play in that little time. Did he literally add more than an entire rack and a half while table changing? That's about the only way to do it.

And are we also to believe that he planned to attempt to introduce 27 more stacks all by himself?

If someone wanted to bet you the day after this news came out that it was a lone wolf and not a team, what kind of odds would you give? 50 to 1? 100 to 1?

So to recap... They screwed most of the final 27, they effectively made the tournament a freeroll for big chunks of Day 1A and 1B at the expense of the rest of Day 1A/1B and 1C and they didn't make any mention of any attempt to recoup Lusardi's "winnings." To top it off, they acted as if the Borgata wasn't negligent at all and they didn't catch any accomplices.

The fact that I didn't expect or feel entitled to a refund, and they still managed to infuriate me tells you how bad it was. I'd like to say I'd take my poker playing business elsewhere, but until someone else starts comping me Friday and Saturday nights for playing 1/2 and a few tournaments, or they stop, I'll begrudgingly keep playing there... But I don't plan on playing any future tournaments there.

Sir, you were completely unaffected by the cheating. You played in a section isolated from Lusardi, where there was absolutely no possibility of coming into contact with fake chips, or into contact with any player who had been affected by fake chips. Your section played out completely normally, exactly as it would have if Lusardi had never been born. You were one of the few who got what you paid for, an honest tournament experience.

Other people were knocked out unfairly. Hundreds of people made mid-level runs, but could have gone further if not cheated - and they received refunds or cashes far below what they actually earned. They could have been final 27 players. Others experienced the cruel illusion of making the final 27, which they hadn't really earned at all - but they didn't know that. What an awful letdown to realize it was all false, that they were no more deserving than hundreds of others. How would it feel to have your hopes unjustifiably lifted, only to come crashing down when the truth comes out? All these affected people lost the chance at an honest tournament experience.

Yes, in some sense the tournament experience was also ruined for you, but at least you suffered no harm. In the big picture, you were relatively lucky, one of the few to get a fair shake. If you could see it this way, you might appreciate why you have no claim, and why others do. You could even be happy to realize that the impacted players are receiving some justice. After all, you could have been one of the players who did suffer harm.

Think about it.

Ruling is terrible. It is remarkably generous to the bust-outs who are being refunded (they were entitled to little/nothing, e.g. refund of $60 fees) and is a windfall for the smaller stacks in the final 27 (who are receiving more than their EV for no good reason).

But they've done a great injustice to the remaining large stacks.

Overpaying some does not offset underpaying others. Bad precedent imo.

I presume the logic of excluding some bustouts from the refunds is that the order and method of breaking down the tables would result in some players never encountering lusardi and the fake chips, correct?

Sorry, no steam. You've made some good points. If Lusardi didn't play in the tournament the final 27 would likely have been different but the fact that the DGE has ruled that the remaining players get some of the remaining money indicates that we are not, in fact, "nominal". It seems strange that we are getting 35% of our payouts. An argument (a shabby one) could be made for nothing but I can see no lucid argument for a partial payout. The $19,323 is acknowledging that we deserve to get paid and that the tournament results were not completely illegitimate. As a shorter stack I have only been cheated out of 10K in equity so I have less reason for outrage but it is a dubious argument IMO to say that the fake chips made me us the "lucky ones".

Any argument about what is "just" and "right" will obviously be open for debate so I'll ignore my own desire for semantic clarity and just say for the sake of non-argument that you describing the DGE ruling as "reasonably fair" is a sensible response. However, I still think it would be "reasonably fair" for the Borgata to now take ownership of this situation and offer a full payout to the final 27, chip chop 900K and make this right.

Borgata is smart. They did this give everyone a little piece to deter lawsuits. Give the final 27 19k half will most likely accept. Refund some players money to help the class action law suit lose traction. Players aren't united. I don't understand how I can get a refund but the guy in the room across from me doesn't. What if lusardi busts a player and that guy goes to the other room?
Didn't they move people from room to room it's very weird ruling that seems to try to appease the public but when you look deep it's wtf

why 4:30 pm? if i remember correctly the rebuy period ended after first 8 levels which was approximately at 2:00pm? im just confused how lusardi joined in day 1A at 4:30 pm if thats what they are saying.. can anyone explain this to me? did i forget something? did borgata find someone else who introduced the fake chips at 4:30? did lusardi first introduce them at 4:30?

http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/n...9bb2963f4.html

I think I see what you are saying - but something still isn't adding up. The fact is that the payout to the 27 is still more than 10th place money. If the tournament had played out, then 18 of them would have cashed for less. The first 3 places or so are the ones really getting the loss - but it will never be known, and there truly is no way to ever know - who the actual 27 would have been, and who would have placed where, if Lusardi hadn't put the fake chips into play.

Why would a court even seriously entertain a lawsuit such as this? Getting class action status isn't easy, and the Borgata would probably bring a motion for summary dismissal on the basis that they are following the rulings of the NJDGE - which they are legally required to do.

+1 You said it better than I could!!

Lee

Some will try to sue, doubt they win. Had the fake chips not been entered the final 27 would be totally different.

Is this a level?

The majority of the 27 will run to cash their checks.