Phil Ivey involved in another incident with Casino - getting sued by Borgata for "Gaming the Deck".....again. Being sued for $9.6 million.

http://www.njlawjournal.com/id=12026...#ixzz2ybfMpXDo

If exploiting stupidity is criminal, the Borgata should get the electric chair.

I find the suit by the Casino(s) to be comical. All he is doing is playing the game with THEIR cards. If he can spot flaws in them and they can't, well to bad for them. They should make/buy better cards. More power to him.

I would like to hear what the status of his first lawsuit is.

Looks like they're suing the manufacturer of the cards too. That sounds like what should be done, not Phil.

When you state that he is again being sued, do you mean Foxwoods as the other time he got sued? Because I believe that was vice versa... He sued them because they would not pay his winnings after he spotted a flaw in the deck etc.

No.....by "again"....I meant involved in a "gaming the deck" incident. Last time with Crokfords in London, where they refused to pay him $12 million for similar accusations. He, in fact, sued them....for not paying.

This seems to be common behavior on his part.

If this story is accurate, it sounds like casinos are free-rolling people in situations like this.

Shouldn't casinos be 100% responsible for the integrity of their gaming equipment?

If the article is true, how is it that a major U.S. casino is dealing out defective cards in a game where millions and millions of dollars are at stake? What safeguards do they have in place - how do they examine the equipment before taking bets for millions of dollars? How is it that Phil Ivey is such a giant leap ahead in understanding the limitations of their equipment?

Further, shouldn't the casino also reimburse any and all losing players who played a game with these same cards, which allegedly, per that article, were somehow defective?

I would think that dealing cards that are defective from the pack - and not from any player tampering - is surely just bad business and the fault of no one but the casino. By using these cards on their own gambling tables, you would think the casino is explicitly vouching and acknowledging their integrity (again assuming no player tampering) for all casino purposes.

Further, sue winning players + no reimbursement for losing players = freeroll in my opinion.

This probably will never see court as you have to sue a person in their state of residence.

As most of you here feel Ivey is God, they would have had to file this in Heaven. Court is in recess in Heaven right now.

"The suit—... also names ...Cheng Yin Sun, who accompanied Ivey on his trips to the Baccarat table and who gave instructions to the dealer.

Read more: http://www.njlawjournal.com/id=12026...#ixzz2yboCZVTb

Pictures, please ?

I mean, he's just sitting there playing the same game you are.

Well.

Kind of.

Title is misleading. It says he is being sued again and I don't know why you would think anyone would comprehend it any other way.

....that's why I changed it......30 minutes ago

Edge sorting was a known advantage play at the time. There were already rumors of millions being won.

Pretty sure I could have told you what he was doing at the time and I've never stepped foot in a Baccarat pit.

Its likely no one at borgata knew about edge sorting, but they seem to ignore the obvious when they think they have a whale on the hook. Just ask Don Johnson.

sounds like they should be suing the dealer

lol

edge sorting... I get it now

is proving that the cards are flawed enough? it shouldn't be, they should have to prove he was aware of this and that's practically impossible isn't it? if all the casino has to do is to prove the cards were flawed then in practice this is simply a means for them to not pay whenever they feel like it

Read a few articles on edge sorting, still don't completely get it, can someone explain it in layman's terms? much appreciated.

Sometimes card manufactures make certain groups of cards with one pattern on the back, and the rest of the cards have another pattern....with subtle differences. Like a diamond pattern that gets cut in 1/2 at the edge on all "nine" cards but not on face cards....

Daily Mail is the nuts

lol Borgata should handle the lawsuit they have against them first regarding the chip scandal. Players still kept in the dark about what is happening nor has the final 27 been paid yet.

In all seriousness, Borgata should fire the dealer, sue the card manufacturer and ban Ivey if they see fit.

IveyPoker has a whole new meaning.

That is not accurate. All cards are equal, but not 100% symmetric, and Ivey gets the edge by requesting "lucky" cards to be turned 180° and the deck being reused.

All cards can't be equal, if they are not 100% symmetric.

In "laymans" terms.....the backs of the cards are "different" , and these differences can help a player identify a card value.