Ivey Vs Casino
- Jul 08, 2020 Edge sorting gave Ivey and Sun, who never touched the playing cards, a 6.8% mathematical advantage against the casino. Under normal circumstances, the casino has a roughly 1% edge in the game. The casino let them bet up to $100,000 a hand.
- Last week, the Supreme Court handed down judgment in Ivey v Genting Casinos UKSC 67. By a unanimous judgment, the Court held that R v Ghosh EWCA Crim 2, no longer represented the law and that directions based upon it should no longer be given.
Borgata Hotel and Casino’s search for assets in its pursuit to recover a New Jersey judgment may find its way to a Nevada courtroom.
Phil Ivey Vs Casinos
Last week, the Supreme Court handed down judgment in Ivey v Genting Casinos 2017 UKSC 67. By a unanimous judgment, the Court held that R v Ghosh 1982 EWCA Crim 2, no longer represented the law and that directions based upon it should no longer be given.
New Jersey’s most profitable casino won a lawsuit over poker pro Phil Ivey related to ‘edge-sorting’ in a baccarat game. This plan identifies manufacturing defects on the card backs. It allows the player to have a better idea of what the card may be if the deck is not cut properly, as was apparently the case in Ivey’s four Borgata sessions where he won approximately $9.6 million. The math did not support the likelihood of the massive wins.
Bond required for appeal
The judgment is for $10.13 million. Ivey and his co-defendant, Cheung Yin Sun, were required to post that amount in a bond during an appeal of the decision handed down in 2016.
Ivey and Sun had a 14-day waiting period to post the bond. Both sought to stay the bond until the appeal’s process was exhausted. They were unsuccessful.
Borgata searched for assets
When the bond was not posted during the allotted time, Borgata searched New Jersey records for assets belonging to them. The casino was only able to find a single bank account in the state belonging to Ivey. It was at Wells Fargo Bank and it was empty.
Borgata then searched Nevada for assets belonging to the pair. A condominium was discovered in Nevada. It was acquired for $279,000 last decade.
Four businesses were located in Ivey’s name in Nevada. One appears defunct, while the others seem related to Ivey League. That was a poker coaching website that officially shuttered in May 2017. It has not posted a video in more than a year and its forum appears to have been abandoned.
One notable piece of Nevada real estate related to Ivey is not accessible. He owned a $2 million home in the Las Vegas suburb of Summerlin, sold in 2013 after a divorce.
Reports indicate that Ivey owns oceanfront real estate in Cabo San Lucas, Mexico. He also used a bank account in that country to wire money to Borgata for his baccarat bankroll. That may be of little help to Borgata. It is difficult for American countries to lien real estate and bank accounts in other countries.
Borgata hopes it can win a motion to docket the case in Nevada. This would allow for liens to be placed on identified assets that include real estate and businesses.
Not Ivey’s first court loss related to ‘edge-sorting’
Ivey Vs Genting Casinos
Ivey Vs Casino Bingo
Borgata was the second casino to get involved in legal action with Ivey after beating them at baccarat using the edge-sorting system. Crockfords in the United Kingdom refused to pay him after a large win. Ivey sued Crockfords, but a UK court sided with the casino.
These baccarat cases are not the only controversial situation Ivey has been involved in related to gaming. He was a house pro and investor in Full Tilt Poker, but the site failed to keep enough cash on hand. This was exposed when the company was indicted on April 15, 2011. This date is known as ‘Black Friday’ in the online poker industry.
Card manufacturer more successful against Borgata
Ivey Vs Casino Poker
Gemaco, the company that manufactured the cards used in the baccarat edge-sorting, fared better against Borgata than Ivey did. A judge ruled against the company. However, Gemaco is only liable for the cost of the cards used by Ivey. That amounts to about $27.