Poker Coverage: Poker Legislation Poker Tournaments U.S. Poker Markets

Divorce Settlement for Poker Star Phil Ivey's Ex-Wife Reopened in Court

Eight-Time WSOP Bracelet Winner Reportedly Took on $15.1M of Debt

Print-icon
 

The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported Monday that details of the 2009 divorce settlement between Phil Ivey and his ex-wife Luciaetta Ivey are being debated in court.

Ivey, the former Full Tilt Poker pro, gave his wife millions and assumed the couple’s debt, according to an answer filed in December to a petition she filed in September. The answer said that the former couple had $15.1 million in “gambling and other debt.”

In the petition, Luciaetta takes issue with contributions her husband had made to a judge presiding over the divorce proceedings.

Luciaetta reportedly stopped receiving alimony from Phil in April 2011. Per the divorce agreement, if Phil stopped receiving payments from his relationship with Full Tilt Poker, the alimony would stop.

Lawyers for the poker star said that his ex-wife “sought to reopen the divorce case because she wasted all her money.”

 
 
 
 

Comments

AdrianP
over 7 years ago

She should be paying Ivey to get divorced, not receiving a share of the assets. She contributed nothing to the marriage financially, and only spent his money ($1.2m on purses and $1m on jewelry??). Obscene. Woman in divorce proceedings are some of the most angry, evil and vindictive people on the planet. There are endless examples of their pre-meditated actions in marrying successful men, then divorcing a few years later. Sadly, the courts just seem to want to screw the person who actually generated the wealth in the relationship.

 
Reply
 

VoiceOfReason
over 7 years ago

I think you will find that women are angry, evil and vindictive people period. Plus they also manipulate via flashing of legs and boobs. Unfortunately the majority of you schmucks just fall for it time and again.

 
Reply
 

mrjimbob
over 7 years ago

I love how AdrianP catorizes Phil Ivey as successful --divorced and 15.1 Million in debt does not sound successful to me

 
Reply
 

AvalancheRyder
over 7 years ago

It didn't say Phil was $15.1 million in debt, he just assumed that debt in the settlement. He could easily have $90 million for example in the bank, and have bills totalling $15 million, in which case he is in the black $75 million. I'm not making any claims about what he may or may not have, just using it as an example to illustrate how assuming a debt doesn't necessarily mean you actually have a -$15 million net worth.

 
Reply
 

1Acehigh
7 years ago

You need some LESSONS IN FINANCES, FAST!!!

 
Reply
 

robtr3
over 7 years ago

JimBob: ALL people and entities have debt of some sort...the electric bill is a debt, the car insurance bill is a debt, the car note is a debt, the mortgage is a debt...you get what I'm saying? So, too, are casino markers (which I'm sure Ivey takes regularly; you don't think he REALLY carries millions in cash wherever he goes, do you?) whether they're more than 30 days old or less than 30 minutes old. Ivey's lifestyle runs in big numbers, therefore significant debt is to be expected. Remember, net worth = assets - liabilities/debts.

 
Reply
 

robtr3
over 7 years ago

* Now, if Ivey was failing to pay off markers in a timely manner, that would be a much different story (not to mention a separate problem). Seeing how he's back to playing open-air tournament poker again, I highly doubt it!

 
Reply
 

mrjimbob
over 7 years ago

I appreciate you fellows speculating on what kind of debt Phil has. Using your examples of an electric bill, car insurance and a car note, you would think that if a "successful" person would not have these debts listed in a divorce proceeding. I can understand a mortgage, but the number seems much too high for the bulk of the debt to be a mortages --or mortgages. I don't know Phil or his Ex-Wife, nor do I know their lifestyle. I suppose that the number could have been a snapshot of the couples total debt at the time including markers and other gambling debts. I just seems odd to me that someone catagorized as successful would be willing to hold such debt. I've known quite a few people I would catagorize as successful and without exception, they all were debt free. As for markers in various casinos, one would think that a successful poker player would have a deposit on account at most of the casinos that he regularly frequented. Suggesting that he plays for millions on markers just does not seem right to me. I wouldn't expect that he plays for stakes that high on a daily basis and probably knows well in advance when he would need to have that kind of money on account. My guess, and this is only a guess, is that Phil is probably in debt up to his eyeballs and his lifestyle is probably not what his image would make it out to be. I'm also willing to bet that when Phil needs big money to play, he doesn't use his own.

 
Reply
 

THEJOEF
over 7 years ago

I think Ivey is one of the greatest hustlers that has ever lived. He still maintains a mysterious way about himself. I mean this is a poker player not a entertainer yet he is a very intrigging figure to us all.Ive been on the dice table with him one time at the Borgata and he is quite different when shooting dice. He is truly trying to hurt the casino,at least that's how i felt listening to him. He was also very nice to the other players and the cocktail waitresses but was working the craps staff very hard.I don't know the guy but i am friends with people that he has been very generous to. I wish him and his family the best and I hope to see him rise above it all. I can't help it I just like the guy.

Oh, as for the dice experience, he bought in for 450K and 8 hours later he cashed in for 1.4 million.

 
Reply
 

1Acehigh
7 years ago

I feel the same way. He's my favorite player and IMO and 99% of others, he Is the BEST POKER PLAYER In the WORLD. Phil had NOTHING to do with the $$$ part of FT, he was just their Michael Jordan of the poker playing. I have a friend that knows him and he said Phil was MAD, SHOCKED, and In DISBELIEF when It all came down. He was led to believe FT had plenty of $$$$. The lawsuit was filed cause he thought they would pay the players until he learned there was NO MONEY. It will come out within the next yr or so what Phil thought was going on. He can't say NOTHING ATM, NOTHING. I'll ALWAYS pull for Phil. BTW, great story!!!!

 
Reply
 

robtr3
over 7 years ago

JimBob, I'll say it again: debts are debts, period. If you owe someone money, that's a debt; doesn't matter what for or how short- or long-term the debt is. Yes, every last item, debts included, is accounted for in a divorce proceeding, with the goal being to leave no room for misunderstanding as to who is responsible for what and have a solid means of resolving whatever questions do arise. Why are Mr. and Mrs. Phil Ivey "holding so much debt?" Wouldn't surprise me if I heard that they were living in a $15 million home; if that home carries a mortgage, guess what...THAT'S A DEBT regardless of whether it's being paid in a timely manner or not and therefore nothing that should necessarily be held against him.

 
Reply
 

mrjimbob
over 7 years ago

Robtr3, I think you misunderstood my original point. My only objection to the original comment was that I would not catagorize someone who has $15 Million in debt as Successful. Even using your example, someone who lives in a $15 Million dollar house with $15 Million in Debt does not make someone successful in my view. I would catorgize someone who lives in a $100,000 house who has it paid off much more successful. The article stated that the debt was gambling and other debt. My only point was that a person who has that much debt --no matter how much their net worth is-- is not a successful person in my opinion. Debt always comes with a price that successful people are not willing to pay. He could be in debt to be successful in the future --but if that's the case, he's not successful yet.

 
Reply
 

mrjimbob
over 7 years ago

As For Phil playing Craps with a buy in of $450K, That should tell all of us everything we need to know. My Father was addicted to Craps his whole life so I know first hand how the swings in that game are quite wild. One Day you are way up, the next way down --in the end, the casino always ends up with the bulk of the money. I've seen first hand my father win 2,3,4 Million at craps only to be way in debt the next week. I think Craps gamblers enjoy the rush and the rush is only there when the money can make or break you.

 
Reply
 

1Acehigh
7 years ago

Him buying in with 450k means NOTHING. GEEZ....

 
Reply
 

robtr3
over 7 years ago

Uhh...Jim...when assets = $100 million and liabilities = $15 million, usually you're in pretty good shape. Is that the case with Phil Ivey? Who knows...wouldn't surprise me if it is. Even if he only has $30 million in assets, I'd say he's still in good shape. Your original point is misguided; the mere existence of debt doth not a person break...it's the person's assets in relation to their debt that defines their net worth.

I saw a piece on TV (don't quite remember which channel; I want to say it was ESPN, but I could be wrong) where one guy followed Phil Ivey around for a weekend. Among the events of that trip was Ivey "writing a check" (I'm thinking more like signing off on a marker) to Foxwoods for $1 million at the craps table in their whale room. Something tells me they wouldn't be doing that if they hadn't thoroughly investigated his ability to make good on that.

I'm pretty sure that, if Ivey was in remotely as sorry a financial shape as you make him out to be based solely on the "$15 million in debt" part of this report on his divorce proceedings, we'd all be hearing about it by now!

 
Reply
 

mrjimbob
over 7 years ago

Looks like we're never going to see eye to eye on this one. You believe that having that much debt is acceptable for a successful person, I don't. The amount of his net assets is irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. He could have 100 Million Dollars or 100 Dollars--Only Phil knows. Lets just agree to disagree.

 
Reply
 

robtr3
over 7 years ago

Last response:

Until you recognize the true definition of net worth, you're right--we aren't going to see eye-to-eye. Knowing what kind of assets Phil Ivey is sitting on (which we probably never will for sure, for it's hardly our business anyway) might also unmuddy these waters for us. Why don't you run my theory by an accountant or two and see if he/she agrees.

Cheers!

 
Reply