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

Phil Ivey's Legal Team: 'Each And Every Penny Of [Ivey's] Winnings Was The Result Of Sheer Skill'

Poker Pro's Defense Is That He Didn't Swindle The Borgata Out Of $9.6M

Print-icon
 

Phil Ivey, who just won his 10th career WSOP bracelet last month, has responded to the Borgata’s $9.6 million lawsuit against him by trying to get the case dismissed. Ivey’s legal team filed a motion on Wednesday, saying that the poker pro didn’t cheat while playing high-stakes mini-baccarat in 2012, but instead used skill to take the house for bundles of money.

“Each and every penny of [Ivey’s] winnings was the result of sheer skill,” his lawyers wrote in the scathing 23-page motion. They said that in no way was Ivey’s method of “edge sorting” illegal. “Plantiff alleges that Ivey’s exquisite power of discernment somehow transforms his play into cheating and swindling,” Ivey’s camp shot back in response to the 58-page complaint.

Ivey and a partner were accused of being able to spot manufacturing defects in the back of playing cards to gain an edge over the house and take the joint for more than $9 million. The casino eventually went after Ivey for the money he won, saying it was won illegally. The casino said it violates New Jersey gaming rules—implying it’s harmful to the casino industry in Atlantic City.

Lawyers for Ivey argued that the Borgata’s “complaint is…nothing more than an attempt to justify its own negligence, motivated by its subjective intent to take as much money from Phil Ivey as it could during his specially arranged and agreed visits” to the casino.

At no point did Ivey or his female companion touch the cards or any other gaming equipment, the motion to dismiss said. Lawyer’s for the defendants said that any casino employee could have noticed the asymmetrical patterns in the cards that gave Ivey the 6.765-percent edge.

Ivey’s lawyers also said that a six-month statute of limitations has passed.

Borgata “voluntarily chose to grant every single request because it wagered defendant Ivey would lose his multi-million dollar deposits and hopefully more. Plantiff only now alleges that its own game was illegal because it lost that wager,” the motion added. In other words, Ivey’s legal team claimed the casino wouldn’t have cried foul if the edge sorting didn’t result in Ivey winning.

Atlantic City is stuck in crisis mode, as two casinos there have closed this year so far, and a third could soon be on the way. Casino revenues have been declining since 2006.

The Borgata vs. Phil Ivey saga is especially dramatic considering it’s the town in which the now-legendary gambler got his first taste of casino gambling during the mid-1990s.

 
 
Tags: Phil Ivey,   Borgata
 
 

Comments

Savy
4 years ago

Lawyers for Ivey argued that the Borgata’s “complaint is…nothing more than an attempt to justify its own negligence, motivated by its subjective intent to take as much money from Phil Ivey as it could during his specially arranged and agreed visits” to the casino.

This had been the most basic argument in Ivey favor. I guess the lawyer conceal their points for the argument until there is a need to surface them.

 
Reply
 

Savy
4 years ago

At no point did Ivey or his female companion touch the cards or any other gaming equipment, the motion to dismiss said. Lawyer’s for the defendants said that any casino employee could have noticed the asymmetrical patterns in the cards that gave Ivey the 6.765-percent edge.
This here is another easy prove that Ivey did not cheat

 
Reply
 

321action
4 years ago

lets dig a canal from Washington state, and let then let water flow down it from all that rain and snow melt up their and then let it flow into the drought plagued southwest and into the western mid-west for agriculture and stuff and to bring back the dinosaurs.

 
Reply