In motions filed on Wednesday in federal court, the Atlantic City casino the Borgata is looking for a dismissal of a lawsuit brought by poker professional Phil Ivey regarding the non-payment of his winnings from a 2012 baccarat binge.
In their motion, attorneys for the Borgata claim that Ivey and a partner, Cheng Yin Sun, utilized the technique known as “edge sorting” to unfairly win $9.6 million during a weekend of baccarat at the casino in New Jersey. “Edge sorting” is the practice of identifying slight defects in the cut of the cards in use for table games in a casino and positioning those cards so that they can be easily identified during a game. “The facts of this case are undisputed that Mr. Ivey and Ms. Sun set out to deceive Borgata with their sophisticated scheme and they were successful in doing so,” attorneys for the Borgata wrote in their motions.
The Borgata’s response with the motion to dismiss followed Ivey’s deposition that exposed a great deal of the inner workings of the casino industry. In that deposition, Ivey mentioned how the Borgata and its staff would try to affect the game in play, plying him and Sun with “free alcohol served by only the most curvaceous and voluptuous females in the industry.” “It distracts you from your playing,” Ivey stated in the deposition. “I mean, anything they can do to give themselves an advantage. Everyone knows that alcohol impairs your judgment and they offer that…they have the pretty cocktail waitresses ad they’re all very flirty. They’re talking to you…I got quite a few numbers.”
In a nutshell, Ivey accused the Borgata (and in reality every casino in the United States if not the world) of trying to distract him through several means in an attempt to separate him from the millions he had brought to the table (betting $50,000 to $100,000 per hand of punto banco, a baccarat-style game, can require some attention). Through the edge sorting methods he and Sun used, it was Ivey’s way of evening up the game through what is called “advantage” play.
The Borgata took up this issue in their motion to dismiss, calling Ivey’s accusations (and I don’t recall ever seeing this in any legal textbook) “gimcrackery,” or basically red herrings that lead nowhere. “When the dust kicked up by defendants’ repeated attempts to vilify the casino industry settles, we will have come full circle to the beginning of this case,” the casino wrote in their motion. “This issue is, and has always been a simple one: is edge sorting, as specifically admitted to and practiced by Mr. Ivey and Ms. Sun, cheating or unfair play? The individual playing cards do not change the answer. Complimentary drinks do not change the answer. Cocktail servers do not change the answer. There is no defense that changes the underlying nature of defendants’ edge sorting scheme. It is either permitted or not, lawful or unlawful, and that is the question before this court.”
If there is one thing that is potentially making the court lean in favor of the Borgata is another case involving Ivey and another casino regarding a similar circumstance. Last fall Crockfords, a popular casino in London, won a lawsuit against Ivey and was not forced to pay up the $12 million Ivey and Sun won playing punto banco at that property in 2012. British judges determined that Ivey’s usage of edge sorting (this was just prior to Ivey’s run at the Borgata in 2012) was indeed “cheating for the purpose of civil law” and denied Ivey the money.
With both sides holding lawsuits over the head of the other – and with all the pertinent documents now filed in the case – it is up to the judges to determine how to move forward. The next action in the case is set for November 2, when the judges will issue their rulings regarding the dismissal cases of both sides.