Casino Loses Millions, Sues Card Manufacturer
Recently, we wrote about a man suing a Las Vegas casino after he lost $500,000 gambling while intoxicated. As ridiculous as that suit may be, the Borgata Hotel Casino and Spa in Atlantic City is now vying for silliest casino lawsuit of the year. In a new suit filed in federal court, the Borgatta is suing Phillip Ivey, Jr., a big time professional gambler, and Gemaco, Inc., a card manufacturer, claiming Ivey won $9.6 million in a baccarat card-cheating scheme.
We imagine the nearly $10 million in winnings was against the house edge.
The real kicker is not that Ivey won such a large amount of money but, rather, how he was able to do so. According to the complaint, Ivey exploited a defect in the cards that allowed him to improperly sort and arrange them using a technique called “edge sorting” – illegal under the New Jersey casino gambling regulations. The cards, manufactured by Gemaco, were allegedly defective in that the pattern on their backs was not uniform. Where the cards were supposed to have a row of small white circles designed to look like the tops of diamonds, some of the cards apparently only had half or quarter diamonds. Allegedly, Ivey was able to sort desirable cards from undesirable ones after observing the defect.
We have to wonder when the Borgatta discovered this alleged defect. In an industry so heavily controlled and regulated, we find it hard to believe that any deck of cards would ever see the light of a casino floor without first being inspected and approved by the casino. With so much money on the line, Judi online have never been shy about self-policing. If this “defect” was an obvious one, we imagine these cards would have been sent right back to Gemaco. If there actually was a defect, then it was most likely so slight that it was undetected by even the most careful inspectors. The fact that Ivey was able to notice the flaw is impressive. Sure, it is easy for the Borgatta to point the finger at Gemaco. After all, its alleged flaw may have cost the casino nearly $10 million. But, why did Borgatta use a card with a decorative card backing in the first place? It seems like such cards would be more susceptible to non-uniformity and enable these types of situations.
We suppose a simple solid design would have been too tacky for the Borgatta. A casino’s extravagance is what draws the gamblers in to throw away their money. Unfortunately, this time it backfired.