unJon
unJon 
Joined: Jul 1, 2018
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 2381
August 23rd, 2019 at 5:08:13 AM permalink
Quote: 100xOdds

if Ivey did file the appeal already before the wsop, then why was Borgata able to go after him for his $100k+ wsop winnings in event #58?

wouldnt the appeal stay any collections?

Because he never posted the appeal bond.
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 248
  • Posts: 7802
August 23rd, 2019 at 7:28:31 AM permalink
He is supposed to put up the money during the appeal.

He has not.

So Borgata is coming for his winnings.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
Gandler
Gandler
Joined: Jan 27, 2014
  • Threads: 31
  • Posts: 1491
Thanks for this post from:
AxelWolf
August 23rd, 2019 at 3:32:37 PM permalink
In all honesty, I think Borgata has the law on their side, but I do not really blame either side.

Ivey took advantage of a situation, Borgata is taking advantage of the law to protect their assets (and no doubt to discourage future behavior).

Both parties are doing what they feel is in their best interest.
Rigondeaux
Rigondeaux
Joined: Aug 18, 2014
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 2537
August 23rd, 2019 at 4:22:24 PM permalink
I think DO's best point is this.

It would seem that the cheating/swindling thing is criminal. Maybe I'm misreading it. But if it is criminal, and that has been proven, why are Ivey and Sun not being prosecuted?

I understand the OJ simpson principle: that you can lose a civil trial based on criminal behavior, even if not convicted in a criminal trial. But it's odd that they nobody even tried.
Gandler
Gandler
Joined: Jan 27, 2014
  • Threads: 31
  • Posts: 1491
August 23rd, 2019 at 4:28:21 PM permalink
Quote: Rigondeaux

I think DO's best point is this.

It would seem that the cheating/swindling thing is criminal. Maybe I'm misreading it. But if it is criminal, and that has been proven, why are Ivey and Sun not being prosecuted?

I understand the OJ simpson principle: that you can lose a civil trial based on criminal behavior, even if not convicted in a criminal trial. But it's odd that they nobody even tried.



Call the NJ gaming commission and make a complaint.

It is such a high profile case, I am sure it is on their radar, and there are probably reasons for why they did and did not do certain things.

They could fine both individuals for quite a but of money (based on the amounts they "won" ) so it could be profitable, but it would also probably be a long and expensive trial and investigation.
Rigondeaux
Rigondeaux
Joined: Aug 18, 2014
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 2537
August 23rd, 2019 at 4:42:55 PM permalink
Quote: Gandler

Call the NJ gaming commission and make a complaint.

It is such a high profile case, I am sure it is on their radar, and there are probably reasons for why they did and did not do certain things.

They could fine both individuals for quite a but of money (based on the amounts they "won" ) so it could be profitable, but it would also probably be a long and expensive trial and investigation.



"There are unknown reasons" is not that satisfying of an explanation.

IDK obvious, but I strongly suspect that if they had been capping bets, there would be a criminal prosecution. So, what is the difference?

How many times has someone been meticulously documented as cheating, in court no less, and the prosecutors were like, "nah, it's fine."
Gandler
Gandler
Joined: Jan 27, 2014
  • Threads: 31
  • Posts: 1491
August 23rd, 2019 at 5:11:59 PM permalink
Quote: Rigondeaux

"There are unknown reasons" is not that satisfying of an explanation.

IDK obvious, but I strongly suspect that if they had been capping bets, there would be a criminal prosecution. So, what is the difference?

How many times has someone been meticulously documented as cheating, in court no less, and the prosecutors were like, "nah, it's fine."



Call and ask?

Or do an open records request?

I can't give you a satisfactory explanation, nobody here can (at least not openly) and only the gaming commission can (maybe if anyone can) , I would recommend: do a FOI request regarding their investigation and post the results here.
RS
RS
Joined: Feb 11, 2014
  • Threads: 62
  • Posts: 8623
August 23rd, 2019 at 5:19:10 PM permalink
Link was posted early in this thread, I think page 2, 3, or 4 of the “judge’s opinion” (look at page 17 of the opinion mostly). Idk what all that crap is, but I read it, and the TLDR is:

The purpose of legalized gambling is for the casino to have an advantage and to make money, among other things (recreation, event centers, etc.). Ivey & co breached their “contract” with Borgata (and CCA) in that they played a game that wasn’t played along the rules or purpose of legalized gambling (casino advantage). Therefore, they broke the rules of gambling.

HOWEVER, they didn’t break the rules of baccarat because in baccarat you’re allowed to touch, bend, etc. the cards, even though Ivey & co didn’t touch, bend, etc. the cards.

Also, Borgata tried to go after them for fraud, RICO, etc. but judge denied that, essentially saying that Ivey asking for certain conditions and misleading the casino about the reasons why he wanted them (he said superstition) doesn’t amount to fraud.
Gandler
Gandler
Joined: Jan 27, 2014
  • Threads: 31
  • Posts: 1491
August 23rd, 2019 at 5:22:07 PM permalink
Quote: RS

Link was posted early in this thread, I think page 2, 3, or 4 of the “judge’s opinion” (look at page 17 of the opinion mostly). Idk what all that crap is, but I read it, and the TLDR is:

The purpose of legalized gambling is for the casino to have an advantage and to make money, among other things (recreation, event centers, etc.). Ivey & co breached their “contract” with Borgata (and CCA) in that they played a game that wasn’t played along the rules or purpose of legalized gambling (casino advantage). Therefore, they broke the rules of gambling.

HOWEVER, they didn’t break the rules of baccarat because in baccarat you’re allowed to touch, bend, etc. the cards, even though Ivey & co didn’t touch, bend, etc. the cards.

Also, Borgata tried to go after them for fraud, RICO, etc. but judge denied that, essentially saying that Ivey asking for certain conditions and misleading the casino about the reasons why he wanted them (he said superstition) doesn’t amount to fraud.



Borgata cannot go after them for criminal charges, only the state can....

Borgata can only bring civil claims (which they successfully have).
RS
RS
Joined: Feb 11, 2014
  • Threads: 62
  • Posts: 8623
August 23rd, 2019 at 5:33:14 PM permalink
Quote: Gandler

Borgata cannot go after them for criminal charges, only the state can....

Borgata can only bring civil claims (which they successfully have).


So Borgata told the state to go after Ivey & co for criminal charges and the judge said no.

  • Jump to: