Poker pro Phil Ivey’s trials over a $10-million Borgata baccarat case are far from over. The popular card player’s legal team asked that a federal judge’s summary judgment on the case be entered as ‘Final Judgment’.
A final judgment is needed so as for Ivey to be able to file the case with the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. It seems that the poker professional is not ready to surrender his baccarat winnings, even though US District Court Judge Noel Hillman ruled against him last October.
Ivey and Atlantic City’s Borgata Casino have been locked in a legal battle for several years now. A hefty sum of almost $10 million has turned into the bone of contention between the player and the gambling venue.
Ivey and his companion player Cheng Yin Sun won that amount back in 2012 by playing baccarat at the casino. As noted in court filings, the two players played 8,618 hands over four visits and eight sessions at the casino.
They received their winnings only to found shortly after that they were sued by the Borgata for using a controversial technique – edge sorting – to improve their edge against the house. In other words, Ivey and Sun exploited barely noticeable imperfections on the backs of the cards they played with.
In his October ruling, Judge Hillman said that the use of edge sorting cannot be defined as a criminal deception or fraud. Yet, he admitted that the two players had violated their contract with the casino and therefore the New Jersey Casino Control Act. Ivey and Sun were ordered to surrender the winnings. However, it all shows that the defendants will do what is needed and possible to keep the money.
Ivey’s request for a final judgment is set to be heard on February 21.
The Borgata has not been the only casino the popular poker pro has been bickering with over the past several years. A very similar legal case between Ivey and Crockfords Casino in Mayfair, London ended unfavorably for him late last year.
Ivey sued the London-based casino for refusing to pay him £7.8 million in punto banco winnings. The player was denied what he believed was his as the gambling venue had found out that he had used the edge sorting technique to improve his chances of winning.
A November London High Court ruling stated that Ivey and his companion player Sun had not been dishonest but yet the use of the above-mentioned technique represented a form of cheating.
