Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lamboguy
my simple question is why did the Borgarta allow Ivy to bet $50,000 a hand to begin with and then decide to let him go up to $100,000 and then come back in court and claim they got cheated? Ivy could have lost even with edge and i doubt the casino would have given back any of his losses.
|
To me this is the biggest argument, they are arguing that Ivey wasn't actually risking his money, but lets face it, if ivey and his partner are 'off' in their calculations on their ability to read the cards, they lose and they wouldn't be getting their money back.
Borgata also had the ability to make sure the backs of the cards were uniform, if those cards are flawed and you can see it, that's borgata's problem, they're the one running the game and taking a 'commission"
I wonder what the 'reverse' of this situation is, in other words, if the casino, even unwittingly, did something to cheat the player and the player sued, would the player get the same 'considerations' as the house? I seriously doubt it.
