Tuesday, July 29, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 7 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

Casino will pay gamblers $1.5 million in unshuffled cards case

By Wayne Parry

Associated Press


ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. >> Hours after a judge ordered the Golden Nugget Atlantic City to let gamblers cash in nearly $1 million worth of chips they won in a card game where the decks were unshuffled, the casino's owner overruled his lawyers and agreed to make the payments.

The judge's decision drew an angry reaction from casino officials, who called it "an ambush" and vowed to file an appeal first thing Tuesday morning.

But Tilman Fertitta, the Texas billionaire who owns the Golden Nugget, said he decided to pay the winners to make the whole thing go away.

"Without question, the mini-baccarat game that took place on April 30, 2012, allowed $10 bettors to realize a gambler's dream and enabled them to beat the house out of $1.5 million," he said. "Even though we can appeal the court's ruling and take full advantage of the appellate process and legal system, and tie the matter up in litigation for a number of years, the Golden Nugget is a people business, and is prepared to allow the gamblers — most of whom continue to gamble at Golden Nugget — to realize the gambler's dream of beating the house."

The casino also will let gamblers keep more than a half-million dollars it already paid them from the same disputed games.

"I wasn't cheating," one of the gamblers, 51-year-old Michael Cho of Ellicott City, Md., said after the judge's ruling. "I didn't do anything illegal. It wasn't right for them to get the money."

The dispute stems from numerous games of mini-baccarat held at the casino earlier this year. Unbeknownst to either the players or the casino, the cards put into use for the games were not shuffled as their manufacturer, Gemaco Inc. of Kansas City, Mo., had promised.

Over a speakerphone in the judge's chambers, the company's attorney, Jeffrey Mazzola, acknowledged the company had erred.

"There was a mistake made at the Gemaco facility, which we freely admitted," he told the judge. "This was a one-time, isolated mistake, but it occurred. It's supposed to be a game of chance. It changed from a game of chance to a windfall for the individual players. What we have now is individual players coming to the court asking for a free payday based on a mistake that took place."

Lawyers for the Golden Nugget said the pattern of cards became apparent to players, who had been wagering $10 a hand and suddenly upped their bets to $5,000 a hand. The cards did not come out of the chute in numerical order, such as 2-3-4-5. Rather, they came out in a predetermined pattern that the manufacturer lists as a proprietary secret, the attorneys said.

But it did become obvious to the players.

"Anybody could see that — that was the dream we all look for," Cho said.

But Cho said he and the other gamblers still faced risk because they had no idea how long the pattern would endure. It lasted at least 41 hands, during which the players won more than $1.5 million. Despite its suspicion that a sophisticated cheating operation was under way, the casino did not stop the games.

"We took a chance on every hand we bet, that it wouldn't change," he said. "We didn't know if it was going to change. That's called gambling."

The Golden Nugget had sought a ruling barring the gamblers from cashing in more than $977,000 worth of chips they won from the game but still have in their possession. The casino also wanted the judge to order the return of more than $500,000 in winnings it paid out to some of the winners immediately after the games.

The judge denied both requests, saying there will be time to address those issues as the lawsuits filed by both sides come to trial. He agreed that the gamblers did nothing wrong, and even though they discerned a pattern, the judge said there was no guarantee it would not change at any moment. Fertitta said the payments to the gamblers would occur on the condition that both sides dropped litigation against the other.

"It was a rigged game," casino attorney Louis Barbone said. "We walked in that day believing everything was on the up-and-up. We walked out $1.5 million in the hole."

The casino claims the vendor's failure to shuffle the cards made them "defective" and in violation of state gambling regulations mandating fair odds for both the casino and its customers.

Fertitta said the proper course for Golden Nugget to recoup its losses was through litigation with the card manufacturer.

"We have a company we can go back against that has admitted fault," he said. "But that's our problem."

 Print   Email   Comment | View 7 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
HOSSANA wrote:
Good PR to the owners of the casino. They will eventually recoup more than their losses as gamblers will be patronizing their casino in good faith due to the trust they have in the owners and the PR of paying up in the baccarat game. Very happy that the owners did not pursue the appeal process but their attorneys need to get a life on the value of integrity which would have been more detrimental to the owners and the reputation of the Casino if they had continued to appeal or fight the case.
on August 31,2012 | 02:28PM
st1d wrote:
the pit crew should have picked up on it way before the players realized the pattern was in play. even the camera security team should have reviewed the tapes to discover the cause of the problem.

rather than blaming and detaining the players, the casino should have switched to hand shuffling rather than continuing to use loaded decks.

in the end, the players will likely return the money to the casino, bet by bet.

on August 31,2012 | 02:59PM
ufried wrote:
on September 1,2012 | 06:54AM
cojef wrote:
A minor set-back which will be recouped easily and quickly. Very astute PR move. Never was a Casino frequenter, although visiting the environs due business necessity.
on September 1,2012 | 07:20AM
Macadamiamac wrote:
The odds favor the house in ANY gambling situation. This time they failed to shuffle the card deck and somehow it's the manufacturer's fault. The customers didn't know the cards were unshuffled, but using their observations and willingness to 'gamble' that the pattern(s) would continue, gambled. Duh. So boo hoo for the casino, but I salute them for standing up and taking their medicine. After all, they'll make up the loss in a couple of days, if not hours anyway.
on September 1,2012 | 07:22AM
honokai wrote:
They lost and then they said we are doing this as good will. Does anyone actually believe that? They have to pay. Lying about how you are doing this for customer after having to make them sue stinks like a huge pile of poop. I would probably still stay there anyways. Because I already no that they are trying to steal from me. That is why they are business.
on September 1,2012 | 09:44AM
HD36 wrote:
Any gamble involves risk and possible reward or loss. It could also be called an investment by some. Bailing people and business out takes away any risk of loss and puts it on others.
on September 1,2012 | 10:58AM
Breaking News