Wynn sues Charles Barkley for gambling debt
May 15, 2008 | 10:13
am
Last month I interviewed music industry mogul Irving Azoff, and he told a story about a night in Vegas a few years ago with basketball great Charles Barkley and Tiger Woods. Azoff recalled that "a very drunk Charles Barkley challenged me to a game of golf. Tiger was going to place a large wager that I would beat Charles provided we went and played at once on that golf course down the Strip that was lighted. It was a very, very large wager, and luckily for Charles, who was so drunk he was cross-eyed, he chickened out at the last minute. Lucky for him, because we would have taken a lot of money." And, indeed that might count as luck in the life of Charles Barkley.
Sadly, Barkley has found plenty of other opportunities in town to place lopsided wagers favoring the house, and math has taken its course. Barkley made this point himself perfectly once on a TNT show: "But I've got to understand you can't beat the casino. You might win a lot of money from them but in the long run they are going to win more money from you." Back in 2006, Barkley estimated his own gambling losses at over $10 million on ESPN. Now, the Las Vegas Sun reports, Wynn resort has filed suit for $400,000 against Barkley for unpaid gambling markers the casino issued to Barkley last October.
Obviously, Barkley is not the only regular Vegas customer to face this predicament. As resorts hate press from these sorts of actions and especially because of Barkley's fame, you can bet the casino made every effort to collect from him before escalating to a court case.
I will add that I have interviewed Barkley twice in Vegas, and both times he seemed to be drinking heavily and talked about getting ready to gamble later.
He certainly is going to wind up having to pay Wynn. In Nevada, failure to make good on markers results in felony charges. But is it hopelessly naive to ask if there comes a point in a free culture where a resort should tell someone they need help instead of extending more credit? The resorts insist on calling gambling "gaming," yet the reality is that gambling isn't a game: If you play too long you will lose, and that is not a fun or recreational activity. The case of Charles Barkley is not unique.
Sadly, Barkley has found plenty of other opportunities in town to place lopsided wagers favoring the house, and math has taken its course. Barkley made this point himself perfectly once on a TNT show: "But I've got to understand you can't beat the casino. You might win a lot of money from them but in the long run they are going to win more money from you." Back in 2006, Barkley estimated his own gambling losses at over $10 million on ESPN. Now, the Las Vegas Sun reports, Wynn resort has filed suit for $400,000 against Barkley for unpaid gambling markers the casino issued to Barkley last October.
Obviously, Barkley is not the only regular Vegas customer to face this predicament. As resorts hate press from these sorts of actions and especially because of Barkley's fame, you can bet the casino made every effort to collect from him before escalating to a court case.
I will add that I have interviewed Barkley twice in Vegas, and both times he seemed to be drinking heavily and talked about getting ready to gamble later.
He certainly is going to wind up having to pay Wynn. In Nevada, failure to make good on markers results in felony charges. But is it hopelessly naive to ask if there comes a point in a free culture where a resort should tell someone they need help instead of extending more credit? The resorts insist on calling gambling "gaming," yet the reality is that gambling isn't a game: If you play too long you will lose, and that is not a fun or recreational activity. The case of Charles Barkley is not unique.
the casino is capable of vicitmizing sir charles, but tiger woods isn't?
Posted by: marty | May 15, 2008 at 01:30 PM
Duh! They don't build those fancy fancy resort/casions by paying out!
Posted by: Duh! | May 15, 2008 at 01:37 PM
Pick a profession, any profession. Not everyone is able to do every job. Some of us are too tall, too short, too fat, too skinny, not strong enough. Some of us are too damned stupid.
Then there are jobs like Pro Athlete where some of us just weren't born with the talent to make it that far. Even with the talent, I can't begin to imagine how much time they put into practices and workouts and whatnot.
Hate gifted/talented people all you want. It might make you feel better, but it won't change the fact that just because they're living what seems to be the big easy lifestyle doesn't mean they didn't go through a lot of blood, sweat, and tears on their way up to the top.
[/rant]
Once a person has worked their ass off and made tons of money, god bless america, they're free to F&@% it off however they want.
Posted by: Travis T Williams | May 15, 2008 at 03:05 PM
I saw Barkley gambling a lot of money on Roulette back in the Summer of '97 at Harvey's or Caesar's in Lake Tahoe. He was there for a celeb. golf tourney and he was winning $20,000 on each spin, but also losing a lot along the way. As a 19 year-old with a fake ID, It was quite funny to watch some of these other wealthy athletes throw away their money and cheat on their wives with whores in the casino. I'll never forget when Mookie Blaylock ran to the casino shop to grab a box of condoms for an unnamed married football player and Matt Lauer (unmarried at the time) who later went upstairs to hook up with some "groupies" in the casino.
Posted by: C | May 15, 2008 at 05:05 PM
Happy solution: Charles makes a tv commercial for WYNN. His salary: $400k. Steve Wynn in the background, big smile, as Charles says "Whenever I'm in Las Vegas..."
Big happy family.
Posted by: Slothrop | May 15, 2008 at 07:14 PM
Life is a game. And we all pick the path we want to choose. We are all responsible for our actions. If someone wants to drink and gamble, so be it. I'm sure Sir Charles knows the difference between right and wrong. And he chose his path...that of a degenerate gambler. Las Vegas will welcome him into the fold as long as he plays the game the right way. He owes money? He pays up. Simple as that. Not the casino's fault about his behavior and bad luck. Also not the casino's business that he should seek help for any gambling and/or alcohol addictions.
By the way, you know that old ad saying about Las Vegas? "Whatever happens in Vegas....stays in Vegas?" Well, it appears it was changed awhile ago. It's now, "Whatever money you bring to Vegas.....STAYS in Vegas." So true......
Posted by: ColinFromLasVegas | May 16, 2008 at 08:36 AM
By the way, one more thing....
In Nevada, residents here do not pay State Taxes. Gaming (7 percent goes to the State of all winnings) takes care of that. I want to extend a warm thank you to Sir Charles for paying my State taxes. I'm sure the State's portion will go toward improving or even building a new road somewhere....but he ain't gettin' his name on it.
Posted by: ColinFromLasVegas | May 16, 2008 at 08:41 AM
Charles Barkley is a real loser. He avoided "repeated demands" by Wynn Resorts for repayment of the debt in question.
Posted by: Richard | May 17, 2008 at 12:05 PM
What's Tiger doing hangin' out with a drunken Charles Barkley in Vegas trying to place a monster bet himself? These chumps can't handle success!!
Posted by: Lawrence Baldrich | May 19, 2008 at 05:31 PM
It's just not proper for the criminal justice system to step in to handle the repayment of debts. We are returning to an old "debtor's prison" system.
Further, I disagree that casino "markers" are checks. Casinos issue credit lines based on a person's credit, not even necessarily on the amount of cash in his bank accounts. A person who has only an average of $20K in the bank can get credit lines for $120K by opening six different lines at six different casinos. The casinos therefore know right off the bat that if a person is hit with a full on "wipe out" at all properties that he could not possibly cover the losses. So try and tell me how, in that sort of situation, markers are equivalent to checks? They are merely credit lines, and should result in at most civil liability.
Another dirty practice the casinos do these days is "post date" markers to some date far in the future, in an effort to toll the statute of limitations on the debt. This turns them into Notes payable in the future, rather than checks. But the Nevada D.A.'s office still prosecutes these post dated notes as checks. At least in other states, post dated checks are recognized as Notes and not checks.
I am an attorney and former gambler. I closed all my casino credit lines in 2002 because I didn't like the way the wind was blowing, and could see the potential for problems. Nowadays, people should avoid markers at all costs - they are powder kegs waiting to blow up in a gambler's face.
Posted by: MDawg | May 23, 2008 at 11:04 AM
This is Charles Barkleys business.....he has to pay this debt, not us, what business of ours if he owes the moon? You are acting like he has killed someone and got by with it. And Sir Charles tells it like it is....doesn't lie,, no hypricrite....I love him, I think he is great!!!!! Get a life you guys....Charles has his own...and no we don't have to pay for his debts...Leave the guy alone!!!
Posted by: Linda Rippetoe | June 10, 2008 at 08:27 PM
Well....I don't know about nationally, but here in OrYgon a bartender is liable for serving alcohol to a visibly intoxicated person. If that person goes out and, for instance, kills himself or someone in a car wreck, then the bartender can be sued directly. What about someone who is visibly intoxicated and gambling? If Chuck loses $400k in a night of drunken gambling, maybe the dealer and should be liable, or the bartender who served him past intoxication? Maybe even go as far as saying that the Casino is LIABLE!? Yes Charles is a grown man and that happy horse crap, but when someone's drunk and you prey off of him, that aint right.
Posted by: Michael | June 26, 2008 at 06:56 AM
Every comment that has been posted favoring Sir Charles has now been overcome by events.
Sir Charles paid off his $400,000.00 debt. Additionally, he paid off the processing court fees too. Sir Charles has apologized and also said he needs to get a handle on stop gambling.
Recently, I heard Sir Charles came back to Vegas here and is participating in some gambling tournament.
So much for that. It's confirmed. Sir Charles is a degenerate gambler. Only difference now is that he probably don't get any "markers." Cash only from now on.
Posted by: ColinFromLasVegas | June 26, 2008 at 09:38 AM