On December 10, the US Court of Appeals hosted a case that could become a landmark moment in the gambling industry. Sam A. Antar, a self-described problem gambler and nephew of Eddie Antar—of Crazy Eddie fame—is taking on BetMGM, one of the most recognisable names in online betting. This isn’t just any legal dispute. With allegations ranging from account freezing to predatory bonus practices, it’s a high-stakes poker game, and the whole industry is watching.

The Crazy Eddie legacy still haunts

Crazy Eddie was more than an electronics store in the 1970s and 1980s—it was a phenomenon. Famous for its wacky ads and “insane” prices, Eddie Antar’s chain was the talk of New York. But behind the scenes, the business was a fraud factory orchestrated by Eddie and his cousin, who served as CFO. The duo cooked the books with schemes involving tax skimming, under-reported income, and inventory padding, ultimately inflating the company’s value.

Crazy Eddie wasn’t just a business. It was a New York institution turned national cautionary tale. The fallout from the fraud captivated the public and cemented the Antar family’s name in infamy.

The empire collapsed spectacularly in 1989. Eddie went to prison while his cousin flipped, becoming a government witness who helped unravel the entire operation. And now, decades later, the Antar name is back in the spotlight, battling BetMGM in a digital-era showdown. This is a crazy tale of chaotic ambition spiralling completely out of control!

When the first hand folded

Antar’s journey to the US Court of Appeals hasn’t been without obstacles. US District Judge Madeline Cox Arleo dismissed his lawsuit earlier this year, citing the Casino Control Act (CCA). Antar had argued that BetMGM breached the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act (CFA) by incentivising a self-proclaimed problem gambler to keep playing, but the judge ruled that the CCA supersedes the CFA.

The decision revealed a key flaw in the regulatory framework: the CCA lacks a duty of care clause that would compel gambling operators to act more cautiously around at-risk players. Judge Arleo’s dismissal highlighted the gap in New Jersey’s laws, leaving lawmakers and industry stakeholders debating how best to protect vulnerable consumers.

Industry insiders have been sounding the alarm for years, calling for operators to step up their duty of care to prevent harm to their patrons. While the court can’t rewrite legislation, the case has brought gambling accountability into sharper focus.

Sam A. Antar doubles down on a billion-dollar giant

Sam A. Antar isn’t claiming personal accountability for his gambling troubles. Instead, he accuses BetMGM, sponsors of the Premier League Darts in 2025, of exploiting his addiction. According to Antar, the operator used enticing bonuses to draw him into a relentless cycle of deposits and bets while freezing his ability to withdraw winnings.

And these weren’t petty stakes. Antar alleges he lost around US$30 million (£22.5 million/€27 million). With this jaw-dropping figure at the heart of his claim, Antar argues that BetMGM’s practices went beyond standard terms and conditions. He insists the company knowingly targeted him, a problem gambler, with offers that pushed him further into financial and emotional distress.

This case can redefine operator accountability in an industry already scrutinised for its responsible gambling measures.

BetMGM stands its ground in legal poker

BetMGM, who recently announced the extension of its partnership with NHL’s Vegas Golden Knights through the 2026-27 season, denies all allegations, claiming its actions were entirely lawful. The company argues that account freezes are standard procedures for compliance, fraud prevention, and responsible gambling measures.

According to BetMGM, its practices were justified under regulatory obligations, making Antar’s claims baseless.

But Antar sees this differently. He alleges that BetMGM used a carrot-and-stick approach, offering lucrative bonuses to keep him playing while restricting his ability to withdraw any winnings. If proven, this could expose a troubling grey area where responsible gaming efforts intersect with aggressive marketing strategies.

On December 10, both sides shuffled their legal decks and stepped into the spotlight, each given just 15 minutes to play their hands. If you blinked, you missed it! For Antar’s lawyers, it proved a race against the clock to convince the judges that BetMGM’s actions crossed a legal and ethical line. BetMGM dedicated every second to defending its reputation and industry practices. With millions at stake and no room for error, this is a legal poker match where every card counts—and the industry is watching.

The stakes are bigger than the jackpot

This case isn’t just about Antar’s lost millions. It’s about the broader question of responsibility in the gambling industry. Should operators bear the burden of safeguarding at-risk players, or should individuals take responsibility for their actions?

If the court rules in Antar’s favour, it could lead to tighter regulations on promotions, account freezes, and operators’ management of their interactions with players flagged for problem gambling. A decision for BetMGM would reinforce the status quo, emphasising personal accountability and operator discretion.

Either way, the outcome will likely ripple across the gambling industry, influencing how operators manage risk and reward in a rapidly expanding market.

As the clock ticked toward December 10, the tension was palpable. For Antar, this case was a last shot at holding BetMGM accountable and shedding light on practices he believes are exploitative. For BetMGM, it was about defending its integrity and its role as one of the leading operators in iGaming.

On , the last cards were dealt. US Circuit Judge Stephanos Bibas considered whether it was even possible to calculate a remedy because it is difficult to estimate how much of Antar’s loss was because of BetMGM. The lawyer for the defence argued that because of his addiction, Antar would have gambled away all of his money in any case. Antar’s lawyer argued that BetMGM’s targeted conversations comprise a prosecutable act.

Will it be a win for the gambler or the house? The panel of three judges are set to rule. Watch this space.

*This is an update to a previously published article. We hereby retract the statement made on November 26, 2024, regarding Sam E Antar. Upon further review, we acknowledge that the information provided was incorrect and may have caused harm. We sincerely apologise for any inconvenience or damage this may have caused.

Perfect your poker face and master the art of the bluff as SiGMA Play brings you the best sports betting sites.