I guess gamblers will try most things - especially if they lose.

But for one video poker player, a judge denied her $6000 to be returned when she complained she didn't get back 80% of her money - since that was what was written on the Cherry Masters machine

The judge reasoned that the notice on the machine acted as an advertisement - not a contract - thereby no-one was liable for her losses - except herself

Kramer attempted to use a state gambling debts and losses statute to recoup the amount of money Hart lost 180 days before she filed the March lawsuit, but couldn't award her anything because Hart said she couldn't remember how much she had lost during that time.

Article: Wolcottville woman loses Cherry Masters suit