it sucks, but...
Despite the obvious nature of their shameful disparagement of your character, there are two reasons why you will never be able to prove this is libel in a court of law. Assuming they did not clearly speak your full name in the broadcast of the show, the 'face blur' effect is enough to protect the casino & the show's producers/ the network/ etc from any prosecution. Its a reality out here in TV land that shows that involve the general public (or people in public who may not want to be photographed) often film people either in the background or, in this case, a person who becomes part of the story. But through a very secure & time-tested & court-upheld method, the practice of face-blurring has already been proven to be an acceptable identity-obscurer, despite the fact that anyone watching who already knows the person can clearly tell who it is. That's because it still protects the person's identity from the general public, and therefore a high enough degree of anonymity is still assured. You see this effect all the time on shows like 'Cops' & many dating & reality TV shows where the main characters are running down public streets, etc.
But the second reason why you really have no basis for a libel case here is that producers of these types of shows have gotten savvy over the past 10 years of the reality-TV boom and an ugly precedent has been set for those wanting to truly remain anonymous in a public setting. Forget signing a model release/authorization form, since this show was filmed on a 'closed set' ie, enclosed inside the grounds of the GVR, i am sure the show's producers had some sort of notice on all the entryways to this private property stating something to the effect of: 'A television show is being filmed here today. Your presence inside the GVR grants permission to the GVR, the Discovery Network, and the show's producers to use your likeness, voice, image, etc etc etc blah blah blah' -- you get the point. This notice may not have been particularly noticeable to the casual passer-by, but i am sure one would have been present. it simply would be too tough to get individual releases from the countless patrons involved in every shot, so a blanket release like this accomplishes the same thing. Your very presence on their property that day grants them your permission. Now, if you had taken a loud argument out to the street with the GVR management, that would have been a different story.
Ultimately, you're actually very lucky that they blurred your face at all. Simply by being there, you gave your consent to be filmed -- they could have a case for not even needing the blur. But with such obvious libel occurring, i am sure the show's producers decided to err on the side of caution & go the extra step 'just in case.' After all, if you damn card counters are already trying to cheat the house, you'll probably try to sue them too!
I know I'm being very discouraging here, but I'm just trying to be realistic with you based on my knowledge of the entertainment industry. Obviously, it wouldn't hurt to check with an actual personal-injury lawyer, if for no other reason than it will not cost you anything! And if you find a scrappy attorney who wants to go the distance & really set a new precedent/overturn old ones for this type of case, then i stand behind you 100%. Personally i am enraged that this type of stereotyping & character defamation still exists in our now very gambling-savvy culture. Why people still equate 'using your brain' with 'cheating' is a lamentable mystery to me, and perhaps most horrifying is the Orwellian way in which the perpetrators of these falsehoods are able to rally the general public to their cause against the evil card-counting witches who find themselves time and again burned at the stake.
-hollywood dave.
