Etiquette Question - Mispay on Ultimate Texas Hold'em

Quote: weaselman

It is not your place to count other people's money, and decide what's theirs and what's not. Get it?

It IS at ANY table I'm at, and for many others with standards, too - if any dirty play is going down, like...taking money that wasn't legitemately won as a VERY good example. Duh. Dirty action gets a flag raised, - and being a member of the table being MORE than enough status, resentments aside. Period, end of story. Forget about the surveillance and security of the casino operator waiting in the wings. Trying some shit at a table is just itching for anything from a backoff or an 86-action, to a takedown and a criminal record. Be a fool and you may get the punishment you deserve. Play by the rules and you're mighty fine.
Get that, because that's how it works in the real world.

Quote: Woldus

Paigowdan - "When I play at a casino, or at a poker game, my opponents are simply participants in a gambling game." and "Poker games I play with friends, and I don't keep people who cheat me in poker as friends. To me they're participants with me at a game of chance, of all things."

Let's make a small, but qualitative distinction, please.... Playing poker at a live table against other players (rather than a carnival game on the gaming floor) is NOT a game of chance. Your own skill plays as much a part, or bigger, in your session outcome as luck. It is only Luck that lets you win in a true game of chance. So in that sense the other players are my enemy. I.e., they have money that I want - and expect to get if they play sloppily or too loose.

Playing and participating in competitve skill games don't always equate to making enemies, in spite of a goal to win by the rules. Chess, bridge, poker, and competitve sports are all good examples. You can actually acquire the ability to do you utmost to try to win at a particular game without lumping the people involved into camps that extend in any way or catagories outside of the game in front of you, or even into personal catagories outside of the game.

Quote: konceptum

So now management says, ok then we will take $1 from each player at the table. Do you say something now?

You bet I do! :)
I say "keep your dirty hands away from me, or I'll see you in court, and it is going to cost you dearly!', that's what I say! :)

Quote:

What if management decided to take $5 from each player at the table?

Basically, your question is if I would point my finger to someone else if I am being robbed? No, I would not.

Quote:

I know it sounds contrived, and it is. But the point of the other side of the argument is that there IS a cost that is passed down to you by these actions of not pointing out someone else's overpayment. In other words, it does affect you.

Yes, and my response to that is that there is cost to you by the driver going above speed limit, and that cost is actually higher, yet, everyone seems to agree, that I should not call in traffic violations committed by others. Why the double standard? I am not seeing any difference in two situations.

Quote:

What if management, cameras, whoever, did see the overpayment, and also saw that you saw the overpayment and chose not to say anything.

Let them be my guest. I am not obligated to watch their dealers. I am not violating any rule (written or unwritten, ethical or otherwise) by not saying anything. I don't mind them (or anybody else) knowing that.

Quote:

So they decide that a waitress will never come take an order from you for the rest of the time you are there.

Too bad, so they'll lose a customer ... Are you trying to make me feel sorry for them?

Quote:

Or they raise the minimum bet level to something you're not willing to pay.
Or they just simply ask you to leave. In those instances, would you be more willing to point out the overpayment?

No, I would not.
If the casino does not want my money, it's fine with me, I'll just take it (the money) elsewhere.

Quote:

What if management informed you that these were the policies of the game. That if there was an overpayment, and that overpayment was not reported by the player who received it or by any of the other players who witnessed it, that those players would have to leave. And forfeit any monies they may have won. Now would you point out?

No. If those were the policies, I would never play there to begin with.

Quote:

Remember that one of the points of the other side of the argument is that it seems to take some sort of negative action and/or punishment to you before you're willing to point out a mistake. Once that threat of punishment exists, it's much more likely that you will want to point out mistakes.

I see your point. But I still don't think it is your place to take actions that can affect other people negatively, even if not taking them can negatively affect yourself (not talking about self-defense situations obviously). If you have to, you could quietly talk to the other person, and try to convince him to come forward, that I could understand, but anything beyond that, I am sorry, in my book that is called "acting like a jerk".

Quote: weaselman

Yes, if not for you speaking out of place, they would have made the money. Because you spoke, they have less money than they otherwise would. What's "false" about it?

No - as they would have taken money that they are not entitled to by the rules of the game at hand, and they usually take the money in full knowledge, and just love it; a rule here is that if a floorman's call is made to correct an error, then you abide by it - feelings and personal points of view aside.
Any storms and screams and protesting above this just Makes them human: emotional, irrational, justifying, selfish, angry, and all the other qualities "of below" that are within us all come out.

Quote: Paigowdan

No - as they would have taken money that they are not entitled to by the rules of the game at hand, and they usually take the money in full knowledge, and just love it;

Yes, just like you admittedly do when you underpay your speeding tickets, or when you don't get caught speeding.
It's still your money, even if you are not "entitled" to it. It is not my place to determine what money you are "entitled" to, and what you are not.
And it's not your place to perform this duty to somebody else's money.

Quote: weaselman

You bet I do! :)
I say "keep your dirty hands away from me, or I'll see you in court, and it is going to cost you dearly!', that's what I say! :)

Good luck. With their deep pockets, lawyers, and legal and political connections, you'll have a fight that'll be a big waste of your life's time and money. Certain cases you got to fight, like being back-roomed or beaten, but if you get caught committing malfeasance and they respond appropriately - even if in a way that you do not "like," - you have a losing battle on your hands.

Quote: Weaselman

Basically, your question is if I would point my finger to someone else if I am being robbed? No, I would not.

If you're at a table and "wrong money" is changing hands, you can be robbed or be a robber, and fingers will point about that action. The people who don't point fingers may wish to keep their fingers in their pockets on the dirty money.

Quote: Weaselman

Yes, and my response to that is that there is cost to you by the driver going above speed limit, and that cost is actually higher, yet, everyone seems to agree, that I should not call in traffic violations committed by others. Why the double standard?

If you have the option to call it in, and you always do, then there is no double standard, even if you do not use it because of "what people think." When it gets to the point where you are restricted in some cases, a double standard is in effect

Quote: weaselman

[Not obligated to watch dealers, to call on something]Let them be my guest. I am not obligated to watch their dealers. I am not violating any rule (written or unwritten, ethical or otherwise) by not saying anything. I don't mind them (or anybody else) knowing that.

No, you are not violating any rules if you wanna play the "hear no evil, see no evil" game. The thing is, no one else is violating any rules in actually calling on the dirty play - even if you wished they'd be quiet as you would be.

Quote: weaselman

[So they decide that a waitress will never come take an order from you for the rest of the time you are there. ]
Too bad, so they'll lose a customer ... Are you trying to make me feel sorry for them?

Feelings don't matter, this is [casino] business.

Quote: weaselman

[Or they raise the minimum bet level to something you're not willing to pay.
Or they just simply ask you to leave. In those instances, would you be more willing to point out the overpayment?]
No, I would not.
If the casino does not want my money, it's fine with me, I'll just take it (the money) elsewhere.

Enjoy the movie.

Quote: weaselman

What if management informed you that these were the policies of the game. That if there was an overpayment, and that overpayment was not reported by the player who received it or by any of the other players who witnessed it, that those players would have to leave. And forfeit any monies they may have won. Now would you point out?]
No. If those were the policies, I would never play there to begin with.

Enjoy the movie.

Quote: weaselman

[Remember that one of the points of the other side of the argument is that it seems to take some sort of negative action and/or punishment to you before you're willing to point out a mistake. Once that threat of punishment exists, it's much more likely that you will want to point out mistakes.]
I see your point. But I still don't think it is your place to take actions that can affect other people negatively, even if not taking them can negatively affect yourself (not talking about self-defense situations obviously). If you have to, you could quietly talk to the other person, and try to convince him to come forward, that I could understand, but anything beyond that, I am sorry, in my book that is called "acting like a jerk".

1. It is to affect other people positively. Getting people to play by the rules is a positive thing, and has been attempted to be taught to people since kindergarten, often to no avail, because they believe what they want by their own ethics [which is fine].
2. Trying to Discuss that there may be a better way or a higher ground concerning the taking "correct money" versus pocketing "wrong money" - and why right behavior is gives right results - will fall on both a percentage of open ears and deaf ears. People openly post their positions. This is all fine.

I know I'm new here, but just thought I'd throw in my two cents.

I was playing blackjack at a casino not to be named and an older lady was dealing who was more focused on flirting than deal and my second hand playing she paid a green chip on a nickel bet. Thinking it was pretty obvious to everyone around me, I tossed it back. Instead of a thanks from deal I got a half hearted shrug and glare and she tossed back a red. The players beside me threw their hands up and said she had been doing it all night. After that I've just taken advantage of the mispays and moved on. If the casino doesn't care why should I???

I will give the casino some credit, though, at one of my regular places I've inadvertently bet below the minimum, and the dealer/pit caught it after I had won the hand. Instead of making me pull back the bet, they let me cap my chips and paid as if I bet the correct the amount. Props for that, and since then when I'm at that house I always call 'em like I see 'em.

Sad to see about that dealer. You did the right thing fo the sake of doing the right thing yourself initially, after that if the lady did not pay more attention, I would have moved out instead of taking the money, - but she had been notified by you, and had continued with her head up her "clouds."

Quote: Paigowdan

Good luck. With their deep pockets, lawyers, and legal and political connections, you'll have a fight that'll be a big waste of your life's time and money. Certain cases you got to fight, like being back-roomed or beaten, but if you get caught committing malfeasance and they respond appropriately - even if in a way that you do not "like," - you have a losing battle on your hands.

Right. But what is "appropriate" about a decision to take money from every player at the table because they payed out wrong to some guy? That was the example I was replying to.

Quote:

If you're at a table and "wrong money" is changing hands, you can be robbed or be a robber, and fingers will point about that action. The people who don't point fingers may wish to keep their fingers in their pockets on the dirty money.

Huh?

Quote:

If you have the option to call it in, and you always do, then there is no double standard, even if you do not use it because of "what people think." When it gets to the point where you are restricted in some cases, a double standard is in effect

Again, huh?
You don't call in traffic violations, but you do "call in" casino mispays. That's the double standard I am talking about.
You are not restricted from calling it in, you just choose not to. Nor are you restricted from stopping by a state trooper's car, and confessing to just having been going 65 mph in a 55 zone.

Quote:

you are not violating any rules if you wanna play the "hear no evil, see no evil" game. The thing is, no one else is violating any rules in actually calling on the dirty play - even if you wished they'd be quiet as you would be.

No, they are not violating rules. They are just being jerks in my opinion.

Quote:

1. It is to affect other people positively.

Certainly. Whatever you do, there is usually somebody that's going to be affected positively.
I am talking about not willingly causing negative effects on other people by your actions. That is a very different standard than what you are trying to substitute it with.
And yes, this is a standard, despite your ridiculous notion that everyone who does not agree with you does not have standards
(I could not stop laughing for 5 minutes when I saw this tremendously condescending, self-righteous, childish remark from you: "It IS at ANY table I'm at, and for many others with standards, too")

Quote: weaselman

Right. But what is "appropriate" about a decision to take money from every player at the table because they payed out wrong to some guy? That was the example I was replying to.

What's appropriate is this:
1. Once it is pointed out by the floor that the overpayment was in error, and the real result and amount indicated by the floor decision, it is inappropriate to refuse it - once presented with the facts of the real result that describes the correct payment. A dealer error does "not make it yours" if the error is caught and corrected, even if you personally refuse to go along with the stated correction and facts of the matter when still at the playing table. The ploys of "It's MINE - all MINE," or "Finders keepers, losers weepers" - or any of that sort of that self-seeking or childish position is a non-starter for most grown-ups, and it's sad and shocking to see how many people regress to infancy at times, - and defend it like Holy Hell - on the casino floor; their behavior is open for all to see. If a bank denotes an overpayment because of a clerk's error, they'll just deduct it in a "you're not tell me, I'm telling you fashion, that's it."
2. The floor makes a decision, it's an official referee call on record about the facts of the matter - which often get an emotional, justifying, rationalizing, selfish "my side Point-of-View is the only reality" by the player. As people, they may feet such soul-shattering minimalization of their feelings when simply presented with the facts, and this is normal from people in "game play" mode with booze in their system. Do not respond here by claiming "I claim Casino conspiracy" floorman bias, as the only money result required is the "right result" money. This is determined by surveillance review on tape of the real play result that occured. The casino does its business by letting the cards fall as they do - as the "call of the play" and sticking to that, with the expectation that players are expected to also play by these "result of the cards" rules as a basic conduct of play. But it's hard, there's a lot of "Well! I'm outraged," and "But I was here for a good time, and the big bad floorman made a call against me!" This is how it was perceived and felt by people, but it was the call as the cards came down and called it themselves.

Quote: weaselman

[If you're at a table and "wrong money" is changing hands, you can be robbed or be a robber, and fingers will point about that action. The people who don't point fingers may wish to keep their fingers in their pockets on the dirty money] Huh?

Simple: if you're at a table, and dirty play is going down - and this is okay with you, - then something may be up with you, in the sense that you seem to have a problem with the "right result" being enforced over a dealer error that had occurred, and was corrected. It's saying, "I want the dirty result to stick."

Quote: weaselman

You don't call in traffic violations, but you do "call in" casino mispays. That's the double standard I am talking about.
You are not restricted from calling it in, you just choose not to. Nor are you restricted from stopping by a state trooper's car, and confessing to just having been going 65 mph in a 55 zone.

Oh. So you're saying, "if you don't call in it all, then all of what you do call in is invalid." Bullshit. No it isn't. Maybe I'm a casino worker and not a traffic enforcement expert, and know the difference. But if I see a car do a California roll through a stop sign but was otherwise safe, I'm not going to call it in, but if I see a car hit-and-run with property damage, I will call it in. So would most people. This isn't a double standard.
If a casino dealer missets a Pai Gow hand and ALL the results would have been the same result with the same payout amounts, it's pretty much a no harm, no foul situation, and mentioning it is for a "remember the two-pair rule for next time." If a play needs to be corrected on payouts, then floor and surveillance are involved, and it's more serious. Recognizing the difference between major and minor, trivial and critical is not a double standard.

Quote: weaselman

[you are not violating any rules if you wanna play the "hear no evil, see no evil" game. The thing is, no one else is violating any rules in actually calling on the dirty play - even if you wished they'd be quiet as you would be.]
No, they are not violating rules. They are just being jerks in my opinion.

I agree - we agree. Not intervening or helping in some situations may be indecent but not a violation. Remember the Seinfeld episode where they were arrested in some town for not being good Samaritans. But refusing to abide by an official play correction by casino management is a non-starter, as is running away from a persuing police car after causing accident. People do that for apparent self-preservation and selfish reasons that they can justify until Kingdom come.

Quote: weaselman

[it is to affect other people positively] Certainly. Whatever you do, there is usually somebody that's going to be affected positively.
I am talking about not willingly causing negative effects on other people by your actions. That is a very different standad that what you are trying to substitute it with.

Fine. Different people are aware of different effects, and may see effects that others don't see or can't understand. I think this is part of the situation, but a lot of it is a 'what's in it for me or my so-called side, and chposing to disregard or ignore the authentic result of the play to increase my own ill-gotten gains. Disobeying a floorman's correction is such a case.

Quote: Paigowdan

What's appropriate is this:
1. Once it is pointed out by the floor that the overpayment was in error, and the real result and amount indicated by the floor decision, it is inappropriate to refuse it

Nobody is refusing anything. Reread the original post, that whole discussion was about an impossible hypothetical situation, nothing to do with what you are talking about.

Quote:

Simple: if you're at a table, and dirty play is going down - and this is okay with you,

It's not dirty play. It's a dealer's mistake. People make mistakes all the time, there is nothing dirty about it.

Quote:

- then something may be up with you,

Just like something may be up with you if you are not calling in that dirty stop sign run incident.

Quote:

Oh. So you're saying, "if you don't call in it all, then all of what you do call in is invalid." Bullshit.

No, I am not saying it's invalid. I am just saying that you are being pompous and self-righteous, and attack people for being immoral or "dirty", or lacking "standards", but in reality, you are the one lacking them more than anyone else.

Quote:

Maybe I'm a casino worker and not a traffic enforcement expert, and know the difference.

Exactly. You are a casino worker, and not a traffic enforcement expert, and I am neither.

Quote:

But if I see a car do a California roll through a stop sign but was otherwise safe, I'm not going to call it in, but if I see a car hit-and-run with property damage, I will call it in.

Sure. If I witness an armed robbery in a casino, I will call it in too.

Quote:

Fine. Different people are aware of different effects, and may see effects that others don't see or can't understand.

No, that's not what I said. What I said is that if you are willingly causing negative effects on other people, you are acting like a jerk.
What you are aware about is irrelevant.