Match play dispute
Poll
 | 28 votes (93.33%) | ||
| | 1 vote (3.33%) | ||
| | 1 vote (3.33%) |
30 members have voted
Quote:wiz,
here is what i sent to the GCB about a recent event. can you give me your opinion?
thanks,
ben
I had previously used a $25 Match Play coupon there on Thursday February 3, 2011 so I thought I was familiar with how it worked. On the Thursday February 3 trip I was required to put my own $25 in the machine and play it through (20 hands @ $1.25/hand). Once I had played the $25 thru the machine the bartender then inserted $25 of the bars money in the machine for me to play. I played approximately 20 more hands and cashed out around $22 and was paid by the bartender with no issues. I was logged on to their tracking system so this can all be verified. The incident which caused me to call the GCB happened on Sunday February 6, 2011 I went to BJ's West on Tenaya and 215. I had an offer for a $20 Match Play coupon. After I had cycled through my $20 by playing the required 16 hands @ $1.25 I asked for the bartender to insert the bars $20 match play into the machine. I was then told that I had to lose my $20 in order to get their $20 in match play. I have lived in Vegas for 15 years and have never had a match play where I was required to lose my money before they would honor their offer. I have only been required to play the equivalent of the match play offer, in this case, $20, through the machine. I proceeded to lose my $20 in the machine like I was told I had to do before the bartender would insert their $20 in the machine for me to play. After the bartender put their $20 in the machine I was then told that I had to lose that $20 also. I asked if I was allowed to play it through and then cash out and was told no. The only was I was allowed to cash out was if I hit something above the $20 amount and then if I cashed out they would keep the $20 and I would only receive the amount that was left after the $20 was deducted regardless of how many times it was cycled through the machine. To put it best, if I was to hit for $100 they would only pay me $80 regardless of how many times I had cycled their original $20 through their machines. To the best of my recollection it does not say anywhere on the coupon that I was required to lose my $20 before they would honor the coupon but rather I had to play $20, which I did do. I feel their offer is deceptive and unethical. Essentially a person has to lose their $20 and the bars $20. I am all for giving the bar a fair shot at my money but I feel once I have cycled $20 through the machine I should be given the $20 match play they promised and then, after I have cycled their $20 through the machine I should be free to do what I want and cash out if that is my desire. Please let me know if you have any questions.[\q]"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
If there are specified T&C's on the match play, it doesn't matter what the player thinks should happen. The T&C's prevail. If he didn't bother to read the T&C's before going to play, it's his own fault. This type of thing happens all the time with Internet Casino MPs.
On the other hand, if the T&C's don't back up this ridiculous scenario, then the player should and will prevail.
So, what was on the coupon or posted disclaimer for this MP?
--Ms. D.
Anyway, is it just me, or did the bar have a really lousy offer? I mean, if it costs you $20 to win $20 in match play, which will be deducted from winnings, what's the point? Sure, if you play $20 and lose, it's fine to get $20 more to play. Otherwise, why bother?
2. Player will NOT prevail.
I base this prediction on the absolutely dismal record of the Gaming Control Board in enforcing player rights. I have heard of the Board ruling in a player's favor in cases that were absolutely unequivocal, and I suppose that it does happen, much as, I suppose, some people in Stalin's purge trials were declared innocent, but that isn't exactly a frequent outcome.
I don't gamble in Nevada bars for the exact reason that caused this problem in the first place--what the bartender says, goes. Illegal or not, unfair or not.
Regarding Gaming, my opinion is they have started taking the player's side more often lately. For example, a friend of mine was given a free play offer from a LV casino (I'm not sure I can say which one). When he asked for his money they said "no," because he was on a list of known advantage players. So he called Gaming, and the agent pretty much said that they to honor the offer, which my friend had in writing. The casino could have asked for a formal ruling, but they elected to honor the offer after the agent had a talk with them.
Quote: mkl654321I base this prediction on the absolutely dismal record of the Gaming Control Board in enforcing player rights. I have heard of the Board ruling in a player's favor in cases that were absolutely unequivocal, and I suppose that it does happen, much as, I suppose, some people in Stalin's purge trials were declared innocent, but that isn't exactly a frequent outcome.
I go back to dealer school were we were told, by instructors who worked in NV and elsewhere, that the NG GCB was "casino protection oriented" and every last other state the local GCB was "player protection oriented."
BTW: That bar should be put in a hall of shame--match play of $20 when you lose $20 but you have to lose the $20? I'll tell you what, Griswold, just gime me $10 and we go in the alley, I'll kick you in the nuts, and we call it even?
By the same logic, why would they want to stiff you on a measly $20 coupon? The answer is the same in both cases - greed. Apparently, their house edge isn't enough - they want you to just GIVE them your twenty bucks.
Quote:Here is what it says on coupon:
Redeem this credit voucher at bjs west during printed date range only. You must be logged in and the gaming machine must have credits equal to the amount of this voucher. The bartender then will exchange this voucher with valid ID for it's credit value. Bartender must put the credits in the gaming machine for your playing enjoyment. Management reserves the right to cancel or modify this promotion at any time. Not redeemable for cash.
On the date of the incident it was only my 3rd time in the establishment. The first time I was there about 3 hours and lost about 280 on the machines. That's what generated these offers. Let me know if you have any further questions.
Quote:Management reserves the right to cancel or modify this promotion at any time.
Even so, this 'offer' is somewhere between lame and ridiculous.
Another argument the bar might use is that if they intended to just give the player $20 then they would have called it conditional free play, not a match play.
Quote: DJTeddyBearYour "match play" reasoning is OK, except that they demand that you LOSE your original $20. It should be that they simply want you to PLAY the entire $20 thru at least once.
Yeah. Kind of like a double match play. If this were an Internet casino bonus I would have called it a 1x Phantom Bonus with 1X pre-wagering requirement.
My true opinion is that I think this should go to the player because the bar previously honored such coupons by letting the player keep the principal on the free play and that the T&C were vague. There is a legal doctrine that if a contract is vague it should be interpreted against the party that wrote it.
I also marginally think this will go the player's way. Gaming seems to have been tougher on the casinos the last year or so.
It would be ebst to see match play as a free loan. That is a loan you don't need to pay back if you lose, but the money loaned does not belong to you. So, you bet $20, the casino matches with another $20, and you pull the lever, push the button, roll the dice or turn the card. If you lose the casino takes everything, but doesn't ask you pay back the $20 it put up (free loan). If you win, you get paid for a $40 bet, but the casino takes back its $20. Essentially you get paid double for your $20 bet. That's not bad at all.
Assuming I got this right, then the complainant in this thread should have been given $20 to match his $20 and not been reuired to first lose his money. Anything else is not real match play, but more like a rebate in match play terms.
Well, I probably would be willing to use a match play coupon now, should I run into one.
That's a good way to look at it. Another way to look at it is as a loss rebate.Quote: NareedIt would be ebst to see match play as a free loan. That is a loan you don't need to pay back if you lose, but the money loaned does not belong to you. So, you bet $20, the casino matches with another $20, and you pull the lever, push the button, roll the dice or turn the card. If you lose the casino takes everything, but doesn't ask you pay back the $20 it put up (free loan). If you win, you get paid for a $40 bet, but the casino takes back its $20. Essentially you get paid double for your $20 bet. That's not bad at all..
Quote: teddysThat's a good way to look at it. Another way to look at it is as a loss rebate.
I'm not so sure. A loss rebate is money you can use for further play (it's always given in free play, right?). There are similarities, beacuse you can't cash the free play you're given. But the crucial difference is that for a rebate you first do have to lose money first.
Let me illustrate:
Match play: you risk $20 of your money on a $40 bet.
Loss rebate: you lose, let's say, $200 and get $20 back in free play.
Either case it's a good deal if you were going to risk that much money. I see match play more useful and a better deal in tabel games, while free play is a better deal for slots and VP (especially VP).
Of course I need to expound on it. Perhaps something as simple as "ask about the terms of the match play coupon before setting any money down." Perhaps something more sarcastic and complicated.
Of course, the above is the legal interpretation, and the law doesn't exactly apply in Nevada. I wouldn't be surprised to see someone thrown in jail for insisting on getting paid on his matchplay. (What law would he have broken? The Don't Annoy the Casino Law.)
Quote: NareedBTW This thread has me thinking of a new Vegas Law: Beware casinos bearing gifts.
My philosophy is welcome casinos bearing gifts. It is not hard to get more in gifts than you give the casinos in expected losses. That pursuit is a large reason behind my sites.
Quote: WizardMy philosophy is welcome casinos bearing gifts. It is not hard to get more in gifts than you give the casinos in expected losses. That pursuit is a large reason behind my sites.
I wonder how you say "faux pas" in Greek.
Thinking about it, there have been a few posts about bad promotions, two problems with match play coupons I can recall and assorted comp-realted gripes, but also stories of comped this and that, good promos, not to mention very favorable reports on Terrible's loss rebate promo. So taken as a whole I think I was way off.
Too bad, because I want to reach at least 40 Laws... And, really, caveat emptor is too general to apply specifically to Vegas. it does apply, naturally, but also to everyhwere else in the world.
BJ's West uses the ETT Card of the Day/TavernTracker System. On Match Play vouchers the system only validates that the logged in player has a coin in/handle of the amount of the voucher for that day before it will validate it. The system itself offers no other type of validated matchplay. I think the scenario this person ran into was just a misinformed or new bartender.
It's always the Player's position that the player should prevail.
It's always the Casino's position that the casino should prevail.
A wise man once said, "Judge not, lest ye be judged".
Quote: Wizard
My philosophy is welcome casinos bearing gifts. It is not hard to get more in gifts than you give the casinos in expected losses. That pursuit is a large reason behind my sites.
I say work em like a $20 dollar Hooker works a John.
