MGM Grand Detroit -- bad service

Quote: NicksGamingStuff

What I dislike is when a player decides to stand and the dealer says no you should hit or whatever. This happened in Lake Tahoe at the lake side inn and I told the dealer if the player wanted to do blah he should be allowed to do blah. Of course what the dealer talked the player into doing ended up making me lose, but either way dealers should respect players wishes.

Whoa there!
Not quite so strong a rule.
Its good that you always use clear and unambiguous motions but dealers should pause for clarification if there is any question in the dealer's mind. That question can arise from sloppy player gestures or anything else. Suppose a player has 21 and motions for an additional card? Are you saying the dealer should hit? That player and other players at the table will be objecting. Also if a player's decision is so contrary to Basic Strategy as to call it into question then its proper for a dealer to pause and inquire and suggest a more optimal play. If the player insists on being stupid, ... so be it.

In Colorado a dealer can not give advice until after a hand is over. That includes when asked for advice. Peobably the same in your jurisdiction ?

My original complaint still stands, but I used some rather strong words in the heat of the moment that I'll leave up for effect. The pit made a decision I disagreed with. I let my feelings be known at the table and on the board. I still think it was the wrong call. If they had made a good call, I would have posted about that too.

Quote: teddys

My original complaint still stands, but I used some rather strong words in the heat of the moment that I'll leave up for effect.

It happens. They seldom help during the on-going debate, as simple facts are sought out. Human nature with money on the is what it is: often noisy, passionate, adamant, and pleading, and not always factual.
Casino view:

Quote: teddys

The pit made a decision I disagreed with.

This too happens. After a final surviellance and floor decision is made, it "is over and decided." Lingering Player feelings and opinions about the matter are dead.

Quote: teddys

I let my feelings be known at the table and on the board. I still think it was the wrong call. If they had made a good call, I would have posted about that too.

Feelings are emotions within our heads as a result of a situation going down that annoys us, quite often caused by other players taking actions we don't like when they have a right to play their hands as they see fit. They can cost us money, so it seems. Feelings have little effect on surviellance reports, police reports, and statements of witnesses, usually from the other players, the dealers and the floorman who are also involved in an incident. Feelings with money on the line can separate us from what we feel should be good calls being made, versus actual good calls that were made when the facts are in, or when examined.
What would be pointed out -
1. Third base player played his hands as see saw fit in the opinion of surviellance, made what was considered a "stay" signal; he also took no action to protest or make a refuting "hit" action, essentially saying his "stay" signal was his intent, all satisfatory to him as the player. If he had protested, or vigourously repeated a hit signal when not receiving a hit, he could have swayed surviellance's opinion by showing that the dealer "had run him over" and it was dealer the error at the table - but had not. This is not what happend. The fact that other players wanted him to take a different action as a player is immaterial, as all players play their hands as they see fit, not how other players wish how any players' play out their own hands in hindsight.
2. Players continued to accept the hand being played out as was without protest, including through moments where the dealer's hand looked as if it would bust thereby "accepting subsequent play", and where no earlier protest or error had occurred to discount the action. Only when a dealer made a surprise pat hand at the very end was a protest raised.
3. If the dealer had busted and had paid the table, no player making the money would have said, "oh! - I cannot accept this money in good conscience, as the third base player actually indicated a different "hit or stand" action, - and so it is improper for us players to accept "improper free money from the casino. I feel honor-bound to return it." This would not have happened in hindsight if the dealer drew a 10 instead of a 2 as his last card, thereby busting his hand.

I've often felt that in many situations the burden should be on the casino and that a close call situation should fall more heavily on the casino than on the public. Here, however, I would come down on the public being required to make clear and unambiguous signals. Dealers get bored and often act on the signal without first thinking of is is reasonable. I've seen people make signals at chin level... the dealer ain't looking there!!

Now it is always a problem with newbies or foreigners or drunks but other than that, it really should be simple for players to make proper and unambigous signals. Think in the practice games, we've all hit the button for "hit" when we meant to press the button for "stay". It happens. In real life I would never hit a pair of tens, but once I press the wrong button its too late.

Dealers see the signal and act, its only fair to let them see an unambiguous signal.

Quote: Paigowdan

Lingering Player feelings and opinions about the matter are dead.

Maybe that is so in the house's view. In reality, the player is highly likely to take into consideration how he or she has been treated in that casino in the past before deciding whether to risk hundreds of dollars the next time the gambling gong sounds.