PaiGow Bonus casino did not pay full amount as shown on the table
Quote: Mission146My understanding is that it is usually prorated.
WHOA! That's not my understanding.
Payout goes in the "regular" order. First seat paid according to "standard" pay (R-to-L or L-to-R) would receive $100, if that is their position (not sure from the description; I don't play BJ). Second seat would receive $24,900. Other seats are up the creek. In my experience, some players sit in seats that get paid first for this reason. If I recall correctly, dealer deals left to right and pays right to left (but I'm not 100 percent certain).
I play in Mississippi. Your mileage may vary. Better ask to be sure. I know I'm going to verify this on my next trip, even though I don't play the high-payout bonus bets.
Quote: LuckyPhowIf I recall correctly, dealer deals left to right and pays right to left (but I'm not 100 percent certain).
Depends on the casino which way the dealer deals and pays.
Most in Vegas (on the strip at least) deal and pay right to left (from the dealer's perspective).
Quote: LuckyPhowWHOA! That's not my understanding.
Payout goes in the "regular" order. First seat paid according to "standard" pay (R-to-L or L-to-R) would receive $100, if that is their position (not sure from the description; I don't play BJ). Second seat would receive $24,900. Other seats are up the creek. In my experience, some players sit in seats that get paid first for this reason. If I recall correctly, dealer deals left to right and pays right to left (but I'm not 100 percent certain).
I play in Mississippi. Your mileage may vary. Better ask to be sure. I know I'm going to verify this on my next trip, even though I don't play the high-payout bonus bets.
I have never heard of a place paying an aggregate in table order. It's always a percentage of what each person bet. If 2 people bet the same amount, the aggregate would be shared 50/50. 3 people, 33.3% each. If the bet different amounts, all get the percentage of the aggregate that they wagered compared to each other.
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13I have never heard of a place paying an aggregate in table order.
I've heard of it.
Edit: Did anyone else win the bonus side bet when the 7 card straight flush hit? If not, then the "aggregate limit" in the Nevada gaming regulation may not apply since it only caps the payout when two or more patrons have winning wagers on the same feature. "Aggregate payout limits may not be combined for different types of wagers" (Nevada Gaming Regulations 5.190(2))
Edit2: Nevermind, I re-read the post and noted that there were Envy payouts due for the bonus bet. Envy could actually be a sneaky way to activate the aggregate limit.
Quote: WizardI've heard of it.
I've "heard" all sorts of stories. I've never seen it that way or talked to a table games director that had it that way. That would be a ridiculous thing to do.
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13I've "heard" all sorts of stories. I've never seen it that way or talked to a table games director that had it that way. That would be a ridiculous thing to do.
ZCore13
If that ever happened to me, I'd be on the phone to the GC, my lawyer, the 6:00 news, and anyone else I could think of.
Quote: Zcore13I've "heard" all sorts of stories. I've never seen it that way or talked to a table games director that had it that way. That would be a ridiculous thing to do.
I asked a casino manager years ago what would happen if two players hit a royal flush in Caribbean Stud, both making the progressive side bet. He said the first hand to be revealed would get the full jackpot. The second player would win only the seed amount. Assuming the dealer adjudicates bets to her right first, there would be a small positional advantage to sitting on the left side of the table, assuming you make the side bet.
Note that this is not that same situation as maximum aggregate payout in one round.
Quote: ams288Depends on the casino which way the dealer deals and pays.
Most in Vegas (on the strip at least) deal and pay right to left (from the dealer's perspective).
Well, I'll be durned! I see Paigowdan gave you a "thumbs up" on this post, so it must be true. I cannot imagine dealers dealing right-to-left except in special situations (like PGP, for example).
Caribbean Stud however, was not an aggregate. This was a progressive jackpot which is triggered by a specific event happening. The first Royal Flush takes down the progressive. Subsequent ones get the seed.
Compare this to a bank of linked progressive slots. Player hits on Machine#5 and 1 minute later, different player hits on Machine#2. First guy gets the progressive, second one gets the reseed value.
Quote: LuckyPhowWell, I'll be durned! I see Paigowdan gave you a "thumbs up" on this post, so it must be true. I cannot imagine dealers dealing right-to-left except in special situations (like PGP, for example).
Yeah, that's not true. They don't deal right to left. Especially not in blackjack, which is what the example was specifically referencing.
Quote: rdw4potusYeah, that's not true. They don't deal right to left. Especially not in blackjack, which is what the example was specifically referencing.
It is perhaps more likely that the dealer may distribute full hands (such as from a 3-Card Poker shuffle machine) first to the player on the far right. But never in my experience when the dealer is dealing one card at a time to each player.
Quote: LuckyPhowIt is perhaps more likely that the dealer may distribute full hands (such as from a 3-Card Poker shuffle machine) first to the player on the far right. But never in my experience when the dealer is dealing one card at a time to each player.
Honestly, apart from PGP, there is no game out there I'm aware of that deals from dealers right to left. PGP does it as a unique aspect of the game. It's possible that Asia poker does it as well, as a derivative of PGP, but I can't recall for sure, and I think it's also left to right. All other carnival games are left to right, whether packets or pitched.
Pays on all games, including PGP and Asia, are right to left .
Quote: beachbumbabsQuote: LuckyPhowIt is perhaps more likely that the dealer may distribute full hands (such as from a 3-Card Poker shuffle machine) first to the player on the far right. But never in my experience when the dealer is dealing one card at a time to each player.
Honestly, apart from PGP, there is no game out there I'm aware of that deals from dealers right to left. PGP does it as a unique aspect of the game. It's possible that Asia poker does it as well, as a derivative of PGP, but I can't recall for sure, and I think it's also left to right. All other carnival games are left to right, whether packets or pitched.
Pays on all games, including PGP and Asia, are right to left .
Not every casino deals POF right to left. Fort McDowell Casino in As deals it left to right.
ZCore13
Quote: armyegadGaming commission called back and stated I have a very strong case against the Flamingo. Recovered video supports that no aggregate signs were displayed. Will know the boards decisions within 45 days and will up date all once a decision is released.
Fantastic. As someone that deals with the Nevada Gaming Control Board daily, you have a solid case but that doesn't mean they will say yes the first time. If they find against you ask for an appeal process.
They did? Not that you don't, I'm just surprised they said that.Quote: armyegadGaming commission called back and stated I have a very strong case against the Flamingo.
Quote: DiscreteMaths2"5.190
Aggregate payout limits for gambling games.
1.
As used within this regulation, “aggregate payout limit” means a maximum payoff amount that will
be paid by a licensee to two or more patrons as the result of winning wagers resul
ting from any single call of the game or hand of play.
2.
Except as otherwise provided herein, a licensee may establish an aggregate payout limit on any
game as defined within NRS 463.0152, as well as on a separate bonus feature requiring a separate wager
made in conjunction with or in association with the game. Aggregate payout limits may not be combined
for different types of wagers.
3.
Each separate aggregate payout limit established for the game or bonus feature may not be an
amount which is less than the highest award with the minimum wager required to play the game or bonus
feature.
4.
All aggregate payout limits must be prominently displayed on the table layout or on a sign placed
on the table, which is unobstructed and clearly visible from all player positio
ns, using language approved by the chairman of the board or his designee.
5.
Aggregate payout limits may not be imposed upon payouts from slot machines, race books, sports
pools or any game where the highest payoff odds on a winning wager are less than 50 to
1, unless otherwise allowed by regulations of the commission. This section does not apply to bingo or keno.
6.
The chairman of the board may, in his sole and absolute discretion, waive one or more of the
provisions of this section, subject to such conditions
as the chairman may impose.
(Adopted: 1/01. Effective: 5/01/01.)"
I might prefer to argue the interpretation of the regulation with the sign display noncompliance to fall back on.
The regulation could be interpreted as…
On the occurrence of two hands having the same qualifying value on the same play (say a straight flush in two hands.) The aggregate maximum would be applicable and should pay each wager either the calculated pay table value or the posted aggregate maximum value whichever is less. In order to pay less than the pay table calculation there needs to be a qualifing aggregate of two players. This is dependant on your interpretation of section two and upholding that they may not combine my bet on my hand with others' bets on my hand under one maximum.
The intent of the regulation may have been that the minimum payout if aggregate maximum is invoked is twice the value of the aggregate maximum. Where a $50k max would never be invoked for pays of $80k and $8k because they don't exceed 2 x maximum. (Wishful Thinking)
Given the interpretation above, how would the payout be divided for different wagers with the same hand?
Given 8000:1, $50k max aggregate with two bets at $10 and $5.
Pay table totals 80k / 40k totaling $120k
Should they pay 50k / 40k or 66.k / 33.k or 60k / 30k?
If you were the $5 player and they pushed you $40k, would you pass $10k to the $10 player?
"I hate ambiguity! Please lie to me consistently."
"While the above is intended as an excersize in diverse thinking,"
braces self on a sturdy fixture, "let the flogging begin." 😏
armyegad,
Congrats on the SF. It sounds like you can expect a favorable outcome given that they will see a floor manager fetching a sign from the other table.
" I interviewed XXXXXX XXXXX over the phone regarding the dispute and his side of the story coincides with what you wrote in the email. I don’t think XXXXXX’s testimony would have any bearing on this investigation. Corrective action has already been taken by the casino to ensure there is no more confusion. The NGCB Regulations, the recorded video, the fact I can confirm the sign was not on the table, and the pay schedule printed on the table layout, all will be the key components to your dispute. Stay tuned!"
My impression is this will be a clear cut case. More to follow in approximately two weeks after the board makes their final decision. My representative has been very professional and always responds in a timely manner!
Quote: armyegad
My impression is this will be a clear cut case. More to follow in approximately two weeks after the board makes their final decision. My representative has been very professional and always responds in a timely manner!
Please update us when you get this resolved. I am always happy when Gaming sides with the player.
Quote: Wizardshame on the Flamingo.
Shame on all casinos that allow amounts to be bet that will run into pay limits in the first place.
Quote: odiousgambitShame on all casinos that allow amounts to be bet that will run into pay limits in the first place.
Not just allow, but actively encourage. Those places with an envy bonus for a $5 Fortune bet but only have a 25k max aggregate (40k optimum payout) are shameful.
Quote: onenickelmiracleSo does the casino get fined as well now when they lose? They lost the case, but tried to cover up their liability. It has been proven he was entitled to more than the casino admitted, the casino tried to short change. What did the casino and employees learn, keep trying to talk people out of money, worst that happens, you pay them, no other consequences.
If the casino got fined there wouldn't be a public record of it but I highly doubt there would be a fine in this case as they broke no rules. So, you're right, the casino had nothing to lose to deny payment. Worst case scenario is they are forced to pay what they should have paid in the first place.
When I had a dispute with a certain casino over an expired sports ticket I complained to Gaming that the casino didn't report the dispute directly, which they are required to do for matters of $500 or more. The agent dismissively said he would note that in his report but any action on that complaint would not be made public.
The system works.
Who woulda thunk it?
At the casino where I work, the first thing I do when coming on shift is to check to make sure the maximum aggregate signs are in place.
Quote: armyegadWell, I just got a call from the Nevada Gaming Commission, it appears the have a check for me in the amount of $30,000. They asked for my mailing address so then can send me the tax forms for my signature and then they will release the check. Guess the system does work, only advice is to make sure you take pictures and make the claim as soon as possible. As I understand, the casinos only have an obligation to retain video footage for 7 days for cases like these. Personally I would like to thank all of those in the group that provided me guidance regarding this matter, you guys are the best!
Haha think of all the taxes you have to pay now. J/k congrats on the huge win. I can only dream of a win like that.
Quote: DRichCongratulations, I love nothing more than when Nevada Gaming corrects a situation and makes the customer whole.
I agree 100%. I hope this story gets more press than just here.
Quote: WizardI agree 100%. I hope this story gets more press than just here.
Who has an ear at the RJ or the Sun? Even AC has the potential to reach more readers in his newsletter. Question is are they willing to risk upsetting the powers that be in Vegas?
Quote: AxelWolfOn the bright side, you get to choose where you gamble at with all that money. You can now tell them to F-off and that you will spend your money elsewhere unless they kiss your ass hard. I doubt they would want you spreading this story on social media.
Knowing CZR, they will prob trespass him.
Quote: BozWho has an ear at the RJ or the Sun? Even AC has the potential to reach more readers in his newsletter. Question is are they willing to risk upsetting the powers that be in Vegas?
I just wrote to the Sun about it.
I'm wondering if word has gotten around and that's why?
The 7 card straight flush with no joker comes so infrequently, that it is almost not an issue. Most of the players who play the Fortune Bonus are looking for 4 of a kind, or 5 aces. Those have full payouts.
If you prefer to get your full payout, then don't bet any more than the amount that gets you that payout.
Quote: FCBLComishIf you prefer to get your full payout, then don't bet any more than the amount that gets you that payout.
If the casino prefers to not pay out the full amount, then don't have such high max bets
It isn't, but there is nobody to fight it with fighting it in their best interests. The only person to whom this is not in their best interest has not won yet. As a whole society, this is in all our best interests, but as society, we look away, wish someone else will sacrifice their time fighting it. It's a phenomena I don't even know a word for, but it's everywhere.Quote: billryanIt doesn't seem right that by putting up a sign, a casino can change an $80,000 payout to a $50,000 one.
Happens across the board in all parts of life, but I see it often in gambling. Usually lottery jackpots highlights it. Such as was the Ohio lottery years back, when the jackpot just wouldn't hit. They changed the formula for funding the jackpot, that basically spare change was kept between $100,000 increments. It's ok to screw lottery winners because when the screwing is done, they're not lottery winners yet and can't fight back. You will be told the lottery funds education, but it really doesn't because the state would spend those dollars anyways, and what the lottery really does is allow the state to spend the education dollars somewhere else. By taking these dollars from the winners, the poor and middle classes predominantly playing are just getting more of nothing for something. Nobody fights back, they have no reason to, no financial motivation.
Then again the lottery sticking it to an unknown winner. First the jackpot drawing was rigged, but because the rigger didn't want to be caught, he didn't cash the ticket. They prosecuted him anyways, and the lottery kept all the money. The next jackpot winner wanted that money, since the unclaimed jackpot was foul, and the lottery thought everything was kosher, and he wasn't owed. The powerful doing the right thing when put on the spot just doesn't happen anymore. The courts and government are just useless. Losing our religion takes away the entitlement to fairness unless in protected classes. No such thing as injustices having appeals and remedies these days.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/latestcasinobonuses.com/news/editorials/straight-up-attempted-casino-fraud.amp
