AC Casinos forcing me to Drop a Hand in Blackjack
Quote: BedWetterBetterGood luck convincing the uninformed why hitting a soft hand can't hurt their hand!
I had the wonderful task of dealing with a stubborn, urban 22 yr old who just kept shaking his head when I suggested it couldn't hurt to hit A-4 against the dealer's 10. The dealer was no help, just staring blankly and yelling at me "It's YOUR move sir!"
Sure enough, the next card was a 6. So I learned from that day, you can't make a horse drink...even when the drinks are on the house!
Do you use index play? If you do then surely you've been yelled at by your fellow players. It happens to me often.
Quote: IbeatyouracesQuite wrong! The casino CAN and WILL do this, especially if they want a poorer player at the table.
I guess so, seems they'll make concessions to get a low buy-in at the table, when he perceives the table is "hot"
But it seems poor tactics to do so when there are open tables a few ft. away.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceI'm mostly concerned with your spreading of mis-information.
Sorry, didn't realize you're the message board police.
Didn't think sharing stories & asking questions of Casino etiquette was spreading info.
Guess I'll just pretend they didn't happen and drink the kool-aid like the message board police order!
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceNo police here. On a board like this, if you start talking about how someone didn't take a hit when they should have and how that effected the order of the cards, causing you to lose, you will probably get called on it.
Didn't say any of that. You're just mis-reading things and seeing what you want to.
I said I did not feel obliged to give up one of my spots and as it turned out he was not a very good BJ player. Didn't cost me a buck as I was NOT playing at the table with him. He nearly cost me an evening with the young woman, but I was able to pursue that venture later on.
But back on point...
Like I said, you're looking for monsters under rocks and arguing over nothing. Perhaps it's out of some sort of insecurity or fear of different ideas, but I won't pass judgement because it doesn't make me feel any better about myself!
Quote: 1BBDo you use index play? If you do then surely you've been yelled at by your fellow players. It happens to me often.
Yea, I remember hitting 12 against a 2 and catching an 8.
Only for the dealer to turn 2-4 into 21.
Someone said "See, he woulda busted!" To which they were right on that hand, the 8 would have been followed by a 10 for a bust.
However, the dealer DID bust the next 7 consecutive hands and I reminded them "So how many hands did we lose since that 21?"
I often politely ask ONCE if the poor player would like a tip or help or advice...., and if they say no, then I am content to watch them donate their bankroll to the casino. As far as what I believe was the start of this thread, being asked to give up a spot, all I ask is that casinos have clear rules as to what their policy is. Seneca Niagara does not require an increased bet, and will not let a new player in even if someone is betting the minimum on two spots. The first time this happened it pissed me off, but now that I know the rule I accept it. Personally, I will play two spots at Pai Gow but will ALWAYS let a player in who wants to play. If I was the casino making the rules it would be simple- "Sir- you want to take the second spot Mr. X has been playing. Mr. X has been averaging $30 on that spot. If you are willing to play that spot at a $35 minimum it is yours." The casino should not care how many humans are playing the spots, but rather how many dollars are.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceQuote: MoscaYou're a civilian, too. Honestly, I think your entire problem comes from not the gambling and the casino but this identity thing, where you feel that they are civilians but you are something more than that. Most of us don't judge others by how well they play at numbered pasteboards.
In fairness to the OP, APs (or people who think that they are APs) need a term to describe those who aren't APs. "Civilian" is fine, I think. I don't think that it's derogatory or judgemental. It's a lot nicer than "ploppy".
I understand, and I also appreciate your parenthetical qualification. I also stand by my statement, terms notwithstanding. Everyone plays differently, and being an advantage player (or "an advantage player") does not make one worth more (or less) as a person, or as a patron of a business. If the OP considers himself an equal person, then he has no problem allowing a new player. If he considers himself superior, then we have this thread.
Quote: MoscaQuote: AxiomOfChoiceQuote: MoscaYou're a civilian, too. Honestly, I think your entire problem comes from not the gambling and the casino but this identity thing, where you feel that they are civilians but you are something more than that. Most of us don't judge others by how well they play at numbered pasteboards.
In fairness to the OP, APs (or people who think that they are APs) need a term to describe those who aren't APs. "Civilian" is fine, I think. I don't think that it's derogatory or judgemental. It's a lot nicer than "ploppy".
I understand, and I also appreciate your parenthetical qualification. I also stand by my statement, terms notwithstanding. Everyone plays differently, and being an advantage player (or "an advantage player") does not make one worth more (or less) as a person, or as a patron of a business. If the OP considers himself an equal person, then he has no problem allowing a new player. If he considers himself superior, then we have this thread.
CLEARLY, the casino would prefer a 'ploppy' to an AP. The AP IS worth less as a patron of the casino. 99+% of casino players are 'ploppys'. Every craps player, every roulette player, every slot player is a 'ploppy'.... the rare AP BJ player or 3CP holecarder I would guess make up less than 1% of casino patrons.
I am going to respectfully disagree with this viewpoint. The casino thrives on regular customers. They allow the casino or any entertainment business to pay the nut. Weekends are always easy to fill most joints, but the really successful ones are able to pay the
weekly nut by Wednesday or Thursday.
If a patron is told he must now play $30 at a $5 minimum table, he is no likely to. Especially in a competitive location. He will walk out the door along with wife, girlfriend, friends etc. The only thing a player will not tolerate is NO ACTION. I have been told to wait while some duffus is betting multiple spots. An email to corporate has always been answered that i every effort will be made to ensure I will have a chance to play on any future visit.
Think of all the coupons, courteous service , friendly staff, etc all going to waste as the player is told play $30 at this $5 minimum table or hit the road.
Quote: SOOPOO
CLEARLY, the casino would prefer a 'ploppy' to an AP. The AP IS worth less as a patron of the casino. 99+% of casino players are 'ploppys'. Every craps player, every roulette player, every slot player is a 'ploppy'.... the rare AP BJ player or 3CP holecarder I would guess make up less than 1% of casino patrons.
Absolutely, but they would also ask a ploppy playing two hands to give up one for a waiting advantage player. My point isn't the type of play, it is the relative value of the people. As patrons, as citizens, as people.
If the OP sees himself as an equal person, he has no problem giving up a position. If he sees himself as superior (in this case based on his belief that he is better at the game) then we have this thread.
And he might see some jerk like me putting a chip on his second spot just to see what happens.
Quote: MoscaAbsolutely, but they would also ask a ploppy playing two hands to give up one for a waiting advantage player. My point isn't the type of play, it is the relative value of the people. As patrons, as citizens, as people.
If the OP sees himself as an equal person, he has no problem giving up a position. If he sees himself as superior (in this case based on his belief that he is better at the game) then we have this thread.
Gotta love all the assumptions and hypocrisy in this board!
"We can call others civilians, but YOU can't because you're not one of us and that is OUR term!"
"We would never wong-in on another counter's table because of some unspoken code, but it's perfectly fine for us to do it to someone else who asks us NOT to come in and nothing wrong with the house making someone give up a spot, when they are not good at making easy plays."
"How dare you tell others how to play BJ and how to think about questionable casino practices, but if one of us says something it is stone cold truth...there is no dispute"
The actual point of this thread, is how it's bad business for them to force a higher tier player to relinquish a spot, when in fact there are other open tables and the individual asking for the spot has limited knowledge of BJ(not doubling 11 against 5, and then hitting twice) which effectively chased away the other 4 players and strengthened my resolve to leave after banking my profits.
So they let in one bad player at the expense of 5 other regular ones. My guess is, at least one of them will now be turned off by the idea of returning and dealing with such individuals. And chances are, that bad player won't return because he lost his money and in his mind it wasn't because of his incorrect play, but because "This place is Bad!"
Considering how I see the same bad players at the same casinos time after time, I nominate this as the silliest statement you have made recently.
Quote: SOOPOOBed Wetter--- I call the players that play that poorly "Chandelier players". As in -- someone has to pay for the expensive chandeliers in the lobby...
I often politely ask ONCE if the poor player would like a tip or help or advice...., and if they say no, then I am content to watch them donate their bankroll to the casino. As far as what I believe was the start of this thread, being asked to give up a spot, all I ask is that casinos have clear rules as to what their policy is. Seneca Niagara does not require an increased bet, and will not let a new player in even if someone is betting the minimum on two spots. The first time this happened it pissed me off, but now that I know the rule I accept it. Personally, I will play two spots at Pai Gow but will ALWAYS let a player in who wants to play. If I was the casino making the rules it would be simple- "Sir- you want to take the second spot Mr. X has been playing. Mr. X has been averaging $30 on that spot. If you are willing to play that spot at a $35 minimum it is yours." The casino should not care how many humans are playing the spots, but rather how many dollars are.
I've been to Seneca, and even though I won on both the slot ($300) and the table ($250) I did not like the place because of the CSM in use.
The same kind of rules are in effect at Sands PA. They purposely open a limited amount of tables, at a $15 minimum, and force people to swarm around them waiting for the first open spot and fighting over it like it's the last Tickle Me Elmo toy.
However, if someone was at the table earlier and plays multiple spots, they will NEVER force them to give up a hand for someone else. People will loudly complain and ask "Why can't he give up one spot?" and the pit boss replies "He was here first. But we'll open up more tables in an hour"
Which I feel is fair and the house should compensate by opening up more tables instead of bothering players who already dug themselves in. But making them wait an hour is bad policy and will result in patrons going elsewhere next time.
And if that policy of player's giving up hands is valid, there should be a sign at the table, clearly displayed saying so. They have no problem doing that a $1 or $5 table and at most of them you are not allowed to play more than one hand. Fine, no problem.
But it seems in poor taste to hassle someone who has been sitting there for several hours just because another poacher perceives the table as "hot' and wants a chance to turn their $100 into something they can write home about.
Quote: Buzzard" And chances are, that bad player won't return because he lost his money and in his mind it wasn't because of his incorrect play, but because "This place is Bad!" "
Considering how I see the same bad players at the same casinos time after time, I nominate this as the silliest statement you have made recently.
And seeing as how your opinion means nothing, we'll just ignore it.
Quote: BuzzardThat won't make you any less silly. LOL
Surely not as silly as someone who uses teenage terms like "LOL" to try and make a point.
Quote: BedWetterBetter
The actual point of this thread, is how it's bad business for them to force a higher tier player to relinquish a spot...
Higher tier player? Good christ, you're betting $10/hand. Even times two you're still not up to green chips. I'm a ploppy, and I'll sit down and play greens if that's what's open, and blacks if I'm winning. I can play a stack of greens or blacks to "even up" over an hour or two, no problem. And I have a low tolerance for loss, and a modest bankroll, usually $500/session and never more than $2500. And regardless, I don't consider my play worth more than yours. If you want to sit down and play $10, and I'm playing $25x2, you're welcome to the chair.
Quote: BuzzardBetter than that point you have made on your tin foil hat.
Childish name calling also a good sign of defeat and poor attempts at bullying.
Especially when said tough guy was crying over someone thinking they are superior to another.
But,carry on. You're quite an amusing hypocrite.
Quote: MoscaHigher tier player? Good christ, you're betting $10/hand. Even times two you're still not up to green chips. I'm a ploppy, and I'll sit down and play greens if that's what's open, and blacks if I'm winning. I can play a stack of greens or blacks to "even up" over an hour or two, no problem. And I have a low tolerance for loss, and a modest bankroll, usually $500/session and never more than $2500. And regardless, I don't consider my play worth more than yours. If you want to sit down and play $10, and I'm playing $25x2, you're welcome to the chair.
So players with higher level cards are only relegated to $25 and up?
They should have their status revoked if they choose to play elsewhere?
Again, I'm not criticizing for him wanting to play and then playing poorly.
If he had been in one of the open spots when they were available, then so be it.
But he insisted on taking one of my spots, when there were other places and tables for him to play, and then proceeded to play poorly. Which did not bother me because I colored in prior to him sitting down. It did however bother the other players and promptly got them to leave the table. One of which, was a cute, young female I was chatting up and having a good time with. So in that sense, he nearly ruined my night. But you can't keep an old dog down!
If that was his plan all along, then mission accomplished. But I'm willing to bet that him losing his money and being cursed out by the other players probably didn't leave him with a good feeling and made him think twice about coming back.
Quote: BuzzardI never called you a name. Just commented on your hat.
Oh cool, is it anything like your pointy white hood?
I will take that action. Ignorance is bliss.
Quote: Buzzard" But I'm willing to bet that him losing his money and being cursed out by the other players probably didn't leave him with a good feeling and made him think twice about coming back. "
I will take that action. Ignorance is bliss.
Yep, because everyone who loses their shirt at a casino goes right back to the same place to throw their pants. No arguments allowed and anyone who thinks different is silly, despite not seeing said shirtless ones ever again at the establishment.
Quote: BedWetterBetterSo players with higher level cards are only relegated to $25 and up?
They should have their status revoked if they choose to play elsewhere?
Again, I'm not criticizing for him wanting to play and then playing poorly.
If he had been in one of the open spots when they were available, then so be it.
But he insisted on taking one of my spots, when there were other places and tables for him to play, and then proceeded to play poorly. Which did not bother me because I colored in prior to him sitting down. It did however bother the other players and promptly got them to leave the table. One of which, was a cute, young female I was chatting up and having a good time with. So in that sense, he nearly ruined my night. But you can't keep an old dog down!
If that was his plan all along, then mission accomplished. But I'm willing to bet that him losing his money and being cursed out by the other players probably didn't leave him with a good feeling and made him think twice about coming back.
I'm the lowest tier available. My belief is that when I get a higher tier card there is a problem, that I'm gambling too much. It's not worth the amount at risk to get a better parking spot, a shorter check-in line, and no waiting at the buffet. I'll pay for valet and wait in line, thanks.
Quote: MoscaIt's not worth the amount at risk to get a better parking spot, a shorter check-in line, and no waiting at the buffet. I'll pay for valet and wait in line, thanks.
Agreed, I've actually let the majority of my tiers slip to entry level. And to my surprise, have gotten MORE offers as a Gold card member for Total Rewards than as a Platinum.
However, Trump Entertainment gave me the higher tier card as a Thank You, despite me being well under the required tier score necessary. So I'd be foolish not to take advantage of the perks and free stuff. I also used it as leverage at Revel to give me a higher tier level and MORE free slot play for getting a Revel card.
I never said "I'm better than so and so because I have this and you don't" But I don't feel that I should be hassled to accomodate someone who
A) can't wait for their own opportunity or play higher stakes
B) lacks the fundamental understanding of BS and why it is important to at least TRY it out and then make their conclusion of when to use it.
The casino however, should be more accomodating to higher tier players, because that is how customer relations are built. If a person seems hesitant to give up a spot, then don't force the issue. Just explain to the person waiting we'll find a spot for you elsewhere. Also, the two $10 tables were at properties where I am NOT a regular or higher rolling player. Which is why I gave up the spot(s) without an argument, just suggestions that there are other tables open. This most recent time, it seemed in poor taste, was actually at a $15 table on a Sunday night and the place was pretty dead. Plus it was the third time and I did not appreciate the hassle this time around for reasons already stated.
It's a free country and you can do as you like, but people don't need to be so sensitive over things that are not even directed at them.
Quote: BedWetterBetterI never said "I'm better than so and so because I have this and you don't" But I don't feel that I should be hassled to accomodate someone who... lacks the fundamental understanding of BS and why it is important to at least TRY it out and then make their conclusion of when to use it.
I see this statement as contradictory on its face. To me, it distills to, "I never said I was better than people I think I'm better than." That might not be what you meant, but that's what it sounds like to me. If the problem is on my end, I'll happily chalk it up to miscommunication.
Quote: BedWetterBetter
It's a free country and you can do as you like, but people don't need to be so sensitive over things that are not even directed at them.
Oh, I don't actually CARE. It's an internet message board where you solicited answers. I think I actually wrote in an earlier response that I would have kept walking, I would have let you play the two hands. It's not that big a deal to me, personally. But the converse would also be true, that if I were playing two hands and someone else wanted the seat, I would happily move my chips over, and ask the new player if he/she had enough room. That's my nature.
Quote: MoscaI see this statement as contradictory on its face. To me, it distills to, "I never said I was better than people I think I'm better than." That might not be what you meant, but that's what it sounds like to me. If the problem is on my end, I'll happily chalk it up to miscommunication.
Oh, I don't actually CARE. It's an internet message board where you solicited answers. I think I actually wrote in an earlier response that I would have kept walking, I would have let you play the two hands. It's not that big a deal to me, personally. But the converse would also be true, that if I were playing two hands and someone else wanted the seat, I would happily move my chips over, and ask the new player if he/she had enough room. That's my nature.
Definitely misunderstanding. Don't wanna group you in with the rest here, but there are just too many posters looking for monsters under rocks and blowing up on statements that are pretty harmless. Then it turns in to a "I'm smarter than you because I think this and you think that" or "You probably do this and that when you're playing BJ and therefore you are a ploppy and not one of us." without any kind of basis, just assumptions.
The only question I asked, was has this happened to anyone else and is it a way of them backing me off without making a scene or risking a lawsuit?
Seems that is NOT the case and I'm grasping at straws, but ya never know!
However, I still consider it a burden and feel that it is significant enough for me to "rant" about it. Just doesn't warrant THAT much criticism.
Quote: BedWetterBetter... The only question I asked, was has this happened to anyone else and is it a way of them backing me off without making a scene or risking a lawsuit?
Seems that is NOT the case and I'm grasping at straws, but ya never know!
However, I still consider it a burden and feel that it is significant enough for me to "rant" about it. Just doesn't warrant THAT much criticism.
They are not going to shy away from backing you off EVER. You have no grounds for a lawsuit, if they ask you to leave. Now, since it is AC, I believe they are not allowed to state it is because you are counting, but I believe they can still ask you to leave for any multitude of reasons, of their choice.
Quote: BedWetterBetterI've been to Seneca, and even though I won on both the slot ($300) and the table ($250) I did not like the place because of the CSM in use.
This is the quote of the thread.
I am scared to ask, but why don't you like CSMs?
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceThis is the quote of the thread.
I am scared to ask, but why don't you like CSMs?
If you have to ask then perhaps you don't belong here.
That's harsh. Maybe a little more attentiveness is in order. CSMs defeat the whole card counting thing that the OP likes to do.Quote: BedWetterBetterIf you have to ask then perhaps you don't belong here.
I was wondering if he didn't like them because you can't count (although, read discountgambling.net) or for some strange superstitious reason, or perhaps some belief that they are designed to stack the deck against the player. We already know that he doesn't like people to sit down at his table and not play proper basic strategy so it's not clear.
uQuote: AxiomOfChoiceThe quote includes the amount of money he won from slots. I dunno, I think that that's funny. Not that there is anything wrong with playing slots, but someone who is willing to play a VERY fast-paced game that has an 8-10% house edge should not worry too much about whether he is +1% or -1% at blackjack.
I was wondering if he didn't like them because you can't count (although, read discountgambling.net) or for some strange superstitious reason, or perhaps some belief that they are designed to stack the deck against the player. We already know that he doesn't like people to sit down at his table and not play proper basic strategy so it's not clear.
There ya go assuming again. And making up stories to try and sound tough.
Ever hear of free slot money? That made me the 300. But go on posting ignorantly and jumping to wild conclusions, it seems to make you happy!
Of course it increases the hands per hour (which more than makes up for it on a per hour basis) but if you really want that short break every once in a while you can just take one :)
Quote: s2dbakerThat's harsh. Maybe a little more attentiveness is in order. CSMs defeat the whole card counting thing that the OP likes to do.
But I thought that's how we treat people who don't automatically know everything about BJ, like they are inferior and have no business posting here?
He asked a dumb question and deserved to be made to look dumb. From now on he'll think twice.
Quote: MoscaAs long as I'm just playing basic strategy, I'm OK with the CSM. The count is always 0, I don't count, so I always know the odds. And now that I'm going to have my WoO/WoV business card, I won't make as many mistakes.
I hadn't seen one until visiting the Seneca and I didn't have a great session. Was down a bit before I came back and the CSM didn't help make it any easier.
Quote: BedWetterBetterHe asked a dumb question and deserved to be made to look dumb. From now on he'll think twice.
It wasn't a dumb question. I know why I avoid CSMs. I was just wondering why you didn't like them.
Quote: BedWetterBetterBut I thought that's how we treat people who don't automatically know everything about BJ, like they are inferior and have no business posting here?
He asked a dumb question and deserved to be made to look dumb. From now on he'll think twice.
Someone did not take their anti paranoia pill.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceIt wasn't a dumb question. I know why I avoid CSMs. I was just wondering why you didn't like them.
Sure you were tough guy. Perhaps if you read all the posts you wouldn't need to ask such a useless question. But instead, you were fishing for info that you would try and start an argument over and got busted.
Quote: BuzzardSomeone did not take their anti paranoia pill.
And someone forgot their sarcasm detector.
