Tournament controversy-Revel

deleted

Quote: aceofspades

The shift manager at the tournament offered the other players at our table a comp dinner for our "inconvenience."

No deal.

Believe it or not, we also had a minor discussion during a Blackjack Tournament on board Victory Casino Cruises out of Port Canaveral today. Much less of a big deal for me, but I'd love to get everyone's opinion in writing to show the Table Games people there:
The rules were that if you bet out of turn (early), your money had to stay out, but you could still add more when it was your turn to bet. Okay, fine. Not a big deal. Well as we get to the final hand, the smarter players were assessing the other stacks and bets, and choosing their wager based on the variables. While I was weighing my options as the second to last person to bet, one of the other players who had already gone added more to his wager. I said "Whoa, he changed his bet!" The floor said, "Yeah, that's okay, he can add to it, he just can't take anything away." I said "Wait a minute, you said you can add to it when it's your turn, but the bet has already been placed, he can't add to it after his turn to bet!" They said "That's the way it's been the whole game." I wish I had known that, as I would have bet the minimum every time and waited to cap my bet before the last person bet if I wanted to bet more. You all agree that once you put your bet out in turn, you can't add to it before the cards are dealt, right?

Also, another silly rule was only one person could request a count of everyone's chips once during the last 5 hands. So if someone else did it on hand 16, you couldn't. But they were being pretty strict about everyone keeping their chips in view and didn't care if you took a little time before you bet, so that wasn't a big deal.

deleted

Most of the Casinos where I have played had different Rules. But to most, the decision by the Floor Managers should be as your scanned copy of rules states....Game in hand should be voided, new game should be played.... Some Managers asked the players if the game should be voided, and yet some are bias and make their own decision, depending of the Dealer's drawn card. They would dis-agree to players asking for game void, and quote that all exposed cards belongs to nobody, none of the players nor dealer and should be burnt!

The only fair resolution that I can think of in the case of a prematurely exposed dealer down card in a blackjack tournament is to burn the exposed downcard and give the dealer a new one. Also burn any cards mistakenly drawn by the dealer. Any other solution gives some players an unfair advantage over others.

Unfortunately, your average blackjack player would go batshit crazy over this decision. However, if it was clearly stated in the rules, then I don't think the casino would have much of a problem.

Voiding the hand is a terrible solution. I would argue that the rule that you have starred doesn't really apply. The term malfunction in casino speak typically refers to problems in the shuffling apparatus, not an action made by the dealer.

When it seems the tournament has no rules, it is unfair for a completely arbitrary call when the second supervisor can clearly see how it affects players still needing to make a decision. The tournament supervisor first mentioned should have burned the 7 in the interest of fairness. When they offer a card and nobody wants it, they then should burn it if nobody takes it and continue dealing where they left off IMO. Definitely wrong, but I hope you find recourse and a case if you're willing to fight it. Again the complete lack of rules for the situation seems wrong and in light of the decision, fishy smelling of favoritism disguised as fairness.

I guess it all depends on regulation BJ. Are there any written rules for that and do they say what was done, should have been done, and can they prove the rules predated the tournament? You should offer to write rules for the tournament for only $10,000. I don't understand them for good reason.

It is my opinion that they did not follow their own rule. The rule sheet says that in the event of human error, the hand shall be considered void. Yet obviously it was not voided, it continued as if nothing happened except the two remaining players knew what the next card was. To me, voiding the hand would have involved burning all of the cards that were dealt that round (to all players and the dealer) and starting over with unknown cards, using the same bets that were placed before the error.

Another thread about the Revel. What are the odds?

In my opinion they should have followed their own rule and replayed the whole hand. However, I think that is a bad rule. What if some players busted before the error was made. You then have a guessing game about how much said players bet.

In a tournament situation I think they should burn every card since the error was made and replay from that point.

Quote: Wizard

Another thread about the Revel. What are the odds?

It does seem to be the Windows 8 of the casino world.

There have to be more rules than the one page. You would think they would have a judges ruling final and binding clause, but I don't see one. I am confused about them stating playing 10 hands of regulation BJ, then never using the phrase again, but it's common sense the rest of the hands would also be regulation BJ unless stated. You need the complete rules and the regulation BJ rules if they exist, to be able to build an argument without surprises. I'm still shocked the rules you posted look like a rough draft and is totally a mess. If the regulation BJ rules describe the action, then it was fair, but wrong. You did seem to mention the supervisor stating it would be how a regular hand would have been played and you need to find out if it's true.

Quote: aceofspades

As of now, they are only offering the other players at the table $500 in Revel comp dollars (for use at the resort). If the players do not accept Revel stated we were free to file a complaint with NJ DGE

You can't possibly lose that complaint, but is the EV more or less than $500?

I think the fair settlement would be 1/36 of the $50,000 prize pool. I would expect that if the DGE found in your favor that is what they would have the casino offer you.

deleted

Quote: aceofspades

As of moments ago - Revel is still refusing to negotiate and merely offering the same: "$500 comp dollars or take it to the DGE"

I have to ask: are they aware of your line of work?

Yes indeed they are aware of who I am and my line of work. This seems to be dragging something out that should have been taken care of on the casino floor within 5 minutes - not dragging it out with two days worth of emails and a take it or leave it offer along with their nonchalance re: the DGE

Quote: aceofspades

Yes indeed they are aware of who I am and my line of work. This seems to be dragging something out that should have been taken care of on the casino floor within 5 minutes - not dragging it out with two days worth of emails and a take it or leave it offer along with their nonchalance re: the DGE

Hey, if they want an attorney to complain about them to the regulating body...well, give them what they're asking for:-)