Blackjack Dealer With a Conscience

So here's an interesting find, at local casino in Atlantic City, I ran into a dealer who actually felt bad when they made a 21.

They felt so bad, that on more than one occasion during the night, they would pick up the cards but conveniently not pick up the chips. The dealer's response to the wide-eyed stares was "It's ok, I can make mistakes too!"

I realize this is grounds for termination and would probably send droves of APs to this location with the intent of preying upon this dealer's conscience. I'm just curious, are we responsible for not speaking up and pretending to point out the dealer's error?

Are we guilty of not having a conscience to let this dealer risk their job just for a few hundred bucks?

I believe Bob N. talked about this a bit on GWAE... Here's the takeaways I found important:

1) It's the dealers job to do dealer procedures, not the players.
2) When it comes to miss-pays in the players favor, the casino does have the right to ask for the money back. However, you may refuse and they can't legally get it back but they can bar you so not worth it (especially if it's like $20).
3) It IS ILLEGAL to "knowingly" take a miss-pay. Now, how do they prove "knowingly?" You have to show that you KNEW it was a miss-pay and then still took the money for it to be illegal. So as long as your eyes are on the ceiling or something then "oh hey, I must have won... <collect chips>" then they can't prove anything. I'm not promoting nor condoning this course of action, as I don't ever recall intentionally collecting a dealer miss-pay... but I'm sure it's happened by accident =).

If this dealer keeps this up and does this a couple times a night even then he'll be fired pretty soon I'd imagine.

I had something like this happen to me in 1999 at the now defunct Showboat in Las Vegas. I was playing blackjack with my father. I had $25 on the table, my dad had $40. I stood on 18, he stood on 19, the dealer had a 6 up, flipped over an 8 and drew a 6. She apparently thought she busted and paid both of us. We knew we had been mis-paid, and said nothing. 15 minutes later 3 suits came down, and informed us of the mis-pay, and asked for it back. We played dumb and refused. He then proceeded to invite us up to his office to watch the video, we again refused, so we were kicked out. We then proceeded to go play at Boulder Station the rest of the night

Quote: Gabes22

I had something like this happen to me in 1999 at the now defunct Showboat in Las Vegas. I was playing blackjack with my father. I had $25 on the table, my dad had $40. I stood on 18, he stood on 19, the dealer had a 6 up, flipped over an 8 and drew a 6. She apparently thought she busted and paid both of us. We knew we had been mis-paid, and said nothing. 15 minutes later 3 suits came down, and informed us of the mis-pay, and asked for it back. We played dumb and refused. He then proceeded to invite us up to his office to watch the video, we again refused, so we were kicked out. We then proceeded to go play at Boulder Station the rest of the night

My experience with overpays suggests leaving with the money before the "suits" approach you. Whether you are ahead or behind, if they made an error that benefits you, the best move is to leave the casino.

Worst case scenario, they make a note in your "file" and wait for you to return and then ask for the money back. Chances are, they forget after 4 months and if you don't use a player card, you stay off the radar.

But in this situation, here's a dealer knowingly giving players a re-do and they are not obligated to. I know there are some HUGE hands in the past where I doubled or pulled 20 and the pesky dealer pulled some B.S. 21 with a hard 15 or 16 to ruin the moment. On the flip side, there are a handful of doubles/pulls where the dealer made a better hand and did NOT take the money because they thought they had busted. So I guess it all balances out and this dealer probably doesn't even care if they are fired.

Yeah, it was 4 years before I returned to Vegas. This trip was actually my 21st birthday present. LOL. When we turned 16 mom took each of us 4 to anywhere in the US for 4 days stateside and when we turned 21, dad took us to Vegas for 4 days. I didn't know any better at the time. We were staying at the hotel that night but I didn't use a players card

Quote: BedWetterBetter

So here's an interesting find, at local casino in Atlantic City, I ran into a dealer who actually felt bad when they made a 21.

They felt so bad, that on more than one occasion during the night, they would pick up the cards but conveniently not pick up the chips. The dealer's response to the wide-eyed stares was "It's ok, I can make mistakes too!"

I realize this is grounds for termination and would probably send droves of APs to this location with the intent of preying upon this dealer's conscience. I'm just curious, are we responsible for not speaking up and pretending to point out the dealer's error?

Are we guilty of not having a conscience to let this dealer risk their job just for a few hundred bucks?

Yes. and also in grabbing back the money you actually should have lost, - but that seems to be a lesser point. (In other words, if the dealer could have paid you illicit wins or pushes in total safety, is it then occupationally all right? Certainly, if he had gone the other way and had stiffed you, saying "Well shoot, you people have won enough - I'm TAKING some money back, screw the cards!," I'm sure you would have demanded that he be sacked, not caring about his occupational safety or unprofessionalism in this case here......) I will say he is probably by now caught by surveillance, and the dealer is on the unemployment line looking for a new career. He'll have a story to tell, perhaps to an unemployment counselor or to a psychiatrist...

What the dealer did was deliberate dereliction of his duty: he deliberately disobeyed the result of his cards in plain sight.
What the gamblers did was basically the same thing: they also disobeyed the honest result of the cards in plain sight..

Gamblers and dealers enter into a pact that says "we win or lose by the true results of the round, with no opinions or feelings subverting the honest result of the round." (He felt "bad about it". Excuse me?) Trust me, this was not the dealer's call to make. I would have provided a written statement to the shift manager, saying "Yeah, he needs to be fired, because this is NOT gambling services offered." If you have so much love to give, then you do charity work after Sunday Mass, but you don't compromise your own integrity, or that of the employer who gave you A Job.

Geoff Hall needs to chime in here, because this is a "Push-21" - a WHOLE new mechanism!

There are times I'm on the ropes due to bad luck, aka variance, but I will refuse to the dealer a false win that I did not win.

Integrity is an issue, and this is a big fail. Conscience cannot be claimed when stiffing the house on a round you know you lost, even if you don't like "the house" (or your boss as a dealer) - just as you do the same when taking the winnings on a round you did win.

When he loses his job, I am sure the BJ players will support his family.... BET ME

Quote: nodummy57

When he loses his job, I am sure the BJ players will support his family.... BET ME

Oh, you know it....

Quote: Paigowdan

Yes. and also in grabbing back the money you actually should have lost, - but that seems to be a lesser point. (In other words, if the dealer could have paid you illicit wins or pushes in total safety, is it then occupationally all right? Certainly, if he had gone the other way and had stiffed you, saying "Well shoot, you people have won enough - I'm TAKING some money back, screw the cards!," I'm sure you would have demanded that he be sacked, not caring about his occupational safety or unprofessionalism in this case here......) I will say he is probably by now caught by surveillance, and the dealer is on the unemployment line looking for a new career. He'll have a story to tell, perhaps to an unemployment counselor or to a psychiatrist...

What the dealer did was deliberate dereliction of his duty: he deliberately disobeyed the result of his cards in plain sight.
What the gamblers did was basically the same thing: they also disobeyed the honest result of the cards in plain sight..

Gamblers and dealers enter into a pact that says "we win or lose by the true results of the round, with no opinions or feelings subverting the honest result of the round." (He felt "bad about it". Excuse me?) Trust me, this was not the dealer's call to make. I would have provided a written statement to the shift manager, saying "Yeah, he needs to be fired, because this is NOT gambling services offered." If you have so much love to give, then you do charity work after Sunday Mass, but you don't compromise your own integrity, or that of the employer who gave you A Job.

Geoff Hall needs to chime in here, because this is a "Push-21" - a WHOLE new mechanism!

There are times I'm on the ropes due to bad luck, aka variance, but I will refuse to the dealer a false win that I did not win.

Integrity is an issue, and this is a big fail. Conscience cannot be claimed when stiffing the house on a round you know you lost, even if you don't like "the house" (or your boss as a dealer) - just as you do the same when taking the winnings on a round you did win.

Darn! Finally I thought there'd be a thread where we would agree....perhaps next time!

Do not worry about agreeing.
Worry about being a Schnorrer.
this time, not next time.

Quote: Paigowdan

Do not worry about agreeing.
Worry about being a Schnorrer.
this time, not next time.

Low blow.

Quote: Paigowdan

Do not worry about agreeing.
Worry about being a Schnorrer.
this time, not next time.

I've "mistakenly" accepted miss-pays before only to sometimes realize it later. I did not feel compelled to give the casino back any money. Am I a Schnorrer?

On a similar note... I've been keeping track. In my last 10 casino trips there have been 32 dealer mistakes, 31 of which were AGAINST the player. When I've been playing I'll correct the dealer most of the time, but the few that either I didn't (dick player deserved it), etc, the suits did NOT come to re-pay the person. How many times do you think the casino "mistakenly" takes players money and DOESN'T pay them back? I'd be willing to wager a lot more often than the other way around.

Sounds to me like the casinos are a Schnorrer.

Quote: Romes

I've "mistakenly" accepted miss-pays before only to sometimes realize it later. I did not feel compelled to give the casino back any money. Am I a Schnorrer?

On a similar note... I've been keeping track. In my last 10 casino trips there have been 32 dealer mistakes, 31 of which were AGAINST the player. When I've been playing I'll correct the dealer most of the time, but the few that either I didn't (dick player deserved it), etc, the suits did NOT come to re-pay the person. How many times do you think the casino "mistakenly" takes players money and DOESN'T pay them back? I'd be willing to wager a lot more often than the other way around.

Sounds to me like the casinos are a Schnorrer.

Little bit of a sidetrack but, just this last weekend. No, it was the weekend before, still trying to catch up on sleep ;-) Anyway, I had some vouchers from CET that coincided on a particular day or two ( in a row ). So I went and played, and cashed in the vouchers.... Only played 4 hours and actually won a bit for a change (woo-hoo!) plus collected the vouchers. So it's time to leave and arrive home in time to get my youngest to the bus stop for school in 3 hours, so I cash in. I think the chips on the table totaled $2890. So dealer stacks them up in various this and that ways, which is not the same way that I stack them, and I always have a hard time following their methods, and slides a smaller stack of bigger chips to me. The Pit is,of course, watching. I reached out and started to slide them the rest of the way toward me, I actually did touch the chips, then lifted my hand and said "that's not right, I'm short 2 purple". The Pit immediately says, 'player is right, add 2 purple'. Dealer slowly looked at chips, both stacks ( old bigger stack of smaller chips and new smaller stack of bigger chips and said something along the lines of 'Oh, sorry' and added two purples to my stack. I looked at it again, took my chips to the cage and swapped for cash, and drove 3 hours home to arrive with 15 min to spare.

Only later did I re-think that whole transaction. Dealer does the count/exchange and slides me my chips with the Pit staring at the transaction. I reached out and, just briefly, actually touched the chips, then lifted my hand and said stop, not right. Pit immediately said add 2 purples, done. Maybe was an innocent mistake by dealer, and Pit who is there to double check all the significant money exchanges, maybe not. Gives me the creeps....

Quote: Romes

I've "mistakenly" accepted miss-pays before only to sometimes realize it later. I did not feel compelled to give the casino back any money. Am I a Schnorrer?

Yes.
Now, this is up to each individual, but I'll say this: accepting money that you know you didn't earn or win is questionable, same as accepting wrong change from a clerk or teller. Doesn't matter if it is a dealer or a clerk or a teller, it matters if it's wrong money and that you knew it wasn't rightfully yours when your hand took it.

People can do what they want, and they will indeed, but I'll call it as I see it, which is an ethically challenged action.

Quote: Romes

On a similar note... I've been keeping track. In my last 10 casino trips there have been 32 dealer mistakes, 31 of which were AGAINST the player. When I've been playing I'll correct the dealer most of the time, but the few that either I didn't (dick player deserved it), etc, the suits did NOT come to re-pay the person. How many times do you think the casino "mistakenly" takes players money and DOESN'T pay them back? I'd be willing to wager a lot more often than the other way around.

Sounds to me like the casinos are a Schnorrer.

Disagree. I've worked for years as a dealer, and I have found that casinos go out of their way to correct wrongs on behalf of their players, and reprimand dealers whose incompetence had shorted people, both as a PR move and as simply their job to do. I have consistently found that it is generally the players who are the shot takers, as the casinos don't need to take any shots. If you feel the casinos are wronging people or are evil, then one can go to the movies.

Quote: Romes

...Am I a Schnorrer?

Quote: Paigowdan

Yes....

This is a personal insult. Schnorrer = Beggar, scrounger; a layabout. This is literally a direct personal insult and I'll expect to see a resulting suspension.

Quote: Paigowdan

Disagree. I've worked for years as a dealer, and I have found that casinos go out of their way to correct wrongs on behalf of their players, and reprimand dealers whose incompetence had shorted people, both as a PR move and as simply their job to do. I have consistently found that it is generally the players who are the shot takers, as the casinos don't need to take any shots. If you feel the casinos are wronging people or are evil, then one can go to the movies.

And I've been much more "aware" of my surroundings/etc in a casino than a simple dealer. 99% of dealers don't know what game their dealing, don't know how to deal them, don't know how to add to 21, and don't know who actually won the hand. I've been an advantage player for over a decade and I have NOT seen ANY casino consistently go above and beyond to correct dealers, compensate players who were wronged, etc, etc. I too have tons of stories of being shorted on my color up, just like 2F. How many times have I been over compensated on my cash out? A resounding zero.

Hell, I had a local casino try to not pay a straight flush on a carny game because the person STOOD UP (didn't leave their seat just stood up in front) with excitement. The casino tried to say they "left the game" and so they "didn't have to pay."

Quote: BedWetterBetter

My experience with overpays suggests leaving with the money before the "suits" approach you. Whether you are ahead or behind, if they made an error that benefits you, the best move is to leave the casino.

Worst case scenario, they make a note in your "file" and wait for you to return and then ask for the money back. Chances are, they forget after 4 months and if you don't use a player card, you stay off the radar.

But in this situation, here's a dealer knowingly giving players a re-do and they are not obligated to. I know there are some HUGE hands in the past where I doubled or pulled 20 and the pesky dealer pulled some B.S. 21 with a hard 15 or 16 to ruin the moment. On the flip side, there are a handful of doubles/pulls where the dealer made a better hand and did NOT take the money because they thought they had busted. So I guess it all balances out and this dealer probably doesn't even care if they are fired.

Curious if they put anything in your file if you correct the dealer on an overpay.

It would seem there's a negative if you keep it, but wondering if they put anything positive if you're honest.

Quote: ukaserex

Curious if they put anything in your file if you correct the dealer on an overpay.

It would seem there's a negative if you keep it, but wondering if they put anything positive if you're honest.

This is a technique advanced AP's will use. If the dealer makes a mistake when the pit is around, correct them in front of the pit. Not saying any of us would or would not correct them anyways, just saying in front of the pit has it's added benefits.

Quote: ukaserex

Curious if they put anything in your file if you correct the dealer on an overpay.

It would seem there's a negative if you keep it, but wondering if they put anything positive if you're honest.

There is no file for non-shot takers. You're supposed to be honest. You do get a thank you. But you do it because it's right.

I get told when I return money I didn't win, "Wow, you're like really honest, THIS IS RARE. This is VERY rare, sir, as most people would just grab the cash and make a stash, and fight like hell to keep it if caught, making all sorts of arguments." I say I know, and that I dealt for many years.

Most of the mistakes by dealers that I have noticed have been overpays to me. I stop them, correct them, hoping I'm not bringing unfavorable attention to the dealer ( which I do NOT want to do). But I'm scared of the boogeyman, or it's a Karma thing, or maybe it's just my interpretation of right vs wrong. I choose right over wrong everyday in so many ways. I don't rob banks, I don't steal cars, I don't sexually assault dem young teenage girls that look so more fruitful than the teenage girls back in the sixties and seventies. It is a personal choice, personal to me.

On the other hand, unusual circumstance, just this last weekend, I witnessed a half dozen instances ( maybe a dozen) of a dealer (several different dealers involved) taking betted chips where the player actually won, or at least pushed. Was odd, never seen such one sided mistakes in a session before. Only when the the player called the dealer on it, dealer called the Pit over, did it become an issue. It. Was mostly on side bets, but not always. Dealer would say 'I took their chips when I shouldn't have', Pit would say 'make it right'. Went quick, no long discussions. Also never once involved my bets, and I leave other players to look after themselves for the most part. Odd session, in a lot of ways. I have no idea how many mistakes were made that were not called by players, only the ones that were called caught my attention...

Quote: Paigowdan

...You're supposed to be honest.

And here I thought you're supposed to be competing playing a game to the best of your ability to win the competition. After all, every casino totes "Come try your best to beat us!" I'm not saying "steal" from the casino... but your job in the arrangement is NOT to be honest, but to play to the best of your ability and let the casino worry about their procedures.

Quote: Paigowdan

...I say I know, and that I dealt for many years.

I love when dealers say this line. It literally means nothing. I had a dealer recently tell me that even money was not a way to shortcut buying insurance. When I postured and said "It works out exactly the same, right?" He said snarkily "Yeah, I've been dealing for 5 years, what do I know?" ...When yes, he didn't know.

Quote: Romes

And here I thought you're supposed to be competing playing a game to the best of your ability to win the competition.

And....you take this as a license to discard honesty, or to ignore the plain and actual results of the cards and take money that wasn't won? No, I don't think so. If it is unacceptable for the dealer, it is unacceptable for the player.
And this "Competition?" With whom??
With the results of the cards? or with the dealer? The dealer is just a referee or umpire, and you're actually not battling the dealer, you see, he's just an impartial worker who deals and calls the cards. He isn't the "enemy," as there is no enemy. You're battling the luck or variance of the cards, if you're "battling" anything.

Me, I see what the cards say to determine if I win or lose. The dealer does the same thing. We're on the same sheet of music.

Quote: Romes

After all, every casino totes "Come try your best to beat us!" I'm not saying "steal" from the casino... but your job in the arrangement is NOT to be honest, but to play to the best of your ability and let the casino worry about their procedures."

Wow. So, you're saying your job as a player is to be dishonest? I don't think that is either a requirement or a positive thing in a gambler.
As for worrying about procedure, yeah, it is the casino's job, true.
But within that scenario, a player can either take or can return what he knows really isn't his, that he either is or is not honest, and that falls to the individual.
Some, a few, are honest, and some are dishonest, and I do not condone dishonesty with cards and money in plain sight. One can be an honest gambler and justify it with arguments as "how he rolls," and one can be a bit crooked as a gambler, and also justify it with "Aha!" arguments and "how I roll" or "It's on THEM, I'm not accountable for MY integrity because of their errors or procedures," etc.
We hold casinos to standards of integrity, and read the riot act if shortchanged by error, but cry like a baby if we have to return an overpayment that was caught and corrected. THIS is what I saw in many gamblers as a dealer.
I don't see many casinos saying "Yeah, I DARE you to beat us, to stomp us, to rip us apart." I DO see many casinos say, "We are simply the place to play at."

Quote: Romes

And here I thought you're supposed to be competing playing a game to the best of your ability to win the competition. After all, every casino totes "Come try your best to beat us!" I'm not saying "steal" from the casino... but your job in the arrangement is NOT to be honest, but to play to the best of your ability and let the casino worry about their procedures.

I love when dealers say this line. It literally means nothing. I had a dealer recently tell me that even money was not a way to shortcut buying insurance. When I postured and said "It works out exactly the same, right?" He said snarkily "Yeah, I've been dealing for 5 years, what do I know?" ...When yes, he didn't know.

Yea, that line always gets a chuckle from me. When they say even more absurd things like "Never split 6's against dealer 4-6" I argued, "Basic strategy says to split them" And he replies "Well then it's wrong, I've been doing this for 10 years and it never works"

I retort, "Then you've been doing it wrong for 10 years" to which he went quiet and muttered under his breath.

If only he knew the difference between knowledge and wisdom!

You're competing with the casino. This is how pretty much every player ploppy to AP see's the game. Casinos often advertise "Come try to beat us, we love winners!" This is just basic and I'd figure someone who dealt for many years would know typical casino advertising.

Quote: Paigowdan

...Wow. So, you're saying your job as a player is to be dishonest?

Not only did I not say this, I didn't even imply it. I simply stated the players responsibilities aren't "watching the dealer," it's to play the game within the rules and to the best of their ability. If the player wants to "assume" the casino makes mistakes often, then they could include the responsibility of making sure they don't get ripped off by the casino, but at no point should a player put the responsibility of protecting the casino from mistakes on their list. That's just ridiculous.

Any over payments that I've received on accident that the casino has asked me back for I've given them. There have been a couple times I didn't believe them either. I was playing craps, lost, placed another $10 and then a few minutes later they said they never took my bet. To this day I'm 99% sure I replaced my bet right after he took it (as any game I play I play proficiently and quickly). In the end the casino took another $10 from me (in my mind) and I had no recourse and didn't even complain. All I did was ask surveillance to review it to which they said "it wasn't clear" which again boggles my mind. So even when they mess up, twice, they didn't correct the situation. Casinos, intentionally or not, rip people off A LOT, every day... and now you want me to be a casino employee and try to spot and correct the errors that are against the casino? lol asinine.

Quote: BedWetterBetter

They felt so bad, that on more than one occasion during the night, they would pick up the cards but conveniently not pick up the chips. The dealer's response to the wide-eyed stares was "It's ok, I can make mistakes too!"

I will assume for the purpose of this discussion that the "they" was really just a he or she, and it was only one dealer doing this.
This one is a little more complicated than the usual PaiGowDan rant.
This is not an accidental overpay in the truest sense. Apparently, since the dealer noticed the overpay, and specifically did nothing to correct it, I see nothing wrong in keeping the money. In fact, the only way to not keep the money is to get the dealer fired. You alert pit boss, they go to tape, notice it has happened a few times, Bam!
Dan, you are correct that he will get caught if he constantly does this, and will get fired, but at least the blood won't be on your hands.

If this overpay was a single event, I could definitely see it as a customer service move, making an otherwise losing player happy to play there, so he will lose the rest of his money there instead of somewhere else.

The only way I see a problem with this accepting the money is if there was collusion..... which there is no mention of by the OP.

Quote: SOOPOO

I will assume for the purpose of this discussion that the "they" was really just a he or she, and it was only one dealer doing this.
This one is a little more complicated than the usual PaiGowDan rant.
This is not an accidental overpay in the truest sense. Apparently, since the dealer noticed the overpay, and specifically did nothing to correct it, I see nothing wrong in keeping the money. In fact, the only way to not keep the money is to get the dealer fired. You alert pit boss, they go to tape, notice it has happened a few times, Bam!
Dan, you are correct that he will get caught if he constantly does this, and will get fired, but at least the blood won't be on your hands.

If this overpay was a single event, I could definitely see it as a customer service move, making an otherwise losing player happy to play there, so he will lose the rest of his money there instead of somewhere else.

The only way I see a problem with this accepting the money is if there was collusion..... which there is no mention of by the OP.

I just used that pronoun as not to divulge the gender of the dealer. In fairness to them, they should not be judged by their gender or be given a free pass for wrongdoing based upon gender either.

Hard to tell if there was collusion, as the young couple at first base was tipping quite often before and after the incidents. My guess is that the dealer took that into account when they did the deed. But I can't know or prove that and was not playing two of the 3 hands where the dealer pretended to not see a 21. Also note, the dealer did not PAY out on any of the hands where a 21 was made. The dealer simply swept up the cards and left all bets alone as if it were a push. Not that it makes it any less illegal, but just wanted to clarify the amount of money involved.

They were probably running some sort of promotion.

Quote: Romes

...

3) It IS ILLEGAL to "knowingly" take a miss-pay. Now, how do they prove "knowingly?" You have to show that you KNEW it was a miss-pay and then still took the money for it to be illegal. So as long as your eyes are on the ceiling or something then "oh hey, I must have won... <collect chips>" then they can't prove anything. I'm not promoting nor condoning this course of action, as I don't ever recall intentionally collecting a dealer miss-pay... but I'm sure it's happened by accident =).

If this dealer keeps this up and does this a couple times a night even then he'll be fired pretty soon I'd imagine.

Quote: Paigowdan

Yes. and also in grabbing back the money you actually should have lost, - but that seems to be a lesser point. (In other words, if the dealer could have paid you illicit wins or pushes in total safety, is it then occupationally all right? Certainly, if he had gone the other way and had stiffed you, saying "Well shoot, you people have won enough - I'm TAKING some money back, screw the cards!," I'm sure you would have demanded that he be sacked, not caring about his occupational safety or unprofessionalism in this case here......) I will say he is probably by now caught by surveillance, and the dealer is on the unemployment line looking for a new career. He'll have a story to tell, perhaps to an unemployment counselor or to a psychiatrist...

What the dealer did was deliberate dereliction of his duty: he deliberately disobeyed the result of his cards in plain sight.
What the gamblers did was basically the same thing: they also disobeyed the honest result of the cards in plain sight..

Gamblers and dealers enter into a pact that says "we win or lose by the true results of the round, with no opinions or feelings subverting the honest result of the round." (He felt "bad about it". Excuse me?) Trust me, this was not the dealer's call to make. I would have provided a written statement to the shift manager, saying "Yeah, he needs to be fired, because this is NOT gambling services offered." If you have so much love to give, then you do charity work after Sunday Mass, but you don't compromise your own integrity, or that of the employer who gave you A Job.

...
Integrity is an issue, and this is a big fail. Conscience cannot be claimed when stiffing the house on a round you know you lost, even if you don't like "the house" (or your boss as a dealer) - just as you do the same when taking the winnings on a round you did win.

Quote: RS

Darn! Finally I thought there'd be a thread where we would agree....perhaps next time!

Quote: Paigowdan

Do not worry about agreeing.
Worry about being a Schnorrer.
this time, not next time.

Quote: RS

Low blow.

Quote: Romes

I've "mistakenly" accepted miss-pays before only to sometimes realize it later. I did not feel compelled to give the casino back any money. Am I a Schnorrer?

Quote: Paigowdan

Yes.
Now, this is up to each individual, but I'll say this: accepting money that you know you didn't earn or win is questionable, same as accepting wrong change from a clerk or teller. Doesn't matter if it is a dealer or a clerk or a teller, it matters if it's wrong money and that you knew it wasn't rightfully yours when your hand took it.

People can do what they want, and they will indeed, but I'll call it as I see it, which is an ethically challenged action.

Quote: Romes

This is a personal insult. Schnorrer = Beggar, scrounger; a layabout. This is literally a direct personal insult and I'll expect to see a resulting suspension.

So. The above, from start (where Romes stated it's illegal to accept an overpay knowingly) to finish (where Romes demands PGD's suspension), I have extracted from the thread and I've been asked to look at it.

1. This discussion is not new to the board, nor are the players and their positions.

2. I do not take what PGD said to RS as an insult under the rules; he's telling RS not to be one by taking advantage of a dealer error.

3. I do not take what PGD said to Romes as an insult under the rules; Romes gave an example of the same activity he'd previously identified as illegal (the quotes around "mistakenly" clearly indicate an awareness of the mistake), and asked if it was him being a Schnorrer in acting that way; PGD answered yes.

I would say this all falls under vigorous debate of a hotly contested concept, and there are no insults intended in the postings above, just a discussion of the ethics of that particular behavior. If Romes insists on taking this as a personal insult despite my ruling, I will reluctantly suspend PGD for violating the personal insult rule. However, I will then, also reluctantly, be forced to suspend both Romes and RS for trolling PGD in this thread, as they teed him up and drove him, knowing in advance what position he would take, then asked him a direct question that an honest answer from PGD would trigger what Romes then claimed as an insult.

All or nothing, guys.

Dan, let me ask you this because it is a real life scenario that happend. I was playing tiles at 2k per hand and on two spots

My phone rang and I walked away from the table after my hands were set. I came back and there was my original bet and 1900 additional next to each spot, I did a full press to 3900 on each hand..... And lost both spots on the next round .

I continued to play and about an hour later the manager came down and said I owed them 7800 additional which I did not have because the dealer set the hand wrong and instead of a win it was actually a loss on both of the original hands.
My contention was I would never have risked 3900 per hand if I did not win the hand prior.... What would you decision be on that ..... Before I share what happened as a result...

Quote: Wizardofnothing

the manager came down and said I owed them 7800 additional which I did not have because the dealer set the hand wrong and instead of a win it was actually a loss on both of the original hands.

First off, I call BS on this. The dealer set his hand wrong in a fashion that turned two winning hands into two losing hands? What did he do, mistakenly set pair-pair as 3-3? It is fairly rare that a reset of a questionable hand (like 2-9 vs. 4-7) will turn a win into a tie, or a tie into a loss. Changing a winner into a loser is a huge shift, and doing it on two hands simultaneously is almost impossible.

As for your specific question: Since you subsequently and immediately lost all proceeds back to the house, I would let bygones be bygones if I were them.

Since you want to stick your foot into you mouth illne happy to explain the dealer had dealer had unmatched sevens and a teen and a four he played the high nine for the high hand and a high one in the low hand instead of playing the pair and the high 6

I had gong 3 in one hand this beating the original hand and losing to the correctly set hand and unmatched 5s and a low 6 in the other hand -
Who are you to tell me that's impossible- do you even play tiles there are hundreds of possibilities where this can happen. Anytime you want to question my bets I'll be happy to post pics as I'm sure many people on the forum will be happy to verify the pics I've posted in the past

Quote: Wizardofnothing

Dan, let me ask you this because it is a real life scenario that happend. I was playing tiles at 2k per hand and on two spots

My phone rang and I walked away from the table after my hands were set. I came back and there was my original bet and 1900 additional next to each spot, I did a full press to 3900 on each hand..... And lost both spots on the next round .

I continued to play and about an hour later the manager came down and said I owed them 7800 additional which I did not have because the dealer set the hand wrong and instead of a win it was actually a loss on both of the original hands.
My contention was I would never have risked 3900 per hand if I did not win the hand prior.... What would you decision be on that ..... Before I share what happened as a result...

1. You were on the phone and away from the table for the moment, and so you didn't know the result. In this case, you operate on the basis that the dealer alone did his/her job correctly. You pressed it, and it was in valid action. Now...
2. If the house comes back an hour later, they were not on top of their work; surveillance later reviewed it. If you later don't have it, then you can't pay it, the house should forgive it; it is NOT as if you were up $60K, and they know that. In the case in particular, the house should let that slide, in as much as if a player busts out, it would be ridiculous for the house to ask, as they already had gotten the result they may have wanted. If a player played until he busted, then an earlier and intermittent win during a losing session can and should later be deemed immaterial in the wash, and it's petty not to take that into account.

As for SOOPOO, I described some of the ethical issues involved with people and game play; I basically said that yes, if you take what you know that you didn't rightfully win with the cards in plain sight, and you know an error occurred, you should insist on clean play at your table regardless of direction of the error, treating it simply as a wrong result to be corrected, like returning an overpayment from a teller or clerk. Gambling depends on clean play and it should be insisted upon, and rightfully and magnanimously corrected and accepted whenever possible and without complaint or resentment. This is a valid view, but was viewed abrasively and was called a rant simply because he personally disagrees with it. You take what you know you didn't win when you would cry the other way, I say something is questionable about that situation on its own terms.

Talk to a Trump supporter, and Sanders is a stinky piece of poo-poo who should die, with Trump as a savior.
Talk to a Sanders supporter, and Trump is a stinky piece of poo-poo who should die, with Sanders as a savior.

All personal POV.

Quote: Paigowdan

1. You were on the phone and away from the table for the moment, and so you didn't know the result. In this case, you operate on the basis that the dealer alone did his/her job correctly. You pressed it, and it was in valid action. Now...
2. If the house comes back an hour later, they were not on top of their work; surveillance later reviewed it. If you later don't have it, then you can't pay it, the house should forgive it; it is NOT as if you were up $60K, and they know that. In the case in particular, the house should let that slide, in as much as if a player busts out, it would be ridiculous for the house to ask, as they already had gotten the result they may have wanted. If a player played until he busted, then an earlier and intermittent win during a losing session can and should later be deemed immaterial in the wash, and it's petty not to take that into account.

As for SOOPOO, I described some of the ethical issues involved with people and game play; I basically said that yes, if you take what you know that you didn't rightfully win with the cards in plain sight, and you know an error occurred, you should insist on clean play at your table regardless of direction of the error, treating it simply as a wrong result to be corrected, like returning an overpayment from a teller or clerk. Gambling depends on clean play and it should be insisted upon, and rightfully and magnanimously corrected and accepted whenever possible and without complaint or resentment. This is a valid view, but was viewed abrasively and was called a rant simply because he personally disagrees with it. You take what you know you didn't win when you would cry the other way, I say something is questionable about that situation on its own terms.

Talk to a Trump supporter, and Sanders is a stinky piece of poo-poo who should die, with Trump as a savior.
Talk to a Sanders supporter, and Trump is a stinky piece of poo-poo who should die, with Sanders as a savior.

All personal POV.

Ok Dan- pov respected and I wish the casino had that same point of view it wasn't how it turned out

No problem.

One of the things not noticed or addressed is that allowing or accepting known wrong money in any direction really gums up table games operations. Mis-pays are often later caught to be reconciled, with the action stopping, and disputes and bad will and PR happening.

Quote: Wizardofnothing

Who are you to tell me that's impossible- do you even play tiles there are hundreds of possibilities where this can happen. Anytime you want to question my bets I'll be happy to post pics as I'm sure many people on the forum will be happy to verify the pics I've posted in the past

Sorry if there was a misunderstanding. I was not doubting the veracity of your story. I was doubting the argument from the house that a dealer's misplayed hand, while you happened to have your back turned, changed the results from a double win to a double loss. I would certainly demand a review of surveillance in this situation, which it seems that you did.

The case you describe is not merely a case of a hand not being set according to house way, which is generally a trade off between the high hand and low hand. This was a case of the dealer setting a clearly inferior way, significantly degrading both hands. I agree that, in this circumstance, the outcome was not unreasonable. It's just that I've never played against a dealer who would make such a mistake, and the assertion that such a mistake would happen on the one hand where my back was turned would be highly suspect.

I log over 2k hours in the casinos each year and that's an understatement - I could tell you mistakes for days, I have seen worse then that I have seen unmatched eights lepta together with teen and day and the list goes on- I've also seen countless mistakes in pai gow poker not to mention mistakes in baccarat . It happens its human error - I have also seen dealers hit a hard 18 in blackjack.

Quote: beachbumbabs

Quote: Romes

...

3) It IS ILLEGAL to "knowingly" take a miss-pay. Now, how do they prove "knowingly?" You have to show that you KNEW it was a miss-pay and then still took the money for it to be illegal. So as long as your eyes are on the ceiling or something then "oh hey, I must have won... <collect chips>" then they can't prove anything. I'm not promoting nor condoning this course of action, as I don't ever recall intentionally collecting a dealer miss-pay... but I'm sure it's happened by accident =).

If this dealer keeps this up and does this a couple times a night even then he'll be fired pretty soon I'd imagine.

Quote: Paigowdan

Yes. and also in grabbing back the money you actually should have lost, - but that seems to be a lesser point. (In other words, if the dealer could have paid you illicit wins or pushes in total safety, is it then occupationally all right? Certainly, if he had gone the other way and had stiffed you, saying "Well shoot, you people have won enough - I'm TAKING some money back, screw the cards!," I'm sure you would have demanded that he be sacked, not caring about his occupational safety or unprofessionalism in this case here......) I will say he is probably by now caught by surveillance, and the dealer is on the unemployment line looking for a new career. He'll have a story to tell, perhaps to an unemployment counselor or to a psychiatrist...

What the dealer did was deliberate dereliction of his duty: he deliberately disobeyed the result of his cards in plain sight.
What the gamblers did was basically the same thing: they also disobeyed the honest result of the cards in plain sight..

Gamblers and dealers enter into a pact that says "we win or lose by the true results of the round, with no opinions or feelings subverting the honest result of the round." (He felt "bad about it". Excuse me?) Trust me, this was not the dealer's call to make. I would have provided a written statement to the shift manager, saying "Yeah, he needs to be fired, because this is NOT gambling services offered." If you have so much love to give, then you do charity work after Sunday Mass, but you don't compromise your own integrity, or that of the employer who gave you A Job.

...
Integrity is an issue, and this is a big fail. Conscience cannot be claimed when stiffing the house on a round you know you lost, even if you don't like "the house" (or your boss as a dealer) - just as you do the same when taking the winnings on a round you did win.

So. The above, from start (where Romes stated it's illegal to accept an overpay knowingly) to finish (where Romes demands PGD's suspension), I have extracted from the thread and I've been asked to look at it.

1. This discussion is not new to the board, nor are the players and their positions.

2. I do not take what PGD said to RS as an insult under the rules; he's telling RS not to be one by taking advantage of a dealer error.

3. I do not take what PGD said to Romes as an insult under the rules; Romes gave an example of the same activity he'd previously identified as illegal (the quotes around "mistakenly" clearly indicate an awareness of the mistake), and asked if it was him being a Schnorrer in acting that way; PGD answered yes.

I would say this all falls under vigorous debate of a hotly contested concept, and there are no insults intended in the postings above, just a discussion of the ethics of that particular behavior. If Romes insists on taking this as a personal insult despite my ruling, I will reluctantly suspend PGD for violating the personal insult rule. However, I will then, also reluctantly, be forced to suspend both Romes and RS for trolling PGD in this thread, as they teed him up and drove him, knowing in advance what position he would take, then asked him a direct question that an honest answer from PGD would trigger what Romes then claimed as an insult.

All or nothing, guys.

You should ban all 3 of them.

Ban dissent? Then you would have nothing but log-rolling.

Quote: Wizardofnothing

Quote: Paigowdan

1. You were on the phone and away from the table for the moment, and so you didn't know the result. In this case, you operate on the basis that the dealer alone did his/her job correctly. You pressed it, and it was in valid action. Now...
2. If the house comes back an hour later, they were not on top of their work; surveillance later reviewed it. If you later don't have it, then you can't pay it, the house should forgive it; it is NOT as if you were up $60K, and they know that. In the case in particular, the house should let that slide, in as much as if a player busts out, it would be ridiculous for the house to ask, as they already had gotten the result they may have wanted. If a player played until he busted, then an earlier and intermittent win during a losing session can and should later be deemed immaterial in the wash, and it's petty not to take that into account.

As for SOOPOO, I described some of the ethical issues involved with people and game play; I basically said that yes, if you take what you know that you didn't rightfully win with the cards in plain sight, and you know an error occurred, you should insist on clean play at your table regardless of direction of the error, treating it simply as a wrong result to be corrected, like returning an overpayment from a teller or clerk. Gambling depends on clean play and it should be insisted upon, and rightfully and magnanimously corrected and accepted whenever possible and without complaint or resentment. This is a valid view, but was viewed abrasively and was called a rant simply because he personally disagrees with it. You take what you know you didn't win when you would cry the other way, I say something is questionable about that situation on its own terms.

Talk to a Trump supporter, and Sanders is a stinky piece of poo-poo who should die, with Trump as a savior.
Talk to a Sanders supporter, and Trump is a stinky piece of poo-poo who should die, with Sanders as a savior.

All personal POV.

Ok Dan- pov respected and I wish the casino had that same point of view it wasn't how it turned out

So you said you were going to tell us how it turned out from there?

Quote: AxelWolf

...You should ban all 3 of them.

Hush, please. Back to your popcorn. :)

Oh yea sorry, they would not show me the video but did bring down a still shot of the table from overhead....
They wanted the money- they said they would allow me to have thirty days and would leave a note on my account that I could pay it in increments out of winnings. If after 30 days it wasn't paid back I would be excluded until it was. It was a very very weird way to handle it, I was adamant about the fact that the bet I made was predicated upon winning the previous hand, they would not budge and by this point the general manager was in on it. They said it was a gaming rule... After about 2-3 hours back and forth they said they would give me 10k in match play if I would pay it In one shot the following day. Which I agreed to

Quote: AxelWolf

...You should ban all 3 of them.

I feel insulted by Axel, lol. (omg just kidding)

So I was apparently "trolling dan" because I knew he'd personally insult me? I mean I figured he'd take the side of the casino and all, but I didn't know he'd resort to name calling. Shouldn't matter what others say if you cross the line you cross the line, but alas I suppose this is the response. It doesn't matter how I take it, it's clearly meant as a personal insult. The fact that dan's words fall on def ears should be erroneous. He's 100% entitled to his own stances on topics, but he shouldn't be allowed to call "the other side" names because of his stance. I attempted to get my message through while at no point in time resorting to name calling (as I've done with him in the past).

I won't push it further, but I do think even for the more prominent members of this site whom skirmish "around the line" (which yes, includes me from time to time) once the hard line is crossed the rules should apply all the same to them. I suppose that's a future request at this point.

For now I'm a beggar, a scrounger, and a layabout.

Quote: Wizardofnothing

Dan, let me ask you this because it is a real life scenario that happend. I was playing tiles at 2k per hand and on two spots

My phone rang and I walked away from the table after my hands were set. I came back and there was my original bet and 1900 additional next to each spot, I did a full press to 3900 on each hand..... And lost both spots on the next round .

I continued to play and about an hour later the manager came down and said I owed them 7800 additional which I did not have because the dealer set the hand wrong and instead of a win it was actually a loss on both of the original hands.
My contention was I would never have risked 3900 per hand if I did not win the hand prior.... What would you decision be on that ..... Before I share what happened as a result...

Interesting scenario. One cannot squeeze blood from an exsanguinated body. My guess is you'd have to tell them you don't have it because the casino won it on the next hand. And then ask him what he/she would have you do. If the manager seriously wanted you to pay this, my guess is he would be disappointed.

Quote: Romes

I feel insulted by Axel, lol. (omg just kidding)

So I was apparently "trolling dan" because I knew he'd personally insult me? I mean I figured he'd take the side of the casino and all, but I didn't know he'd resort to name calling. Shouldn't matter what others say if you cross the line you cross the line, but alas I suppose this is the response. It doesn't matter how I take it, it's clearly meant as a personal insult. The fact that dan's words fall on def ears should be erroneous. He's 100% entitled to his own stances on topics, but he shouldn't be allowed to call "the other side" names because of his stance. I attempted to get my message through while at no point in time resorting to name calling (as I've done with him in the past).

I won't push it further, but I do think even for the more prominent members of this site whom skirmish "around the line" (which yes, includes me from time to time) once the hard line is crossed the rules should apply all the same to them. I suppose that's a future request at this point.

For now I'm a beggar, a scrounger, and a layabout.

I don't think you're any of those things. I also don't think Dan called you that; you gave him an example, and asked if that would make you one. He agreed it would fit his definition. His ethics are different from yours; mine, FWIW, are somewhere in between.

Splitting hairs, yes. That's what this comes down to sometimes.

However, I will say this: Dan, and any others, Warning(I searched the forum; the offensive and judgmental Yiddish term goes back to 2010-11 on here, though this seems to be the first use of it in several years), labeling other members with judgmental and derogatory terms in this way is close to an ad hominem attack on them. There's another current thread you brought that label into the last couple of days; this needs to stop. Any further propagation of it on here in this context will constitute an ad hominem attack on other members, as you are on notice it is offensive and judgmental (not just in this post, but by the objections in the thread). Thank you.

Quote: beachbumbabs

I don't think you're any of those things. I also don't think Dan called you that; you gave him an example, and asked if that would make you one. He agreed it would fit his definition. His ethics are different from yours; mine, FWIW, are somewhere in between.

Splitting hairs, yes. That's what this comes down to sometimes...

So to be clear... If Dan fits my definition of a dirty word, I can call Dan that dirty word? He absolutely called me that because I straight up asked him if I was one after him stating it, and he said yes.

Quote: Romes

So to be clear... If Dan fits my definition of a dirty word, I can call Dan that dirty word?

C'mon, Romes. He didn't say "You are a..." anything. He confirmed that if you do such and such (from your example and direct question), it fits his definition. Can we move on?

Quote: Wizardofnothing

Oh yea sorry, they would not show me the video but did bring down a still shot of the table from overhead....
They wanted the money- they said they would allow me to have thirty days and would leave a note on my account that I could pay it in increments out of winnings. If after 30 days it wasn't paid back I would be excluded until it was. It was a very very weird way to handle it, I was adamant about the fact that the bet I made was predicated upon winning the previous hand, they would not budge and by this point the general manager was in on it. They said it was a gaming rule... After about 2-3 hours back and forth they said they would give me 10k in match play if I would pay it In one shot the following day. Which I agreed to

Whaaaa? Once again, the extent to which casino employees don't understand math boggles the mind. Nice work getting that deal though. The $10K in match play would be worth roughly a bit under $5K, for an $1100 expectation of profit on your side. They would have been better off letting it go.

Quote: Romes

I feel insulted by Axel, lol. (omg just kidding)

So I was apparently "trolling dan" because I knew he'd personally insult me? I mean I figured he'd take the side of the casino and all, but I didn't know he'd resort to name calling. Shouldn't matter what others say if you cross the line you cross the line, but alas I suppose this is the response.

Huh? I agreed with romes, saying that the casino shouldn't seek repayment on a dealer error that was a) caught late, and b) an intermediate hand that was part of an overall losing session in the end.
What I am against are:
1. The assumption that different standards of clean play apply to gambler and dealer. If dealer errors are to be corrected and the right payouts are to be restored, it goes both ways, within reasonable and timely limits that take the session actions into account. This is a reasonable position, and has been called both "fanatical" and "a rant," which it is not, and I also don't take personal offense, or demand that this view be considered a ban-able insult.
2. Espousing the view that both gamblers and dealers are part of a table-play tag-team, then neither should be shot-takers.

Quote: romes

It doesn't matter how I take it, it's clearly meant as a personal insult.

No. Certain behaviors and POVs may be questionable and counter-productive, and it was put in those terms with the reasons given. This was without "to the man" attacks, and to say that they were present when they are not is untrue. To say something like "cheating on taxes is bad," then someone may think "Well, since I secretly know that I cheat on my taxes, then clearly he is saying that I am personally a bad person." No, even though it is natural to feel this way through identification or through a disagreeing POV. This is how attacking a position, a belief, or a questionable practice gets converted into a claim of personal insult when it was not the case. In these terms, the attacks on casinos, casino workers, and the general gaming industry that gives gamblers the ability to play (and complain) in the very first place is generally beyond the pale in its one-sidedness and "to the industry attacks" here, and I think this is true.
For that matter, I am routinely insulted and disparaged by name, and I let it slide.

Quote: romes

The fact that dan's words fall on def ears should be erroneous. He's 100% entitled to his own stances on topics, but he shouldn't be allowed to call "the other side" names because of his stance. I attempted to get my message through while at no point in time resorting to name calling (as I've done with him in the past).

I was totally fine with Romes responses here, I took nothing personally, and thought it was a good give-and-take.

Quote: Romes

I won't push it further, but I do think even for the more prominent members of this site whom skirmish "around the line" (which yes, includes me from time to time) once the hard line is crossed the rules should apply all the same to them. I suppose that's a future request at this point.

I am against any one-sidedness. And this includes descending into a sea of one-sidedness on some threads where the position of welching on a gambling debt is openly espoused, saying "a dealer error makes it mine IF it is to my advantage, but not the other way around." In this thread's case the DEALER was the guilty party, who said and acted out: "Okay, I hit out to a surprise 21 hand, so I'll ignore the cards in plain sight and push your bets - to give you a break." In live casino action. Seriously. The dealer wasn't called delusional or incompetent, the dealer was called "someone with a conscience." Now, what if the players were on a hot streak, and the dealer said, "Okay, you guys had won enough, so I'll now treat my busted hand like a dealer's 21, this time to have a conscience for the house." ? We see the one-sidedness here with this example, but the thread's one-sidedness was unseeable, unfathomable, and even a reasonable dealer action prior to pointing this out.

I don't think it is just deaf ears, but also blind eyes and closed minds at the table, in a positive "initial reaction" sense to some free money not legitimately won. Beware the seeming gift.

To quote a Commandment from Mike Shackleford himself "Thou shalt honor thy gambling debts." This goes pretty deep.

Quote: Romes

For now I'm a beggar, a scrounger, and a layabout.

Hang in there, you'll bounce back better than ever.

Quote: AcesAndEights

Whaaaa? Once again, the extent to which casino employees don't understand math boggles the mind. Nice work getting that deal though. The $10K in match play would be worth roughly a bit under $5K, for an $1100 expectation of profit on your side. They would have been better off letting it go.

The casino loses theoretically by handling it this way, but the table games dept improves its hold while the match play gets charged against the promotions budget. The dealer probably gets to keep his job too. I wouldn't be surprised if the table games manager proposed the solution knowing full well it would cost the casino more than just letting it go.

Quote: AcesAndEights

Nice work getting that deal though. The $10K in match play would be worth roughly a bit under $5K, for an $1100 expectation of profit on your side. They would have been better off letting it go.

Wait, I thought WoN said he had to pay up $7,800 to get the $10K match play. Wouldn't he have lost ~$3K in the transaction?