Seneca Buffalo Creek - house money payout / table max question...

I need some clarification other than what the Seneca pit boss told me. They took the house just screws over the player side.
Then offered to take me in a side room and explain it to me. I'd have probably gotten kicked out for challenging their authority and telling them where to stick it.

I was playing at a 15/300 BJ house money table on Thursday afternoon. I think I had 200 on the main bet and 50 on the house
money side bet. Before the cards were dealt the dealer made no announcement to alert the pit of 'pay or take table max'.

I was dealt AK suited and the dealer did not have blackjack. So I won big.

In my opinion and understanding a $50 house money bet pays 9-1 making that $500 which I should have been allowed to add onto my main bet which would then pay $750 for the BJ making my $50 side bet turn into $1250. On top of what my main bet paid anyway (200- paid 300) I feel my total $250 bet should have paid out $1550. Or the dealer should have alerted the pit of a table max situation before the cards were dealt. I don't want to get the dealer in trouble though.

How they handled the payout was only paying out $750 - paying $300 for the house money they paid out and paid $450 on the main hand. After the house money brought that to the max of $300.

My rational is simple. They were separate bets. If a person is at a 50/1000max table and plays 1000 and then splits and doubles, I have seen them pay out $3000 on a single hand. Clearly above the table max. How is them not respecting the house money side bets any different? They should clearly pay out on a blackjack on the side bets as well. Not just tell me to go to a higher limit table and screw a guy playing bigger just because they can refuse to pay out. I was only staying at the lower limit table because it was hot for me so I was increasing my bets accordingly...

Anyways - beware of Buffalo Creek - at least if your at a 15/300 table don't put over 25 on the side bet with 50 on the main so they don't have an excuse to short the payout and cry they only pay up to the table max payouts. After not announcing it before the cards were dealt.

I feel I got screwed but learned a good lesson. They don't honor their side bets properly when ya hit too big. They scam back every nickle they can... I wonder if they hedge off a 7-7-7 at Spanish 21 also if its over their payout cap? They are crooks...

Do you have their rack card for the side bet?

Was a maximum payout or maximum aggregate payout posted?



(I am sympathetic. If they won't cover the action, they shouldn't take the action.)

You should contact the NY gaming commission.

Be aware Seneca is Indian casino. You may or may not have jurisdictional issues.

The side bets they let you play I think $1 up to $100. But the table limit was $15/$300 and that is
where they capped my side bet payout. If they won't payout 9 to 1 in full on up to $100, they shouldn't
be allowed to even offer it at the table. It's false advertising. Or the dealer should have mentioned
'pay or take table max' before the cards were dealt...

Plus its a blackjack table. Not paying 3-2 on a payout is criminal. They should have made an
exception in my case simply because the dealer did not mention pay or take before dealing.

The side bets should pay 3-2 on BJ winners automatically when the dealer doesn't have it also.
I'll probably just start going to Seneca Niagara instead where the pit bosses and managers aren't
morons...

Its like Indian Giving - we have a side bet but only pay out on blackjack up to our table max. So
your not really winning your entire sidebet. Just what we feel is that time of the month for us...

Your blog post said you were betting $150 regular and $50 on the side bet. My understanding of the game, which is contradicted in your above post, is that you win $450 on the side bet and you're allowed to move that money (up to $450 + $50 = $500) over to your regular bet so your total regular bet would be $650. You don't get an extra $500 to put on your regular bet, you use what you won on the side bet before play continues for the dealer and other players. So a BJ on a $650 bet would pay $975. You were limited to a $750 payout. What I think happened was they counted $150 of your side bet moved to the regular bet so the max bet of $300 had a BJ on it and paid $450. Then you still had $300 left from your side bet winnings and they added that to your $450 for a total of $750. Plus you got your original $150 + $50 = $200 back.

If you change the numbers to $200 regular bet and $450 won on the side bet, they'd add $100 to the regular bet and you'd have $350 left of your side bet. Your payout would be $450 for the BJ and $350 for the side bet win for a total $800 win. These numbers do not add up to your original blog post with a $750 payout.

I've never seen the game played and never heard of it before yesterday and only read a little about it. I'm just trying to make some sense of what I'm reading here.
From my description, everything worked out OK except they didn't tell you the amount of money that could be moved from the side bet winning was limited because of the regular $300 table max.

@ Chump. I don't recall if I had 150 or 200 main bet. I know I had $50 on the side bet. Which pays 9-1 and you are giving the option to add it in on your main bet up to the table max. I think they paid me 750 total was how I figured it.

300 for the side bet because that was table max payout for the side bet and they capped off my main bet at $300 with that also (with either $100 of $150). So the side paid me $300 and $450 for BJ on the main. That is how I figured the $750.

But technically they should state that on the side bet card - that they will not pay out more than the table max for the side bet.
I was thinking my $50x9 pays $450 and then adding it onto the main bet, it s pays 3-2 on top of that. So basically 50 turned into 500 and they would honor that paying 3-2. They did not...

If you have 5 on the side bet, is turns into 125. 5 turns to 50 and you add that onto your main bet which pays at 3-2. So your 50 pays out $75 in addition to any main bet. Therefore $5 - pays $125 but I don't think the card clearly states that.

Or maybe they paid me $450 for the side bet and only $300 on my blackjack. Which would be even more ridiculous. What does a $300 BJ pay at a 15/300 table ? Does it pay $450 like it should or do they cap it at table max. I'll find out next time I go in there...

They don't let you take pictures of the rack cards or anything at the tables for that matter. I would have gotten thrown out. Pretty much if they aren't going to pay out 9-1 on AK suited up to the side bet max of 100 because the table max is 300 - they should make that more clear. Plus the dealer should have stated it before dealing the cards. The house not honoring their side bets in full is ridiculous...

I don't believe your side bet payout was limited to $300. But you were there. How much in chips did they give you before they paid you for the BJ on the $150 + $150? I'd expect they gave you 4 blacks and 2 greens to add to your 2 greens on the side bet. Since I've never seen the game played, I'd expect that you move your side bet chips behind your regular $150 bet like a double down for more. Then the dealer just made a decision to pay you $450 for the BJ on the $300 limit. Since losing the hand was not an option with a Black Jack, they didn't feel the need to tell you to take back $300 in chips from your double down for more.

If you bet $100 on the side bet, you'd win $900 on that bet and you'd have $1,000 available to add to your regular bet. But since the table max is $300 and your bet is already $150, you can only add $150 to the regular bet. You'd have $750 winnings to pull back plus your original $100 bet, leaving $150 to add to your regular wager. You'd win $450 on the BJ. Total win would be $750 + $450 = $1200 plus $300 + $100 = $400 of your bets back. There's another way to express this, like $900 + $450 = $1350 won plus $150 + $100 = $250 bets back. Both ways total to $1600 in chips coming back to you.

I don't really recall the exact payout and the details but I think they paid all in green (25). Maybe a few blacks but it wasn't clear to me which and what amounts were for the side bet vs the main bet. It kinda happened at the same time after we got the pit boss involved and they just heeled it off. I didn't specifically ask them to break down each payout individually. I should have so I knew exactly what happened...

I never touched the chips after the initial bet. The dealer handled them, put the side bets into the main bet up to the max and paid out both at the same time. There in lies my confusion and I know they screwed me somehow. It didn't seem right.

Table limits caught you off guard but I don't think the dealer was wrong at this point.

Quote: wizardofbuffalo

They don't let you take pictures of the rack cards or anything at the tables for that matter.
link to original post

A number of casinos let you take the cards with you.

The casinos seem not to care if I attempt to photograph the cards once I'm off the gaming floor.

Quote: ChumpChange

If you bet $100 on the side bet, you'd win $900 on that bet and you'd have $1,000 available to add to your regular bet. But since the table max is $300 and your bet is already $150, you can only add $150 to the regular bet. You'd have $750 winnings to pull back plus your original $100 bet, leaving $150 to add to your regular wager. You'd win $450 on the BJ. Total win would be $750 + $450 = $1200 plus $300 + $100 = $400 of your bets back. There's another way to express this, like $900 + $450 = $1350 won plus $150 + $100 = $250 bets back. Both ways total to $1600 in chips coming back to you.
link to original post

ChumpChange's assessment all seems right to me.
It feels dirty that they won't let you add all your sidebet winnings to the main bet, but it seems entirely plausible that they would only allow your sidebet win to be added up to the table limit for the main bet.

The game is brace, but it's the only game in town.

That sounds right to me also. I"ll just be more careful next time and keep bets well under having the issue again.
I feel they should honor the sidebet blackjack and pay the blackjack on the sidebet full amount anyways. Thats
why people play house money - you are allowed to add it into your original bet. Especially in case of a BJ when
the dealer does not have it - it should be automatic added on top and paid out Otherwise they should add a note
on the house money card that says will not pay over table max and in case of blackjack - will not pay 3-2 on entire
sidebet - only the portion added into main hand. They let the house table max rules override what is stated on the
house money card.

At pair square on a $50/1000 table I have seen them pay out $1500 for a $100 bet when a suited pair hits.
That is over the table max but they pay that out but you can't add the sidebet into your main. A house money BJ
should be different or they are not honoring the basic rules of blackjack. A guy hits blackjack and the side bet only
pays 9-1. Not an entire blackjack amount. They chose not to pay 3-2 on the house money because my $50 became
$500. The $350 or $400 not added into my main bet, they just did no pay the blackjack on. Still the technicality cost
me $525 to $600 I figure. Very shady of the Indian Givers...

If you had a $50 regular bet and a $25 side bet, the side bet would have $250 available for the main bet on an A-K suited and add-in your $50 regular bet you've got the table max of $300. You'll get paid $450 on the BJ. You'll get $750 back in chips on a $75 bet, your total win is $675. The total win is 9:1 on your total bet. I'll bet half my regular wager on the side bet so that payout works if I ever play the game.

If there was a local table with a $3,000 maximum, my limits would be $500 with a $250 side bet.

Quote: ChumpChange

If you had a $50 regular bet and a $25 side bet, the side bet would have $250 available for the main bet on an A-K suited and add-in your $50 regular bet you've got the table max of $300. You'll get paid $450 on the BJ. You'll get $750 back in chips on a $75 bet, your total win is $675. The total win is 9:1 on your total bet.
link to original post

Exactly. I was over the limits so they limited my payouts. I'm not sure if they limited my sidebet to the table max of $300 or not. They probably paid the full (9-1) $450 out and then moved what they could into the main bet to cap that at 300. But I was still expecting to be paid 3-2 on the entire house money bet which they did not honor. The funny thing tough with the house money is they usually only have a few tables. So I was at 15/300 and doing well. Raised my bets recklessly without switching tables which could potentially destroy my tempo. I didn't notice a 25/500 table so I think the next house money was 50/1000. If I was over there,table limits wouldn't have mattered but I'd have had to wait for a new shoe where the smaller tables are with automatic shufflers. 50 or higher tables are usually show games and they usually have no mid shoe entry anyways.

The moral of my House Money story based on the odds is AK suited comes in roughly every 60 hands. The entire housemoney sidebet should payout 9-1 then a pay out blackjack (3-2) on top of that. But it doesn't so based on table max limits - make sure you are getting the most bang for your buck by not betting housemoney such that you lose out on full payout potential.

Pairs hit roughly every 16 hands and pay 3-1, straights maybe every 8 hands pay 1-1, and straight flushes happen every 30 hands and pay 4-1. The house money can pay as long as they respect the general rules of blackjack also. Not cheese ya on the payouts like Seneca Buffalo Creek chose to do to me.

You can play $100 on the main with $50 on the side bet and as long as you don't hit AK suited at 9-1 on a 15/300table all can be added into your bet and your action will pay out the max. AK unsuited they will still add the $200 from side into cap main at $300 and that will still pay 3/2.

I mistyped here: Actually AK unsuited with a sidebet of $50 pays only $50, but that $100 gets added into your main bet
which will pay the BJ $150 on top.

"AK unsuited they will still add the $200 from side into cap main at $300 and that will still pay 3/2."

Do you know who their regulator (gaming commission per se) is?

Some dumb indian or useless white trash pit boss...

You should edit that post before a mod notices that.

Quote: wizardofbuffalo

Some dumb indian or useless white trash pit boss...
link to original post

Let's call that 3 days for racist slurs (Rule 18).