Bob Nersesian guest again

While I applaud the plaintiff's chutzpah in suing tribal officials in order to get around the impediment of sovereign immunity, I have to wonder whether it will result in the type of payday one might expect from a similar type lawsuit against a Nevada non-tribal casino.

Casinos have deep pockets; but what about tribal officials?

A judgment for a considerable sum which turns out in the real world to be impossible to collect all or part of would seem a pyrhric victory.

Quote: michael99000

I would not say I’m “for” preferential shuffling ..

ZK stated in an earlier thread that it was illegal for the casino to do this because it changed the odds of the game sand made them worse. I’m just saying , what it does is it resets the odds for the next hand to whatever the house edge is under that given games rules. It cannot make the odds of the next hand worse than that.

Put it this way , a player has the ability to start out playing a new shoe and then stop playing and walk away to a new table that’s starting a new shoe as soon as the count has gone negative. Ok so the casino electing to shuffle when the count goes positive is basically the mirror image of that move on their end. Both sides have a decision they can make that allows them to not play the game under certain conditions.

Why should a player be able to walk away after 1 hand or 5 hands or 10 hands into a shoe if he doesn’t like the count, but the casino has to play out the entire shoe regardless of how they feel about the count ?

Preferential shuffling is illegal. Whether we can win a case against the casino is a different story.

Let's say there's a blackjack game with a 0.5% HE. That 0.5% HE is the AVERAGE house edge for all hands played. The HE looks sorta like a sine wave ( https://4.bp.blogspot.com/_6t_ZmJSkbL4/TJLFDrqFhYI/AAAAAAAACbU/BZgLx7HLP9U/s320/Sinewave_horizontalview.jpg ), it goes up and down. On that picture, the 0.5% HE would be represented by the line directly through the middle, the average. If a casino were to shuffle any time the wave was "up", above the average, and only continue dealing a shoe if the average was below the average of 0.5%, then effectively they are changing the house edge, because now the average is something like 1% or 1.5% HE.

This is a crazy example, but yolo. Let's say there's a game where you can only flat bet $100 and you must play the first and second round of the game. If you win, you win $95. If you lose, you lose $100. There's a red ball and a blue ball in the drum. If the picked ball is blue, you win. If it's red, you lose. They do not replace the ball after it's pulled from the drum. The house edge would be 2.5%. Pretty simple. Now let's say some casino decides they're going to "preferential shuffle" in this game. If the first ball comes out and is blue, the casino pays you your $95. Then the next round it must be red, so you lose, and they take your $100. But when the first ball is red, and you lose, they take your $100, then they decide to shuffle. This, without a doubt, will change the HE of the game. If my math is correct, by preferential shuffling in this game, the house edge would become 35%!

Quote: Keyser

I see the new game is to sue the employees of the Indian Casinos. I LIKE IT. :)

If you sue an Indian casino does it have to go though Tribal Court or State?

Quote: GlenG

Quote: Keyser

I see the new game is to sue the employees of the Indian Casinos. I LIKE IT. :)

If you sue an Indian casino does it have to go though Tribal Court or State?

If it goes through state court the decision is always to kick it to tribal court for sovereign immunity purposes

Quote: MrV

While I applaud the plaintiff's chutzpah in suing tribal officials in order to get around the impediment of sovereign immunity, I have to wonder whether it will result in the type of payday one might expect from a similar type lawsuit against a Nevada non-tribal casino.

Casinos have deep pockets; but what about tribal officials?

A judgment for a considerable sum which turns out in the real world to be impossible to collect all or part of would seem a pyrhric victory.

If im not mistaken most tribal pacts mean the officials are receiving a percentage of profits as opposed to salary.

So yea deeper pockets than say officials at a nornal casino

I don't know why people keep saying Gaming Control is heavily weighted towards the casinos? Over the years I have had to call gaming many times, most of the time they have ruled in my favor. I have known many people who have had to call Gaming, and for the most part, gaming ruled in their favor.

If you are acting like a know it all arrogant asshole to the gaming agent (just like any other cop) they will find a way to FK you.

There was one time, in particular, Gaming told me to go pound sand, even though I had a written "contract" with a location regarding a promotion. Long story short, it was a small place and I knew they were going to renege on the deal once I hit a certain level (thus "the contract"). They assumed getting to that level was nearly impossible. Basically, they were doubling the bonus amount each time I hit a jackpot. In their mind, they assumed no one could hit that many Royals in such a short period of time. And they were correct, however, I didn't play for Royals. Thye kept changing the rules and I kept adapting. At one point they realized they were going to be screwed.

Gamings argument was that they can't hold them accountable for a promotion that will put them out of business no matter what they promised(I think I have to agree with that argument).

I probably would have won somthing had I taken further, but I just let it go, as I knew they made a promise they couldn't keep in the first place.

But for the most part, I have seen gaming rule for the players even at times where I knew the casino had the right not to pay.

Can anyone give me some examples where gaming ruled against them in the end but they were totally wrong?

Quote: darkoz

Okay then i am not certain about vegas but most tito i have seen says directly the tickets are bearer bonds at least here on the east coast

Can you confirm thats true in vegas?

If so i see no difference between a $1000 tito and a $1000 chip

Do las vegas casinos refuse to cash out titos for lack of proof of ownership?

Fortunately, I have a ticket on my bulletin board. It expired six years ago, I've been meaning to try to cash it one of these days. Anyway, it says, "Casino reserves the right but it is not obligated to withhold validation and payment pending a determination whether the ticket has been stolen, lost, counterfeited, or duplicated."

I assure you that if a known TITO troll (someone who wanders the casino floor looking for abandoned credits or tickets on the floor) would be denied if he tried to cash one for a large amount at the cage.

To answer your question, I believe that TITOs and chips here are pretty much treated the same way -- either can be refused or seized if not presented by a player who obtained it through the normal course of play.

Coincidentally, I saw Nolan Dalla on his radio show the other day. Here is a link to the story of his $5,000 chip that was seized by the MGM and Gaming was no help getting it back or paid: Follow-up on the Nolan Dalla Chip Confiscation Story.

I will say that I am speaking only about Nevada. It would not surprise me if players at non-tribal casinos on the east coast had more rights.

Quote: Wizard

Fortunately, I have a ticket on my bulletin board. It expired six years ago, I've been meaning to try to cash it one of these days. Anyway, it says, "Casino reserves the right but it is not obligated to withhold validation and payment pending a determination whether the ticket has been stolen, lost, counterfeited, or duplicated."

I assure you that if a known TITO troll (someone who wanders the casino floor looking for abandoned credits or tickets on the floor) would be denied if he tried to cash one for a large amount at the cage.

To answer your question, I believe that TITOs and chips here are pretty much treated the same way -- either can be refused or seized if not presented by a player who obtained it through the normal course of play.

Coincidentally, I saw Nolan Dalla on his radio show the other day. Here is a link to the story of his $5,000 chip that was seized by the MGM and Gaming was no help getting it back or paid: Follow-up on the Nolan Dalla Chip Confiscation Story.

I will say that I am speaking only about Nevada. It would not surprise me if players at non-tribal casinos on the east coast had more rights.

Well we agree not to disagree then but to be bound by rules and regulations of a different jurisdiction



Thats a NYS tito. I have seen similar verbiage at least somewhere else possibly pa or nj. I can check nj in a day or so since im passing through

Just so you know im not bonkers :)

Edit: Even bearer bonds like titos above can be cancelled or refused payment if known to be wrongfully gained. Even cash must be returned to its owner

But no one will refuse tito or cash without solid proof of theft

It seems in vegas casinos are simply reserving the right to withhold payment at their whim. Which in my book equates to theft

What ever happened to the notion of putting RFID chips in casino chips, especially large denomination ones, in order to better track and verify their movements / verify who last received it from the casino and when?

Quote: MrV

What ever happened to the notion of putting RFID chips in casino chips, especially large denomination ones, in order to better track and verify their movements / verify who last received it from the casino and when?

Borgata has these weird plasticy feeling chips and I figured it might be for RFID. They are terrible.

Quote: MrV

What ever happened to the notion of putting RFID chips in casino chips, especially large denomination ones, in order to better track and verify their movements / verify who last received it from the casino and when?

Here in Vegas, I think most black chips and higher have an RFID chip. Maybe greens too.

However, I think they can't be tracked from a far distance. I think they are generally only scanned when presented at the cage.

Quote: darkoz

Quote: Wizard

Fortunately, I have a ticket on my bulletin board. It expired six years ago, I've been meaning to try to cash it one of these days. Anyway, it says, "Casino reserves the right but it is not obligated to withhold validation and payment pending a determination whether the ticket has been stolen, lost, counterfeited, or duplicated."

I assure you that if a known TITO troll (someone who wanders the casino floor looking for abandoned credits or tickets on the floor) would be denied if he tried to cash one for a large amount at the cage.

To answer your question, I believe that TITOs and chips here are pretty much treated the same way -- either can be refused or seized if not presented by a player who obtained it through the normal course of play.

Coincidentally, I saw Nolan Dalla on his radio show the other day. Here is a link to the story of his $5,000 chip that was seized by the MGM and Gaming was no help getting it back or paid: Follow-up on the Nolan Dalla Chip Confiscation Story.



I will say that I am speaking only about Nevada. It would not surprise me if players at non-tribal casinos on the east coast had more rights.

Well we agree not to disagree then but to be bound by rules and regulations of a different jurisdiction



Thats a NYS tito. I have seen similar verbiage at least somewhere else possibly pa or nj. I can check nj in a day or so since im passing through

Just so you know im not bonkers :)

Edit: Even bearer bonds like titos above can be cancelled or refused payment if known to be wrongfully gained. Even cash must be returned to its owner

But no one will refuse tito or cash without solid proof of theft

It seems in vegas casinos are simply reserving the right to withhold payment at their whim. Which in my book equates to theft

A bearer instrument isn't necessarily a bearer bond. While all bearer bonds are bearer instruments, not all bearer instruments are bearer bonds.
Just as all apples are fruits, but not all fruits are Apple's.

Quote: billryan

Quote: darkoz

Quote: Wizard

Fortunately, I have a ticket on my bulletin board. It expired six years ago, I've been meaning to try to cash it one of these days. Anyway, it says, "Casino reserves the right but it is not obligated to withhold validation and payment pending a determination whether the ticket has been stolen, lost, counterfeited, or duplicated."

I assure you that if a known TITO troll (someone who wanders the casino floor looking for abandoned credits or tickets on the floor) would be denied if he tried to cash one for a large amount at the cage.

To answer your question, I believe that TITOs and chips here are pretty much treated the same way -- either can be refused or seized if not presented by a player who obtained it through the normal course of play.

Coincidentally, I saw Nolan Dalla on his radio show the other day. Here is a link to the story of his $5,000 chip that was seized by the MGM and Gaming was no help getting it back or paid: Follow-up on the Nolan Dalla Chip Confiscation Story.



I will say that I am speaking only about Nevada. It would not surprise me if players at non-tribal casinos on the east coast had more rights.

Well we agree not to disagree then but to be bound by rules and regulations of a different jurisdiction



Thats a NYS tito. I have seen similar verbiage at least somewhere else possibly pa or nj. I can check nj in a day or so since im passing through

Just so you know im not bonkers :)

Edit: Even bearer bonds like titos above can be cancelled or refused payment if known to be wrongfully gained. Even cash must be returned to its owner

But no one will refuse tito or cash without solid proof of theft

It seems in vegas casinos are simply reserving the right to withhold payment at their whim. Which in my book equates to theft

A bearer instrument isn't necessarily a bearer bond. While all bearer bonds are bearer instruments, not all bearer instruments are bearer bonds.
Just as all apples are fruits, but not all fruits are Apple's.

Point taken

Fast froward to today, did Nolan Dalla ever get reimbursed for his $5,000 chip? (I think the follow up article is dated?)

Quote: Greasyjohn

Fast froward to today, did Nolan Dalla ever get reimbursed for his $5,000 chip? (I think the follow up article is dated?)

No. I asked him what he would sell the rights to the chip for. He said around $30.

Quote: Wizard

No. I asked him what he would sell the rights to the chip for. He said around $30.

Why didnt he just go buy into a game and then with the chips he colors up with use that to get paid out at the cashier? Did they change out all the chips or something? Or was it simply too late after the cashier pay out fiasco and they marked that chip to not be 'legit'? If thats the case, he really shouldve thought twice about the possibility of this happrning and just give some action on the floor and then cash out.

The problem is, he didn't know that cashing in the chip would be a problem. This took a lot of people by surprise.

And anyway, a $5,000 chip would have to be accounted for. You couldn't just add it to your stack when you went to the window to cash out. A record of it being "bought in for" would have to exist. A $5,000 chip would prompt a call from the cage to the pit. "What game were you playing at, sir?"

Quote: Greasyjohn

The problem is, he didn't know that cashing in the chip would be a problem. This took a lot of people by surprise.

And anyway, a $5,000 chip would have to be accounted for. You couldn't just add it to your stack when you went to the window to cash out. A record of it being "bought in for" would have to exist. A $5,000 chip would prompt a call from the cage to the pit. "What game are you playing at, sir?"

Yeah i said to buy in 'WITH IT'. Then with the new colored up chips, use that to cash out. He shouldve thought about it more clearly in case any questions arose, which it did.

Quote: ZenKinG

Yeah i said to buy in 'WITH IT'. Then with the new colored up chips, use that to cash out. He shouldve thought about it more clearly in case any questions arose, which it did.

You can't just walk up to a table with a $5,000 chip and say, "Give me black" and start playing a few rounds. Buying in with a chip of that denomination would, I would think, definitely get scrutiny--even at Wynn. Just my opinion.

I really think he should have tried small claims court

The casino gave him a receipt

Should have brought the person who gave it to him in front of a judge

Small claims is for $5000 and under in certain jurisductions altho i dont know about vegas

Quote: Greasyjohn

And anyway, a $5,000 chip would have to be accounted for. You couldn't just add it to your stack when you went to the window to cash out. A record of it being "bought in for" would have to exist. A $5,000 chip would prompt a call from the cage to the pit. "What game were you playing at, sir?"

This sounds accurate to me.

Quote: darkoz

I really think he should have tried small claims court

Someone correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I believe the Gaming Control Board to be both the police and courts when it comes to gaming in Nevada. If you tried to file a small claims case over a gaming matter, they would say it isn't their jurisdiction and refer you to Gaming.

Quote: Wizard

Someone correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I believe the Gaming Control Board to be both the police and courts when it comes to gaming in Nevada. If you tried to file a small claims case over a gaming matter, they would say it isn't their jurisdiction and refer you to Gaming.

That is probably true for many things, but maybe not for all.

For example, when Bob Nersesian represents AP's who have been wrongly back-roomed and assaulted, must he first do his dog and pony show before Gaming, or can he file suit immediately, thus bypassing Gaming?

Having a casino keep your money is different than having a casino unlawfully detain you.

Quote: Wizard

Someone correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I believe the Gaming Control Board to be both the police and courts when it comes to gaming in Nevada. If you tried to file a small claims case over a gaming matter, they would say it isn't their jurisdiction and refer you to Gaming.

That would surprise me. I think you could sue the casino in small claims court. That would be a good question for Bob N.

Quote: Wizard

Someone correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I believe the Gaming Control Board to be both the police and courts when it comes to gaming in Nevada. If you tried to file a small claims case over a gaming matter, they would say it isn't their jurisdiction and refer you to Gaming.

Everyone here should read this as it answers some questions

Chips confiscated for showing false id at cage. Gaming board sided with casino

Nevada supreme court determined casino HAS NO RIGHT TO DO SO.

Gaming board decision overturned and both stake and winnings awarded to player

http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/A%20Nevada%20Court%20Victory%20for%20Counters.htm

Quote: MrV

That is probably true for many things, but maybe not for all.

For example, when Bob Nersesian represents AP's who have been wrongly back-roomed and assaulted, must he first do his dog and pony show before Gaming, or can he file suit immediately, thus bypassing Gaming?

That's a good point. These big back-rooming cases are fought outside of Gaming. I should probably shut up at this point, but I think if you're suing a casino for damages, that's outside of Gaming. However, if you're looking for a ruling on a disputed bet, that falls under Gaming.

Quote: DRich

That would surprise me. I think you could sue the casino in small claims court. That would be a good question for Bob N.

I don't think I worded my post well. See what I just wrote to MrV.

Quote: Wizard

I assure you that if a known TITO troll (someone who wanders the casino floor looking for abandoned credits or tickets on the floor) would be denied if he tried to cash one for a large amount at the cage.

To answer your question, I believe that TITOs and chips here are pretty much treated the same way -- either can be refused or seized if not presented by a player who obtained it through the normal course of play.

Do you know how much tito gets purchased versus how much lands on the floor we're talking about? I always leave my chump change slips, if they are smaller than a spin, rather then mess with them.

Quote: ZenKinG

Yeah i said to buy in 'WITH IT'. Then with the new colored up chips, use that to cash out. He shouldve thought about it more clearly in case any questions arose, which it did.

If you try to buy in at a table with a $5000 chip, and they have no record of you having colored up recently and walked away from a table with a $5000 chip , this would also bring some heat.

I believe that between keeping track of buy-ins, color ups, and cash outs, a casino always knows how many $5000 chips a player should have in his/her possession.

Quote: michael99000

I believe that between keeping track of buy-ins, color ups, and cash outs, a casino always knows how many $5000 chips a player should have in his/her possession.

I agree with this.

Quote: michael99000

I believe that between keeping track of buy-ins, color ups, and cash outs, a casino always knows how many $5000 chips a player should have in his/her possession.

How about in poker rooms?

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

How about in poker rooms?

Total number of poker rooms in the State of Nevada that ever have any cash games in which $5000 chip(s) might be present: Two.

Throughout the State of Nevada, the total number of tables of such games running right now (https://www.bravopokerlive.com/venues/?State=NV @10:02pm): One.

Quote: DrawingDead

Total number of poker rooms in the State of Nevada that ever have any cash games in which $5000 chip(s) might be present: Two.

Throughout the State of Nevada, the total number of tables of such games running right now (https://www.bravopokerlive.com/venues/?State=NV @10:02pm): One.

My point was, that these large denomination chips are routinely passed around in the big games in Vegas.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

My point was, that these large denomination chips are routinely passed around in the big games in Vegas.

And my point was the simple easily & immediately verifiable fact that any such "big games" only actually exist ever at exactly two venues, and are not commonplace even in those two. The actual factual tracking broadcast is right there, all poker rooms that would ever conceivably have any game with a buy-in over $300 and therefore any such players are right there, right now, waiting to be seen for the price of a click, if you like. But I guess feel free to return to fantasy if you wish. if that makes someone happy for some reason.

A casino's poker room is NOT one of the more likely places for such things.

If you got the chips to the right person they could probably cash them over time, I'm sure the person doing so would want a cut.

Quote: DrawingDead

And my point was the simple easily & immediately verifiable fact that any such "big games" only actually exist ever at exactly two venues, and are not commonplace even in those two. The actual factual tracking broadcast is right there, all poker rooms that would ever conceivably have any game with a buy-in over $300 and therefore any such players are right there, right now, waiting to be seen for the price of a click, if you like. But I guess feel free to return to fantasy if you wish. if that makes someone happy for some reason.

A casino's poker room is NOT one of the more likely places for such things.

I'm not talking about today's game. I'm talking about when this incident happened years ago. Apparently you've never watched what goes on in Bobby's Room.

I may as well tell this story in its entirety.

About ten years ago I was in investor an a card counting team with a bankroll in the low seven figures. The players were definitely black/purple chip. In an effort to keep cash transactions to a minimum, they kept caches of chips in various places around the world, including Vegas. To make a long story short, the team was struggling to make money. To this day, opinions vary on why -- overspending on expenses, bad luck, players stealing from the bankroll, bad management -- I personally don't know, but probably some combinations of all these factors. After about two years and showing a small loss (post expenses) it as decided to dissolve the venture.

I was asked to redeem about $12,000 in yellow $1,000 Red Rock chips from the Vegas cache, which I agreed to. Keep in mind that at the time I was a strong video poker player there and had moderate table game play, which I played low green for fun with friends once in a while. I was advised to cash them in gradually and to not just present them at the cage but wash them through the tables first, which I did. I should also add the style of the chips in question had been discontinued.

I got rid of about five of them this way, presenting them at the blackjack table, one per visit. playing a little, and redeeming different chips. Each time it was noted at the table I was cashing an old chip and I think they wrote it in their notes. It always took a little time for them to break down these yellow chips.

It was going too easy so one day I foolishly attempted to redeem a couple at the cage directly. As I recall there was a sweet bet in the sports book and I was in a hurry and didn't have time to wash it through the tables. The the cage there was a big discussion and different suits were called up. In the end, I was told by one of them, "Our records don't show you playing at the kind of level to legitimately own these chips and we're not going to honor them." I asked what I was supposed to do with them and the woman just shrugged, as if to say "That isn't my problem."

I then had several Emails about getting the remaining chips to a member of the card counting team who played there so he could cash them. However, by this time the Super Bowl was approaching, and at this time I was betting in the low six figures across all the props. I would have bet at least $25,000 at the Red Rock alone. So I went up to the window and fired away on lots of props and paid partially in cash and partially with the remaining yellow chips. They accepted them without blinking.

So, that is my story. It should at least show that in Nevada chips are not bearer instruments, as darkoz says, and casinos have the right to refuse them.

Blame all of this on the feds and FINCEN and the phony anti-money laundering campaign.

Quote: darkoz

Quote: GlenG

Quote: Keyser

I see the new game is to sue the employees of the Indian Casinos. I LIKE IT. :)

If you sue an Indian casino does it have to go though Tribal Court or State?

If it goes through state court the decision is always to kick it to tribal court for sovereign immunity purposes

I don't think that's true in either Mississippi or Louisiana. The state helps them arrest, try, and jail, depending on the situation, I hear.

Quote: Wizard

...It should at least show that in Nevada chips are not bearer instruments, as darkoz says, and casinos have the right to refuse them.

Thanks for the story, quite interesting! However, just because they refused them doesn't mean that had the 'right' to refuse them. Bob has said numerous times on numerous appearances that in Nevada chips are considered a gambling debt owed by the casino, and they're legally not allowed to welch on a gambling debt.... etc, etc.

Quote: beachbumbabs

Quote: darkoz

Quote: GlenG

Quote: Keyser

I see the new game is to sue the employees of the Indian Casinos. I LIKE IT. :)

If you sue an Indian casino does it have to go though Tribal Court or State?

If it goes through state court the decision is always to kick it to tribal court for sovereign immunity purposes

I don't think that's true in either Mississippi or Louisiana. The state helps them arrest, try, and jail, depending on the situation, I hear.

You probably are correct

I recall reading somewhere that each state has different rules and laws outlined in their tribal agreements or compacts with the indian casinos.

Nersessians advice is simple. From his recent book its simply dont AP in an indian casino

There is also a difference between an Indian Casino on tribal land and an Indian casino on non-tribal

Sovereign immunity only applies to the former

Mohegan Sun Poconos would be governed by PA state law while Mohegan Sun Connecticutt by tribal court

Quote: Romes

Thanks for the story, quite interesting! However, just because they refused them doesn't mean that had the 'right' to refuse them. Bob has said numerous times on numerous appearances that in Nevada chips are considered a gambling debt owed by the casino, and they're legally not allowed to welch on a gambling debt.... etc, etc.

You're welcome. I am not arguing that a Nevada casino can seize your chips because you wore an ugly shirt. They have to have a legitimate reason. A legitimate reason is the chips were not procured by the person cashing through his own play.

To quote the article Chips no longer good as cash, "That culture started to change 20 years ago when Nevada defined tokens as the property of individual casinos and prohibited their use "for any monetary purpose" outside the casino. They were simply intended as stand-ins for cash, loaned to players for the sole purpose of gambling."

To get even close to the source:

Quote: NRS 12.060

Chips and tokens are solely representatives of value which evidence a debt owed to their custodian by the licensee that issued them and are not the property of anyone other than that licensee.

Source: http://gaming.nv.gov/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=2925

To go further:

Quote: NRS 12.060.4

A licensee shall not redeem its chips or tokens if presented by a person who the licensee knows or reasonably should know is not a patron of its gaming establishment,

I see why people get angry, it's all good until the money gets big. From the outside, it seems like a rule change, a technicality for the casino to become a weasel. The casino should have to prove the chip is counterfeit, maybe counterfeiting is going on more than we know and that is the real reason, they can't tell them apart.

Quote: Wizard

You're welcome. I am not arguing that a Nevada casino can seize your chips because you wore an ugly shirt. They have to have a legitimate reason. A legitimate reason is the chips were not procured by the person cashing through his own play.

To quote the article Chips no longer good as cash, "That culture started to change 20 years ago when Nevada defined tokens as the property of individual casinos and prohibited their use "for any monetary purpose" outside the casino. They were simply intended as stand-ins for cash, loaned to players for the sole purpose of gambling."

To get even close to the source:



Source: http://gaming.nv.gov/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=2925

To go further:

Well that sucks but i cant argue with that

Im staying on the east coast :)

In the case of Nolan Dalla, he was given the $5,000 chip by another poker player as payment owed to him. It's one thing for MGM to not allow it to be cashed in. It's another thing for the MGM to confiscate it.

I wonder if Mr. Dalla ever produced before MGM the poker player that gave him the chip to verify that the chip was fairly obtained from their property? Or is it that once it was given to someone other than the original holder it could just be confiscated?

Quote: Greasyjohn

In the case of Nolan Dalla, he was given the $5,000 chip by another poker player as payment owed to him. It's one thing for MGM to not allow it to be cashed in. It's another thing for the MGM to confiscate it.

I wonder if Mr. Dalla ever produced before MGM the poker player that gave him the chip to verify that the chip was fairly obtained from their property? Or is it that once it was given to someone other than the original holder it could just be confiscated?

I was just watching a 2007 WSOP event where Phil Hellmuth kept getting insurance from Phil Ivey against losing his poker hand. After Hellmuth was knocked out, he came back and paid Ivey with high denomination chips. Did Ivey have a problem cashing those out?

As I said before, high stakes poker players routinely pass around these big chips as payment for debts owed.

Quote: Wizard

I may as well tell this story in its entirety.

About ten years ago I was in investor an a card counting team with a bankroll in the low seven figures. The players were definitely black/purple chip. In an effort to keep cash transactions to a minimum, they kept caches of chips in various places around the world, including Vegas. To make a long story short, the team was struggling to make money. To this day, opinions vary on why -- overspending on expenses, bad luck, players stealing from the bankroll, bad management -- I personally don't know, but probably some combinations of all these factors. After about two years and showing a small loss (post expenses) it as decided to dissolve the venture.

I was asked to redeem about $12,000 in yellow $1,000 Red Rock chips from the Vegas cache, which I agreed to. Keep in mind that at the time I was a strong video poker player there and had moderate table game play, which I played low green for fun with friends once in a while. I was advised to cash them in gradually and to not just present them at the cage but wash them through the tables first, which I did. I should also add the style of the chips in question had been discontinued.

I got rid of about five of them this way, presenting them at the blackjack table, one per visit. playing a little, and redeeming different chips. Each time it was noted at the table I was cashing an old chip and I think they wrote it in their notes. It always took a little time for them to break down these yellow chips.

It was going too easy so one day I foolishly attempted to redeem a couple at the cage directly. As I recall there was a sweet bet in the sports book and I was in a hurry and didn't have time to wash it through the tables. The the cage there was a big discussion and different suits were called up. In the end, I was told by one of them, "Our records don't show you playing at the kind of level to legitimately own these chips and we're not going to honor them." I asked what I was supposed to do with them and the woman just shrugged, as if to say "That isn't my problem."

I then had several Emails about getting the remaining chips to a member of the card counting team who played there so he could cash them. However, by this time the Super Bowl was approaching, and at this time I was betting in the low six figures across all the props. I would have bet at least $25,000 at the Red Rock alone. So I went up to the window and fired away on lots of props and paid partially in cash and partially with the remaining yellow chips. They accepted them without blinking.

So, that is my story. It should at least show that in Nevada chips are not bearer instruments, as darkoz says, and casinos have the right to refuse them.

Ignoring the legal aspects this story exposes the casino had no problem with you playing with the chips. Clearly if they felt it suspicious where you received them they would refuse action

However action was fine. It was only cashing out that was not

Its shocking to me how that can be accepted but when in rome i guess

Quote: Greasyjohn

I wonder if Mr. Dalla ever produced before MGM the poker player that gave him the chip to verify that the chip was fairly obtained from their property? Or is it that once it was given to someone other than the original holder it could just be confiscated?

I've wondered that too. In all fairness, we've only heard Nolan's version of the story.