Betting on another players progressive in Carib. Stud, Pairs side bet (BJ), & PairPlus (3CP)?
Is this allowed in most casinos?
Issue came up while I was playing Carib. Stud. Lady in 6th seat places a chip for the progressive in the 5th players spot since he wasn't playing it. She does it twice more and on the 3rd hand, the 5th seat player checks his cards and sees he has a flush, he enthusiastically thanks her and tells her he will give her half ($50). But she says she wasn't betting for him, that she was betting for herself and that she wanted the whole $100. Player said he thought she was just helping him out since he was low on chips. He reluctantly gave her the black chip.
She said that in the past she had played other players Pairs side bets in Blackjack, and PairPlus bets in 3CP when other players don't play it and that she never had an issue collecting the winnings.
Suppose the 5th seat player refused to give her the $100, how would most casinos rule on this?
Most casinos allow back-betting, so I think that most casinos would give the money to the person who placed the bet. When I've played the PP or progressive on another player's spot, the dealer has always been good about giving the winnings directly to me. I don't know what would happen if the 6th spot didn't state her intentions and the dealer gave the winnings to the 5th spot player.
Most casinos leave it up to the players and will say it is their responsibility to handle any disputes. Horseshoe Council Bluffs on PGP allows players to bet on everybody's bonus hand, and in fact, if the bet is $5 it ALSO gets an Envy, which is the only place I've ever seen that option. In that case, the dealer pays out each bonus to each player, regardless of where the bonus bet is. Again, that's the ONLY place I've ever seen that.
In many cases where the casinos leave it to the players, the individual dealer will collect the winnings and pay it to the betting player directly. However this procedure is probably incorrect in most cases.
And when he won, he couldn't give me the winnings directly. He had to pass them back under the table.
Never been a problem in Vegas though. That is why Vegas >> Washington state.
I've had very few problems over the years and I'm thankful for that because technically it could very well be the other player's money.
Quote: 1BBI sometimes use scavenger play at blackjack picking up the other half of a double or split or taking insurance on another player's hand. I don't do it with just anyone and I am very specific about making sure they understand it is not a loan.
I was going to say to always make sure you set the terms down and the other payer agrees, prefferably in front of witnesses.
For the record, if somone were to ask me about betting a progressive or a side bet in my postion, I'd accept only if they agree to let me keep a portion of the winnings, say 20% or so (subject to negotion, naturally). And no, I wduldn't share in the loses. I figure I'm selling them the chance to bet more. If they say no, I'm no worse off. The expected value of no bet being made in my position is zero whether it's me or someone else who doesn't make the bet :)
Also, I've never really been a fan of allowing back-betting in BJ on my hand. I'd have a $50 bet out there and a stranger having put $300 behind mine makes for an uncomfortable situation if we disagree on surrendering/hitting/standing.
People give others money for double downs on BJ all the time. When they win, they give back just what was given. The giving player doesn't say a word, which I can't understand at all. I guess they're just being nice and allowing that person to triple their money. I would want my bet back, plus at least 25% of the win. These people are risking money to get NOTHING back.
Next time I go, I will ask for clarification on this. As I said, I just naturally figured this is the reasoning behind their requirement for doing so.
Quote: konceptumThe casinos around here require that the player touch the bet if another person places the bet. So if player 4 puts up player 5's progressive bet, player 5 has to touch the bet, or it won't be allowed. I asked a floor person about this, and they said that it is a requirement, because that proves that it is player 5's bet. It occurred to me at the time that this means the casino views the bet as belonging to player 5, and thus if there were a dispute, the casino's stance would be that it is player 5's bet, and they paid player 5, and that's the limit of their involvement.
Next time I go, I will ask for clarification on this. As I said, I just naturally figured this is the reasoning behind their requirement for doing so.
Konceptum is correct. It is the practice of a "controlled player spot." The player controling the betting seat or spot controls the money, and all parties operate on the basis that it is the player's money-in-action.
Here's the clarification from a casino source:
1. All money at a player position is controlled by that one player, - period, end of story. The winning player may stiff the 3rd party bettor, and the casino will allow the controlling player to keep it. In fact, some players say, "Don't do that, because it's my money now. My betting spot = my money. Thanks for your charity. If my spot wins, it is my money, or a dealer's tip as I see fit." - and they are correct.
2. Don't like it? File a lawsuit, or buy in yourself, and sit your ass down at a table, basically playing your own player position.
Quote: konceptumThe casinos around here require that the player touch the bet if another person places the bet. So if player 4 puts up player 5's progressive bet, player 5 has to touch the bet, or it won't be allowed. I asked a floor person about this, and they said that it is a requirement, because that proves that it is player 5's bet. It occurred to me at the time that this means the casino views the bet as belonging to player 5, and thus if there were a dispute, the casino's stance would be that it is player 5's bet, and they paid player 5, and that's the limit of their involvement.
That is exactly how it is where I work. Players playing on each others spots are strictly between the players involved, we just ask that the player playing the spot touch the bet.
Quote: Toes14Who in their right mind would even try this without first asking the other player?
LOL... it happens a LOT! Just tonight I was dealing blackjack and two newbie players sat down. An experienced player that hadn't been hitting his sidebet tosses a nickel to the newb closest to him and says, hey put that on your sidebet. The newb had no idea what the sidebet even was and the experienced player didn't negotiate any terms before the cards came out. I've seen situations like this nearly turn ugly when a clueless player "allowed" others to wager on their sidebet and then didn't want to turn over the winnings. I think many experienced players make a huge mistake when they assume others know what's going on, but like I said, it happens all the time.
It happened between my brother-in-law and mother-in-law.
I was in Vegas for a family wedding. Fortunately, I was far away from the scene, but I keep hearing about it:
Not entirely the same situation, but my mother-in-law gave/lent money to my brother-in-law who was tapped out. When he won, she expected the proceeds. It got resolved quickly but he's still pissed about it.
---
I like the casino that requires the player in position to touch the chip.
For the record, I beleive that, touching it or not, the player in that position has total control over the action, as well as the dispostion of the winnings.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/1743-gambling-stories-tales-from-the-pit/
Quote: DJTeddyBearNot entirely the same situation, but my mother-in-law gave/lent money to my brother-in-law who was tapped out. When he won, she expected the proceeds. It got resolved quickly but he's still pissed about it.
If the mother-in-law lent him $50 and she got her $50 loan amount back, then she's paid in full. The ups and downs that happened in his life are immaterial. She was lending, not investing.
If I lend a gambler $500 and he pays me back the full $500, I happy he paid me back, and I do make claims to any fortune or misfortune in his life outside of that.
Quote: PaigowdanIf the mother-in-law lent him $50 and she got her $50 loan amount back, then she's paid in full. The ups and downs that happened in his life are immaterial. She was lending, not investing.
I agree. However, out of simple manners and common decency, if I were to have a big win with borrowed money, I'd at least offer a part of the win to the lender on top of the borrowed amount.
Quote: PaigowdanKonceptum is correct. It is the practice of a "controlled player spot." The player controling the betting seat or spot controls the money, and all parties operate on the basis that it is the player's money-in-action.
Here's the clarification from a casino source:
1. All money at a player position is controlled by that one player, - period, end of story. The winning player may stiff the 3rd party bettor, and the casino will allow the controlling player to keep it. In fact, some players say, "Don't do that, because it's my money now. My betting spot = my money. Thanks for your charity. If my spot wins, it is my money, or a dealer's tip as I see fit." - and they are correct.
2. Don't like it? File a lawsuit, or buy in yourself, and sit your ass down at a table, basically playing your own player position.
Dan,
I'm sure this is true where you deal. It may be true in all of Vegas, or even in all of Nevada. It's not true in other places - and I've played in enough of them to say that with a very high degree of certainty.
Quote: rdw4potusDan,
I'm sure this is true where you deal. It may be true in all of Vegas, or even in all of Nevada. It's not true in other places - and I've played in enough of them to say that with a very high degree of certainty.
In Nevada its the player at the player's seat or spot who controls the money in action. It's perhaps different outside the U.S., but I can't see it working well if bystanders are making claims to action against an occupied player position. Where have you hear of this and how are transactions conducted?
I've heard where some casinos in other locales have felts (layouts) with betting spots in between player positions just for bystanders in games such as Baccarat.
Quote: NareedI agree. However, out of simple manners and common decency, if I were to have a big win with borrowed money, I'd at least offer a part of the win to the lender on top of the borrowed amount.
Sure, I would too, or offer dinner.
But any bossiness, or demand of increased debt would produce a brick wall with me.
Quote: PaigowdanIn Nevada its the player at the player's seat or spot who controls the money in action. It's perhaps different outside the U.S., but I can't see it working well if bystanders are making claims to action against an occupied player position. Where have you hear of this and how are transactions conducted?
I've heard where some casinos in other locales have felts (layouts) with betting spots in between player positions just for bystanders in games such as Baccarat.
LOL. Dan...you just wrote "In Nevada...different outside the U.S." are you intentionally not allowing for differences within the United States? :-)
I'm allowed to freely bet the side bets or progressives on other people's spots here in MN, and the dealer returns the winnings to me (you DO have to be playing your own spot as well) In CA, the action is pretty incredible, and numbered markers are used to keep track of which player has action on which bet in which spot. In PA and NJ, I've had to hand money under the table to make a side bet on another player's spot, even when it was intended to be played as a dealer toke. In MI, I was just about backed off of my own spot for even asking if I could play another player's progressive. In MS and LA (I'm a bit fuzzy on that trip. they might be different, but it's all "the south" in my mind), the Vegas-style bet-touching rule was in effect.
I think I like the Vegas-style rule, and some form of standardization - as long as the bets remain allowed - would be appreciated. But the system across the U.S. is far from uniform now.
Quote: rdw4potusLOL. Dan...you just wrote "In Nevada...different outside the U.S." are you intentionally not allowing for differences within the United States? :-)
I'm allowed to freely bet the side bets or progressives on other people's spots here in MN, and the dealer returns the winnings to me (you DO have to be playing your own spot as well) In CA, the action is pretty incredible, and numbered markers are used to keep track of which player has action on which bet in which spot. In PA and NJ, I've had to hand money under the table to make a side bet on another player's spot, even when it was intended to be played as a dealer toke. In MI, I was just about backed off of my own spot for even asking if I could play another player's progressive. In MS and LA (I'm a bit fuzzy on that trip. they might be different, but it's all "the south" in my mind), the Vegas-style bet-touching rule was in effect.
I think I like the Vegas-style rule, and some form of standardization - as long as the bets remain allowed - would be appreciated. But the system across the U.S. is far from uniform now.
Hold on here, I said it's the player always controls his own betting spots, NOT some other player controls those betting spots. If a player allows a third party to give him money to bet on his empty spots, and he returns his money, then fine. I also allow for differences within the U.S. where ever sitting players allow it, okay it, and are a part of it. I said "different" outside the U.S., where third party "bystand" players can bet at a table - without the sitting players' approval of it.
I know it is NOT okay here, for bystanders to walk up to a table and bet on a sitting player's empty spots - WITHOUT that player's approval.
