Thread Rating:

gts4ever
gts4ever
Joined: Apr 2, 2013
  • Threads: 10
  • Posts: 115
August 10th, 2013 at 3:50:43 PM permalink
Just got back from a nice trip to the Showboat in AC. Three things I ran into that I thought the board might enjoy:

Ethics: The first time I banked, the other two players pulled their bets back. I nicely let them know that I would not mind at all if they left their bets up when I bank. I used to get frustrated with that but someone on this board commented that many players do it as a courtesy to the banking player. I don't really understand that mentality unless there is reason to believe the player isn't comfortable covering the amount, but I had never even thought of that as a possibility, so these days I give the benefit of the doubt and assume they are trying to be nice. One player said no thanks, and the other shot back with some ridiculous attitude saying that I can bank all I want, but that he doesn't have to play against me. Okay, fine. I banked every other hand, eventually the first player began to play against me. After doing this for a while, the dealer would simply look at me and I would nod indicating I wanted to bank. The angry gentleman in the corner was not paying attention for one of these hands and left his bets up. I knew he just missed it and didn't mean to. I didn't point it out. While the responsibility is on him to pay attention, I feel that ethically, I should have pointed it out and allowed him the chance to pull back. Maybe if he wasn't such a dick, I might have. As it turns out, it could not have worked out any better. Dealer flips over a Pai gow to which he responded with a sharp cheer of glee, only to realize he missed the fact I was banking. She flips over my AAKK. His face sank. My favorite hand of the trip. He kept needling me under his breath saying that I needed to verbally announce I was the banker. I don't know if that is technically correct or not, but I'm not there looking for issues, so I didn't say anything. After a few minutes the comments became more aggressive, to which I responded "you gotta pay attention" which ended our encounter.

Short pay: Showboat has a pretty good mix of dealers/pit crew. Most are decently skilled, nice, entertaining etc. but as in most places there are some that are not. One dealer in particular was not even skilled enough to be dealing the game, IMO. On one of my banking hands, I won my own hand for $100, two bets from another player, $50 each, $15 from another player and lost $15 to the last player. Total win of $200 minus 5% commission so I should get back $190. In making change for the other winning player's commision, she removed a red from my winning stack so she only calculated my commission off of $195 and gave me back the $185.25. I (and all the others at the table) pointed out right away what happened. She refused to even listen to me, yelling "you still have to pay commission you still have to pay commission" The floor person came over and she quietly said to him, "he won $195 so I took commission". I calmly said that I understand I have to pay commission but that I won $200 and should have been getting back $190. He stated, "No, you won $195". I responded that he had not even seen the hand, so how did he know I only won $195? As I began to walk him through the hand, apparently his ability to speak English disappeared and he also began repeating. $195 you must may commission. no one cheating sir. I felt it beginning to escalate so I just said that I wasn't going to argue over $5 dollars, but that the dealer had made an error. Same dealer made several other payout errors throughout her shift, so I'm hoping the crew at least realized I was not trying to scam them out of $5. I think that's the first time I've ever seen the house not correct a mistake that was pointed out in time to rectify it without a big procedure.

Houseway: Interesting hand that happened on the table next to me. Dealer got AAAA222. The houseway is to play the pair from the three of a kind. Is that just a factor of having to create a set of rules that combines effectiveness/ease of use? Seems ridiculous to play 22 which can easily lose compared with AA which cannot lose regardless of anyone baking, just to improve from Aces full to four of a kind, which still has a small chance of losing.

Sorry for the wall of text.
PapaChubby
PapaChubby
Joined: Mar 29, 2010
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 494
August 10th, 2013 at 4:35:59 PM permalink
Thanks for the interesting post.

It might appease Mr. Grumpy a bit if you point out that he was going to be playing against the AAKK hand regardless of whether you were banking or not. If you were not banking, that hand would've gone to the dealer.

I guess the thing I don't understand about the short pay is that you say the dealer took a red off your winning stack right at the start. Why did she do this? Seems pretty arbitrary.

Yes, I agree that full house plus AA is a much, much stronger hand. Hard to believe that the four of a kind is actually the house way. Did you see any kind of documentation indicating that this was correct? Or maybe the dealer just screwed up again?
rdw4potus
rdw4potus
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 7236
August 10th, 2013 at 4:38:41 PM permalink
Quote: PapaChubby

Thanks for the interesting post.

It might appease Mr. Grumpy a bit if you point out that he was going to be playing against the AAKK hand regardless of whether you were banking or not. If you were not banking, that hand would've gone to the dealer.



The whole table would have been rotated. Maybe Angry Man would have had a monster!
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
PapaChubby
PapaChubby
Joined: Mar 29, 2010
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 494
August 10th, 2013 at 4:39:21 PM permalink
BTW, one of the things I like about PGP is that the dealers tend to be some of the brightest bulbs in the casino. Gotta be pretty smart and experienced to memorize the house way and calculate commissions. Unfortunately, this can make the game pretty painful if the dealer isn't up to the task.
PapaChubby
PapaChubby
Joined: Mar 29, 2010
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 494
August 10th, 2013 at 4:39:52 PM permalink
Quote: rdw4potus

The whole table would have been rotated. Maybe Angry Man would have had a monster!



I wouldn't point out that bit. :-)
FleaStiff
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 265
  • Posts: 14484
August 10th, 2013 at 4:43:39 PM permalink
Even if you are banking, you are not running the game and the burden is on the casino and the other players to be informed.

I think you should have made a stink further up the chain of command. What are surveillance cameras and pit bosses for, anyway.
gts4ever
gts4ever
Joined: Apr 2, 2013
  • Threads: 10
  • Posts: 115
August 10th, 2013 at 4:54:50 PM permalink
Quote: PapaChubby


I guess the thing I don't understand about the short pay is that you say the dealer took a red off your winning stack right at the start. Why did she do this? Seems pretty arbitrary.


She just should not have been dealing that game. She seemed very confused and was unsure of any procedures. She kept picking up chips/putting them down moving stacks left and right trying to figure everything out. She must have dropped one of them back in her tray during the exchange. She had no confidence in her ability to read the hands. When the players (as they often do) yell out what they think the dealer has, sometimes correctly,sometimes not, she became very offended "oh I'm a moron now? I'm going to let you guys deal. How about that?". None of us were even close to her level of aggressiveness. She probably had little experience with the game. For all I know her husband could have cheated on her yesterday, maybe she wasn't feeling well or just having a bad day or whatever. I don't really care, but she just shouldn't have been dealing that game.
gts4ever
gts4ever
Joined: Apr 2, 2013
  • Threads: 10
  • Posts: 115
August 10th, 2013 at 4:59:55 PM permalink
Quote: rdw4potus

The whole table would have been rotated. Maybe Angry Man would have had a monster!



I used to point this out but I've found it's very similar to the plight of the third basemen so I usually save my breath.
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
August 10th, 2013 at 5:04:54 PM permalink
Quote: gts4ever


Houseway: Interesting hand that happened on the table next to me. Dealer got AAAA222. The houseway is to play the pair from the three of a kind. Is that just a factor of having to create a set of rules that combines effectiveness/ease of use? Seems ridiculous to play 22 which can easily lose compared with AA which cannot lose regardless of anyone baking, just to improve from Aces full to four of a kind, which still has a small chance of losing.


I doubt it was the house way; with two three of a kinds or quads plus trips, just about all specify highest pair for the top. Just assume that these beauties didn't know what they were doing in addition to the commission errors.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
gts4ever
gts4ever
Joined: Apr 2, 2013
  • Threads: 10
  • Posts: 115
August 10th, 2013 at 5:20:50 PM permalink
Quote: Paigowdan

I doubt it was the house way; with two three of a kinds or quads plus trips, just about all specify highest pair for the top. Just assume that these beauties didn't know what they were doing in addition to the commission errors.



The only house way rule lists I've ever seen are from the Wizard's site. I don't see Showboat listed but here is Trump's:

"Four of a kind and three of a kind: Play pair in front from the three of a kind."

Bally's was similar. They did refer to a laminated chart as we were discussing it because I think when you look at this particular hand it is pretty obvious that's not the best way to play it.

  • Jump to: