Insanity at Foxwoods

Quote: Boz

Since you are back Ace, whats your take on the Revel sale? Have you visited during your time away from WoV? I was there last Wednesday and it was empty. I hadnt visited there in years and wanted to get a players card and chips as collectors items. The Players Card area near the front was closed and I was directed to the back where I did get 2 cards to keep.

I tried to buy chips at the cashier and they sent me to a table. I bought them at the table and felt bad for the dealers when I told them what I wanted them for. They are innocent victims in a much large game of incompetance from Kevin and Crew.

I have been to Revel and heading there for a tournament next weekend. The dealers I have spoken to all informed me they have no idea what is happening and are scared for their futures. Additionally, a few other sources there had told me that Steven Wynn had walked the property as well as some Hard Rock representatives. But, I have no further information other than that.

Quote: SOOPOO

If AFTER this trip, he came up short, then of course he would not be invited back..

First time at a casino (which he said he was at Foxwood), I say you want to play big. They will generally over compensate you not knowing who you are. It will come up in the next offers.

You don't want to play smaller action the first visit. Exactly the opposite.

I would consider it an opportunity missed.

Quote: Boz

Actually I'm with Kewjl on this one. However for Ace I look at it as a lesson learned and nothing lost. You won money, enjoyed a free room and know to never visit them again. All things considered, you should consider yourself lucky.

Agreed - I wish the "implicit" expectation was "explicit" - the offer was there to entice me. On my first trip, I expected to sort of get a lay of the land, play in the tournament, etc. Of course, I was going to play but the tournament was my draw in to see how I felt playing in that casino. I am always trepidatious of tribal land casinos and know that trying to fight this will go nowhere - the same with the damage to the car - if they decide to say "screw you", that is basically where it will stay.

I see both sides of this equation, but, when I accepted the offer, my past play at other casinos was never stated as being a minimum requirement for this trip (as in, I was expected to play to that level prior to the start of the tournament). I would probably have played to my average for the weekend, but, being told I had to put in all that time prior to sitting at the tournament did not sit right with me…what if, at the time of the tournament they decided that someone else had more and "better" play than I did and I would therefore, subject to their final decision-making power, be DQ'd from the tournament anyway. It is hard to hit a moving target.

Straying off topic, I just can't stop myself from commenting on a statement ACE said early in his original post. Something to the effect that the Mashantuck Pequot tribe had done well for themselves. Lol. What a bunch of malarkey THAT is! The last member of the Pequot Indian tribe on that reservation died in 1973. At that point the government seized the land and sold parts off to developers, who built several developments consisting of hundreds of fairly high priced homes. Some time later a small group of about 20 people turned up claiming to be Pequot Indians and rightful owners of that land and sued the government for land grab. There was no evidence that these people were even Native Americans and frankly most did not look to be. But in a settlement with the federal government, approved by Ronald Reagan, these folks were officially recognized as Pequot Indians and the remaining unused land was given back to them, on which they built the world's largest casino (at the time). Lol

Quote: kewlj

Straying off topic, I just can't stop myself from commenting on a statement ACE said early in his original post. Something to the effect that the Mashantuck Pequot tribe had done well for themselves. Lol. What a bunch of malarkey THAT is! The last member of the Pequot Indian tribe on that reservation died in 1973. At that point the government seized the land and sold parts off to developers, who built several developments consisting of hundreds of fairly high priced homes. Some time later a small group of about 20 people turned up claiming to be Pequot Indians and rightful owners of that land and sued the government for land grab. There was no evidence that these people were even Native Americans and frankly most did not look to be. But in a settlement with the federal government, approved by Ronald Reagan, these folks were officially recognized as Pequot Indians and the remaining unused land was given back to them, on which they built the world's largest casino (at the time). Lol

WOW I didn't know that - thanks :)

Quote: kewlj

Straying off topic, I just can't stop myself from commenting on a statement ACE said early in his original post. Something to the effect that the Mashantuck Pequot tribe had done well for themselves. Lol. What a bunch of malarkey THAT is! The last member of the Pequot Indian tribe on that reservation died in 1973. At that point the government seized the land and sold parts off to developers, who built several developments consisting of hundreds of fairly high priced homes. Some time later a small group of about 20 people turned up claiming to be Pequot Indians and rightful owners of that land and sued the government for land grab. There was no evidence that these people were even Native Americans and frankly most did not look to be. But in a settlement with the federal government, approved by Ronald Reagan, these folks were officially recognized as Pequot Indians and the remaining unused land was given back to them, on which they built the world's largest casino (at the time). Lol

I found it hilarious when seeing pictures of the Pequots that they looked whiter than me. Tribal membership is based on descent from tribal members in the 1900 census. If one of your grandparents was a Pequot then you would be 25% blood. If one of your great-grandparents was a Pequot then you would be 12.5% blood. And that would have to be based on your qualifiying ancestors being full-blood themselves.

Quote: SOOPOO

I totally agree with Ace. If the entry into the tournament is conditioned upon meeting a certain minimum gambling requirement, he should be informed of such up front. If AFTER this trip, he came up short, then of course he would not be invited back. My favorite story that shows how good customer service should work.... My first trip to Seneca Niagara, I'm sitting with my friend at a $10 paigow poker table. We cash in for chips, and ask the pit boss how long would we have to play at this low level to earn free lunch buffets. His answer.... 'you've earned them', and he wrote us up a voucher. We could have just left after the one hand we played and had the free lunch, but he was savvy enough to realize his investment in us will pay off. There are other casinos within walking distance. The free tournament entry for Ace should have been looked upon as an investment in the future.
As far as being charged on his credit card, I have never had a problem when I needed to dispute a charge.
As far as the car, it's probably a totally separate department, so you 'probably' will get reimbursed for the repairs.

I hope the Wiz weighs in on this one.....

Well yeah, there's other casinos within walking distance, but you need a passport, and it's about 20 minutes to Niagara, 40 minutes to Fallsview, and the Canadian side won't treat you any better than Seneca.

Quote: kewlj

Everyone is siding with ACE on this one (no surprise from a bunch of gamblers...lol). Now, I am not saying that the foxwoods host was without blame, nor that he handled it in a correct manner. But I am saying ACE has some blame as well (IMO). As a new player at this location, accepting this offer, and knowing, what kind of action was expected from me, BECAUSE IT WAS DISCUSSED, I would have met that amount of play to establish myself.

You have to remember the host didn't ask ACE what his average play was because he wanted to find out that information. He ALREADY KNEW that information. He asked because he wanted ACE to say it, to unofficially 'commit' to it. Confirming your average as ACE did and then meeting 1/3 of that number over 2 days is not a very good way to establish yourself and begin any kind of relationship that will lead to more offers.

A player accepting offers and then not giving the expected play is known as stiffing the offer. Once established you can do this with little consequence on occasion. Prehaps you didn't feel good that trip, or lost a majority of funds early on. There are reasons. But, doing so on the initial visit is not a good way to establish yourself or begin such a relationship. Especially when it was specifically discussed. You just come across as not living up to your end of the bargain, or what you, yourself verbally told them you play. Now, again, the casino and hosts response was poor and extreme, and I fear could end up being worse than we currently know. But I really think there is some blame to go around.

The other issue: Knowing that ACE uses speed count, the casino and host were expecting a significant loss by ACE at the BJ tables, and then he goes and wins $2100. What's up with that?? (don't get riled up ACE....just a bit of humor and fun)

A few things could have happened:

(1) It's doubtful that MGM is sharing all of that information. Foxwoods probably got a list of players who would qualify for who they wanted for the blackjack player. Foxwoods asks MGM for a list of all players living in ME, NH, NY, PA, VT, CT, MA, RI with with average bets of over xxx/bet.

(2) The host did not know what the qualifier was, but the room comp was probably based on that expectation given by Ace for the phone call.

(3) The host also knew that Ace was up a bunch.

But i still think that Ace is not obligated to qualify based on a half-day's play. Ace could have felt sick, could have had a good TV show to watch, whatever. To disqualify him based on a 1/2 day of play is ridiculous.

OTOH, maybe the host pretty much knew that the promotion was overbooked and he had to disqualify some people, and that Ace wasn't likely to be a FW convert anytime soon.

I think that the host, knowing what he probably knew (which was very vague and incomplete most likely) made a horrible choice. Knowing a little more about Ace from his postings here, and being a bit cynical, Ace is in fact exactly who they want there. He has discretionary money he's willing to risk (including being susceptible to tilting), he's willing to travel to Revel (closing) pretty often, he enjoys the entire casino environment and can be brought in with relatively cheap comps (an entry to a tournament that costs the casino almost nothing, a nice suite that might go to a lower ADT player otherwise but might also stand empty, marked-up food and bev that costs very little to comp, etc.). They made a commitment to him, and he spent some time and money to travel to a tournament with full RFB. The host needed to bite his tongue and encourage Ace to play but stop short of threatening him. If Ace had gone the full weekend (and the host certainly knew he was booked thru Monday) without averaging his typical ADT, THEN he's a write-off.

Since nobody but Ace was present for the ugly Saturday conversation, it's possible that they started out with a resolvable situation but provoked each other into a showdown that backed Ace into a corner just through how it progressed; that happens, and he is a professional arguer/lawyer, after all (teasing). Perhaps it boils down to semantics and misunderstandings. I would think it's still fixable if Ace wants it to be, although that bridge may be burned. But it was the host's job to be the facilitator, under the old profit/overhead argument of commerce (Ace=profit, host=overhead), and the host blew it.

The more I read this, the more I feel that my initial feelings are right.

I think that the question about your average play is so the host can decide whether to give you a room or a suite, and food comps, etc.

The tournament was already booked. (or so it seemed...)

You got screwed.

Quote: beachbumbabs

I think that the host, knowing what he probably knew (which was very vague and incomplete most likely) made a horrible choice. Knowing a little more about Ace from his postings here, and being a bit cynical, Ace is in fact exactly who they want there. He has discretionary money he's willing to risk (including being susceptible to tilting), he's willing to travel to Revel (closing) pretty often, he enjoys the entire casino environment and can be brought in with relatively cheap comps (an entry to a tournament that costs the casino almost nothing, a nice suite that might go to a lower ADT player otherwise but might also stand empty, marked-up food and bev that costs very little to comp, etc.). They made a commitment to him, and he spent some time and money to travel to a tournament with full RFB. The host needed to bite his tongue and encourage Ace to play but stop short of threatening him. If Ace had gone the full weekend (and the host certainly knew he was booked thru Monday) without averaging his typical ADT, THEN he's a write-off.

Since nobody but Ace was present for the ugly Saturday conversation, it's possible that they started out with a resolvable situation but provoked each other into a showdown that backed Ace into a corner just through how it progressed; that happens, and he is a professional arguer/lawyer, after all (teasing). Perhaps it boils down to semantics and misunderstandings. I would think it's still fixable if Ace wants it to be, although that bridge may be burned. But it was the host's job to be the facilitator, under the old profit/overhead argument of commerce (Ace=profit, host=overhead), and the host blew it.

The conversation never deteriorated and no game of chicken was played. He stated that my tournament seat was conditioned upon my playing 3 hours per day (Fri and Sat) at a 200minimum. I replied that those were averages built up over a long history of play at various casinos and that some weekends I play more, some I play less. He did not see this is a valid response.
FYI - I was not even given RFB - I was given the suite but would have to "earn" food and beverage based upon my play (up until that point though, I had not charged anything to the room…choosing to pay for my meals).

Quote: DJTeddyBear

The more I read this, the more I feel that my initial feelings are right.

I think that the question about your average play is so the host can decide whether to give you a room or a suite, and food comps, etc.

The tournament was already booked. (or so it seemed...)

You got screwed.

I agree - just left a bad taste in my mouth.

As a follow-up, I realized last night I had left my brand new Sonicare Black Diamond toothbrush in the room - I called lost and found today and they had it and are shipping it back to me. Everything about Foxwoods other than my experience with the tournament was friendly and classy.

I think everyone agrees that legally they could do whatever they wanted. So the question is whether they made a smart business decision by doing what they did. I find it strange that some people think this was a smart business decision...

Quote: FinsRule

I think everyone agrees that legally they could do whatever they wanted. So the question is whether they made a smart business decision by doing what they did. I find it strange that some people think this was a smart business decision...

Well, the host stated they were losing a lot of the NY players to Pennsylvania and, in an effort to attract more NY players before MA casinos are built (whenever that is), they were reaching out to known players of a certain level. Now, that being said, I think that half-a-day of play is no way to rate someone for a long-term casino relationship. I feel as if they dropped the ball from a customer service standpoint. As I said, the rest of my experience there was top notch and friendly. It's a shame, I likely would have started making that a mainstay in my casino rotation had I been afforded the entry into the tournament as presented to me.

Quote: aceofspades

The conversation never deteriorated and no game of chicken was played. He stated that my tournament seat was conditioned upon my playing 3 hours per day (Fri and Sat) at a 200minimum. I replied that those were averages built up over a long history of play at various casinos and that some weekends I play more, some I play less. He did not see this is a valid response.
FYI - I was not even given RFB - I was given the suite but would have to "earn" food and beverage based upon my play (up until that point though, I had not charged anything to the room…choosing to pay for my meals).

Thanks for the clarification, Ace!

We all side with ace, no doubt about it.
The host cheated ace.
However, I blame (well, not really blame, maybe an advice?) ace on two fronts:
1) you should not take such a cheap offer (I still think it's not an offer at all).
Man, you are a high roller by any definition.
2) you should talk to higher level people after arguing with the host. As others said, a host is at the bottom
of the food chain. There were several times I had to talk to higher level people than casino hosts.

Quote: pokerface

We all side with ace, no doubt about it.
The host cheated ace.
However, I blame (well, not really blame, maybe an advice?) ace on two fronts:
1) you should not take such a cheap offer (I still think it's not an offer at all).
Man, you are a high roller by any definition.
2) you should talk to higher level people after arguing with the host. As others said, a host is at the bottom
of the food chain. There were several times I had to talk to higher level people than casino hosts.

I'm trying to find contact info for higher ups

Ace,

If it were me, I'd simply call the property, ask for VIP services, and then ask whoever answers for the name / phone number / email of the head of marketing. Whoever that is, is likely to be your guy's boss.

Quote: beachbumbabs

Ace,

If it were me, I'd simply call the property, ask for VIP services, and then ask whoever answers for the name / phone number / email of the head of marketing. Whoever that is, is likely to be your guy's boss.

That would be Gary DiBartolomeo. Look up what happened to him when he was president of Caesars in Atlantic City.

Quote: beachbumbabs

I think that the host, knowing what he probably knew (which was very vague and incomplete most likely) made a horrible choice. Knowing a little more about Ace from his postings here, and being a bit cynical, Ace is in fact exactly who they want there. He has discretionary money he's willing to risk (including being susceptible to tilting), he's willing to travel to Revel (closing) pretty often, he enjoys the entire casino environment and can be brought in with relatively cheap comps (an entry to a tournament that costs the casino almost nothing, a nice suite that might go to a lower ADT player otherwise but might also stand empty, marked-up food and bev that costs very little to comp, etc.). They made a commitment to him, and he spent some time and money to travel to a tournament with full RFB. The host needed to bite his tongue and encourage Ace to play but stop short of threatening him. If Ace had gone the full weekend (and the host certainly knew he was booked thru Monday) without averaging his typical ADT, THEN he's a write-off.

Since nobody but Ace was present for the ugly Saturday conversation, it's possible that they started out with a resolvable situation but provoked each other into a showdown that backed Ace into a corner just through how it progressed; that happens, and he is a professional arguer/lawyer, after all (teasing). Perhaps it boils down to semantics and misunderstandings. I would think it's still fixable if Ace wants it to be, although that bridge may be burned. But it was the host's job to be the facilitator, under the old profit/overhead argument of commerce (Ace=profit, host=overhead), and the host blew it.

Very well written BBB.

Ace pm me for info- I know Gary very well and he is a complete stand up guy- lived a couple doors down from my in margate for a while and was coo and my local casino. However I do not think he is there any longer last I heard it was at golden nugget in ac- but I'll be happy to reach out to him and get you a contact name at foxwoods

Quote: FinsRule

I think everyone agrees that legally they could do whatever they wanted. So the question is whether they made a smart business decision by doing what they did. I find it strange that some people think this was a smart business decision...

It could be. Create an offer as a lure for cold/dead leads and let the "independent contractors" try to make hay with it. If some good prospects rise to the top of the prospective pool without wasting time or money they win. If some toes get stepped on then address it on a case by case basis. Let the customer work for you. Temporary, contracted host screwed up? Bye bye!

Aceofspades was expecting to engage in some court and woo. Foxwoods was looking for results after dinner and a movie. They didn't get what they wanted, so there was no second date.

Quote: BleedingChipsSlowly

It could be. Create an offer as a lure for cold/dead leads and let the "independent contractors" try to make hay with it. If some good prospects rise to the top of the prospective pool without wasting time or money they win. If some toes get stepped on then address it on a case by case basis. Let the customer work for you. Temporary, contracted host screwed up? Bye bye!

Aceofspades was expecting to engage in some court and woo. Foxwoods was looking for results after dinner and a movie. They didn't get what they wanted, so there was no second date.

There was no dinner (I paid for my own food) and the movie could be akin to the suite I had for one night at that point. LOL

After all that has been said here it boils down to "Breach of Contract" by Ace. It need not be writen and could be oral.

This is a reminder to all to read the fine print and take it seriously. In this case here " subject to qualification" could mean anything. It is incumbend on Ace to find out what it means. The casino is in their right to tell you only when you are in their casino.

When the host found out that Ace is not going to honour the agreement they stop his signing authority for the cc and ask him to come to reception to find out how long he is staying and get payment from him. I like to know how much a hit he will take for the hotel room. Will it be at the casino published hotel rate.

In leaving the hotel without paying or checking out, this borders on a criminal case for cheating. He is lucky it is not in LV as the police there tend to side with the establishment.

Quote: Deck007

I agree with Kewlj.

" I showed up and was then told I would have to play to the level I stated when he asked my averages." Clearly you did not fulfil your part of the bargain.

I think you will be charged for your room. Best to phone up your credit card company right away before they make payment to the casino as you have more leverage then.

But he never offered anything for a "bargain". They sent him an invite to a tourney, he took them up on it, then they revoked the invite. A shady move, thanks for the heads up!

Quote: WBGamble

But he never offered anything for a "bargain". They sent him an invite to a tourney, he took them up on it, then they revoked the invite. A shady move, thanks for the heads up!

This is in Ace own words " I showed up and was then told I would have to play to the level I stated when he asked my averages."

It is the fine print and a conditional offer which he accepted from the host with those playing conditions.

Quote: aceofspades

Well, the host stated they were losing a lot of the NY players to Pennsylvania and, in an effort to attract more NY players before MA casinos are built (whenever that is), they were reaching out to known players of a certain level. Now, that being said, I think that half-a-day of play is no way to rate someone for a long-term casino relationship. I feel as if they dropped the ball from a customer service standpoint. As I said, the rest of my experience there was top notch and friendly. It's a shame, I likely would have started making that a mainstay in my casino rotation had I been afforded the entry into the tournament as presented to me.

Well they seem to be doing a hell of a job! And the MGM is western MA is supposed to break ground in the next month or 2.

Quote: Deck007

This is in Ace own words " I showed up and was then told I would have to play to the level I stated when he asked my averages."

It is the fine print and a conditional offer which he accepted from the host with those playing conditions.

But from what he said, if they had told him that during the initial booking, he would've stayed home. That hosts knee-jerk reaction after 1 days play wasn't quite what they expected is ridiculous. Where the hell do they find these people? No wonder they are losing so much money.

Quote: WBGamble

But from what he said, if they had told him that during the initial booking, he would've stayed home. That hosts knee-jerk reaction after 1 days play wasn't quite what they expected is ridiculous. Where the hell do they find these people? No wonder they are losing so much money.

If Ace had ask during the initial booking what is "subject to qualification" they would have told him. But apparently he did not ask this question.

Quote: Deck007

This is in Ace own words " I showed up and was then told I would have to play to the level I stated when he asked my averages."

It is the fine print and a conditional offer which he accepted from the host with those playing conditions.

He was told this on Saturday morning. The original invitation, first phone call, and first meeting with the host at the hotel, (3 opportunities, 2 of them before he had paid in time and money to travel up there); at none of those was he told it was a prerequisite for the tournament play and that he'd have to demonstrate that before he would be seated.

I've been to a couple dozen invitationals over the years, all based on ADT's, and have had several hosts around the US. I have NEVER been put in a position remotely similar to the one the host put Ace into, being challenged about qualifying for an event after I'd accepted an invitation and had arrived for the event. The industry standard I've experienced has been that they're providing an attraction that's a possible loss-leader, whether you cash, don't play up to your theo during that particular stay, or provide enough action that you keep getting invited. The idea is to bring you in, having identified you as a person likely to play outside the tournament, and provide every opportunity for you to do so. If you don't perform up to spec, your future invitations get fewer, farther between, or less lucrative.

The host property is placing a bet on you covering any expense of theirs with your action, just like when you place a bet on a table or press the play button on a machine; that money is gone, and now you have to win it back, along with any odds (including 1:1 pays) that might come with that win. It's how much you expose, not what you win or lose, that gets you invited to this stuff, usually tailored to the game or games you play most often. That's what they did with Ace, betting on him to get him there. And he didn't really say it, but he told me before he came back here that he had expected to reach his ADT over the time he was there, just not on a "clock every day for exactly 3 hours" schedule. That's why they should have left him alone to do it in his own time, rather than threatening him with reneging on the tournament seat.

FWIW, I most often get slot invites, because when I take breaks from the tables, I go pull a slot handle sometimes. But there's no decision-making in slots; they're just mind-candy without decisions. Tables pay better, but I don't play BJ or bacc, which are the tournaments I don't get invited to. Lately, though, I'm getting poker tournament invites, maybe because I like paigow and UTH tables the best and that's what they see me playing. I used to get roulette invites but haven't played that in a decade, so those have dropped off. But I'll play in any tournament that includes the buy-in and the comp stay, what the hell. I'll just go play what I like outside the tournament hours. Which is exactly what they want me to do, so I keep getting invited back.

Quote: beachbumbabs

He was told this on Saturday morning. The original invitation, first phone call, and first meeting with the host at the hotel, (3 opportunities, 2 of them before he had paid in time and money to travel up there); at none of those was he told it was a prerequisite for the tournament play and that he'd have to demonstrate that before he would be seated.

I've been to a couple dozen invitationals over the years, all based on ADT's, and have had several hosts around the US. I have NEVER been put in a position remotely similar to the one the host put Ace into, being challenged about qualifying for an event after I'd accepted an invitation and had arrived for the event. The industry standard I've experienced has been that they're providing an attraction that's a possible loss-leader, whether you cash, don't play up to your theo during that particular stay, or provide enough action that you keep getting invited. The idea is to bring you in, having identified you as a person likely to play outside the tournament, and provide every opportunity for you to do so. If you don't perform up to spec, your future invitations get fewer, farther between, or less lucrative.

The host property is placing a bet on you covering any expense of theirs with your action, just like when you place a bet on a table or press the play button on a machine; that money is gone, and now you have to win it back, along with any odds (including 1:1 pays) that might come with that win. It's how much you expose, not what you win or lose, that gets you invited to this stuff, usually tailored to the game or games you play most often. That's what they did with Ace, betting on him to get him there. And he didn't really say it, but he told me before he came back here that he had expected to reach his ADT over the time he was there, just not on a "clock every day for exactly 3 hours" schedule. That's why they should have left him alone to do it in his own time, rather than threatening him with reneging on the tournament seat.

FWIW, I most often get slot invites, because when I take breaks from the tables, I go pull a slot handle sometimes. But there's no decision-making in slots; they're just mind-candy without decisions. Tables pay better, but I don't play BJ or bacc, which are the tournaments I don't get invited to. Lately, though, I'm getting poker tournament invites, maybe because I like paigow and UTH tables the best and that's what they see me playing. I used to get roulette invites but haven't played that in a decade, so those have dropped off. But I'll play in any tournament that includes the buy-in and the comp stay, what the hell. I'll just go play what I like outside the tournament hours. Which is exactly what they want me to do, so I keep getting invited back.

Such a long write-up. Most of the thing I have answered already.

I just want to repeat what KEWLJ said.

If you "stiff" a casino that has a record of your play, you can enjoy the Comp but wont get invited back.

However if you have no record, the Comps come with conditions which you have agreed to but fail to deliver. That is a Breach of Contract or in the worst senerio Cheating.

Quote: Deck007

After all that has been said here it boils down to "Breach of Contract" by Ace. It need not be writen and could be oral.

This is a reminder to all to read the fine print and take it seriously. In this case here " subject to qualification" could mean anything. It is incumbend on Ace to find out what it means. The casino is in their right to tell you only when you are in their casino.

When the host found out that Ace is not going to honour the agreement they stop his signing authority for the cc and ask him to come to reception to find out how long he is staying and get payment from him. I like to know how much a hit he will take for the hotel room. Will it be at the casino published hotel rate.

In leaving the hotel without paying or checking out, this borders on a criminal case for cheating. He is lucky it is not in LV as the police there tend to side with the establishment.

Lol
The host and I spoke and neither of us were heated or disrespectful. He told me he would check me out of the hotel and the room for that night would be comped. I did not just "leave" -- I did things above-board.

Ever try to enforce an oral contract? And, herein, an oral contract was never entered into as there was never a "meeting of the minds".

Here's a question:

If the host had told you, either when you called to inquire, or while checking in, that you needed to meet the average you specified, would you have done so?

Or

If the host had, instead of revoking the tourney, simply told you that you need to bump up your play to X after the tourney, would you have done so?

The casino host handled the entire situation poorly. Just because Ace had a track record of an average bet of $200 and three hours play a day in the past does not mean he should be held to the same standard at Foxwoods. He should have been allowed to find his own level of play there. If the casino host would have got away with it the first time with Ace, he would have continued to pull these kind of antics with him.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Here's a question:

If the host had told you, either when you called to inquire, or while checking in, that you needed to meet the average you specified, would you have done so?

Or

If the host had, instead of revoking the tourney, simply told you that you need to bump up your play to X after the tourney, would you have done so?

(a)I would have declined the offer to begin with. What if I busted out my bankroll the first 2 hours of play? I would be stuck with a big loss and no tournament;

(b)I would have still declined - I cannot be held to a minimum amount of play to correspond to a lifelong average - there are many factors which go into my decision of how long and how much to play - I can never guarantee a minimum.

Quote: mickeycrimm

Just because Ace had a track record of an average bet of $200 and three hours play a day in the past does not mean he should be held to the same standard at Foxwoods. He should have been allowed to find his own level of play there.

This would be true, if there was no conversation of AoS's play level. When the Host asked ACE what his play level was and then ACE responded, the host expected that level of play. That is EXACLY why he asked. He wasn't fishing for the information. He already had that information. He wanted ACE to acknowledge and commit to that level, which ACE did.

I am not saying the host handled this whole thing very well....he didn't. The object was to attract a new high-roller to the property, hopefully as a returning customer. He failed miserably. The proper way to handle would have been to allow ACE to play the tournament and complete his trip and then at the end of the trip evaluate his play and decide if he warranted future offers.

But I am saying there was a definite communication issue, and ACE played some responsibility in that. He indicated that he would play XXX amount of play and then turned in 1/3 that over the first 2 days. Again, in ordinary circumstances, this probably would not be an issue. (maybe downgraded offer next time). But on the initial visit, ACE should have bent over backwards to play the amount he said he would and establish himself.

Quote: kewlj

This would be true, if there was no conversation of AoS's play level. When the Host asked ACE what his play level was and then ACE responded, the host expected that level of play. That is EXACLY why he asked. He wasn't fishing for the information. He already had that information. He wanted ACE to acknowledge and commit to that level, which ACE did.

I am not saying the host handled this whole thing very well....he didn't. The object was to attract a new high-roller to the property, hopefully as a returning customer. He failed miserably. But I am saying there was a definite communication issue, and ACE played some responsibility in that. He indicated that he would play XXX amount of play and then turned in 1/3 that over the first 2 days. Again, in ordinary circumstances, this probably would not be an issue. (maybe downgraded offer next time). But on the initial visit, ACE should have bent over backwards to play the amount he said he would and establish himself.

I never stated I played that level every trip. The host asked me what my average play was. I gave him the average. An average is not a minimum level and an average is determined over time, not less than the 16 hours I was actually on property (which includes time sleeping, eating, checking in, getting the lay of the land and dealing with the valet situation for over an hour). I would, over time, play 200min for 3 hours/day — this host lost an opportunity to allow that to happen.

Quote: aceofspades

I never stated I played that level every trip. The host asked me what my average play was. I gave him the average. An average is not a minimum level and an average is determined over time, not less than the 16 hours I was actually on property (which includes time sleeping, eating, checking in, getting the lay of the land and dealing with the valet situation for over an hour). I would, over time, play 200min for 3 hours/day — this host lost an opportunity to allow that to happen.

I agree with you ACE that the host should have allowed that to happen and THEN at the trips conclusion made an evaluation. I actually was adding something to that effect to my previous post as you posted.

But I don't think you realize that when he asked you your average bet, he was asking for a commitment. He already knew that information. And as a new player establishing himself, you should have gone out of your way to show your value (IMO).

Now the more important question of the moment. It is Monday morning (well, where I am in Vegas...I guess noonish east coast). How can you waste prime Lawyering time posting about this? Just who are you billing these hours to? Lol.

Quote: kewlj

I agree with you ACE that the host should have allowed that to happen and THEN at the trips conclusion made an evaluation. I actually was adding something to that effect to my previous post as you posted.

But I don't think you realize that when he asked you your average bet, he was asking for a commitment. He already knew that information. And as a new player establishing himself, you should have gone out of your way to show your value (IMO).

Perhaps it is the attorney side of me that does not imply conditions. I know the offer stated it was conditional and at the casino's discretion BUT, give me a chance to explicitly commit. When he asked me my average, I knew he would never have reached out to me had he not known this ahead of time and, when I confirmed those averages, I was doing just that, confirming my "averages". I never committed, I was merely answering a question he knew the answer too. He failed to allow me time to achieve an average.

Quote: aceofspades

I know the offer stated it was conditional and at the casino's discretion

ACE, I am not an attorney, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but it would seem to me, this phrase is a key piece of 'evidence', counselor. :) Especially the CONDITIONAL part. ("Offer based on Qualification")

And now sir, I am off to do what I do for a living. I don't have a law degree to fall back on. :( Lol. I do hope everything, including the car issue, gets resolved to your satisfaction.

Quote: kewlj

ACE, I am not an attorney, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but it would seem to me, this phrase is a key piece of 'evidence', counselor. :) Especially the CONDITIONAL part.

But one cannot imply conditions -- they must be explicitly stated -- that is known as a "condition precedent"

Quote: kewlj

But I am saying there was a definite communication issue, and ACE played some responsibility in that. He indicated that he would play XXX amount of play and then turned in 1/3 that over the first 2 days. Again, in ordinary circumstances, this probably would not be an issue. (maybe downgraded offer next time). But on the initial visit, ACE should have bent over backwards to play the amount he said he would and establish himself.

Your points are well made and true except for the part where he got in late on Friday and the host approached him 10:30 am Saturday. Yes, this covers 2 calendar days, but it is closer to 12 hours, and many of these he spent sleeping. That's the part that is crazy here. They expected him to stay up all night on Friday to hit 3 hours and did not even give him a chance to screw it up.

The best way to handle it is for them to let him in the tournament and not invite him back, but if they aren't willing to do that then the host should have been a bit more direct before the fact. He could have said, "We've got a great tournament coming up. Come on out on Friday and I will take care of suite and your meals. The tournament costs $XXXX to enter but of course I will comp it if you play for a few hours on Friday and Saturday."

Quote: bigfoot66

Your points are well made and true except for the part where he got in late on Friday and the host approached him 10:30 am Saturday. Yes, this covers 2 calendar days, but it is closer to 12 hours, and many of these he spent sleeping. That's the part that is crazy here. They expected him to stay up all night on Friday to hit 3 hours and did not even give him a chance to screw it up.

The best way to handle it is for them to let him in the tournament and not invite him back, but if they aren't willing to do that then the host should have been a bit more direct before the fact. He could have said, "We've got a great tournament coming up. Come on out on Friday and I will take care of suite and your meals. The tournament costs $XXXX to enter but of course I will comp it if you play for a few hours on Friday and Saturday."

Right. Considering my meals were only going to be comped based on play. The only reason I showed up was for the comped room and tournament entry.

"The host then stated that if I played 5 more hours today and my average bet was 200, I would be guaranteed a seat at the tournament. I informed him I felt duped and was leaving.
He asked if there was anything he could do to change my mind – I said, “Stick to your word that I was invited here to play in a tournament, not have a seat reserved so that I could then play my way in based on my time in and average bet” – to which he replied “How could you not know that my asking about your average time and bet was in implicit qualification for the tournament?” – I told him unless it is spelled out, too many things can be implied. I then said “Secondly, please lose my number!”"

What a bunch of low life scumbags. We should have given the Indians free anything rather than the right to casinos. Might as well have given them nothing, at least they'd have an intact soul. Pretty much turned them into a bunch of low life, money grubbing d bags lower than a cockroach. But hey, at least they re rich!

In addition, none of the Indians even run these casinos, they import a bunch of career cockroaches from Vegas and AC who decided a casino w a complete monopoly and zero liability was a better scam for them to get their claws into. None of Indians gain any business knowledge, not that you gain any from running a casino other than how to scam old people out of social security checks.

Luckily, I have a tournament coming up at Revel this weekend :)

Quote: aceofspades

Luckily, I have a tournament coming up at Revel this weekend :)

if they make it that far.
bazinga!!

Quote: GWAE

if they make it that far.
bazinga!!

Well, I haven't heard otherwise and the original WARN letters to employees stated the closing would be 8/16 without a buyer…time is a'tickin'

Quote: aceofspades

Perhaps it is the attorney side of me that does not imply conditions. I know the offer stated it was conditional and at the casino's discretion BUT, give me a chance to explicitly commit. When he asked me my average, I knew he would never have reached out to me had he not known this ahead of time and, when I confirmed those averages, I was doing just that, confirming my "averages". I never committed, I was merely answering a question he knew the answer too. He failed to allow me time to achieve an average.

Ghosh! you are a lawyer and I am not and we are talking legal.

The condition is specifiic " subject to qualification". There is nothing like "imp;ied conditions". If you did not agree to the conditon you would not be allowed into the hotel.

According to your account the host made a concession to you by reducing your hours of play and only kick you out of the hotel when you show no sign of meeting this lower target.

Quote: aceofspades

Lol
The host and I spoke and neither of us were heated or disrespectful. He told me he would check me out of the hotel and the room for that night would be comped. I did not just "leave" -- I did things above-board.

Ever try to enforce an oral contract? And, herein, an oral contract was never entered into as there was never a "meeting of the minds".

Again the lawyer and I.

You left the hotel without paying or checking out. Nothing here is above-board.

In spite of the host offering 1 night comp you just walk away. In the hospitality business this is a Mortal Sin, for lack of a better word.

Quote: Deck007

Ghosh! you are a lawyer and I am not and we are talking legal.

The condition is specifiic " subject to qualification". There is nothing like "imp;ied conditions". If you did not agree to the conditon you would not be allowed into the hotel.

According to your account the host made a concession to you by reducing your hours of play and only kick you out of the hotel when you show no sign of meeting this lower target.

Qualification can mean anything. The host asked my averages AFTER I was already booked for the weekend and tournament.