> So if you place a bet (any bet) and win, and the casino says "OK,
but
> by our rules, if you don't cash in within one minute, your bet is
> void" -- you'd be OK with that?
O.K., I can see that maybe "bludgeon" was inappropriate given the
information-
don't have an emotional attachment to the process. The problem I'm
having with this is that folks seem to think that secret policies
were put in place after-the-fact to thwart the winning gambler.
Aren't the casino's policies fully disclosed to all who seek to know?
Wouldn't a "reasonable man," especially one oriented toward detail,
investigate the rules of a game that he wanted to play beforehand?
An Illinois–area, non-Harrahs casino I was at couple of years ago,
I'm not sure which one, had a statement printed on the cash-in/cash-
out ticket that it had to be redeemed the same day. When I asked the
cashier about it, she was emphatic that they would not redeem an
expired ticket even if cash had been deposited into the machine and
withdrawn without subsequent play. This isn't a direct comparison,
but it is an example of a particular rule that I've never seen
anywhere else. Evidently, they didn't think it made them non-
competitive and Gaming had no objection.
We're the ones that argue that casino policies that reduce EV or
comps or the incentive to wager are counter to the casinos long-term
best interests. They don't think so. Their belief that there are
always more baby-boomers and, recently, more foreign visitors, to
replace ex-customers hasn't hurt the bottom-line yet. Maybe it never
will.
Casinos don't book any bet that their clients want. I may want a
Royal to pay 50,000:1 or a Place 8 bet to pay 10:1, but a casino
isn't going to accept that bet and pay it based on my desires. They
accept bets that are within defined parameters and they're the ones
doing the defining, not us. Our choice is to accept the recognized
policy, even a "one-minute" rule, or walk. It just seems to me as a
non-sports bettor that this house rule is the same as any other, and
to say that a bettor should be allowed to retroactively pick-and-
chose which clearly established rules apply to him and which ones
don't doesn't make sense from the casino's viewpoint. Nice gesture,
notwithstanding, why should they be expected to do something that
doesn't make sense to them simply because we don't like the way it
affects our pocketbook when we chose to disregard the house rule? Why
hold casinos to a higher standard than other businesses?
This doesn't affect me, I'm just wondering.
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
