Bobby's Breakroom - for gaming employee chatter + YTF appreciation. See restrictions in Post #1

Had a first recently: Dealing our daily afternoon tourney, I had to call the floor for a player who had a complaint about a dealer on another table.

Our entire room is basically regulars. The most notoriously loud, non-stop talker was at the table behind me. It was a Sunday, and instead of his usual play-by-play hand dissection, the topic du jour was football. Well, the dealer at his game was also one of our more... loquacious, shall we say-- but on top of that, he bets on everything, so we hear about every leg of his parlays all day on Sundays, with commentary on every play as they unfold across the TVs. This created the perfect storm, and while most of the players at my table were laughing about it, one guy couldn't stand it anymore (he had been visibly tilted by this for awhile), and asked if the manager could do something about the dealer. I called the floor, and the player said, "It's bad enough we have to listen to [player's name] being loud every day, but now your dealer won't shut up either, and we can barely hear what's going on at our table because of those two." Personally, I found every aspect of the whole situation to be hilarious, and it was a great start to my day. 😃

These posts were originally in the breakroom thread, when discussing a proposed change to the posting policy in that thread. https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/27/ca...

--

I might be wrong so please correct me if I am, but instinct is to post these types of things in the break room thread simply because they are rules questions, but they are rules questions that involve (potential) angles. They don't involve strategy (or behaviors players should be emulating), but they involve crazy grey areas that dealers often see so I think they should be shared so all dealers can learn. That said, I generally do not mind players providing feedback (sometimes I would even welcome it), but I think it needs to be provided in the spirit of the thread. We don't need to beat up on dealers for sharing a story they are uncertain of.

Maybe I should have started a new thread for this post because it does involve things player need to think about.

mod: it's totally up to you whether to post your questions/requests in the breakroom thread or in its own thread.

Having said that, if you post it in the breakroom thread, I'm going to ask/enforce (to the best of my ability) that only room employees respond with feedback, in keeping with the rules of the thread. If you want feedback from others, you'll need to post it in its own thread or in LC.

Even though you may welcome feedback from others, I can tell you that I get many, many complaints from room employees about non-employees getting involved in conversations here, it is probably the post report type I get most often here in CCP (even more than spam reports).

So the standard for anything posted here will be what the OP states, even if you personally don't mind a wider audience.

Thanks.

Of course neither you nor anyone else knows for sure who here is an employee and who isn't.

And the employee who started this thread specifically said that
"Of course, anyone is welcome to post here, whether you are a gaming employee or not" (direct quote).

I will admit that I wasn't thinking about Player A initially. I panicked when I heard him declare his hand because I didn't think Player B called.

Player B's actions really weren't as close to a call as I made them out to be in the OP. I mean they were close, multiple times he cuts out chips and then made some gestures, but it was something that dealers (and experienced players) see often enough. It was clear he was agonizing over the decision and deep in thought. I am sure that 99% of experienced higher level poker players would never thought he had called.

However the more I thought about Player A's actions, the weirder they were. He did it in a way that no one would ever turn over their cards. After declaring, he sort of slowly lifted them and looked like he was going to turn them over without ever revealing them keeping them facedown throughout his full forward motion. It was an awkward motion. Most poker players turn over their hands much smoother and faster, especially after declaring what they have. Then when there was lots of confusion and we were waiting for the first floorman, he never argued that the other player called. He never said anything.

When the tournament director came over he handled really well. He is an excellent TD and he showed it.

He came over and asked me what happened. I explained that Player A bet, Player B went deep into the tank, made multiple motions but never made anything I would consider a call. After one of those motions, Player A declared he had a straight and started to turn over his hand but never exposed his cards and stopped. I explained Player B never did anything after that and I stopped all action.

The TD then asked each player what they thought happened. Player B spoke first and said he was thinking and never made a call. Player A never said anything. When the TD directly asked Player A what happened all he said was "I said straight." The TD then asked him direct questions (Did you start to turn over your hand?, what did B do that made you think he called?, etc). Player A would struggle to answer, think, and then say "I said straight". The TD would repeat his question and the player would do the same.

The TD started to get frustrated and it became pretty clear at least to me that Player A didn't want to say anything, especially anything that would incriminate himself. I am sure the the TD picked up on it.

The TD told Player A that since he wouldn't answer any direct questions, he would have to rule it not a call and Player B was free to act however he choose. I was watching Player A as the TD ruled and I am pretty sure he was relieved by this, he didn't say anything at all. He was quiet.

Player B went back into the tank.

While tanking, Player B asks the TD what would happen if he called and Player A doesn't not have a straight. The TD says he doesn't want to discuss theoretical situations but it would be a penalty to misrepresent a hand in such a manner. Another player spoke up and said that since it wasn't a call, the most Player A could be penalized was 1 round for discussing a hand while it was happening. The TD shut the other player down immediately and told him there shouldn't be any discussion, but rather sternly said that there is a vast difference between discussing a hand while it is going on and angling.

Player A continues to be silent for a few seconds and then explodes (panics....). He starts saying he has a straight and the other player called and should be held to that call. The TD tells him that the ruling has been made and he should have spoke up earlier. Basically let the other player decide what to do.

After a while Player B folds (to everyone's dismay) with Player A folding his cards right behind him. It should be noted that I mucked Player B's cards right away, but let Player A's cards linger while I pushed the pot. I wanted to make sure the TD did not want to see them.

The TD then tells the table that yes, discussion of a hand while it is happening can result in a 1 round penalty. However angling by misreprenting your hand in order to get an opponent to fold is much more severe. Since everyone who spoke up agreed that Player A had attempted (maybe faked, but still) to turn over his hand, it was clear he wasn't just potentially discussing his hand. His actions were either genuine or obviously angling. If Player B called and Player A had anything other than a straight he would have been DQed.

Player A was quiet the whole time. He never whined or complained about not being called. I only dealt one more hand (that hand took up most of my down), and he was quiet. My read was that he was relieved. I think that he is normally a very straight up player, but saw an opportunity to get his opponent to fold and took it, but immediately regretted it. Someone who doesn't normally look for those situations, but stumbled upon one and let the devil on his shoulder take over. I am pretty sure he won't be doing that again.

After I got up, I talked to the floor about the hand (I should have continued to push, but this was too important).

The TD admitted that he initially considered peeking at Player A's hand but realized that doing so would set a precedent and could open a big can of worms. He also was worried that looking at the hand would affect the action. He decided that since it was the Christmas season that he was going to assume everyone was acting in good faith, so he decided he wasn't going to look at the hand.

When I brought up to him that he could have looked at it after the hand was over he admitted he was too locked in to not wanting to affect the action so he didn't think about it until it was too late. He noticed that I had let the hand linger and only thought about why I did so after it was too late.

We both agreed that we really think Player A was angling. In fact we both agreed that we would bet lots of money on it, but we both recognized that it was just our (very experienced) reads, so we cannot assume anything.

Later in the day I went back and asked him how much he would bet at even odds that Player A was angling? He thought a really long time and admitted he really thought he was, but he wouldn't bet. I think that is a cop out.

I know I would bet thousands of dollars he was angling. I am that sure.

Interesting hand. Made me think for a long time afterwards.

I did not realize this. Thanks for the feedback. I understand both sides of it so it is all good.

Agreed, but I will do what I can, and we'll make it work.

That may have been what was originally said (I didn't bother checking), but it's not what the thread has evolved into, or what the current rule is.

As it happens, the OP has now asked me to edit the OP to remove all ambiguity going forward. So the proposed change will be to make it so that only cardroom employees can post in this thread going forward, full stop.

For the next few days I'll leave it open here for people (including non-employees) to provide feedback on that change, then will make a decision around the new year.

Thanks all!

Well obviously I think that is a terrible decision.

A bad policy in general, but again, you have no way of knowing who is or isn't an employee.

What about former employees?

And then I suppose you won't be allowed to post here yourself?

Or what about people who are in the business, but don't work in card rooms? I deal in bar-poker leagues and home games.

Perhaps it really should be more about defining what this thread's intentions are rather than who can post here.

I think the intentions are stated pretty well in the OP, and the original guidelines were fine. I haven't seen many violations of them and think the few that happen could easily be handled on am individual basis.

Former employees are welcome to post in the thread, within reason (ie if you worked in the legal dept for a week back in 1995, maybe don’t).

Correct, I will not be posting, except in mod capacity when needed.

Which is fine I try not to post here anyway. When I do it’s usually an accident, ie I didn’t realize I was in this thread.

We've had players come in here and derail threads before. Replying to every post whether they knew anything about the topic or not. I don't know if those people got bored and left on their own or if a mod had a talk with them.

Sometimes we want to bitch, tell stories, or ask advice from others who have been doing this for a while. Some things you just don't fully understand until you've been the one sitting in the chair.

As for who gets to post here, I feel like if you're posting something from the point of view of a card room employee then that's fine. Past, present, soon to be, or just asking us what our thoughts are on something. Someone who's only dealt home games, for example, could certainly contribute to some discussions but not others that are specific to working as an employee in a regulated establishment. Just like I wouldn't be able to give them advice on how strict to be with rules, working for shady game runners, etc. I can imagine some of the things they likely deal with, but I'm not in that world so I don't really know.

I don't mind the occasional post by a non-employee either looking for an insider's perspective or someone just coming in to say "hey, thanks for ...." but what I don't want is non-employees coming in to give their take on how a situation should have been handled or what a ruling should be.

And if we banned all non-employees from posting anything whatsoever I'd be fine with that too.

As for mods posting in here, I trust that they were appointed as mods for good reason and they were vetted by the 2+2 higher-ups, so they're welcome to post as they see fit.

This is mostly the case for me as well.

But not this time!

You don't think it could be important or at least useful to know how long time card room customers think particular situations should be handled? In the long run, shouldn't every situation be decided the way most players would want it to be?
"The customer is always right" seems to generally make for a more successful business of any type.

We already have a thread for people to ask how a certain situation should have been handled. There's no reason to be asking those kinds of questions and not allowing customers to give their input, as the way they should be handled should be based on what customers want (unless your want your place to go out of business).

Maybe we should also have a thread where players can complain about dealers and other card room employees, but none of them are allowed to post in it? Makes the same amount of sense.

Going to take this opportunity to legally post in the epic thread.

As one who has been in card rooms since the 90's, have played for a living, have had many conversations with dealers and floors about the business, I would never, ever think that my statements and opinions belong in this thread. I've never been in the box, never been an employee at a card room. I've got enough of a clue to realize I don't belong in this thread. But I can still appreciate it without actively taking part.

But my opinion on that is meaningless, so is everybody else's opinion who isn't an employee. The only opinions that matter are the OP, the mods, and to a lesser extent, the other employees that post here.

Some posts from them over the last few months...

Cliffs, if you aren't a card room employee then get a clue and realize your place is not in this thread. Hopefully, going forward, mods will delete offending posts and give those posting them some time off.

If the general public was unable to view this thread that would be a great loss to those who enjoy it and can learn stuff at the same time. If randoms can interact in a thread, it will instantly turn to junk. That's the beauty of this thread, no randoms except for those who can't grasp the concept, therefore it's a great thread.

Out of respect, this will be my only post here. I will not be drawn into the incoming salvo of excuses on why it's OK for randoms to post here. I appreciate the insight of the employees that continually put up with crap while in the box.

As someone who has inadvertently over-discussed in this thread a time or two, totally agree with nitBO. This thread is very valuable and interesting. If a situation is posted that benefits from outsider input, either that person or any other person can obv start a separate thread in the forum for that purpose.

I think it's better not to post here if not an employee feeling the work under his/her skin. I'm otherwise all for inclusion, but this is a thread dealers want to have and many non-dealers want to read. We can't have it all.

Would appreciate if dealers also do threads with everybody's views welcome. The risk is those go to this thread too. That's the main downside, risk of exclusion.

It’s one thread out of the entire forum. Let them have it. Sheesh.

The Casino & Cardroom category is full of threads on "What do you think of this ruling?" or "How should this situation be handled?" and plenty of dealers and non-dealers share their thoughts.

Is that what you meant?

Yes. But sometimes posts here deserve broader attention. Difficult for this thread not to become a bit unbalanced. But worth the effort I would say. "Excluding randoms" is always there lurking. Who wants to be a "random"? People can get hurt when being excluded in their own forum in plain sight.

Probably it's best to clearly exclude all but employees in the OP, and see what happens. Then anybody could lift general stuff into own threads, non-dealers and dealers.

I may or may not have explained myself, plaaynde out, Happy New Year!

You mean how the title of the thread says "for gaming employees" and the OP says multiple times it's intended for gaming employees?