Suppose Tipping Poker Dealers Was Illegal [Archive]

David Sklansky

07-20-2007, 01:38 AM

This is actually a technical question that under other circumstances should be posted on a different forum. But it is topical here.

Obviously if tipping poker dealers was absolutely not allowed, and the ban was stictly enforced, the casinos would have to pay a larger salary and charge a larger rake. Let's go under the assumption that this larger rake was exactly equal to the pay raise the dealers got, in order to make up for no tips.

We can also presume that some casinos would up the rake by smaller amounts and get less competant dealers while some would charge more and get better dealers. (The very best dealers might look for different work, at least those who have the skills to succeed elsewhere.) If, after a time, it looked liked the customers wanted better, (or worse) dealers, hiring practices and rakes would be adjusted.

Here is my question: Under this scheme, would reasonably good dealers who chose to remain dealers make as much or more than they do now? If not how would things change for them?

Clarkmeister

07-20-2007, 01:41 AM

[ QUOTE ]
would reasonably good dealers who chose to remain dealers make as much or more than they do now?

[/ QUOTE ]

It would be about a $12-14/hr job with benefits is my guess.

Rottersod

07-20-2007, 01:43 AM

Post it in Poker Theory please.

07-20-2007, 01:43 AM

I think the very best dealers would do better and the majority of dealers would make less.

David Sklansky

07-20-2007, 01:52 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I think the very best dealers would do better and the majority of dealers would make less.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you understood my post, you answer is equivalent to saying that you think a few cardrooms could get away with a bigger rake increase because it would allow them to hire the best dealers. Is that what you meant?

afish

07-20-2007, 01:52 AM

Given that dealer quality improved dramatically when tip pooling was eliminated in AC, I think dealer quality would go down if tipping were eliminated (at least in cash games). This would be the case whether or not they made more or less. There would simply be less incentive to deal quickly.

Tournaments might be different.

W brad

07-20-2007, 01:54 AM

Tip pooling makes the game quality suck. Keep the tipping system as long as the dealers get to keep their individual tips. The best dealers should and do make more than the average ones do.

07-20-2007, 01:56 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the very best dealers would do better and the majority of dealers would make less.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you understood my post, you answer is equivalent to saying that you think a few cardrooms could get away with a bigger rake increase because it would allow them to hire the best dealers. Is that what you meant?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the few games that demand the very best dealers would go out and get them. I think right now the dealing market is not efficient in that a room will have low limit players that "overtip" dealers allowing the high limit players to free ride. Currently the people that demand the very best dealers pay the least and those that will settle for the worst dealers pay the most.

shaniac

07-20-2007, 02:04 AM

I don't have an answer, but I know that in Australia, dealers and casino staff aren't allowed to accept tips, and they were mostly competent at the Aussie Millions.

gobboboy

07-20-2007, 02:07 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't have an answer, but I know that in Australia, dealers and casino staff aren't allowed to accept tips, and they were mostly competent at the Aussie Millions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed.

07-20-2007, 02:10 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't have an answer, but I know that in Australia, dealers and casino staff aren't allowed to accept tips, and they were mostly competent at the Aussie Millions.

[/ QUOTE ]

How large of an event was this? Do they have to hire temp dealers for it? The underlying problem with the WSOP is that it is so big that they have to get dealers from somewhere. There are a few dealers that just like to travel the circuit, but most of the temp dealers would rather be working a full time job rather than working as a temp.

DonovanMD

07-20-2007, 02:11 AM

suzy89222

07-20-2007, 02:13 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't have an answer, but I know that in Australia, dealers and casino staff aren't allowed to accept tips, and they were mostly competent at the Aussie Millions.

[/ QUOTE ]

just guessing, but that is probably because there is much less tipping in australia than US in all service jobs (waiters, taxi drivers,etc). when i was out there a few years ago, an australian told me that they almost view tips as insults, like they arent able to take care of themselves. employers apparently compensate them fairly, and they dont have the tip-crazy culture the US has.

ncpokeresq

07-20-2007, 02:15 AM

Several interesting aspects of this question:
Would the poker rooms better reward dealers as a group than players,
Would poker rooms better reward better dealers than players
Would the total amount going to dealers as a whole increase
Would some cardrooms attempt to attract better dealers by paying more
Would the pay vary greatly at the same room among dealers or would it be basically flat absent seniority
My algebra, based on WAG, is that dealer pay would go down because an acceptable level of competence/incompetence could be achieved at a lower hourly rates than most average dealers currently make, much less better dealers (who presumably make more by getting out more hands by general speed/keeping game going, thus variance in tipping evening out). Of course, there may be different definitions of what constitutes a good dealer.

LA_Price

07-20-2007, 02:23 AM

David,

In England tipping dealers is illegal, so maybe you should go there and do a case study. I used to play a lot in Birmingham(UK) and there was a mix of good and bad dealers, like there is here. At the place I played most often they charged 5 pound an hour sessions. There was another place with worse dealers that only charged 3 pounds an hour, but because the game was a little smaller(which may have had something to do with the bad dealers) I didn't go there.

One thing was that people who were good tended to rise to management positions, so they didn't stay dealers as long as they would have if they worked in America.

Jerry D

07-20-2007, 02:25 AM

That's why electronic poker tables with no human dealers is the way to go. Alot of old fogey poker players won't like it, but in 10 years it will be VERY RARE to see an actual human dealing poker in a B&M. Mark my words because they are very true. So in my humble view your question is moot. There is no need to raise the rake to compensate for dealers not making 'tips.' Just get rid of the dealers, and then you get rid of the 'tips.'

Everybody wins with electronic tables. The casino makes more money per hour. The players get more hands per hour. The players don't have to tip. The players don't have to endure the missed deals and numerous mistakes dealers are constantly making.

Ramon Scott

07-20-2007, 02:39 AM

In 10 years, I'll be back just to say like Brent Carter did to Phil Hellmuth...

"I was busy marking your words."

I guess if casinos were interested in the bottom line, poker would've already been eliminated all together.

How did that Hollywood Park e-poker room fare?

I guess everyone will just stay home and play on teh internets.

Believe it or not some people just don't trust machines... or teh internets.

Kevroc

07-20-2007, 02:51 AM

DS,

Does Brandi toke as well as the tokes she receives from her "other" job?

BTW, I never gives any womans my monies either playa!

BiggieFats

07-20-2007, 03:53 AM

Wdanger

07-20-2007, 05:07 AM

As an ex UK casino dealer i can safely say that not being allowed legally to accept tips, but having a higher basic rate of pay, results in an overall net loss of earining compared to dealers in casinos that do allow tipping. It looks good on paper but sucks when you come to spend anything. Not tipping does also, in my experience, lead to less interested dealers in some cases, but also less voracious dealers too, who concentrate on the game rather than angling for tips.

So in summary there are pros and cons, the cons mainly being felt by the dealers that dont get tips. In a casino setting rather than a straight cardroom, the fact that the dealers are paid a higher salary and dont rely on tips doesnt mean the casino has to charge more for anything as all the cash that would have been tipped will eventually find its way into the drop boxes.

fees

07-20-2007, 05:53 AM

live poker is stupid, it makes no sense

online poker is all that matters

ijustliketoplay

07-20-2007, 06:19 AM

[ QUOTE ]
live poker is stupid, it makes no sense

online poker is all that matters

[/ QUOTE ]

so, so wrong

kerr

07-20-2007, 07:03 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't have an answer, but I know that in Australia, dealers and casino staff aren't allowed to accept tips, and they were mostly competent at the Aussie Millions.

[/ QUOTE ]

How large of an event was this? Do they have to hire temp dealers for it? The underlying problem with the WSOP is that it is so big that they have to get dealers from somewhere. There are a few dealers that just like to travel the circuit, but most of the temp dealers would rather be working a full time job rather than working as a temp.

[/ QUOTE ]
13 events ranging from $550 to $100,000 buy-in. Main Event had 747 runners at $10,500 each. I don't think there would have been any temp dealers, or any from interstate. But Crown has seen a lot of experienced dealers leave in recent times, so the dealers were probably even better in 2005/2006.

kerr

07-20-2007, 07:05 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't have an answer, but I know that in Australia, dealers and casino staff aren't allowed to accept tips, and they were mostly competent at the Aussie Millions.

[/ QUOTE ]

just guessing, but that is probably because there is much less tipping in australia than US in all service jobs (waiters, taxi drivers,etc). when i was out there a few years ago, an australian told me that they almost view tips as insults, like they arent able to take care of themselves. employers apparently compensate them fairly, and they dont have the tip-crazy culture the US has.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure about the recipient of a tip being insulted, but you're right, tipping is rare. And tipping dealers is illegal in all Australian casino, although tipping wait staff is allowed, though not expected.

Brettski

07-20-2007, 07:35 AM

[ QUOTE ]

How large of an event was this? Do they have to hire temp dealers for it? The underlying problem with the WSOP is that it is so big that they have to get dealers from somewhere. There are a few dealers that just like to travel the circuit, but most of the temp dealers would rather be working a full time job rather than working as a temp.

[/ QUOTE ]

Crown Casino does not hire temp dealers for the Aussie Millions; we use all our own permanent staff.

On a side note, whilst I was at the WSOP this year, I was quite surprised by the number of dealers I met who asked how they could get a job dealing at the Aussie Millions. I had to apologise and say that we did not hire casual labour for the event.

I got a bigger shock when they then said, "what if I emigrate?" /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

DonkeyChip

07-20-2007, 08:18 AM

I always assumed that poker dealers didn't get much, if any, benefits. If that is the case, and if benefits did become part of their pay, then they would certainly get a lot less money. Benefits are very expensive these days. But they would probably get more value considering that if they bought their own health insurance/etc. it would cost a lot of money. Some people would just rather have the cash.

Whether the best dealers made more/less money? I suppose they would get a higher wage, just like many other jobs where the best performers get a better wage. But it still seems that they would make less. Almost all would likely make less because so many people way overtip and the casino/cardroom isn't going to overpay like that.

Clarkmeister

07-20-2007, 10:15 AM

I'm sure lots of them would be upset they now were forced to pay taxes on all of their earnings.

GotQuads

07-20-2007, 10:41 AM

Dealers should be replaced by e-tables that shuffle properly

Clarkmeister

07-20-2007, 10:53 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Dealers should be replaced by e-tables that shuffle properly

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, I want cards, chips and people.

fees

07-20-2007, 10:57 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
live poker is stupid, it makes no sense

online poker is all that matters

[/ QUOTE ]

so, so wrong

[/ QUOTE ]

are you over 30, just curious?

David Steele

07-20-2007, 11:15 AM

One idea is that the regular winning players will be hurt
and the losing players, the ones who make giant results oriented tips, will be helped. It may even lead to the loss of enough regular players to kill off middle limit games etc etc, end of the world scenario.

D.

TMTTR

07-20-2007, 11:16 AM

[ QUOTE ]
live poker is stupid, it makes no sense

online poker is all that matters

[/ QUOTE ]

Wipe your nose, pull up your pants and take a shower. There is a world outside.

GotQuads

07-20-2007, 11:19 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Dealers should be replaced by e-tables that shuffle properly

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, I want cards, chips and people.

[/ QUOTE ]

You still play against people. Just with a deck that's shuffled properly, and you don't need to tip, either.

Clarkmeister

07-20-2007, 11:20 AM

[ QUOTE ]
One idea is that the regular winning players will be hurt
and the losing players, the ones who make giant results oriented tips, will be helped. It may even lead to the loss of enough regular players to kill off middle limit games etc etc, end of the world scenario.

D.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with this concept is that it assumes that the only regular players are winning players. Not at all the case. Also, the rooms with the highest rake, such as Commerce, tend to be the most successful, also suggesting that games aren't necessarily hurt by more rake, and may in fact be better off by getting rid of the marginal nit pro.

StevieG

07-20-2007, 11:57 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't have an answer, but I know that in Australia, dealers and casino staff aren't allowed to accept tips, and they were mostly competent at the Aussie Millions.

[/ QUOTE ]

And I know that when I played at Burswood in WA the dealers made between 15-19 dollars an hour with benefits, since tipping is not allowed in casinos, and generally never done ever in Oz.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't the Aussie casinos also take a ridiculous amount in rake?

See this thread in the B&M Forum from May where AshtrayBroom (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showprofile.php?Cat=0&User=91213&what=search&topic =) asks "1/2NL game at my B&M beatable? (Crown Casino, Melbourne, Australia (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=cardroom&Number=10380293& Main=10380293#Post10380293)" and in the OP indicates a 10% rake upto $6 in $1/2NL and a $5 hourly time charge.

gsolis

07-20-2007, 12:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Here is my question: Under this scheme, would reasonably good dealers who chose to remain dealers make as much or more than they do now? If not how would things change for them?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd say they make at least as much with the upside of making more. only they truly know how much they make so if they were not meeting this rate they could go elsewhere as its easy to imagine casinos vying for good dealers until bots take over.

the best ones should have an edge.

resboard

07-20-2007, 12:34 PM

I posted a similar reply in another thread, but basically why do dealers make so much? It really makes no sense to me. They aren't doing a hard job. They are using a very small portion of their brain to count some chips and throw some cards. As far as i'm concerned if a dealer makes $12-15/hr they should be happy.

rafiki

07-20-2007, 01:01 PM

word is we're getting all electronic poker room here in a few months. I'll let you know how it goes...

Mano

07-20-2007, 01:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the very best dealers would do better and the majority of dealers would make less.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you understood my post, you answer is equivalent to saying that you think a few cardrooms could get away with a bigger rake increase because it would allow them to hire the best dealers. Is that what you meant?

[/ QUOTE ]

Would the dealers get paid hourly, or basically keep the extra rake in the games they deal? If it is the latter, the better dealers tend to get more hands out per hour, and thus would make more money.

disjunction

07-20-2007, 01:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Let's go under the assumption that this larger rake was exactly equal to the pay raise the dealers got, in order to make up for no tips.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a bad assumption. It's the same fallacy that baseball teams pass on salary costs to the fans, instead of just charging what the market will bear.

Casinos will pay dealers the minimum that they can get away with, according to the laws of supply and demand for dealers. There may be a larger demand for better dealers, because they can generate more rake and more $$$ for casinos. But it's pointless for the casino to just pass all the additional rake $$$ from fast dealers right back to the dealer, if they did that, why hire a great dealer? Instead they will pocket some of that additional rake for themselves. Dealers do not have the power to stop this from happening.

Thus dealer salary would go down.

Wolverine

07-20-2007, 06:12 PM

suzy89222

07-20-2007, 06:24 PM

while i agree with you, you can say the same thing about most bartenders, waiters, taxi drivers, etc.

PITTM

07-20-2007, 06:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
while i agree with you, you SHOULD say the same thing about most bartenders, waiters, taxi drivers, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

suzy89222

07-20-2007, 06:40 PM

i know i should know this, but what does QFT stand for?

jh12547

07-20-2007, 06:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Tip pooling makes the game quality suck. Keep the tipping system as long as the dealers get to keep their individual tips. The best dealers should and do make more than the average ones do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree 100% with this post

Foxwoods dealers dont keep their own tips and i always read on here how much a lot of you say their dealers suck. Probably because most dont have to be good or care since someone either on another table or in the table games will make money for them. If dealers keep their own tip many of their attitudes would positively change.

PITTM

07-20-2007, 07:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
i know i should know this, but what does QFT stand for?

[/ QUOTE ]

quoted for truth(iness).

Number27

07-20-2007, 07:23 PM

For those of you saying that e-tables are the solution I think you are ignoring that many tourists and casual gamblers want to hold cards and chips and pretend that they're maverick at the poker table. While e-tables might be more efficient in terms of faster deals/tipping it will almost certainly scare away some portion of the fish who will go back to the blackjack tables.

bravos1

07-20-2007, 08:25 PM

DS, You make a horrible assumption that the rooms/casinos will increase their dealer's pay for compensation. Why would they do that? They "may" raise the base salary (to keep from having a mass revolt), but I would lay 10:1 that it would in no way be near enough to compensate for tips lost. Sure, they may lose a few dealers, but they don't care, and will easily replace them.

the_scalp

07-20-2007, 09:20 PM

David,

I'd be estatic if tipping were illegal, but dealers were paid 1$ per hand dealt (more in rooms where quality dealers were really important, i.e. Bobby's room). You'd need to balance this by charging a penalty (5$?) for misdeals that required the floor to be called -- the 5$ could spalsh the next pot.

The casinos could charge a (10%) four dollar rake and make a steady 3$ per hand. Dealers would get through hands faster, knowing that their income is dependant on speed and not making mistakes.

David Steele

07-20-2007, 11:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The problem with this concept is that it assumes that the only regular players are winning players.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not really, just that the regular winning players wouldn't be over-tipping. The regular losing players that over-tip will be spared that money wasting. Sanely-tipping-regular-losing players will also be hurt.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, the rooms with the highest rake, such as Commerce, tend to be the most successful

[/ QUOTE ]

Successful for the card-room, but locally ( Vancouver ) the growth is mostly in low limit games.

D.

RacersEdge

07-21-2007, 02:49 AM

I think the poker rooms would increase the rake equivalent to the lost tip amount. They would like to distrubute the rake in favor of the better dealers than tips distributes money now. But since tips are a combination pay/rating stsytem, the PRs would ahve a hard time ranking the dealers. So good dealers would probably be worse off.

Twistofsin

07-23-2007, 11:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Dealers should be replaced by e-tables that shuffle properly

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, I want cards, chips and people.

[/ QUOTE ]

You still play against people. Just with a deck that's shuffled properly, and you don't need to tip, either.

[/ QUOTE ]

What makes you think people will settle for 1 out of 3?

My casino uses auto shufflers, fwiw.

bwiii

07-24-2007, 02:23 AM

Apparently no poker dealers have chimed in. I deal at a locals casino in Vegas and I'll tell you if tipping was illegal say bye-bye to any good dealer. There is no way casinos will pay a good dealer what they make by accepting tips. This isn't higher math. You deal for an hour, usually get a dollar per hand, and the average good dealer gets out about 30-35 hands per hour. I guarantee if tipping was banned you would really see what bad dealing is about. People are talking about dealers making mistakes, everyone does in their job. Maybe in your job you don't have ten people sitting there waiting to correct you for some minor mistake. I think everyone should have ten people standing over them while they work and see how they do day in and day out. Back to the tipping. Every good dealer would stop immedieatly if they were paid an hourly rate by the casino. The only reason there are good dealers is because they are either a player or they like the money they make.

fatshaft

07-24-2007, 04:04 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Given that dealer quality improved dramatically when tip pooling was eliminated in AC, I think dealer quality would go down if tipping were eliminated (at least in cash games). This would be the case whether or not they made more or less. There would simply be less incentive to deal quickly.

Tournaments might be different.

[/ QUOTE ]See the UK.

fatshaft

07-24-2007, 04:07 AM

[ QUOTE ]
DS, You make a horrible assumption that the rooms/casinos will increase their dealer's pay for compensation. Why would they do that? They "may" raise the base salary (to keep from having a mass revolt), but I would lay 10:1 that it would in no way be near enough to compensate for tips lost. Sure, they may lose a few dealers, but they don't care, and will easily replace them.

[/ QUOTE ]see the UK

fatshaft

07-24-2007, 04:09 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i know i should know this, but what does QFT stand for?

[/ QUOTE ]

quoted for truth(iness).

[/ QUOTE ]LOL, really? I alwqays thought that it was Quite [censored] True /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

What does FTW mean then? I'm scared to ask now.

fatshaft

07-24-2007, 04:12 AM

NicksDad1970

07-24-2007, 03:14 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I posted a similar reply in another thread, but basically why do dealers make so much? It really makes no sense to me. They aren't doing a hard job. They are using a very small portion of their brain to count some chips and throw some cards. As far as i'm concerned if a dealer makes $12-15/hr they should be happy.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you took money away from good dealers then IMHO those dealers would quit and find something making more money. After all (IMO again) those dealers would be able to find jobs making more because they have the skills to do better. Then you would start to get dealers who aren't as good deal poker.

My example is if a good dealer makes 65k a year and then he/she is told they are going to eliminate tips and get an hourly rate (of what you suggest) of $15 dollars and hour. $600 or approx $480 after taxes a week or $31200 (approx 24960 after taxes) a year. They would eventually figure out a better source of income and quit.

Then you would get people who are willing to deal for less and odds are who don't do as good of a job as the good dealers.

But I do believe you're correct in saying (for the most part) it doesn't take someone with a lot of brains deal cards. I think the tough part of dealing is being professional when people are treating you like a second class person, when you have to remind the same person 40 million times it's their turn to act, or so many other rules.

I'm curious what type work you do for a living? I guess it doesn't matter but what would you do if your bosses decided that you should be happy working for 30% less than your current salary. My guess would be if you have a years worth of salary saved you'd probably quit and find something else to do for a living. If you're like many and live paycheck to paycheck you'd continue working in that job until you found something better, then you'd quit. I doubt your bosses would be able to find someone to do your job at your new low salary who does the job at a very high level.

brick

07-24-2007, 04:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
would reasonably good dealers who chose to remain dealers make as much or more than they do now?

[/ QUOTE ]

It would be about a $12-14/hr job with benefits is my guess.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even if it were a $16-18/hr the number of good dealers would decrease. A very good dealer who keeps the game moving (and it tipped well) can deal 40 hands an hour @ dealing 75% utilization which is $30 per hour.

Another question is "what is the optimal pay to that casinos should pay dealers in order to maximize their profit"?

My guess is that casinos wouldn't even do the math nessesary to analyze this question and would just pay the dealers whatever they could get away with. Probably $15 an hour.

Zetack

07-24-2007, 04:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I posted a similar reply in another thread, but basically why do dealers make so much? It really makes no sense to me. They aren't doing a hard job. They are using a very small portion of their brain to count some chips and throw some cards. As far as i'm concerned if a dealer makes $12-15/hr they should be happy.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

I think when they work in an environment where really large amounts of money are being slung around, you'd want their compensation to be high enough that they give a shyte about keeping their jobs. If a guys making say 40 bucks an hour or so, I think he's likely to feel like that's pretty good money. If he's making 12...well how tempting does it become to collude with one of the players somehow?

pkrporcupine

07-24-2007, 06:12 PM

I was just skimming through so I dont know if this was brought up or not. Harrahs does these "Marketing" events, basically they are for their high end slot players or something like that. They staff it with some road dealers that live in vegas full time and with break-in dealers. They are paid a flat $20/hour for a short weekends work. They had suggested to do this for the WSOP and there was an uproar of course from the "old timers" and it was squashed.
Now if I was promised a full time schedule, min 40 a week, with bennifits, then I think $20/hour is pretty good. That also depends on not having any other options too, but I would go for it and see how it goes.

Not to stir the [censored] pot but I think this is a very usefull discussion.

Donkey-Milker

07-24-2007, 08:17 PM

who is this sklansky guy?

is he a dealer?

why is his name in red?

Dranoel

07-24-2007, 08:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
who is this sklansky guy?

is he a dealer?

why is his name in red?

[/ QUOTE ]

He's your Dad... /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Wiki on the man... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Sklansky)

antipeon

07-24-2007, 08:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Everybody wins with electronic tables.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah you're totally right!! except for the dealers who will lose their jobs. wouldn't be the first time people lost their jobs due to machines doing the work for them.

fatshaft

07-26-2007, 09:23 AM

FTW? Anybody?

TroutMaskReplica

07-27-2007, 02:08 PM

[ QUOTE ]
FTW? Anybody?

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&q=ftw&btnG=Google+Search

PBear

07-27-2007, 03:56 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
would reasonably good dealers who chose to remain dealers make as much or more than they do now?

[/ QUOTE ]

It would be about a $12-14/hr job with benefits is my guess.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even if it were a $16-18/hr the number of good dealers would decrease. A very good dealer who keeps the game moving (and it tipped well) can deal 40 hands an hour @ dealing 75% utilization which is $30 per hour.

Another question is "what is the optimal pay to that casinos should pay dealers in order to maximize their profit"?

My guess is that casinos wouldn't even do the math nessesary to analyze this question and would just pay the dealers whatever they could get away with. Probably $15 an hour.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why? Do most poker players not care if their dealers are crappy? Or are casinos just really bad at making money?

I would think your original guess was right -- casinos would pay whatever they have to keep the dealer quality high enough to keep customers coming in the front door. Just like any other business.

s33w33d

07-27-2007, 04:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
That's why electronic poker tables with no human dealers is the way to go. Alot of old fogey poker players won't like it, but in 10 years it will be VERY RARE to see an actual human dealing poker in a B&M. Mark my words because they are very true. So in my humble view your question is moot. There is no need to raise the rake to compensate for dealers not making 'tips.' Just get rid of the dealers, and then you get rid of the 'tips.'

Everybody wins with electronic tables. The casino makes more money per hour. The players get more hands per hour. The players don't have to tip. The players don't have to endure the missed deals and numerous mistakes dealers are constantly making.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is insane. Simply simply insane.

JohnnyGroomsTD

07-27-2007, 05:53 PM

Has anyone here ever played on an e-table. Is there an increased risk of cheating and collusion due to a lack of presence by a 3rd party with no vested interest in the game? I would think that the risk of 2 or 3 players teams would be much higher, along with the risk of player disputes over the numerous things that happen at a poker table. Any comments??

po-Jay-to

07-27-2007, 07:17 PM

Johnny-
As a former ePoker Room Manager, I can tell you that although there is not a dealer present, a floorman is there to make decisions. Any player that believes collusion is going on can ask the floorman to observe the current table or to investigate previous hands (mucked holecard info is not available) but soft playing may be inferred from the hand history.

I may be biased to ePoker, but I never felt that a live dealer was more in tune with collusion than any of the experienced players within a game. Thus relying on a dealer to detect collusion instead of the players is not as important as the floorman excercising penalties to those caught cheating.

I am in the present minority who thinks that ePoker is better than a live dealer. Playing more hands per hours, no misdeals, no players acting out of turn, no incorrect bet/raise amounts, no dealer tipping, etc. All better for the game/player/casino. If you play to win money then you will win faster (if you lose, you will lose faster also). If you play because you enjoy the game, you will get to play twice as often (twice as many hands per hours). You will have to give up touching 2 plastic cards and tossing chips into the pot (and my favorite-- dragging a pot) but I personally don't enjoy poker because I touch cards, I enjoy poker for all its nature of competition, game theory, chance/skill, and strategic components.

JohnnyGroomsTD

07-27-2007, 08:39 PM

Not necessarily talking about soft playing. Too many types of "unethical" play could happen with no floorperson called. Also, for a live player, it would seem that a huge amount of information is lost, and some edge, bu the fact that players no longer need to do actions that are unfamiliar to them, i.e. placing chips in a pot, handling cards, etc. Poker is a human game, with human aspects that by their nature are nullified when we rely on equipment to do the job. I see the obvious benefits of e-tables, as a management member in a casino. What I don't think is practical is relying on the e-table to increase profits.

What happens when you have a major event? 300 E-tables. If you have a tech issue on one table, does it get replaced? Does the field stop playing? The tables would take away much of the flexibility and decision making inherent in tournament and live poker.

But I digress......

Bond18

07-28-2007, 10:00 AM

In my first week back in Australia, i have had the "man tipping is so stupid compared to the way you guys do things" conversation like 5 times.

IMO, just paying people better and doing away with tips is the way to go, i don't mind paying a little more rake, or more for a drink, or a cab ride, or whatever else, just so its standardized and we get rid of the sense of entitlement.