Nolan Dallas confiscated flag (5k chip)

[MicroBob]

This is a ridiculous conversation now which is kind of frustrating and sad because the Nolan Dalla issue is an interesting and important one imo.

Elliot is wrong and ElD is right.
Why wouldn't they want you to color-up to purple?
And, as ElD said, who said anything about HAVING to color-up? Of course you don't have to and I don't think anybody said that you did.

I also have been asked to color up black-chips to purple at the BJ table.

Along with wanting to avoid fills another reason they want you to color up is to update their records on how much you are up or down.
When you leave the table they like to think they are looking at EXACTLY how much you have on or lost and, in most cases, they are.


I am also guessing that while still playing there is a greater chance you will throw out a higher-denomiation chip instead of bothering to break it down.
I've seen some players do this. They get some of their red colored up to green. Then when they run out of red they just up their bets to the remaining green chips almost because they are lazy and that's all they have left.

[cardcounter0]

What's with all the purple, they always want to jump me up right to Yellow.
[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[NajdorfDefense]

[ QUOTE ]
e,

I get asked to color up black chips all the time in Vegas pits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Greens, blacks, oranges, purples. Always get asked to color up, like 100.9% of the time.

[pete fabrizio]

I think a lot of people in this thread don't understand that there is a big difference between small denomination chips and big denomination chips. Small chips get passed around like air and it's no big deal, b/c even if someone manages to steal a cart full of them, you're only talking about tens of thousands of dollars. But big chips, especially 5k and above, are like gemstones. Imagine if just a few racks of 5k chips were stolen, that could be a hit of millions of dollars to a casino. If they have to honor any 5k chip they come across without regard for origin, they would have no recourse. Furthermore, even if such a theft has never happened, it still makes sense for them to have this rule, because if they didn't, it would significantly increase the incentive to steal from them. It would make casino chips much more desirable to steal than diamonds, since the casinos would act as their own fence, while paying 100% of the value of the stolen property.

I would even go so far as to say that, as a player and frequenter of casinos, I like these rules for several reasons: 1) I'm more comfortable with the 5k chips casinos give me b/c I don't have to worry about getting mugged in the bathroom for them; 2) It means that the places I spend a good deal of my time aren't as good of targets for high risk/high reward thieves like bank robbers; 3) It keeps things relatively smooth and informal in the casino. When I cash out I CAN color up easily, and when I or someone else wants chips there's always some guy with tons of them standing around. Moreover, I can walk in and out of a casino without having to show ID or sign in and without being frisked or interrogated. If high denomination chips were "as good as cash," I would expect casinos would have much stricter security measures in place to prevent theft or fraud, and those could be a big nuisance to those of us who are legit.

I think Dalla's best recourse isn't media or petitions and stuff, it's to contact the person who gave him the chip and establish a legitimate chain of custody going back to whoever obtained the chip in the first place. Assuming it checks out, I'm sure they will eventually give him his money.

[fyodor]

[ QUOTE ]
1) I'm more comfortable with the 5k chips casinos give me b/c I don't have to worry about getting mugged in the bathroom for them

[/ QUOTE ]

For this to be true you have to be under the assumption that the would be thiefs are aware of the rule. I wouldn't count on that.

[pete fabrizio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1) I'm more comfortable with the 5k chips casinos give me b/c I don't have to worry about getting mugged in the bathroom for them

[/ QUOTE ]

For this to be true you have to be under the assumption that the would be thiefs are aware of the rule. I wouldn't count on that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I should have said "don't have to worry as much."

[Voltaire]

[ QUOTE ]
I think Dalla's best recourse isn't media or petitions and stuff, it's to contact the person who gave him the chip and establish a legitimate chain of custody going back to whoever obtained the chip in the first place. Assuming it checks out, I'm sure they will eventually give him his money.

[/ QUOTE ]

Love this, especially the "Assuming it checks out" part.

I have a possibly silly question that nobody has asked: what is the probability that the chip is a counterfeit? And would the manager at the cage be able to tell? If not, this is another reason for demanding a chain of custody.

[Guthrie]

Had he plunked the 5K chip down on a table, I'm sure the MGM would have gladly accepted his action.

[Dan Druff]

Some of you are ascribing a surpising amount of noble intention to both the MGM Grand and casinos in general.

Casinos exist for one reason and one reason only: To take your money. All of their marketing, operating procedures, and rules have that goal in mind.

Mr. Dalla was the victim of after-the-fact verification.

A 19-year-old will always be asked for ID after winning a big jackpot, and will lose the money if he can't prove himself to be 21. On the flip side, this same teenager can't recover gambling losses if he suddenly says he's underage -- even if he can prove such losses really occurred.

Known card counters are often allowed to continue playing blackjack if they start to tilt and play poorly, but are ejected as soon as they get their head back on straight.

Similarly, casinos are happy to find reasons to avoid paying you when you bring your chips to the cage. It's the only way they ever have to part with money -- when they actually exchange their chips for U.S. currency. As someone already pointed out, the casino would not have given him a hard time about the origin of the 5k chip had he sat at a blackjack table and asked for change. Why? Because he's using the $5,000 to continue playing games at a disadvantage against the house -- exactly what they want him to do.

It should not be up to the player to know the obscure rule that they need to "prove" their play in order to cash out. There are no signs anywhere on the premises stating this, nor is it common knowledge. Players are led to believe that it is their right to hoard their chips for a year and return to cash them later, if they so desire. It is also NOT a requirement to have one's play tracked. Therefore, it should be perfectly legal to walk into the MGM, cash out a $5000 chip, and say that you played last year and never got tracked. Tracking is a marketing tool for the casino. It should never be a requirement to be able to get paid.

Now, let's look at Dalla's case. He didn't say that he played a long time ago and wasn't tracked. He probably would have ultimately gotten paid in such a case, albeit after somewhat of a hassle. His mistake was admitting that he received the chip from someone else -- thus allowing MGM to invoke the "no using chips for payment of other debts" rule.

However, MGM can't have their cake and eat it, too. If their stance is that the chip belongs to someone else, they should ask Mr. Dalla for that party's contact information, and do their best to locate and pay that individual. At that point, Nolan could collect the $5000 back from the guy he got the chip from, provided that the man isn't a complete scumbag. Under NO CIRCUMSTANCES should the MGM Grand be the ones to ultimately end up with that $5,000.

This is somewhat of a personal subject to me, because I have also found myself hassled at times when cashing my chips here in Las Vegas. In one instance, I played blackjack at Caesar's, and immediately walked to the cage with $2700 in chips. I did not give my card or ID to get tracked, but I did tell them where I had played. Unfortunately, because I couldn't give them an exact location of the pit I played at (Caesar's is big and rather confusing), they didn't want to pay me. The moron cashier kept telling me that I shouldn't have played without being tracked, and how she might not be able to pay me. After arguing for a few minutes, I simply said, "You have two choices at this point. You can get one of your people to walk with me and I'll find the pit where I just played and I'll never come back here again, OR you can pay me my $2700 and end this stupid discussion. Your choice." I got paid, but at the time I was surprised that they were making such a big deal -- especially for something as small as $2700.

Bottom line: Casinos need to decide one way or the other regarding their policy with chips. If they will allow you to take them off premises and hoard them, they need to honor all cashouts. If they want to track where every big chip has gone, they need to post clearly visible "YOU MUST CASH OUT OR FACE POSSIBLE CHIP CONFISCATION" warnings at all exits.

[SGspecial]

Great post. I suspect the only way casinos will ever abide by such a policy however is if it's legislated against them or they are successfully sued.