|
|
#101
11-12-2007, 06:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Canterbury drama last night
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] In over 1300 hours at CP... [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Players chatting with dealers is likely less, "I'm so cool because I know the dealer from outside of here," and likely more, "I'm a degenerate who plays here constantly, and I've gotten to know the dealers from seeing them over and over again." [/ QUOTE ] Based on how you keep telling everyone all over 2+2 about your 1300 hours, I'd bet you are one who chats with dealers... [ QUOTE ] The reason this thread is so lame is that players getting booted for repeated f-bombs or getting cut-off for being drunk is incredibly routine. [/ QUOTE ] Yet, instead of just reading my post and moving on, you've read all five pages. And posted. [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img] How lame does that make you [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] I do often chat with the dealers. I'm a friendly guy. I also chat with other players, a few of the floors, people at work, and all sorts of other folk. I read all five pages before posting, because I just found the thread. I also read all five pages b/c there's a lot of good stuff in there. Sometimes it works out that way... 
|
|
#102
11-13-2007, 05:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Canterbury drama last night
[ QUOTE ]
What does everyone think of the Canterbury in regard to service, game selection, tournaments? I'm new to the area and have no idea how the place is perceived [/ QUOTE ] I think that Canterbury is a very good poker room. The dealers are the best around by far, and the games are always good. I have been playing there for over 4 years and unfortunately have noticed things going down hill of late. It seems that more and more, common sense is being tossed out the window. They recently outlawed the use of cell phones at the table. Apparently (this is what I have heard from several people) some idiots at 2/4 attempted to collude via text message. OK. Whatever. IMO colluding via text would be almost impossible to pull off, but that is irrelevant. All it takes is for people to think it is possible, and thus the trust is broken and people will be scared to play there. OK. That is reasonable. However, tonight I saw something that was not reasonable. A player was on the phone. He was up and away from the table (like he is supposed to be), reading an email or text or doing something with his phone. He was dealt a hand. He then placed his phone down on one of those small drink tables behind him. It was still open, but several feet behind him and obviously of no use to him or anyone else. The dealer said "Your hand will be dead unless you close the phone." (Or something to that effect.) This is completely absurd. The phone may as well have been 3 miles away. Are we really going to be militant to the point of being utterly irrational? It looks like we are. Another issue that they have had of late is a recent floor addition. I never noticed this individual until about 6 months ago. A friend of mine who plays there maybe 3-5 times/month wanted to get his valet ticket validated. (At Canterbury if you are playing poker, you can give your valet ticket to a floor person and they will validate it for you.) He approaches this person and asks the person to validate it for him. The dialgoue went something like this: Dave:: Hi. Could you validate this for me. Floor: Well, are you playing poker? Dave(confused): Yes. Floor: What table? Dave(now confused and flustered): I don't know. The one over there behind the cage. Floor: OK. I'll be over there in a few minutes to verify that. There are about 873 ways that the floor could have handled that situation, but this person chose the method that says "Hey, I think you are a [censored] liar who is trying to weasel out of paying 6 bucks." Since then I have now noticed on several occasions how bad this person is at their job. For example, the other day I sat in the 30/60 must move game. The game was 5-handed, so there were 4 open seats. There was no list. I sit down and give the dealer my little MVP card which scans me in to something, but to what is still unclear. Eventually another player sits down. A while after that this same floor person comes over and asks which of us sat down first. I indicate that I did. I am then informed that they are not aware of me being there at the board, and thus I am not on the must-move list. I am told, in a condescending tone, that I need to check in at the board before sitting down. This, of course, makes no sense to me, and I say "Well, I guess I foolishly assumed that this elaborate computer system that was recently installed at each table would be able to tell them that I was in the game. Apparently I was wrong." The guy who was there AFTER me gets moved before I do. I do not care about this, and said as much. He can go ahead of me, I don't care. What was so absurd about the situation is the way it was handled. The floor easily could have said, "I realize that it may seem kinda odd that we still need to write down who came in when given this elaborate computer set-up we have, but we still would appreciate it if you check in at the board before taking a seat." How hard would it be to throw that sentence together? If can't be that hard, because I am an idiot who doesn't even have a job and I could do it. Yet this person chose the worst possible avenue. I realize that the floor have to enforce rules and is not merely a customer service agent, but customer service is still a big part of their job, and for whatever reason this floor person is simply awful at it. It blows my mind that they have yet to terminate this individual.
|
|
#103
11-13-2007, 05:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Canterbury drama last night
[ QUOTE ]
Another issue that they have had of late is a recent floor addition. I never noticed this individual until about 6 months ago. A friend of mine who plays there maybe 3-5 times/month [/ QUOTE ] huh? Who is this? Maybe I just haven't seen the new floor yet.
|
|
#104
11-13-2007, 05:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Canterbury drama last night
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Another issue that they have had of late is a recent floor addition. I never noticed this individual until about 6 months ago. A friend of mine who plays there maybe 3-5 times/month [/ QUOTE ] huh? Who is this? Maybe I just haven't seen the new floor yet. [/ QUOTE ] ignore that quote....more was supposed to follow it.
|
|
#105
11-13-2007, 06:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Canterbury drama last night
ya he isnt a new floor, hes been there for a while, and resembles a cartoon character
|
|
#106
11-13-2007, 06:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Canterbury drama last night
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Another issue that they have had of late is a recent floor addition. I never noticed this individual until about 6 months ago. A friend of mine who plays there maybe 3-5 times/month [/ QUOTE ] huh? Who is this? Maybe I just haven't seen the new floor yet. [/ QUOTE ] ignore that quote....more was supposed to follow it. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, I know. I'm asking for the rest...please?
|
|
#107
11-13-2007, 06:50 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Canterbury drama last night
[ QUOTE ]
However, tonight I saw something that was not reasonable. A player was on the phone. He was up and away from the table (like he is supposed to be), reading an email or text or doing something with his phone. He was dealt a hand. He then placed his phone down on one of those small drink tables behind him. It was still open, but several feet behind him and obviously of no use to him or anyone else. The dealer said "Your hand will be dead unless you close the phone." (Or something to that effect.) This is completely absurd. The phone may as well have been 3 miles away. Are we really going to be militant to the point of being utterly irrational? It looks like we are. [/ QUOTE ] I should qualify this by saying that another dealer mentioned that he could be suspended if someone is caught using a phone at the table during his down. So, either one of 2 things were going on in the above situation. (1) The dealer in question is just an overzealous prick without an ounce of common sense. (2) The higher-ups have horrified the dealers with threats of suspension/reprimand/demotion, etc. so much so that now dealers are hyper paranoid and thus totally irrational to the point that an open phone on a drink table 5 feet away elicits a "close that phone behind you or your hand is dead" response. Either way, this reflects badly on Canterbury and makes playing there feel like living in a police state where no one trusts anyone. My suspicion is that in this particular phone case it was more (1) than (2), as this dealer tends to be a bit of a stiff. That said, I do know that the aforementioned floor person tends to be a complete hard-ass when it comes to the phone situation. Not merely enforcing the rule, but going out of their way to "stake out" tables and individuals (dealers mostly, as they are the ones who suffer most from this stupid rule) in an effort to bust them. On several occasions I have seen this individual attempting to stealthily observe someone who may or may not be reaching for a phone. It is comical. If you want to be sneaky, you sure as hell better make sure no one can see what you're up to, otherwise you just look like an idiot who is going out of their way to bust the very people you should be trying to make happy. It's ludicrous.
|
|
#108
11-13-2007, 06:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Canterbury drama last night
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Another issue that they have had of late is a recent floor addition. I never noticed this individual until about 6 months ago. A friend of mine who plays there maybe 3-5 times/month [/ QUOTE ] huh? Who is this? Maybe I just haven't seen the new floor yet. [/ QUOTE ] ignore that quote....more was supposed to follow it. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, I know. I'm asking for the rest...please? [/ QUOTE ] go back....i added more.
|
|
#109
11-13-2007, 07:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Canterbury drama last night
OK with the story in question I was the person told to totally close my cell phone. Basically, my phone was open, but face down, on a table behind me 3 feet away. For me to view it, I would have to
a) turn my body 150-180 degrees. b) be able to see through the phone to see the screen that is face down. Canterbury says they want to "eliminate the appearance of collusion." I don't see how making me totally close the phone, as described above, is helping to achieve that. If that is the goal, what is next? Saying you can't have chips placed on your cards to protect them (because chip placement is often used in collusion)? Deciding you cannot speak at all when a hand is in play because vocalization is another way to collude? I've played at a lot of places, rules aren't necessarily a bad thing -- but blind enforcement of rules without any sense of judgment is only going to alienate your player base Canterbury, and before long when the new card club opens in the northern suburbs the players may flock to where they feel less like they're at a boarding school and more like where they're at a place that they get treated like adults.
|
|
#110
11-13-2007, 07:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Canterbury drama last night
I agree. I've always felt that Canterbury has sort of been a nanny state. The phone rule has always pissed me off. I understand the reasoning but they have been way too draconian in their enforcement of it.
I'm especially surprised to see that they did that to you, Schneids. You'd think they would exercise a little judgment there. Not that you should be treated as special but they have to know that you're on the level. I am looking forward to the new room. Hopefully they'll have the old $4 max rake and put some pressure on Canterbury to return to their former glory.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
