Suppose Tipping Poker Dealers Was Illegal

[David Steele]

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]

[ 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]

[ 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]

[ 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]

[ 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 asks "1/2NL game at my B&M beatable? (Crown Casino, Melbourne, Australia" and in the OP indicates a 10% rake upto $6 in $1/2NL and a $5 hourly time charge.

[gsolis]

[ 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]

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]

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

[Mano]

[ 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]

[ 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.