Ballys AC a must

[jordiepop]

I never hear anyone talk about this casino. its always taj, hilton, trop , borgata. These games are sooo sweet. The action is very loose and very fast but the players are horrible. If you can stand the smoking, Id highly suggest checking their card room out.

[MikeyG80]

It is a little dangerous though in this way. I went there one time and here is what happened within the first 20 minutes.

One guy reloaded 3 different times for $300 each re-buy. One guy almost every single hand no matter the action was raising a minimum of $55 pre flop. IT'S A 1/3 NL TABLE!!!!!!!!! Why $55 too, I have no idea? You'd have like a raise of $10, he'd make it $75. Two limpers, he'd make it $55. It was like ok it's like you had to defend your whole stack if you wanted to play a hand. And he sucked out twice when someone made a stand for all their chips. The dealer was a young women who said, excuse me if I'm out of it, I was up drinking all morning and not really paying attention. Pushed a pot to the wrong person, who by the way wasn't even in the hand. After about 45 minutes total, which was 45 minutes too long I had to just say sorry guys I have to go. That was my only experience at that casino. I played one hand after the flop and doubled up by my man for $200 and just sat and watched the circus. Maybe it was just a goofy table and not always like that. But that is all i have to go on that place.

I will agree with you on your comments, the play when I was there was absolutely horrible and unpredictable.

[xxrod17xx]

I agree the play is weak, as it is pretty much at any low limit game, but the room is old, the service is terrible and the dealers are not the best in AC by any means.

I prefer any other poker room over bally's personally

[mxp2004]

My buddy played at Ballys in AC one time. He said that, after about an hour of play, the dealer discovered that a deck being used was missing an Ace. The players went ballistic. The floor determined that everything was "ok" because all the players were operating under the same handicap. That may or may not be correct, but from a player relations standpoint alone, Ballys should have offered some kind of comp to the players at the table. It did not. That story and the smoking policy has been enough to keep me away.

[dc_publius]

I played there twice. The first time was a regular juicy game, and the second time was a very nitty game of regulars/old timers. After playing so many hours in smokey environment, I don't think it's worth it.

[AKQJ10]

That's an absolutely correct ruling. It's been discussed at length here several times and I'm not going to rehash it, but as long as you didn't have one or more players knowing the identity of the missing card, the game was fine. That holds both from a theoretical perspective and from a rules perspective.

[govman6767]

Before the poker boom. There were top notch players here.

Not everyone played at the Taj or Ceasars (The Old small room) etc.

With the poker boom and the creation of the "ite" mentality
this place has gone south.

Whiny people who cannot handle smoke. People who need armrests and would rather drink heine kin. instead of schlitz.

Remember this room USED to be top notch if you don't like it now blame one group of people "ITES"

[mxp2004]

[ QUOTE ]
That's an absolutely correct ruling. It's been discussed at length here several times and I'm not going to rehash it, but as long as you didn't have one or more players knowing the identity of the missing card, the game was fine. That holds both from a theoretical perspective and from a rules perspective.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree completely with the ruling. But I also think that the players' had a legitimate gripe, too, about the casino. I think players reasonably expect casinos to run the game as it is intended to be played, and that certainly includes the use of full decks. To this end, dealers are frequently seen counting the cards occasionally to make sure all 52 are there. Where was Ballys' standard procedure on this?

Ballys took a rake and ran a game with 51 cards. The game may have been fair, but it wasn't the game that the players had paid to participate in. Ballys should have made some gesture towards the players -- whether in the form of some food comps or rake-free play for a period of time -- to make up for its clear error in running the game.

[ace93rd]

[ QUOTE ]
That's an absolutely correct ruling. It's been discussed at length here several times and I'm not going to rehash it, but as long as you didn't have one or more players knowing the identity of the missing card, the game was fine. That holds both from a theoretical perspective and from a rules perspective.

[/ QUOTE ]

100% false. this can be proven by looking at the case where you make decision based on counting on Ace as an out...the one ace missing from deck changes all the math involved.

[punkass]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That's an absolutely correct ruling. It's been discussed at length here several times and I'm not going to rehash it, but as long as you didn't have one or more players knowing the identity of the missing card, the game was fine. That holds both from a theoretical perspective and from a rules perspective.

[/ QUOTE ]

100% false. this can be proven by looking at the case where you make decision based on counting on Ace as an out...the one ace missing from deck changes all the math involved.

[/ QUOTE ]

The point is that if no one knows that a card is missing, let alone it being a specific card, no one has an advantage over another.