"henryitkin" wrote...
In his specific case, there were rules allowing paying
of jackpots (W2-G's) when playing on a spouse's card. This is
undeniable because he has been playing and qualifying both himself
and Shirley month after month for years! That alone sets up a
standing rule and makes the precedent that Station Casinos has no
formal objection to spouses having this type of activity.
The two situations do seem different to me such that the first doesn't establish a precedent for the second.
For the most part, certainly in Nevada, there's no requirement to have a slot card when making a wager on a machine. You pay money for your bet, and you get paid back on the basis of that bet. A slot card, if any, is a side-channel tracking system, but it has no influence on the machine wager. I think this topic has been hashed out many times here on vpFREE, with the same consistent conclusion.
In my mind, the difference with the Jumbo Jackpot situation is that the player is not specifically wagering on the Jumbo Jackpot. The JJ is a promotional scheme specifically related to the slot card system itself. So the casino wouldn't be reneging on a wager if they refused to pay because the player broke the rules of the JJ contest.
At any rate, I'm glad they did pay Bob -- and congrats on the hit, Bob.
--Joe