vpFREE2 Forums

The Wizard of Odds: Las Vegas Casino Blacklist

#1

http://wizardofodds.com/casinos/vegasblacklist.html

<a href="http://wizardofodds.com/casinos/vegasblacklist.html">
http://wizardofodds.com/casinos/vegasblacklist.html</a>

···

************************************************

This link is posted for informational purposes and doesn't
constitute an endorsement or approval of the linked article's
content by vpFREE. Any discussion of the article must be done
in accordance with vpFREE's rules and policies.

************************************************

#2

Part of me feels sorry for him not getting his
winnings, but the other part of me wonders why someone
would forget about a $2,900 win. Afterall, rules are
rules. Someday I hope I have enough money not to care
about such a "small" win.

http://wizardofodds.com/casinos/vegasblacklist.html

<a

href="http://wizardofodds.com/casinos/vegasblacklist.html">

http://wizardofodds.com/casinos/vegasblacklist.html</a>

···

--- vpFae <vpFae@Cox.net> wrote:

************************************************

This link is posted for informational purposes and
doesn't
constitute an endorsement or approval of the linked
article's
content by vpFREE. Any discussion of the article
must be done
in accordance with vpFREE's rules and policies.

************************************************

      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

#3

I agree with Michael, that the 60 day expiration is just a way for the
casino to rip off customers.

Although If I were him, I wouldn't have admitted to the online world
that I "lost track of time" :slight_smile: I'd have to say I "misplaced" the
ticket.

I wonder how much is added to the Strat sports book yearly profit from
tickets that go unredeemed?

Mac
www.CasinoCamper.com

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, a k <andyk711@...> wrote:

Part of me feels sorry for him not getting his
winnings, but the other part of me wonders why someone
would forget about a $2,900 win. Afterall, rules are
rules. Someday I hope I have enough money not to care
about such a "small" win.

#4

The event date was 9/22/07 and the winning ticket expired
60 days later. It says right on the ticket, "Sports tickets are
valid for 60 days after the event."

The ticket is no INVALID. Period.

Why should the casino should honor an invalid ticket FOUR
MONTHS after the event date? Should they honor a ticket
six months later? A year later? Two years?

At what point do you say it's enough time?

The customer is responsible for reading and understanding
the information and limitations printed on the ticket. Period.

The casino should not honor an invalid ticket.

···

On 1/31/08, vpFae <vpFae@cox.net> wrote:

http://wizardofodds.com/casinos/vegasblacklist.html

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#5

The terms on the Strat's ticket are an absolute joke. Those familiar
with sports betting in Nevada will confirm that some books have terms
of six months for payment but MOST have ONE YEAR stated. I can't
think of ANY other books that have 60 days on them for sports bets
(pari mutual wagers do have a shorter term due to the nature of the
wager).

The Strat's 60 day period was made for no other reason but to try to
increase their profits by refusing to honor tickets. The Strat is
far from a locals joint, which means the vast majority of their
wagers are booked by visitors (and low end visitors at that). What
% of this Vegas visitor returns to town every two months? I'd
venture a guess and say it's quite small. Sure, patrons can mail in
a ticket but how many people will go through that effort for a wager
under a bill? Again, given this demographic, I'd say not too many.
It's nothing but a bush league move based on casino greed.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Curtis Rich" <LGTVegas@...> wrote:

The event date was 9/22/07 and the winning ticket expired
60 days later. It says right on the ticket, "Sports tickets are
valid for 60 days after the event."

The ticket is no INVALID. Period.

Why should the casino should honor an invalid ticket FOUR
MONTHS after the event date? Should they honor a ticket
six months later? A year later? Two years?

At what point do you say it's enough time?

The customer is responsible for reading and understanding
the information and limitations printed on the ticket. Period.

The casino should not honor an invalid ticket.

#6

I absolutely agree with you, Hockey. I have never heard of a Sport's
Book with this outrageous rule or with this type nasty attitude
towards their customers. IMO, if records to back up the win are
still available, there shouldn't be ANY time limit on collecting on
a valid winning bet.

Unless the casino never intended to pay off on their losing bets,
it's actually advantageous to them to allow the player all the time
he/she would like to take. After all, the casino has free use of
the money that the player won during that time.

The fact that the Stratsphere did not honor the Wizard of Odds'
winning ticket, should be fair warning to all players to avoid
patronizing that casino.

I believe that the same premise should apply to ALL gift cards, TITO
paper etc. I can't imagine any justification for not paying the
customer, or letting the customer redeem the full amount that was on
the ticket or gift card.
~Babe~

···

=================================================
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "hockeystl" <vegasstl@...> wrote:

The terms on the Strat's ticket are an absolute joke. Those
familiar with sports betting in Nevada will confirm that some books
have terms of six months for payment but MOST have ONE YEAR stated.
I can't think of ANY other books that have 60 days on them for
sports bets (pari mutual wagers do have a shorter term due to the
nature of the wager).

The Strat's 60 day period was made for no other reason but to try to
increase their profits by refusing to honor tickets........

In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Curtis Rich" <LGTVegas@> wrote:

The event date was 9/22/07 and the winning ticket expired
60 days later. It says right on the ticket, "Sports tickets are
valid for 60 days after the event."

The ticket is no INVALID. Period........etc., etc., etc.

#7

Add MGM grand to your list for refusing to pay out on a $5000 chip....

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2007/mar/09/chips-no-longer-good-cash/

#8

Why should the casino should honor an invalid ticket FOUR
MONTHS after the event date? Should they honor a ticket
six months later? A year later? Two years?

At what point do you say it's enough time?

Oh, I don't know--how about forever???

Let's put this into perspective. I owe you three thousand bucks.
However, we live in different cities. So I tell you that you will
have to submit a claim to me for this money I owe you, and if you
don't do so within sixty days, too bad---you're S.O.L. Go away, and
don't bother me. If for whatever reason, you didn't attempt to
collect this LEGITIMATE debt by then, and I told you, too bad, I
ain't payin' ya, would YOU be happy? Would YOU just walk away and
say, oh well???

The key concept is that the deadline on the ticket is NOT, repeat
NOT, a contract. The wagering transaction occurs before the customer
reads the resulting ticket (which is only a receipt, NOT a
contract). The only way that the time restriction would be valid is
if it were EXPLICITLY EXPLAINED to the customer BEFORE the wager was
placed and accepted. A material condition of a contract that is not
spelled out at the time the contract is made is VOID.

Now, this would be upheld in any court of law EXCEPT on the Planet
of Nevada, first, because it's the LAW, and second, because it's the
decent and fair result. In Nevada, however Gaming Control and/or the
courts will not protect you, as the Wiz's experience shows. All we
can do is stay away from any casino that does this sort of thing to
people. Which, by the way, begs the question:

Is welching and thereby saving three grand WORTH the ill will that
doing so engenders, and will engender as word spreads???

#9

Then, don't bet there.

···

On 2/2/08, hockeystl <vegasstl@charter.net> wrote:

The terms on the Strat's ticket are an absolute joke.
<SNIP>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#10

Will there ever be a casino in Vegas that would make jackessiebabe
and tralfamidorgooglycrackers happy by having NO EXPIRATION DATE
on their sports tickets and TITO vouchers?

I seriously doubt it.

···

On 2/2/08, jackessiebabe <jackessiebabe@yahoo.com> wrote:

I absolutely agree with you, Hockey. I have never heard of a Sport's
Book with this outrageous rule or with this type nasty attitude
towards their customers. IMO, if records to back up the win are
still available, there shouldn't be ANY time limit on collecting on
a valid winning bet.
<SNIP>
I believe that the same premise should apply to ALL gift cards, TITO
paper etc. I can't imagine any justification for not paying the
customer, or letting the customer redeem the full amount that was on
the ticket or gift card.
~Babe~

On 2/2/08, tralfamidorgooglycrackers <tralfamidorgooglycrackers@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Why should the casino should honor an invalid ticket FOUR
> MONTHS after the event date? Should they honor a ticket
> six months later? A year later? Two years?
>
> At what point do you say it's enough time?

Oh, I don't know--how about forever???
<SNIP>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#11

Hey, tralfamidorgooglycrackers! This is fun! :slight_smile:

You wrote: "....I owe you three thousand bucks. However, we
live in different cities. So I tell you that you will have to submit
a claim to me for this money I owe you, and if you don't do so
within sixty days, too bad---you're S.O.L. Go away, and don't
bother me. If for whatever reason, you didn't attempt to collect
this LEGITIMATE debt by then, and I told you, too bad, I ain't
payin' ya, would YOU be happy? Would YOU just walk away
and say, oh well???"

My replies
1) If I didn't agree to the terms, I wouldn't have made the bet.
2) If I did agree to the terms, I would have honored them.
3) If I failed to honor the terms, I would be S.O.L.

You wrote: "The key concept is that the deadline on the
ticket is NOT, repeat NOT, a contract. The wagering transaction
occurs before the customer reads the resulting ticket (which
is only a receipt, NOT a contract). The only way that the time
restriction would be valid is if it were EXPLICITLY EXPLAINED
to the customer BEFORE the wager was placed and accepted.
A material condition of a contract that is not spelled out at the
time the contract is made is VOID."

My replies:
1) First you state that the ticket is a receipt, NOT a contract.
But, then you go on to state that the "contract" is void because
a material condition of the "contract" was not spelled out at the
time the "contract" was made.
2) I'm not as sure as you are that sports books do not inform
customers of their policies before processing wagers.

You wrote: "Is welching and thereby saving three grand WORTH
the ill will that doing so engenders, and will engender as word
spreads???"

My reply:
Apparently, Stratosphere thinks it is. But, if I owned a casino,
I would not.

Curtis

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#12

Coulda; shoulda; woulda revisited. The Wiz screwed up. Now, by using
the threat of negative publicity on a well-liked site, he wants
someone else to assume the blame for his lack of attentiveness. There
was a token disclaimer when the Wizard suggested that he intended to
move the discussion to another site. But he didn't, did he? What he
did do was to use the popularity of his home website in an attempt to
bludgeon the Stratosphere into paying.

Nothing against the Wizard of Odds, but he's wrong. By his reasoning,
when I miss a vp hold I should inform management and demand that they
pay me for the cards that I would have picked had I been alert. What
about a craps game when I have the premonition that a seven will roll
next and wipe out my place bets, but I let the bets up anyway because
I'm distracted? Should the dealer negate my loss by acknowledging my
first intent when I mention it four days later?

There is a time limit placed on almost all wagers and contests. State
lotteries come to mind. Whether the time restriction is for 60 days,
60 years, or 60 hours is immaterial. Rules were established by the
casino. Rules were broken by the bettor. Why is the casino the bad
guy for following the rules?

I believe that the only negative public they will engender will be
among folks who don't pay attention to their bets and want casino
rules to apply to everyone, save them.

#13

You wrote: "The key concept is that the deadline on the
ticket is NOT, repeat NOT, a contract. The wagering transaction
occurs before the customer reads the resulting ticket (which
is only a receipt, NOT a contract). The only way that the time
restriction would be valid is if it were EXPLICITLY EXPLAINED
to the customer BEFORE the wager was placed and accepted.
A material condition of a contract that is not spelled out at the
time the contract is made is VOID."

My replies:
1) First you state that the ticket is a receipt, NOT a contract.
But, then you go on to state that the "contract" is void because
a material condition of the "contract" was not spelled out at the
time the "contract" was made.

Yo Curtis buddy,

OK, I'll SPELL IT OUT. Yes indeedy, I did state that the TICKET (and
therefore anything printed on it) is a RECEIPT, not a contract.
The "contract" I was referring to was the contract THAT INVOLVED THE
CASINO'S ACCEPTANCE OF THE WAGER, i.e., the physical transaction and
the recording by the casino of the amount and type of the bet. This
contract exists independent of the ticket. Furthermore, I did not
state that a CONTRACT is void when a material condition is not
explicitly spelled out, only that THAT MATERIAL CONDITION IS VOID.
So the wager stands, as does the casino's obligation to pay it, but
the time restriction is invalid. Q.E.D.

In the future, feel free to disagree or criticize, but please try to
restrict those disagreements or criticisms to things that I actually
SAID.

#14

You wrote: "The key concept is that the deadline on the
ticket is NOT, repeat NOT, a contract. The wagering transaction
occurs before the customer reads the resulting ticket (which
is only a receipt, NOT a contract). The only way that the time
restriction would be valid is if it were EXPLICITLY EXPLAINED
to the customer BEFORE the wager was placed and accepted.
A material condition of a contract that is not spelled out at the
time the contract is made is VOID."

My replies:
1) First you state that the ticket is a receipt, NOT a contract.
But, then you go on to state that the "contract" is void because
a material condition of the "contract" was not spelled out at the
time the "contract" was made.

Yo Curtis buddy,

OK, I'll SPELL IT OUT. Yes indeedy, I did state that the TICKET (and
therefore anything printed on it) is a RECEIPT, not a contract.
The "contract" I was referring to was the contract THAT INVOLVED THE
CASINO'S ACCEPTANCE OF THE WAGER, i.e., the physical transaction and
the recording by the casino of the amount and type of the bet. This
contract exists independent of the ticket. Furthermore, I did not
state that a CONTRACT is void when a material condition is not
explicitly spelled out, only that THAT MATERIAL CONDITION IS VOID.
So the wager stands, as does the casino's obligation to pay it, but
the time restriction is invalid. Q.E.D.

In the future, feel free to disagree or criticize, but please try to
restrict those disagreements or criticisms to things that I actually
SAID.

#15

<<There is a time limit placed on almost all wagers and contests. State
lotteries come to mind. Whether the time restriction is for 60 days,
60 years, or 60 hours is immaterial. Rules were established by the
casino. Rules were broken by the bettor. Why is the casino the bad
guy for following the rules? >>

Because they are welshing on a bet.

Cogno

#16

brentevans73 wrote:

Nothing against the Wizard of Odds, but he's wrong. By his reasoning, when I miss a vp hold I should inform management and demand that they pay me for the cards that I would have picked had I been alert. What about a craps game when I have the premonition that a seven will roll next and wipe out my place bets, but I let the bets up anyway because I'm distracted? Should the dealer negate my loss by acknowledging my first intent when I mention it four days later?

I think the analogy above is flawed. At the Strat sports book, the guy didn't make an unintended bet and lose, rather the casino made up a non-standard rule affecting the payout and tried to make it part of the "agreement" by notifying him of the rule only after the bet was booked. Sort of like the laws on credit card "agreements" that allow the bank to change the rules and interest rates retroactively on all your past purchases whenever they want.

The situation at the Strat is more similar to the following:

After inserting a Benji on your favorite DDB machine, you hit quad aces with a kicker. Excitedly, you hit the cash out button and receive your ticket. When you reach the cashier, the cashier points to your ticket and says, "I can't cash this: see here on the printed ticket it says it is not valid in leap years. Since this is now 2008, we don't have to pay you until next year, at which time the ticket will have expired. Rules are rules. You agreed to our rules by placing your bet. NEXT!!!"

Dave

#17

The situation at the Strat is more similar to the following:

After inserting a Benji on your favorite DDB machine, you hit quad aces
with a kicker. Excitedly, you hit the cash out button and receive your
ticket. When you reach the cashier, the cashier points to your ticket
and says, "I can't cash this: see here on the printed ticket it says it
is not valid in leap years. Since this is now 2008, we don't have to
pay you until next year, at which time the ticket will have expired.
Rules are rules. You agreed to our rules by placing your bet. NEXT!!!"

Dave

This places too little faith in the state of Nevada. Most people who
make sports bets are aware that the tickets expire, anyone who isn't
aware of their expiration (which is standard, as I've made hundreds of
sports bets and have never had one that didn't have an expiration
date) and makes a bet can read about in on the back of the ticket, and
the Gaming Commission has decided that these expiration dates are
reasonable, as they wouldn't in your "leap year" example."

#18

You can't "welsh on a bet" when the bet is no longer valid.

I was in a video poker tournament a couple of weeks ago at
Orleans. Any winnings not picked up immediately after the
tournament 'awards ceremony' was sent to the casino cage.
Any winnings not picked up from the cage within 24 hours
was forfeited and Orleans kept the money.

All of this was explained in writing in the tournament rules
and again verbally by the tournament emcee.

Is Orleans "welshing on a bet" when it keeps tournament
winnings that are not claimed within their specified time limit?

Nope.

···

On 2/2/08, Cogno Scienti <cognoscienti@gmail.com> wrote:

<<There is a time limit placed on almost all wagers and contests.
State lotteries come to mind. Whether the time restriction is for 60
days, 60 years, or 60 hours is immaterial. Rules were established
by the casino. Rules were broken by the bettor. Why is the casino
the bad guy for following the rules? >>

Because they are welshing on a bet.

Cogno

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#19

If people paid to enter this tournament I would say no, the Orleans is not
within its rights to claim forfeit of the winnings. That money was put up by
the entrants and belongs to them.

If it was a freeroll tournament they have more ethical leeway in my mind.
Still, it doesn't seem to me to serve any valid business purpose and can do
nothing more than irritate good customers.

In the Wiz's situation the Stratosphere sportsbook refused to pay a winning
bet on a legal technicality. There are many situations in which a gambler
has no legal recourse to collect a winning bet. That does not change the
fact that they welshed. Any ethical casino should pay a winning bet any time
it is claimed.

Cogno

···

-----Original Message-----
From: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vpF…@…com] On Behalf Of
Luke Fuller
Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2008 5:03 PM
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] The Wizard of Odds: Las Vegas Casino Blacklist

You can't "welsh on a bet" when the bet is no longer valid.

I was in a video poker tournament a couple of weeks ago at
Orleans. Any winnings not picked up immediately after the
tournament 'awards ceremony' was sent to the casino cage.
Any winnings not picked up from the cage within 24 hours
was forfeited and Orleans kept the money.

All of this was explained in writing in the tournament rules
and again verbally by the tournament emcee.

Is Orleans "welshing on a bet" when it keeps tournament
winnings that are not claimed within their specified time limit?

Nope.

On 2/2/08, Cogno Scienti <cognoscienti@gmail.com> wrote:

<<There is a time limit placed on almost all wagers and contests.
State lotteries come to mind. Whether the time restriction is for 60
days, 60 years, or 60 hours is immaterial. Rules were established
by the casino. Rules were broken by the bettor. Why is the casino
the bad guy for following the rules? >>

Because they are welshing on a bet.

Cogno

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm

Yahoo! Groups Links

#20

tralfamidorgooglycrackers:

I apparently misunderstood one statement of yours
("A material condition of a contract that is not spelled out
at the time the contract is made is VOID") and you
corrected me.

Now that you have clarified that one point, would you
care to respond to any of the other comments I made?

To refresh your memory, I said....

Re: Your "$3,000/60 days" argument
If I didn't agree to the terms, I wouldn't have made the bet.
If I did agree to the terms, I would have honored them.
If I failed to honor the terms, I would be S.O.L.

Re: Your argument that the time restriction would be valid
if it were EXPLICITLY EXPLAINED to the customer BEFORE
the wager was placed and accepted
I'm not as sure as you are that sports books do not inform
customers of their policies before processing wagers.

Re: Your questioning if welshing (and saving three grand) is
worth the ill will that doing so engenders
Apparently, Stratosphere thinks it is. But, if I owned a casino,
I would not.

Maybe you didn't respond because you know I'm right and
you're wrong? :wink: And, the only thing you could do is point
out that I misunderstood one sentence? :slight_smile: LOL!

Yeah, like I said before, this is FUN!

Curtis

···

On 2/2/08, tralfamidorgooglycrackers <tralfamidorgooglycrackers@yahoo.com> wrote:

> You wrote: "The key concept is that the deadline on the
> ticket is NOT, repeat NOT, a contract. The wagering transaction
> occurs before the customer reads the resulting ticket (which
> is only a receipt, NOT a contract). The only way that the time
> restriction would be valid is if it were EXPLICITLY EXPLAINED
> to the customer BEFORE the wager was placed and accepted.
> A material condition of a contract that is not spelled out at the
> time the contract is made is VOID."
>
> My replies:
> 1) First you state that the ticket is a receipt, NOT a contract.
> But, then you go on to state that the "contract" is void because
> a material condition of the "contract" was not spelled out at the
> time the "contract" was made.

Yo Curtis buddy,

OK, I'll SPELL IT OUT. Yes indeedy, I did state that the TICKET (and
therefore anything printed on it) is a RECEIPT, not a contract.
The "contract" I was referring to was the contract THAT INVOLVED THE
CASINO'S ACCEPTANCE OF THE WAGER, i.e., the physical transaction and
the recording by the casino of the amount and type of the bet. This
contract exists independent of the ticket. Furthermore, I did not
state that a CONTRACT is void when a material condition is not
explicitly spelled out, only that THAT MATERIAL CONDITION IS VOID.
So the wager stands, as does the casino's obligation to pay it, but
the time restriction is invalid. Q.E.D.

In the future, feel free to disagree or criticize, but please try to
restrict those disagreements or criticisms to things that I actually
SAID.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]