The great Muckleshoot blunder of \'05
 

They blew it on this one. This one goes to the crack casino management staff as they're the ones who're responsible for this one. The floor and dealers hated it right along with the players so this isn't a reflection on the fine job that they do.

I guess it started when someone 'thought' they hit a bad beat JP. The rooms 'known' rules were Aces full of tens beaten. Both had to have an A in their hand, both cards must play.

Well, it hit but not that way. It was something like 3 aces on the board and a PP in hand, FH beaten by quads. So the guy on the losing end goes to the rules posted on the board and lo and behold, they forgot to change the wording. Word is that they didn't pay him off. Speculation ensues about that. Other word is that he got a lawyer and took them to the gambling commision. Not sure the result. My only problem with the guy would be if he knew the board said this in advance and didn't bother to mention it to anyone. Minor, but noteable.

So they decide to change the qualifier. Why, instead of just making it more clear on the posted rules they make it tougher to qualify all around? Who knows. They decide to make it Quads beaten. Evidently they implemented this at noon on saturday without announcing it or telling any of the players. (That part the floor is to blame)

2 JP qualifiers from the previous 'known' way go off and aren't paid. Think that's good? It gets better.

The memo they post about the new qualifier is Quads beaten by quads 'only'. How about quads beaten by a str8 flush? The floor is really not looking forward to the next 2 days as they'll have to wait that long to try and get it fixed as everyone key to the process is off for the weekend.

Tuesday comes, it isn't fixed yet. Guess what happens. A str8 flush beats a quad, both cards play. No JP. Players are pissed, floor is pissed at the casino mgt. for putting them in this spot, dealer watches the table empty. No compensation at all!?! I think even a comp would do something to ease the pain. At least it's a gesture in the right direction. BTW, the JP is about 30k.

They now have it back to normal, somewhat. Quads beaten, both cards must play.

What a mess.

b

Re: The great Muckleshoot blunder of \'05
 

This story makes me feel sick to my stomach.

Re: The great Muckleshoot blunder of \'05
 

I had this conversation with with the floor saturday night. They seemed like they knew what was comming in the next few days. It's a shame they fixed it I wanted to see how close my 90K estimate was going to be. Though even adding in SF's it shouldn't change my number much.

Re: The great Muckleshoot blunder of \'05
 

Why wouldn't they just give out the BBJ? Is the money coming out of the casino coffers directly? This should be one of those things were the casino does not benefit from not paying out the BBJ.

Re: The great Muckleshoot blunder of \'05
 

When the new rules were posted, they were posted by Casino managment in a memo as Quads beaten by Quads. Obviously the upper level manager was not a poker player.

Since Quads beaten by a SF doesn't qualify the jackpot doesn't go, and after getting called on the carpet because of the rules posted before I wouldn't expect anything different to happen. We have a classic managerial over reaction, correcting the original problem would have been a $10 printing job, this one likely lost them some long term customers.

BTW bernie did the red chip jackpot petition go anywhere? I'm betting not.

Re: The great Muckleshoot blunder of \'05
 

[ QUOTE ]
BTW bernie did the red chip jackpot petition go anywhere? I'm betting not.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know what that petition was. What is it?

b

Re: The great Muckleshoot blunder of \'05
 

Jesus, what a clusterfuck. I had always thought that the Muck was the best run room I had played in (small sample size, but still). I can't imagine how I would feel if I was one of the 'winners' who didn't get paid. Ugh.

Re: The great Muckleshoot blunder of \'05
 

[ QUOTE ]
Jesus, what a clusterfuck. I had always thought that the Muck was the best run room I had played in (small sample size, but still). I can't imagine how I would feel if I was one of the 'winners' who didn't get paid. Ugh.

[/ QUOTE ]

Certainly would be enough to not go back, with all of the other card rooms around. ESPECIALLY if you're a Muck regular who has been paying into that jackpot fund for years....

Re: The great Muckleshoot blunder of \'05
 

[ QUOTE ]
I had always thought that the Muck was the best run room I had played in (small sample size, but still).

[/ QUOTE ]

It's still the best overall. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Seems most times I play elsewhere, Im thankful.

Along with the fact no other room in the world (that I know of) regularly gives back around 500k to the players throughout the year.

b

Re: The great Muckleshoot blunder of \'05
 

[ QUOTE ]
Certainly would be enough to not go back, with all of the other card rooms around. ESPECIALLY if you're a Muck regular who has been paying into that jackpot fund for years....

[/ QUOTE ]

Considering how much they give back to the players in comparison to anyone other room you'll ever play in, this, imo, would be a mistake.

Not saying it doesn't suck, however.

b