Cashier situation (1 Viewer)

[QuiQuog]

I'd like permission to use this in future circus games, please.

Granted

 

[Lemonzest]

You control the bank. If you have a no loans policy simply don't allow someone to rebuy on borrowed money.

It does save arguments if you don't allow loans. Also you won't have someone not show up because they owe other players money. You also won't be asked to adjudicate if someone buys in at a later game but still owes someone money. You won't have any accusations of collusion between players that are on a loan.

Loans are just a bad idea all around. If they can't come with enough money to play the game then they shouldn't be there.

I understand your perspective in not wanting loans and the conflict they create. I am just saying it seems weird to dictate what two adults want to do with their money.

But I guess if it is made clear at the outset and everyone agrees it can work.

Not to be patronizing but I feel like by the time people are 20 or older one should have already figured out who you can lend money to and who you can't. We learned this as kids lending money at school for buying 5c candies and cokes etc. Sure every once in a while a friend may shaft you but that is a rare occasion indeed.

I would only lend money to friends. And if I loan you money and you don't pay me back we aren't friends anymore. I consider it a small price to pay to sort of vet your friends. If my friends are flakes or willing to squelch on a bet for example I am glad to cull my friend group. That is just kinda how I see it. The guys we play with I really don't every see this happening as we have played together for over 10 years and never had an issue with people constantly betting each other and lending each other money.

PS. I understand every game is different. Our group is super tight. If you have a mix of different people constantly coming and going with friends of friends showing up then stricter policies need to be implemented.

 

[QuiQuog]

A agree with the "no bank loans" sentiment. If the bank is short because they loaned someone money, someone is getting shorted that night. And if the banker goes busto, then it's not going to be the one who made the loan getting shorted. Nope, just a bad idea.

 

[QuiQuog]

You control the bank. If you have a no loans policy simply don't allow someone to rebuy on borrowed money.

It does save arguments if you don't allow loans. Also you won't have someone not show up because they owe other players money. You also won't be asked to adjudicate if someone buys in at a later game but still owes someone money. You won't have any accusations of collusion between players that are on a loan.

Loans are just a bad idea all around. If they can't come with enough money to play the game then they shouldn't be there.

This seems overbearing and oppressive.

 

[justsomedude]

I think that the issue with putting any of it on the player is that, how do you know it's his $100 that's short? I don't know how you could say he has anything to do with it. The bank remembers loaning him $200, and after a full table count the totals confirm that. So either the short happened sometime between that count and the last man that cashed out, or the bank made multiple mistakes that night. Unless you can show that someone reached in the bank and stole it, the person who is handing out chips for cash and cash for chips is the one who made the error, and therefore responsible for it.

From my reading of the story it sounded like he already knew the math was wrong at the table count, and instead of owning up or helping to correct the error, he accepted the host's mistake.

According to OP, the player thought he was $100 more short, and was surprised to hear that he wasn't...

Cashier says let's just do a quick audit and see. So everyone counts their stack quickly and it's determined that cashless is on the book for $200. Cashless one celebrates by saying, I thought it was $300, excellent it's like I just won a buyin.

Player knew exactly where he stood, and was happy taking advantage of the host's math error. For social/friendly games, I think ripping off a friend/host for 100 bucks when you know you're wrong is pretty shitty. Call me crazy.

 

[Nex]

He does have a very solid point though.
This goes beyond the point of "not your business" as it does have the potential to influence your hosted game.

 

[QuiQuog]

From my reading of the story it sounded like he already knew the math was wrong at the table count, and instead of owning up or helping to correct the error, he accepted the host's mistake.

According to OP, the player thought he was $100 more short, and was surprised to hear that he wasn't...



Player knew exactly where he stood, and was happy taking advantage of the host's math error. For social/friendly games, I think ripping off a friend/host for 100 bucks when you know you're wrong is pretty shitty. Call me crazy.

Yeah, that would be shitty, but we don't really know who was in error. We don't know other factors that may be in play. Is Cashless drunk? Has the bank had a few? How often has the bank had to be in the till? Are there any new bills that could stick together? Endless scenarios and too much we don't know.

What we do know is that the OP indicates that Cashless has only borrowed $200. The count reflects what the bank believes should be correct. He's the one keeping track. Bad on him if he's not doing his job, but we can't say that Cashless borrowed $300 when the OP says he borrowed $200.

 

[Poker Zombie]

Yeah, that would be shitty, but we don't really know who was in error. We don't know other factors that may be in play. Is Cashless drunk? Has the bank had a few? How often has the bank had to be in the till? Are there any new bills that could stick together? Endless scenarios and too much we don't know.

What we do know is that the OP indicates that Cashless has only borrowed $200. The count reflects what the bank believes should be correct. He's the one keeping track. Bad on him if he's not doing his job, but we can't say that Cashless borrowed $300 when the OP says he borrowed $200.

This is why I always count my money before walking away from the person cashing me out. I'm not worried about being stiffed a buck or two, but I'd hate to be the guy that walked off with $100 of the hosts money, just because I took the money and just stuffed it in my wallet.

 

[JTBass]

I agree with moose, players should come to the game with the amount of cash that they would feel comfortable losing. If they dont, they are already showing you that they are a little flaky. I would not be fronting people money, just a bad idea. Especially If Its getting late and people have been drinking. Drunks even though they might be friends tend to make bad decisions.

 

[SWEATER]

I don't get where a lot of folks are coming from. Borrowing people money is part of the "homegame" culture, at least where I'm from.

 

[QuiQuog]

I agree with moose, players should come to the game with the amount of cash that they would feel comfortable losing. If they dont, they are already showing you that they are a little flaky. I would not be fronting people money, just a bad idea. Especially If Its getting late and people have been drinking. Drunks even though they might be friends tend to make bad decisions.

No argument there. To loan or not to loan is a personal decision and I wouldn't fault anyone for saying no. I also agree that the bank shouldn't give out chips without equivalent cash. What I don't agree with is a rule that the house won't allow someone to rebuy on borrowed money. A personal loan between 2 adults is their own business. If player A borrows $50 from player B and wants to use that cash to buy chips, that's between them. The bank isn't their mother.

 

[jja412]

I am almost always the bank at the home games I play at, as I bring the chips . If there is ever an issue with the total at the end of the night, it's 100% on me. I've possibly been burned for small amounts because of it ($20 once, $30 another time), but I'm sure both were from carelessness on my part. Both times the people left at the end of the night offered to cover it as a group, but I refused, as both times it was quite possible I made a mistake making change from my personal bankroll. Play a 10-12 hr session at the end of a long week into the early morning hours, and mistakes can be made. That's why I keep it all on me. Then I know who to blame.

As far as loans, we have a few guys who will write checks at the end of the night, but it's all personal loans between them and another player. They are both kept around because they are great for the game, and have always paid back. But with our group, if someone runs out of cash early, people will offer them a loan (even if they are a huge nit.) I never EVER loan from the "cage". If chips are going out, cash is going in.

 

[Nex]

If player A borrows $50 from player B and wants to use that cash to buy chips, that's between them. The bank isn't their mother.

The point was not that the bank/host is trying to patronize people by disallowing rebuys with borrowed money, but trying to protect their own interests.

 

[DoubleEagle]

My observations. This is how we run our cash game.

1. If you bank and want to take an IOU from a player, consider that a personal loan. If you do take an IOU, put your own money in the bank to cover the loan you are making to the player.
2. Never play on the books. We quit that after my college days. Bad debts were constantly a problem.
3. Any player is always welcome to loan money directly to another player. It has nothing to do with the game, it is a private transaction. Just don't take chips off the table to do it.
4. Any bank shortages are the responsibility of the player running the bank. If you are not willing to accept the risk, do not be the bank. The players should not be responsible for the bank's mistakes.

We have never had a problem doing things this way over many years.

 

[MatB]

I volunteered to bank last Thursday so @k9dr could just play cards and not worry about it, I regretted that decision about midnight when i just wanted to go to sleep.. so come 5.30am i'm still there racking up chips to make sure nothing is missing.

Its the responsibility of the bank to make sure its all correct.

If i'm running the bank and you need chips, bring me cash. Borrow from another player or PayPal another player for cash, doesn't matter to me. You only get chips when i see the cash. This bank takes deposits only. No loans. No exceptions.
Part of the reason is theres always a lot going on and your trying to play cards. Mistakes happen, like the OP stated, sometimes theres a little confusion.
The OP situation is a tough break, and maybe can address the group next time and if your all buddys, maybe chip in $20 each to make the bank whole.

 

[Schmendr1ck]

I volunteered to bank last Thursday so @k9dr could just play cards and not worry about it, I regretted that decision about midnight when i just wanted to go to sleep.. so come 5.30am i'm still there racking up chips to make sure nothing is missing.

Not sure if I said thanks for that, so thanks for that.

Regarding the idea of disallowing personal loans between players at the game, I fall into the "too overbearing" camp also. My players are adults, and if they want to loan each other money I have no issue with that.

However, if the loan goes bad, it's between them and not me. If it becomes a problem and you let it bleed over into my game, you'll be home watching old Mork and Mindy reruns instead of playing at my house next time.

 

[MatB]

Not sure if I said thanks for that, so thanks for that.

Regarding the idea of disallowing personal loans between players at the game, I fall into the "too overbearing" camp also. My players are adults, and if they want to loan each other money I have no issue with that.

However, if the loan goes bad, it's between them and not me. If it becomes a problem and you let it bleed over into my game, you'll be home watching old Mork and Mindy reruns instead of playing at my house next time.

I love More and Mindy.

I was glad i could help Mark in a small way, so i didn't really regret it. (much)

But you are right.. loans between 2 grown adults is their business.

Also if i'm the bank and decide to lend you money, i wont just give you the chips, i'll physically pull the money out of my wallet (assuming theres any left) and put it in the bank.

 

[QuiQuog]

The point was not that the bank/host is trying to patronize people by disallowing rebuys with borrowed money, but trying to protect their own interests.

Maybe one could see it like that in an overbearing and oppressive way, but the banks interests should be that the bank is square at the end of the night, not whether or not player B is making a sound decision by lending his buddy a few bucks.

 

[Nex]

Maybe one could see it like that in an overbearing and oppressive way, but the banks interests should be that the bank is square at the end of the night, not whether or not player B is making a sound decision by lending his buddy a few bucks.

I agree with you on that, patronizing in the sense of "you are making a bad decision here by lending someone money for gambling" is wrong. If you decide for yourself you won't do it, that's okay, but disallowing others to do it just because you think it is a bad idea in general is not good.

Patronizing to protect the interests of the host and the other players at the table (danger of collusion, danger of people not showing up because they still owe money to someone and don't have it yet, as was mentioned) however I think is absolutely sound.

Leave people their freedom in what they do, but only to the point where they negatively interfere with your own freedom and the freedom of others.

 

[Mental Nomad]

I don’t recall ever seeing the Bank being long in my years of playing.

My bank's been long at least twice... it's very rarely off.

I check all ins and outs twice against someone else - by which I mean someone else has to count and validate whatever I'm doing. (Old casino habits.) People got into the habit quickly, because I'd hold up the game. "Here's your fifty; somebody count it." If they say, "whatever, I trust you, I can't count," I put the chips back on the table and someone else counts it. Every transaction gets checked by two people. (And yes, they catch my errors, because yes, I make them.)

The bank never loans money. If someone wants a loan, they borrow from someone else, who puts into the bank. The bank is always whole; there's never a debt. Between players is between players. There's never a chip out of the rack not backed by money in the bank.

Very, very rarely, we run into this: a big mismatch between cash/Venmo inputs and cash/Venmo outputs which exceeds my personal cash/Venmo balance on hand. Usually someone else is willing to do a cash-for-Venmo swap to sort it out and then I can pay out the last person in their desired form. I've gone into a 25c game with $200 cash in my pocket, had a big winning night, and left with $20. (Huge Venmo gain.) Or vice-versa... I've had a losing night and doubled the dollars in my pocket.

 

[Lemonzest]

I do think restricting others from lending is overbearing.

But OTOH I can see it working. If the host just lets everyone know... "hey we have had several issues in the past so no one is allowed to lend. if you want to play tonight bring 3-4 buyins because no lending is allowed".

If all the players know the deal up front it could actually lead to a smoother game. This will especially be true if there are lots of random players coming and going.

I personally would not institute a rule like this but I get it.

 

[rjbf65]

I check all ins and outs twice against someone else - by which I mean someone else has to count and validate whatever I'm doing. (Old casino habits.) People got into the habit quickly, because I'd hold up the game. "Here's your fifty; somebody count it." If they say, "whatever, I trust you, I can't count," I put the chips back on the table and someone else counts it. Every transaction gets checked by two people. (And yes, they catch my errors, because yes, I make them.)

I’m a big fan of this approach. Keeps everyone sort of accountable for the bank being right. And puts less pressure on the banker.

 

[Amarena Fabbri]

The host is responsible for correctly selling and redeeming chips, as well as for the security of the game. Unfortunately, the host has to eat the $100 discrepancy. Tough lesson to learn, but you can bet that the book will be kept up to date in a timely fashion in the future. Good luck.

 

[TheBigTater]

The bank only sells chips for cash money. No credit extended from the bank. Personal loans between players is, between players, not a problem. But any chips sold from the bank require cash (no IOU's).

 

[QuiQuog]

The bank only sells chips for cash money. No credit extended from the bank. Personal loans between players is, between players, not a problem. But any chips sold from the bank require cash (no IOU's).

Exactly. If the banker is giving chips out on credit, I would consider that a personal loan between the two of them and he would have to put the money in the till when chips come out.