Host can't pay out everyone, what to do? (3 Viewers)

[Bluegrass Poker]

Are other winners getting paid (big winners) outside of yourself?

It may suck to not collect but why does host owe anyone — no rake, he’s not making money. Granted if these are all friends I’ve seen people go on payment plans. If strangers are in the game then they should definitely pay the winners out.

Are you seriously asking why the host is responsible? He was in charge of the game; he collects the money, gives out chips, does rebuys and cashes out at end of night. Since he is only one dealing with everyone’s money he is responsible. period. Your game , you’re responsibility to make everyone whole.

 

[RagingAZN]

It's the host responsibility, regardless of whether he takes a rake or not.

I host myself and always make sure I have enough cash on hand to handle electronic transactions. If there are more electronic transactions than there is cash on hand, I don't allow anymore.

Even though my group is mainly friends and long-time regulars, you can never be too careful when money is involved.

 

[Venturalvn]

Yeah this almost seems like rhetorical question. You know what to do - hound the host until you get paid, and obviously never go back there again.

In a situation like this no matter how much edge you have, winning and not being able to collect as you cash out is not a substitute for a straight game.

 

[DietCornSyrup]

First off, I wouldn't go back knowing that the host is willing to let players bet monopoly money against real currency. Credit needs to be backed by someone, if no one knows where the dollars are coming from at the end of the night then don't deal the chips, simple as.
As for what you're owed, I'd accept that I'm never getting that money and move on with my life. At least you didn't lose money on the endeavor.

 

[BPTDirector]

Credit extended by the host should be paid by the host. No question that BL owes the host, not you. You did not know of or extend the credit. Friendship not withstanding right is right.

 

[allforcharity]

Isn't this the time to hire someone muscle?

Kidding, kidding...mostly

 

[l33tf0b]

Are you seriously asking why the host is responsible? He was in charge of the game; he collects the money, gives out chips, does rebuys and cashes out at end of night. Since he is only one dealing with everyone’s money he is responsible. period. Your game , you’re responsibility to make everyone whole.

What to do… just be amicable and wait to get paid. I’m not saying the host is right but in our circle of friends - debt gets passed around. I didn’t catch that OP was added as a new player — so yes he should be collecting from host if host didn’t set up buyin restrictions.

Normally amongst friends we will all ask does everyone agree on how to handle results since bank doesn’t cover prior to the huge addons and rebuys

 

[CantSpellPoker]

I know you don’t actually want to do this, and I’m certainly not actually suggesting it, but what if you said to the host, “Ok, if I can’t get my actual cash winnings, I assume it’s no problem if I show up and play on the house until I’m back to even?”

Can’t imagine the host would take kindly to that suggestion, and when they say they can’t do that, you have the ultimate, “Rules for thee but not for me” leg to stand on.

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

Does he own a sporting goods store? Get some coolers, the good kind.

What to do… just be amicable and wait to get paid. I’m not saying the host is right but in our circle of friends - debt gets passed around.

I get what you're saying, but this isnt a small circle of friends passing debts around, this is a game with relatively high stakes and the host can and should be held completely responsible for bank and payouts. When you're gambling for thousands and people are shorted, being amicable and waiting doesnt get you paid. Squeaky wheel gets the oil.

 

[doublebooyah85]

Ugh. Definitely on the host.

You haven’t been to my game in a year and ur playing with these wahoos???

 

[doublebooyah85]

I know you don’t actually want to do this, and I’m certainly not actually suggesting it, but what if you said to the host, “Ok, if I can’t get my actual cash winnings, I assume it’s no problem if I show up and play on the house until I’m back to even?”

Can’t imagine the host would take kindly to that suggestion, and when they say they can’t do that, you have the ultimate, “Rules for thee but not for me” leg to stand on.

I would def do this if there was a game before you got paid.

Tough spot to be in nonetheless. Comes w the territory of home games…I guess?

 

[CraigT78]

Look @Rhodeman77 I told you that you'd get your money. Sheesh.

 

[Labrat]

Players playing on credit would be a huge red flag to me at those stakes.

 

[Rhodeman77]

Look @Rhodeman77 I told you that you'd get your money. Sheesh.

The worst part was laughing manically in my face as you said it!!!

To be clear, @CraigT78 was not the host, it was Drunk CraigT78 !!

 

[Rhodeman77]

Ugh. Definitely on the host.

You haven’t been to my game in a year and ur playing with these wahoos???

I know!

I will get back hopefully sooner than later.

 

[GK Willie]

The host is still hosting games and playing in them? If so, you take his seat, playing off his buyins and leave with your winnings/losses until you're complete?

 

[gopherblue]

I definitely wouldn’t be inviting the host to any PCF games, even if he generates action given the stakes.

 

[FordPickup92]

Ugh this sucks sorry this happened to you Adam
I would definitely continue to contact the host, and any other players you'd feel comfortable sharing this with to keep tabs on how or when the host and BL will repay you and the other person. I don't know I'd write it off just yet, but I definitely think the host needs to make you both whole, one way or another.

 

[Rhodeman77]

Players playing on credit would be a huge red flag to me at those stakes.

Playing on credit is a normal/ accepted way to handle the bank at these stakes. Having 8 people showing up with $10-20k in cash to a game regularly is just looking for the game or players to get robbed.

But also, as the host they then have a responsibility to know/vet the players in the game for how much credit they feel comfortable allowing them to have.

Personally I have used the policy that I will allow credit equal to the amount of cash the player brings. Some players get an exception to that rule, but those are players I have known for many years.

And some players I won’t offer credit to at all from knowing their history as taking a long time to repay loans as well.

Perhaps a policy of verifying funds available (screen shot of Venmo/bank balance) before extending a large amount of credit could reduce the chances of this happening?

 

[WedgeRock]

To those suggesting not to let anyone play on credit, I think you're missing the point. Unless this is held at a secured location, you don't want a half dozen people showing up with $10-$20k cash each. I'm assuming that in the past, players show up, play, and settle up at the end of the night.

In this, BL kept lighting buy-ins on fire because he knew he was never gonna settle up.

BL is the bad guy, no doubt, but the gist extended the credit. It's on the host.

 

[Labrat]

Playing on credit is a normal/ accepted way to handle the bank at these stakes. Having 8 people showing up with $10-20k in cash to a game regularly is just looking for the game or players to get robbed.

But also, as the host they then have a responsibility to know/vet the players in the game for how much credit they feel comfortable allowing them to have.

Personally I have used the policy that I will allow credit equal to the amount of cash the player brings. Some players get an exception to that rule, but those are players I have known for many years.

And some players I won’t offer credit to at all from knowing their history as taking a long time to repay loans as well.

Perhaps a policy of verifying funds available (screen shot of Venmo/bank balance) before extending a large amount of credit could reduce the chances of this happening?

I still think that's asking for trouble, but you absolutely can run your games your way but it's on you as the host. If you are doing it that way, I want to see your bank balance before I buy into such a game to feel some level of comfort that you can cover deadbeats such as that clown.

If you're going to be buying in for $1000 in a game I'm hosting (as if), you're transferring the funds to me before those chips hit your hands.

 

[Labrat]

To those suggesting not to let anyone play on credit, I think you're missing the point. Unless this is held at a secured location, you don't want a half dozen people showing up with $10-$20k cash each. I'm assuming that in the past, players show up, play, and settle up at the end of the night.

In this, BL kept lighting buy-ins on fire because he knew he was never gonna settle up.

BL is the bad guy, no doubt, but the gist extended the credit. It's on the host.

I'm not saying you have to have cash, but there's no reason to play on credit in today's day and age with financial services such as Venmo, PayPal, or Zelle.

 

[upNdown]

To those suggesting not to let anyone play on credit, I think you're missing the point. Unless this is held at a secured location, you don't want a half dozen people showing up with $10-$20k cash each. I'm assuming that in the past, players show up, play, and settle up at the end of the night.

In this, BL kept lighting buy-ins on fire because he knew he was never gonna settle up.

BL is the bad guy, no doubt, but the gist extended the credit. It's on the host.

I understand how cash isn’t practical at these stakes, and I also understand how a host might not want 30 Venmo transactions in one night, but I think this story is a pretty good example of why you have to do one or the other.
I dunno, I play for quarters - bring cash - it’s easier down here.

 

[Labrat]

I dunno, I play for quarters - bring cash - it’s easier down here.

Amen bruthuh. lol

 

[l33tf0b]

At most house games with strangers - usually the same players we’ve seen before at casinos or card rooms, absolutely the host makes it right. They typically don’t take that risk either — electronic payment prior to receiving chips or cash on spot.

No credit lines unless it’s a well known whale but again host will take the responsibility.

 

[Benjaminotaur]

People are bringing up good points about the security of the game when the stakes get this high. All valid. And I understand the want to keep transactions down to a minimum to help keep things clean and possibly not raise too many red flags. But what would be the harm of setting plateaus for payment?

You’re got 3k in markers? Those are getting paid before you get any more chips. Pick your trigger points. It’s for the hosts integrity and piece of mind. They’re the ones who should be holding the bag since they extended the credit when they handed out the chips without payment.

As for getting paid, it keep the pressure on a simmer to keep lines open. Getting paid something would be better than nothing. And later is better than never. Either way, I’m not playing in the game again until the payment structure is changed or clarified to my satisfaction

In any case, I’m sorry you got stiffed to this point and hope the resolution works out in your favor sooner or later

 

[Taghkanic]

I find it easier as a host to just have a no book / no credit policy. It eventually leads to awkwardness or bad feeling, even among old friends. Bring what you need, and no more than you are prepared to lose.

I feel like even when credit is extended at no interest and in a friendly way, as a convenience, it’s a slippery slope. Someone eventually doesn’t pay on time and then a convenience becomes an issue.

Another game I play in regularly does run a modest book, and it sometimes causes the game to not go off — because some regs are in too deep and start ducking the (not at all predatory or aggressive) host.

Some of them also owe each other money, and start avoiding each other.

And then there is the sports betting epidemic also sucking their wallets dry. It’s hard to know when the poker players are playing recklessly in hopes of covering their sports bets, or the other way around.

 

[inca911]

Clearly communicate to the host that you expect him to pay you what he owes you by a specific date: 30Apr2024 seems reasonable with a month already elapsed. Make your expectation clear and unambiguous without threatening as you need his cooperation to collect an “illegal” gambling debt. Just my $0.02, focus on only collecting and don’t get distracted.

 

[chippitydoodah]

 

[TomC727]

Oh hell no!!!!

This is absolutely on the host. It is a rare occurrence at my games, but if not enough cash is on hand for the player, they Venmo/paypal/zelle me. I've never even had to tell them, they have always asked which method I prefer and they immediately send, and again, extremely rare.

The host should have required said player to send him the money electronically. If the host didn't have the cash on hand, the money electronically collected then needs to be sent to you.

If the host can't pay out like a respected person, he has no business hosting these stakes, or games in general.

I would bother him multiple times a week until you are made whole, and after a few weeks, I would begin reaching out to the other players. I would even go as far as to let the host know that his reputation is going to start to take a hit, because you are going to start singing, and that the debt should be getting paid by him and he then needs to settle up with BL.

This entire scenario stinks to high heaven.