Host can't pay out everyone, what to do? (2 Viewers)

[Budha]

Yup, our revenue service tends to take more notice of such transfers. Probably can't say too much more than that without crossing the no-politics outside the politics forum rule.

Non-political: yup agree.

Also - In addition, there’s also AML triggers that could be set off by frequent large cash app transactions.

Generally anything $10k+ is getting flagged and reported. Multiple smaller transactions that exceed $10k can also get flagged, etc.

The EU, etc., also has pretty stringent AML requirements as well.

(Anti Money Laundering)

 

[WedgeRock]

Crypto?

 

[TheRealTeddyKGB]

^^This

Maybe the out-of-towners should have been paid & the regulars who are used to this system could get theirs on the back end then?

 

[Budha]

Crypto?

I thought about that, and I think there is less ability to track crypto, but I am honestly not that familiar with the inner workings of crypto.

I know blockchain, etc., but don’t fully grasp how all the exchanges work.

 

[Highli99]

I thought about that, and I think there is less ability to track crypto, but I am honestly not that familiar with the inner workings of crypto.

I know blockchain, etc., but don’t fully grasp how all the exchanges work.

Crypto is fully trackable. You're not hiding anything. But there is no moderation like you find with Paypal/Zelle/etc. Any amount can be sent. Up to each person to follow the law of your location.

 

[Josh Kifer]

Crypto?

You are yer future money! We just got indoor plumbing!

 

[ChipMonster]

My luck, I’d use crypto and buy in with $1,000 and win big during poker and walk out with $10,000 but by the time I cashed it into real money crypto will have collapsed and I’d only get $100 back

 

[bergs]

 

[TheYeti]

Every time I see "BL" referenced in this thread I always picture Bad Brad

 

[Bluegrass Poker]

You are yer future money! We just got indoor plumbing!

Then why do you still crap in the yard!

 

[Josh Kifer]

Then why do you still crap in the yard!

Old habitsssss

 

[Rhodeman77]

Fertilizer for the potatoes to grow bigger!

 

[ekricket]

Fertilizer for the potatoes to grow bigger!

Just sayin

https://amp.abc.net.au/article/102548340

 

[chippitydoodah]

Just sayin

https://amp.abc.net.au/article/102548340

@Josh Kifer ahead of the curve

 

[BGinGA]

Please provide instructions on how I can join this cash/credit high-stakes game where winnings get paid in cash and any losses are easily skated.

Asking for a friend. I'll vouch for 'em.


Only half-joking. Sounds like a recipe for disaster and collusion on many levels. Who in their right mind would host or play in such a fucked-up environment?

 

[JustinInMN]

Please provide instructions on how I can join this cash/credit high-stakes game where winnings get paid in cash and any losses are easily skated.

Asking for a friend. I'll vouch for 'em.


Only half-joking. Sounds like a recipe for disaster and collusion on many levels. Who in their right mind would host or play in such a fucked-up environment?

But remember, those of us that host low-stakes don't understand this.

 

[JustinInMN]

But remember, those of us that host low-stakes don't understand this.

Sorry, that is pretty insensitive, but I know that's the source of tension here. Most of us that do cash for chips, and have stakes where we find that practical, may not fully understand that at some stakes cash for chips may become impractical and other arrangements are needed.

That said, even though I would personally avoid the situation @Goldfish found himself in, if I put myself in his shoes now with everything that happened, I can only imagine how awful it would feel to believe one thing about the culture of the game your hosting and then have the BL (and if the other players understood the culture and would be expected to share in the loss from these situations) leave him holding the bag all alone.

So yes, it's not ideal that this continued for two years, but the anger and frustration of one realizing how badly someone screwed you over and left you holding the bag, is still difficult to face.

 

[doublebooyah85]

Please provide instructions on how I can join this cash/credit high-stakes game where winnings get paid in cash and any losses are easily skated.

Asking for a friend. I'll vouch for 'em.


Only half-joking. Sounds like a recipe for disaster and collusion on many levels. Who in their right mind would host or play in such a fucked-up environment?

Invite only, a more fucked up environment would be having all that cash at his house.

Have you guys seen the 7 days to vegas movie? High stakes games where the winners paid out and checks bounced and he never recovered his money.

Such is the risk with splashy home games…u won’t find these games in casinos and again if you do, invite only, on a private table, and even then crypto is being exchanged and money is being loaned. Another stupid idea is loaning money to poker players as well…

 

[MatB]

If I wanted to play in cashless regular home game. .25/.50 or 1/1, I’d be ok with shipping 5k to managed money market account that all the regular player pays in to. and let it sit there accumulating interest and as you win or lose your invested amount is adjusted accordingly.

Goes below 2k. Ok I have to re-up.

This either the dumbest idea ever or genius. I can’t tell.

I know this thread is centered around higher ( much higher ) stakes. Which makes me think they can afford to hire an accountant

 

[doublebooyah85]

If I wanted to play in cashless regular home game. .25/.50 or 2/1, I’d be ok with shipping 5k to managed money market account that all the regular player pays in to. and let it sit there accumulating interest and as you win or lose your invested amount is adjusted accordingly.

Goes below 2k. Ok I have to re-up.

This either the dumbest idea ever or genius. I can’t tell.

I know this thread is centered around higher ( much higher ) stakes. Which makes me think they can afford to hire an accountant

If the game had an unknown player(s) who couldn’t vouch without a doubt this is the way to do it. But when you have had a regular game for 10 years this is what happened to Goldie, not saying it’s the best way to do it, your idea is bulletproof.

Thankfully all squared away now and hopefully John gets his money back. Now BL knows he screwed the good host and not some random out of towners.

 

[JustinInMN]

Have you guys seen the 7 days to vegas movie? High stakes games where the winners paid out and checks bounced and he never recovered his money.

Such is the risk with splashy home games…u won’t find these games in casinos and again if you do, invite only, on a private table, and even then crypto is being exchanged and money is being loaned. Another stupid idea is loaning money to poker players as well…

The problem this incident reveals is that clearly not all participants were on the same page with the host here as for what to do in the event of a non-payer. But it seems to me that as soon as any game gets a reputation for winners not getting paid, it's doomed. Which puts the host in a bad spot, he pays the winners to avoid damage to the game's reputation, or he doesn't and the game will die.

 

[Highli99]

The meta-game of poker is just as complicated as the game of poker.

 

[Jimulacrum]

If I wanted to play in cashless regular home game. .25/.50 or 1/1, I’d be ok with shipping 5k to managed money market account that all the regular player pays in to. and let it sit there accumulating interest and as you win or lose your invested amount is adjusted accordingly.

Goes below 2k. Ok I have to re-up.

This either the dumbest idea ever or genius. I can’t tell.

I know this thread is centered around higher ( much higher ) stakes. Which makes me think they can afford to hire an accountant

Something like this would at least head off this kind of problem.

I used to do a ledger settle-up method at Rungood Lounge, which had to be cashless because it was online, and having everyone pay in and cash out thousands from a common bank twice a week would leave the banker eating way too much risk.

What I would have preferred was a system more like this, where players all have a minimum of cash on deposit that's reflected in their accounts on the site, but that I keep in a safe bank account and pay out from only on request.

Being able to do that would have added a lot more flexibility to the way I ran the club, and taken a lot of work out of managing the results every night. I could have just put a bunch of tables up 24/7 and let people play whenever they felt like it.

 

[doublebooyah85]

Something like this would at least head off this kind of problem.

I used to do a ledger settle-up method at Rungood Lounge, which had to be cashless because it was online, and having everyone pay in and cash out thousands from a common bank twice a week would leave the banker eating way too much risk.

What I would have preferred was a system more like this, where players all have a minimum of cash on deposit that's reflected in their accounts on the site, but that I keep in a safe bank account and pay out from only on request.

Being able to do that would have added a lot more flexibility to the way I ran the club, and taken a lot of work out of managing the results every night. I could have just put a bunch of tables up 24/7 and let people play whenever they felt like it.

But let’s be honest. What makes a game more splashy? “Freerolling” as some mentioned when you don’t front the money at buy-in.

Just like a bookie. Are u going to sports gamble more when you have to deposit like Draft Kings? No. You deposit and then manage that bankroll much more efficiently.

When you don’t deposit w a bookie you can just keep betting to get even or go above your normal spend w poor discipline.

Hence why most of these higher stakes games do have a rake, bc of these risks…to achieve a more splashy game, the money your gambling hasn’t even exchanged yet, so mentally you are a bit “looser”.

If everyone had to escrow the money in…I guarantee the game would not be as splashy. High stakes games certainly do this ^ but usually for a crowd of unknowns. Game being discussed was well known regulars.

Hard for some to imagine bc that’s not how we/they/some of us think, but gamblers certainly do, and that’s exactly who you want @ the game.

“But Booyah, what if they don’t pay?”

Well, that’s the risk. But take that into account when you won much much much more than you would have bc the game is much more splashy this way…

 

[bergs]

Something like this would at least head off this kind of problem.

I used to do a ledger settle-up method at Rungood Lounge, which had to be cashless because it was online, and having everyone pay in and cash out thousands from a common bank twice a week would leave the banker eating way too much risk.

What I would have preferred was a system more like this, where players all have a minimum of cash on deposit that's reflected in their accounts on the site, but that I keep in a safe bank account and pay out from only on request.

Being able to do that would have added a lot more flexibility to the way I ran the club, and taken a lot of work out of managing the results every night. I could have just put a bunch of tables up 24/7 and let people play whenever they felt like it.

That said - most the players have known each other for longer than a decade and there wasn’t really anyone playing who hadn’t played at Truman’s House.

 

[Highli99]

If I wanted to play in cashless regular home game. .25/.50 or 1/1, I’d be ok with shipping 5k to managed money market account that all the regular player pays in to. and let it sit there accumulating interest and as you win or lose your invested amount is adjusted accordingly.

Goes below 2k. Ok I have to re-up.

This either the dumbest idea ever or genius. I can’t tell.

I know this thread is centered around higher ( much higher ) stakes. Which makes me think they can afford to hire an accountant

Something like this would at least head off this kind of problem.

I used to do a ledger settle-up method at Rungood Lounge, which had to be cashless because it was online, and having everyone pay in and cash out thousands from a common bank twice a week would leave the banker eating way too much risk.

What I would have preferred was a system more like this, where players all have a minimum of cash on deposit that's reflected in their accounts on the site, but that I keep in a safe bank account and pay out from only on request.

Being able to do that would have added a lot more flexibility to the way I ran the club, and taken a lot of work out of managing the results every night. I could have just put a bunch of tables up 24/7 and let people play whenever they felt like it.

Using crypto accounts is the perfect solution for this. A player could transfer USDC or UDT to a dedicated wallet controlled by the host. After each game, winning or losses are added or subtracted from players acct by host. Players could withdrawal from their account by asking the host to transfer to their own wallet, but the custodial acct would always be their credit limit.

The key here would be trusting the host. However, the transparency of the block chain allows anyone to verify the balance at any time. You couldn't do that with a bank account.

 

[Jimulacrum]

But let’s be honest. What makes a game more splashy? “Freerolling” as some mentioned when you don’t front the money at buy-in.

Just like a bookie. Are u going to sports gamble more when you have to deposit like Draft Kings? No. You deposit and then manage that bankroll much more efficiently.

When you don’t deposit w a bookie you can just keep betting to get even or go above your normal spend w poor discipline.

Hence why most of these higher stakes games do have a rake, bc of these risks…to achieve a more splashy game, the money your gambling hasn’t even exchanged yet, so mentally you are a bit “looser”.

If everyone had to escrow the money in…I guarantee the game would not be as splashy. High stakes games certainly do this ^ but usually for a crowd of unknowns. Game bing discussed was well known regulars.

Hard for some to imagine I bet, bc that’s now how we/they/some of us think, but gamblers certainly do, and that’s exactly who you want @ the game.

But, “Booyah what if they don’t pay?” Well, that’s the risk. But take that into account when you won much much much more than you would have bc the game is much more splashy this way…

"It's better to structure your game in a way that psychologically manipulates people to gamble way beyond their means!"

That's what you're saying here, in a nutshell.

Same reason cruise ships make you use an on-board account for everything, so as many passengers as possible make reckless financial decisions that they'll regret when it comes time to disembark.

No thanks.

 

[doublebooyah85]

"It's better to structure your game in a way that psychologically manipulates people to gamble way beyond their means!"

That's what you're saying here, in a nutshell.

Same reason cruise ships make you use an on-board account for everything, so as many passengers as possible make reckless financial decisions that they'll regret when it comes time to disembark.

No thanks.

100% correct. Not saying it’s right or wrong. Just explaining.

And not necessarily more beyond their means, but psychologically make the players give more action than normal.

 

[Jimulacrum]

Using crypto accounts is the perfect solution for this. A player could transfer USDC or UDT to a dedicated wallet controlled by the host. After each game, winning or losses are added or subtracted from players acct by host. Players could withdrawal from their account by asking the host to transfer to their own wallet, but the custodial acct would always be their credit limit.

The key here would be trusting the host. However, the transparency of the block chain allows anyone to verify the balance at any time. You couldn't do that with a bank account.

Makes sense if you're denominating the game in that crypto, but not so much if it's in the local currency. Swings in the crypto's value could cause some very uncomfortable situations.

 

[Jimulacrum]

100% correct. Not saying it’s right or wrong. Just explaining.

I get all that.

I just think it's unethical and bad for the game, same as I think it's unethical and bad for the economy to give every sucker who wants to shop a credit card.