Foxwoods didn’t stop gambling addict who asked to be banned — until he won

From The Boston Globe:

Quote:

---

MASHANTUCKET, Conn. — On the edge of a vast casino, David Schreiber played video poker at a frenetic pace — fast enough to place almost 50 bets a minute. Beat, pause, beat-beat, pause. Over and over again.

An admitted compulsive gambler, Schreiber was not supposed to be here on the gambling floor at Foxwoods Resort Casino. Three years ago, distraught over his gambling losses, he asked the Indian-owned casino to ban him for life, a desperate step he hoped would save him from himself.

Foxwoods, like most casinos, keeps a “voluntary self-exclusion” list of compulsive gamblers who sign an agreement that they would be denied entry or ejected from the premises, and denied rights to winnings. Casinos, responding to critics, point to the program as evidence that they are responsible institutions.

But in Schreiber’s case, at least, neither part of the equation has worked: He keeps gambling and, he says, Foxwoods does not stop him.

“I’ve been back to Foxwoods a hundred times since I got on the list,” Schreiber, 59, of Danielson, Conn., said after a betting session on the Game King poker machine. “They don’t enforce it. It’s a joke.”

Schreiber said he has been detected only once, when he won a $1,250 jackpot, large enough to trigger the requirement that he deposit a portion of his winnings into a tax withholding account. As it turned out, he didn’t get to keep a cent, he said.

“They took me to an office and wouldn’t let me keep the money,” he said. “After that, they said they were going to keep a real close eye on me. But they didn’t.”

---

In short: Foxwoods....it's kinda bad

The only thing more desperate than a compulsive gambler is Foxwoods itself.

With three casinos opening in the next 2 years in Massachusetts - Foxwoods is slated to become low income housing.

However, Steve Wynn is too blind to see (lol) the future of HIS Boston casino is being played out in Ledyard, CT. Only difference being Wynn Boston will have a far shorter run.

Too many and too big. Bet on it.

"Places over 50 bets a minute"

Shoddy journalism right there.

It is not possible to play 50 hands of video poker in a minute.

I would have guessed he was doing multi-play of something like 5 hands per deal, and doing 10 of those per minute, but the $1250 jackpot sounds like a straight flush at the $5/credit level, so I'm not sure what to say, unless it was a rare dealt straight flush, or unless he was playing $5 per credit 5 ways.

I'm guessing he was doing single-play $5/credit, and the article about 50 hands per minute is just incorrect.

Anyway, yeah, this is a bullshit policy. They should always pay winnings on a self-exclusion, and then just kick you out at that point. This is a lame way for them to cheat people.

They are hiding behind the legality that self-exclusion is essentially equivalent to underage gambling. If a 17-year-old played video poker and lost, he wouldn't be entitled to the money back. However, if he hit a handpay jackpot, they wouldn't have to pay him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

"Places over 50 bets a minute"

Shoddy journalism right there.

It is not possible to play 50 hands of video poker in a minute.

I would have guessed he was doing multi-play of something like 5 hands per deal, and doing 10 of those per minute, but the $1250 jackpot sounds like a straight flush at the $5/credit level, so I'm not sure what to say, unless it was a rare dealt straight flush, or unless he was playing $5 per credit 5 ways.

I'm guessing he was doing single-play $5/credit, and the article about 50 hands per minute is just incorrect.

Anyway, yeah, this is a bullshit policy. They should always pay winnings on a self-exclusion, and then just kick you out at that point. This is a lame way for them to cheat people.

They are hiding behind the legality that self-exclusion is essentially equivalent to underage gambling. If a 17-year-old played video poker and lost, he wouldn't be entitled to the money back. However, if he hit a handpay jackpot, they wouldn't have to pay him.

---

Foxwoods have done this all the time. There is a story where a girl who hit a bad beat jackpot for $450k at $2/$5 NL one night. Obviously, everybody was stoked...until Foxwoods carded the girl, and she was 1 month underage.....and then they just rescinded her portion of the Bad Beat Jackpot (the rest of the table got their piece of the cash; the loser of the hand is an old reg who gets 50 percent....the table chops up 25 percent)

And not only does she not get the roughly $100k for having the winning hand in the jackpot...they confiscate her $1100 on the table and, she got arrested, and got the 86 banhammer.

And that shoddy journalism.....yeah, that's the Globe for you. John Henry owned, NYT-influenced fail.

A self-exclusion list is only good if the Casino enforces it and the player sticks with it.

Foxwoods is in their rights to stop him at his request but this is bad PR because it looks like they just waited until he won to take the money from him, thus freerolling him had he lost because they aren't going to refund him if he loses.

If they wanted to get around this without paying him because they missed him get in casino or were too busy to approach him before he won they should have let him play more and being compulsive person he is he will lose it. Once he's lost it all then you approach him and escort him out then it won't look so bad that they shit the bed in the first place.

The degen Todd interviewed couple weeks ago from Florida told the same story. I think he said he'd gamble at the HardRock even though he self excluded himself, knowing that if he won they would or did take his money. I think he also gave that as a reason for playing at the dudes houses that scammed him.

You need to get him back on radio.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shizzmoney

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

"Places over 50 bets a minute"

Shoddy journalism right there.

It is not possible to play 50 hands of video poker in a minute.

I would have guessed he was doing multi-play of something like 5 hands per deal, and doing 10 of those per minute, but the $1250 jackpot sounds like a straight flush at the $5/credit level, so I'm not sure what to say, unless it was a rare dealt straight flush, or unless he was playing $5 per credit 5 ways.

I'm guessing he was doing single-play $5/credit, and the article about 50 hands per minute is just incorrect.

Anyway, yeah, this is a bullshit policy. They should always pay winnings on a self-exclusion, and then just kick you out at that point. This is a lame way for them to cheat people.

They are hiding behind the legality that self-exclusion is essentially equivalent to underage gambling. If a 17-year-old played video poker and lost, he wouldn't be entitled to the money back. However, if he hit a handpay jackpot, they wouldn't have to pay him.

---

Foxwoods have done this all the time. There is a story where a girl who hit a bad beat jackpot for $450k at $2/$5 NL one night. Obviously, everybody was stoked...until Foxwoods carded the girl, and she was 1 month underage.....and then they just rescinded her portion of the Bad Beat Jackpot (the rest of the table got their piece of the cash; the loser of the hand is an old reg who gets 50 percent....the table chops up 25 percent)

And not only does she not get the roughly $100k for having the winning hand in the jackpot...they confiscate her $1100 on the table and, she got arrested, and got the 86 banhammer.

And that shoddy journalism.....yeah, that's the Globe for you. John Henry owned, NYT-influenced fail.

---

Yup that's a legendary Foxwoods story. They even tried to invalidate the hand and not pay anyone st the table but they ended up paying everyone but her.

The arrest made sense.... they knew it wouldn't play well but they had to do it because she could have came back and said she didn't do anything wrong.... they even let me walk out the door. My understanding is they cleared her of any wrong doing it was just so she wouldn't/couldn't fight it.

How would you like to be the asshole who was there two weeks earlier and flop a K High straight flush in Spades vs a set of j-j and q-q?....... yeah that was me. No 5% one time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sanlmar

The only thing more desperate than a compulsive gambler is Foxwoods itself.

With three casinos opening in the next 2 years in Massachusetts - Foxwoods is slated to become low income housing.

However, Steve Wynn is too blind to see (lol) the future of HIS Boston casino is being played out in Ledyard, CT. Only difference being Wynn Boston will have a far shorter run.

Too many and too big. Bet on it.

---

I kind of sort of disagree but you are not wrong either. Foxwoods is 75% Boston money, 25% New York. Foxwoods might as well close the doors when the Boston casinos open. I'm in complete agreement there.

The Boston casinos will do well i think. There is a lot of money and a lot of degenerates in Boston. It was a big deal to go to Foxwoods for a weekend with the guys. Now that it will be local you can just go for the night and hang out. You don't need a wait to plan a weekend and spend $300 for a hotel room now.

I agree with Daly that the Boston casino will do great initially with tons of enthusiasm, and the poker room has the ability to be dynamic if done right.

Boston is a place with a lot of single males 18-45 (including me). The casino, and poker room, will do well off these demos alone and once you add in the "suburbia middle-to-old age guy" who will travel from NH/VT/ME and be excited he can be closer to his house, in a real city, and not have to spend an assload of cash to stay overnight. This, along with premier dining options and happy hour, will get butts in the door into Wynn's casino the first 5-8 years.

The question is the long term allure of poker live....and even gambling live.....in general. Some of the biggest conventions in Boston all year deal with eSports, Comic Con, and other alternative gaming outlets which are potential competition for eyes for the future potential degens of the future...male and female.

The issue isn't the demo now who will go to the Boston casino when it opens (they will initially flock to it, mostly as a middle finger to Foxwoods); it's will the same demo 10-20 years from now care about poker or live gaming in general to frequent these overbuilt casinos enough to profit?

You mention NH/VT/ME. You think casinos won't be built there in the next 10 years? The Boston market gets further subdivided.

My schtick is that casinos will be as common as libraries some day. Maybe they will be built in abandoned libraries.

My issue is with the financial scale of the Wynn property.

Plainridge, Twin Rivers and lots of them is the future. They're comin'.

I think of Florida and the little gambling parlors in the strip malls. Never set foot in one but you get the idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sanlmar

You mention NH/VT/ME. You think casinos won't be built there in the next 10 years? The Boston market gets further subdivided.

My schtick is that casinos will be as common as libraries some day. Maybe they will be built in abandoned libraries.

My issue is with the financial scale of the Wynn property.

Plainridge, Twin Rivers and lots of them is the future. They're comin'.

I think of Florida and the little gambling parlors in the strip malls. Never set foot in one but you get the idea.

---

the issue i would think is with those places being economically viable...no question in this day in age if theres an empty plot of land they'll plop up a fucking casino on it to make revenue...i cant imagine NH/VT/ME being able to support anything but very tiny casinos...will that be enough to draw away from nicely done boston ones? time will tell...

convenience gambling is the thing nowadays...convenience will always trump anything...id only wonder if the very tiny states have the population bases to make even the smallest casinos viable...im sure they will get built since some schmuck will come up with trumped up projections about how this casino is gonna fucking kill shit...(see new jersey interactive gaming revenues...$250MM a year projected...BAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sanlmar

You mention NH/VT/ME. You think casinos won't be built there in the next 10 years? The Boston market gets further subdivided

---

Well the idea of a Boston casino, at least in the developer's eyes, is that is would be a "destination casino" where people would come from out of state to have it be *one* of the things people would do on a weekend. This gives them the excuse to build (and get loans for) the biggest monstrosity ever, instead of what should of been built (IMO): smaller scale blackjack and poker parlors like you do see in CA/FL. But that's harder to sell to legislators because they don't create as many jobs as the destination resort casinos which get built and fail after 15 years all the time.

Quote:

---

I think of Florida and the little gambling parlors in the strip malls.

---

NH does this at racetracks around the state. Maine has 2 casinos (both at racetracks; the one in Bangor is actually pretty nice), VT none.

ME/VT/NH legislatures have constantly voted down "high end" casinos for various reasons (traffic, costs, all of the big companies want tax breaks), but if Boston does get a casino soon and it kills it initially, you may seen them pivot in order to compete.

I do think a high end ski resort/casino up near Mt Washington would kill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daly

I do think a high end ski resort/casino up near Mt Washington would kill.

---

didn't think of the skiing angle...that might actually work for a resort type property in one of these states...you cant go overboard, but one, maaaaaaybe two might be able to prosper...

think of Tahoe east kinda deal...

Wynn: I have a great idea. Let's build a billion dollar casino in the heart of NYC.

It'll have really nice rooms.
Great restaurants.
We will offer great entertainment.

Cause none of this is available in NYC right now. Now think of Boston's monstrosity.

Purpose built Costco style gaming will win in the long run financially. I could give a shit if I was playing craps in Costco or the Wynn. My vision goes no further than the felt, the dealers and the people I am playing with.

I have just as much fun at Twin River as I do Foxwoods. One has no overhead. Poker may not be as much fun but casinos don't make money with poker in the grand scheme.

You are spot on, Shizz, about legislative approval. But it wasn't the right play financially. He won approval but it's a bad bet

Quote:

---

David Schreiber

---

?

I'm a goddamn subscriber!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sanlmar

Wynn: I have a great idea. Let's build a billion dollar casino in the heart of NYC.

It'll have really nice rooms.
Great restaurants.
We will offer great entertainment.

Cause none of this is available in NYC right now. Now think of Boston's monstrosity.

Purpose built Costco style gaming will win in the long run financially. I could give a shit if I was playing craps in Costco or the Wynn. My vision goes no further than the felt, the dealers and the people I am playing with.

I have just as much fun at Twin River as I do Foxwoods. One has no overhead. Poker may not be as much fun but casinos don't make money with poker in the grand scheme.

You are spot on, Shizz, about legislative approval. But it wasn't the right play financially. He won approval but it's a bad bet

---

I live in philly...its why I go to parx or valley forge if I want to gamble and id still do that even if I didn't want to support AC in any way...should probably give sugarhouse a look, but heard its ghetto as fuck...

ACs gambling numbers show that there are a lot of people out there who agree with what I bolded of your statement San...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sanlmar

Wynn: I have a great idea. Let's build a billion dollar casino in the heart of NYC.

It'll have really nice rooms.
Great restaurants.
We will offer great entertainment.

Cause none of this is available in NYC right now. Now think of Boston's monstrosity.

Purpose built Costco style gaming will win in the long run financially. I could give a shit if I was playing craps in Costco or the Wynn. My vision goes no further than the felt, the dealers and the people I am playing with.

I have just as much fun at Twin River as I do Foxwoods. One has no overhead. Poker may not be as much fun but casinos don't make money with poker in the grand scheme.

You are spot on, Shizz, about legislative approval. But it wasn't the right play financially. He won approval but it's a bad bet

---

Here is the thing though. I'm not a whale but I'm the middle aged slightly upper income white guy that can afford to lose a random 1-2K. There are a bunch of me up there in New England. I can't talk my wife into getting my parents to sit the kids and take her to twin rivers. Shit I can't do it for Foxwoods only Mohegan would do. But I can take her away to a ski lodge/casino.

Casino didn't do anything wrong IMO unless on the other occasions when he gambled there, they knew he was banned, and turned a blind eye, which I doubt is the case. Just lol @ playing video poker while being banned from a casino, a game which requires you to show ID if you hit a jackpot. If you lose, they get your money. If you win, they get your money. TBC actually posted once that he needed to play video poker instantly, and going into some downtown casino he was banned from and playing for a short while, while hoping he didn't hit a royal. One of my friends self excluded from canterbury in shakopee, and was actually caught by security in there 3 times. They called the cops, who wrote him a trespassing ticket each time, and let him go. Once he was actually on the table when the bad beat jackpot hit, which his table share was a few thousand dollars. He was freaking out debating if he should just leave right away, but the few thousand dollars was too much for him to run from. He had to show ID and fill out forms to get the jackpot, but they still didn't notice that he was excluded, so he got to keep his money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SetofKs

Casino didn't do anything wrong IMO unless on the other occasions when he gambled there, they knew he was banned, and turned a blind eye, which I doubt is the case. Just lol @ playing video poker while being banned from a casino, a game which requires you to show ID if you hit a jackpot. If you lose, they get your money. If you win, they get your money. TBC actually posted once that he needed to play video poker instantly, and going into some downtown casino he was banned from and playing for a short while, while hoping he didn't hit a royal. One of my friends self excluded from canterbury in shakopee, and was actually caught by security in there 3 times. They called the cops, who wrote him a trespassing ticket each time, and let him go. Once he was actually on the table when the bad beat jackpot hit, which his table share was a few thousand dollars. He was freaking out debating if he should just leave right away, but the few thousand dollars was too much for him to run from. He had to show ID and fill out forms to get the jackpot, but they still didn't notice that he was excluded, so he got to keep his money.

---

EXPERT MUCH ?

That dude getting to keep his money, pulling out ID etc.. Man I bet that was a rush for him. He'll learn to not do THAT again !

It is just gambling but now chance you get another court case (technically could they arrest?) AND you gamble that if you win, it might be confiscated.