- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Casino to patron: Sorry ma‘am, you didn’t win $43M—there was a slot machine “malfunction”
Posted on 6/16/17 at 7:29 am to LSUTANGERINE
Posted on 6/16/17 at 7:29 am to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
Although that may be true, did it specifically state on the machine that that was the max a person may win?
A slot machine is not going to print a cash ticket for $43 million. She fricked herself with that picture
1
Posted on 6/16/17 at 7:30 am to udtiger
quote:
Then the casino should have paid her $6500
Small price to pay instead of dragging this through court. If she accepted the $6500 as her "payment", case closed.
Posted on 6/16/17 at 7:34 am to Thib-a-doe Tiger
Also, from the article:
I'm going to guess the slot machine she played on had the same/similar user-agreement available.
quote:
Iowa's top court ruled in 2015 the slot machine's user-agreement, available on the touchscreen, said the maximum payout was $10,000.
I'm going to guess the slot machine she played on had the same/similar user-agreement available.
Posted on 6/16/17 at 7:37 am to Bunta
I don't get why they just don't give her the 6500 and be done with it. The amount maybe a malfunction, but she won. Just give her 6500 and avoid this whole story.
Posted on 6/16/17 at 7:40 am to Street Hawk
She'll lose. 
Posted on 6/16/17 at 7:44 am to tiggerthetooth
quote:
For those not willing to investigate, the machine was set up to max out at $6500. She wasn't supposed to win anymore than that AT MOST. The $43 million is a complete malfunction for sure.
That's their problem. I guarantee they didn't have that 6500 max advertised on the machine. No one would play
Posted on 6/16/17 at 7:44 am to Street Hawk
Do you have any idea how germans this is?
Posted on 6/16/17 at 7:47 am to East Coast Band
quote:
Casinos are rigged, plain and simple.
Posted on 6/16/17 at 7:48 am to Swagga
quote:
I don't get why they just don't give her the 6500 and be done with it.
Because gaming law specifically requires that this not happen.
Posted on 6/16/17 at 8:03 am to foshizzle
How is it possible for a machine to make up that number? That's so odd.
Why is there not a fine print rule on the machine that says $xx is max payout and if any number over $xx is shown to be won we will revert to $xx?
Why is there not a fine print rule on the machine that says $xx is max payout and if any number over $xx is shown to be won we will revert to $xx?
Posted on 6/16/17 at 8:06 am to Street Hawk
if any of y'all followed the Phil Ivey card marking case, you'll know she's almost assuredly going to lose
these states have the literal expected profits and losses in their regulatory schemes, and anything that diverts from that can be voided as a violation of that scheme. the casino in NJ suing ivey doesn't just want the money he won back, it's also suing him for the expected losses of Ivey the casino should have won as profit
these states have the literal expected profits and losses in their regulatory schemes, and anything that diverts from that can be voided as a violation of that scheme. the casino in NJ suing ivey doesn't just want the money he won back, it's also suing him for the expected losses of Ivey the casino should have won as profit
Posted on 6/16/17 at 8:08 am to tiggerthetooth
quote:
For those not willing to investigate, the machine was set up to max out at $6500
Then they should have at least given her the max and pointed out the max winning on the machine. But a steak dinner? Yeah, no, hope they have to pay a lot more now.
Posted on 6/16/17 at 8:10 am to AUsteriskPride
quote:
Then they should have at least given her the max
it doesn't work that way, as in, if they paid her, that may violate the law
slot machines are literally programmed to pay out whatever % the law dictates. any deviation from that is illegal
Posted on 6/16/17 at 8:14 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
it doesn't work that way, as in, if they paid her, that may violate the law
slot machines are literally programmed to pay out whatever % the law dictates. any deviation from that is illegal
So a casino doesn't have an operating budget? Discretionary funds? Something of the like? I understand the need to keep regulated wagers/winnings in a strict control, but it seems this could have easily been circumvented with minimal effort.
Posted on 6/16/17 at 8:16 am to tiggerthetooth
If im playing a machine and I hit something and it says ON THE SCREEN printing ticket for 43,347,474.00 yes im gonna think I won 43 million and immediately go on Facebook and tell alllll those motherfrickers to kiss my arse.
Posted on 6/16/17 at 8:20 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
these states have the literal expected profits and losses in their regulatory schemes, and anything that diverts from that can be voided as a violation of that scheme. the casino in NJ suing ivey doesn't just want the money he won back, it's also suing him for the expected losses of Ivey the casino should have won as profit
What in the actual frick?
quote:
“What this ruling says is a player is prohibited from combining his skill and intellect and visual acuity to beat the casino at its own game,” Jacobs said to The Associated Press. “The casino agreed to every single accommodation requested by Phil Ivey in his four visits because they were eager to try to win his money.”
Posted on 6/16/17 at 8:21 am to AUsteriskPride
quote:
So a casino doesn't have an operating budget? Discretionary funds? Something of the like? I
this s beyond the casino and is a general regulatory scheme of the state of NY
paying out a % different than what they're mandated to do by law may lead to government sanctions
it's not "oh man we may take a $6500 loss" it's "oh man we may lose our gambling license"
Posted on 6/16/17 at 8:23 am to Rouge
quote:
Without knowing the details, I hope she wins
Casino should pay it out and sue the manufacturer of the machine if it was a true malfunction
The casino should have some type of insurance for these things.
And malfunction my arse! How long was it malfunctioning? How many people played that lost but should have won? (Bc the malfunction works in both directions). Pay up!
Posted on 6/16/17 at 8:25 am to tiggerthetooth
quote:
Obviously not. This suit is dumb, but she should get the $6500, not just a steak dinner.
I'm betting she gets a fat settlement...prob around $1M.
Then I bet every auntie and baby daddy in the county is camped out where she stay.
Posted on 6/16/17 at 8:25 am to MontyFranklyn
the ivey case is really interesting and more complex than a slot issue b/c it involves a game of chance with player activity (as opposed to hitting buttons) AND the casino obliged to his requests (giving them sort of a contractual acceptance of a non-standard scenario)
LINK
LINK
quote:
After ruling in Borgata's favor, Hillman asked the casino's attorneys to make a specific request for damages. Borgata asked for a refund of $9.6 million – or, if the court so ruled, for $15.2 million to account for "expectation damages."
The latter included $5.6 million that the casino estimated it would have won from Ivey if he played those same thousands of hands with no advantage
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News