Las Vegas’ Red Rock casino is refusing to pay out a bad beat jackpot from July 2017 because one of the players in the hand accidentally turned over his cards on the river. He had the nut straight flush v. another straight flush.

The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported that a hearing on Tuesday featured testimony about the controversial poker hand that occurred in the casino’s 20-table poker room. Regulators will decide what to do about it next month.

The casino, along with its sister properties around the gambling hub, had a bad beat progressive jackpot worth $120,000 when 83-year-old Avi Shamir lost with a straight flush to a higher one from a poker player by the name of Len Schreter.

Shamir was in line to collect $60,000 for losing, while Schreter was going to pocket $30,000, a typical breakdown for bad beat promotions. Under the Station’s Jumbo Hold’Em Poker Progressive jackpot promotion, poker players at four other poker rooms operated by the casino operator (at the time the straight flush vs. straight flush hand happened) would share a piece of the six-figure prize pool. More than 80 players reportedly were set to win some money.

That didn’t end up happening.

Red Rock examined video footage of the hand and decided to invalidate the jackpot because Schreter turned over his two cards prior to the end of the hand. He exposed his cards after the river card was dealt, but before the final round of betting had been completed.

The casino operator does have a rule that if players discuss their hands during the action it could potentially void a jackpot. But that’s up to the “discretion of managers.” The poker players involved reportedly can’t believe the casino is enforcing the rule, considering that the exposure of the cards apparently didn’t influence action or the outcome of the hand. Both players held straight flushes after all. The Gaming Control Board was called to investigate the matter.

An investigator with the Board conducted a review and determined that the players should be paid, according to the Review-Journal. Both Schreter and Shamir were present at Tuesday’s hearing. Schreter said that the invalidation of the jackpot has damaged his reputation.




https://www.cardplayer.com/poker-new...d-beat-jackpot

I just read about it here:

https://www.reviewjournal.com/busine...poker-jackpot/


One of the players involved in the hand said this:

That doesn’t make sense. If there are chips left and he has a straight flush, then why expose the hand right away? Why not try to get more money in the pot? Did these players communicate to each other that they were winning the promotion? Not sure what other reason there would be.

And this guy was a regular. He should know he needed to be more careful than that. I’m surprised he flipped his cards over that quickly.

I wish the article said more about info like stack sizes, how much money was in the pot, etc. Not sure who I side with on this. I don’t always agree with people that are too nitpicky with rules either.

It’s amazing how many people believe poker rooms start these promotions and give away $120k for free like that. They’re often shocked when rooms like Aria, Caesars and others refuse to bother with high hands, jackpots, etc.

Articles don’t say what game it is. Could even be a 2-4 limit game where the play can be extremely passive and players are less serious than they are in NL games. That could explain the lack of action on the river.

Edit: Sounds like 1-2 NL after reading the other thread.

Every card room I have ever played in has a sign that says essentially don't do exactly what this guy did. You have to play the hand just as you would any other hand or else they have the ability to do exactly what they just did and not pay it out. Based on the cardroom rules they have every right to not pay it out since the players violated the rules. Sucks but true

It didn't influence the result of the hand, but it did influence the last round of betting. The smaller straight flush is probably loses a lot more money here had the guy not exposed his hand

Oh well...

Sounds like a bad beat

"The poker players involved reportedly can’t believe the casino is enforcing the rule"

Lol that's a solid court case. I broke the rules but you should let me?

I see their point, but I also wonder if the bad will from not paying out a bad beat is worth it.

The counter to that is when they put these funds back in the bad beat, they'll have a big jackpot that will attract the old man nits.

Why does it influence action? Does the smaller straight flush fold to a bet and throw away his BBJ?

If it were a situation where the person with the smaller straight flush was facing a raise and chose to turn over his cards to get a reaction from his opponent (which is within the rules there), but nothing about the bad beat was mentioned, and he ended up calling, then they should pay it out. Pretty much anything else - I think the casino is in the right to void it if they choose.

I won a mini bad beat a couple years ago, the qualifying hand was aces full of kings. I had KK vs. AJ on an A95AA run out and I almost folded facing a huge raise on the river, because I played with the guy all the time and knew he had an ace. I don't think I ever actually fold, but the point is the BBJ was the last thing on my mind. I turned my cards over and said "you really got an ace huh?". At that point villian's face turned white as a ghost and the whole table suddenly looked very constipated. No one said a word until I called, and the table exploded. I was nervous during the review, but they paid it out. I often wonder what would've happened if I had re-jammed over him, he still had a lot of chips behind. I think that would've been enough to disqualify it, but we'll never know.

To this day Villian's name for me is "that dumb **** who almost folded 12k"

Station is just trying to get out of paying, for specious reasons. Turning over the hand obviously didn't influence action- he ain't folding the straight flush nor is the winner folding the nuts. Why on earth is anyone in the thread defending them? So what if they arbitrarily carved out a rule (possibly) allowing themselves to get out of this, that doesn't make it right.

The rule is good IMO. If one person flops a straight flush and says, "don't fold, I'll check it down for the BBJ" that's clearly a reason to deny the BBJ.

It's the enforcement that sucks.

Why does the casino care? They have to pay out eventually anyway. The money comes from the rake/extra drop. Maybe there's a drop in nit action for a bit but eventually the pot gets built up again, plus the extra publicity about the BB hitting might draw people to that casino.

I've seen this topic in 3 or 4 threads so far and I still dunno exactly what happened

The casino wants the jackpot to go as high as possible so it draws in more players.

I was playing at GVR once at like 10 in the morning and I flopped quad aces which according to the promo screen I suppose to win 450. Played the hand out right (it was a 1/2 game and I raised the flop to a stupid amount just to end the hand since I don't want the other guys money if there is 450 anyway; just trying to be nice) and show the dealer my hand, all set and done they claimed someone won that promo earlier that morning and I only get 25 bucks. I am at a table full of locals but me and they all eventually say oh...thats right. Blah blah blah. The annoying part is there is no proof at all so you never know. However, I kept playing there cuz it's really easy 1/2 there. One can make a lot more at GVR 1/2 than any 2/5 at Aria IMO.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Really... it makes the next bbj bigger. Sounds like a win win to me.

Why?

The BBJ is player money not the house. Why can't someone flop a hand that can beat another hand to win? It's BS the houes doesn't want to pay. In fact all these rules are designed to make it harder to hit it. It's such a scam not to mention I bet all casinos skim if not all out steal from the fund.

How would you like to play in a game where everyone limped preflop and checked it down so they could get the biggest chance of hitting the BBJ?

They don't need to steal. They're legally allowed to help themselves to an "administrative fee."

Not all BBJ and high hand promotions are completely player funded... often they have an overlay.

A lot of players actually would like to play in a game like that. If you raise PF a lot and are aggressive postflop, it feels like you’re being rude and annoying because people are there for the promotion. They don’t really want to play poker.

Let me rephrase.

How would YOU like to play in a game where everyone limped preflop and checked it down so they could get the biggest chance of hitting the BBJ?

and let me guess... Their "administrative fee" is whatever they want it to be? If that's the case I wonder why some poker rooms choose to not have any promos when they can do whatever they want with the money.

It's limited by law but high. Like 25-50%.