I have recently played in a few local Houston card houses when a guarantee isn't going to get met I see staff like dealers and managers jump in to play.

Most recently there was a $1500 guarantee in a $100 buy in tournament we only had 13 players with less than 20 minutes left in the 2hr registration period and a dealer and a manager bought in.

I know that dealers are probly on their own dime but the managers probably have a vested interest in the guarantee not being met. Should it be allowed for them to play in this situation?

As long as they don't control any floor decisions that happen, I don't see the problem with it.

If what you are talking about is unregulated underground card rooms, I think they are going to do whatever they want. After all, who is going to tell them "no."

I know these card clubs are not regulated so I am not asking from a legal standpoint. I am thinking on an business ethics and customer service stand point.

1) Are they buying in with their own money or house money? (Or no money?)
2) Who gets the money if they win/cash?
3) Are they still involved with the tournament 'operations' once they enter?

As with lots of poker 'history' going by the way side, Dealers are being allowed to play in the same room these days. In our room they only have to change clothes and remove their car from the employee lot. In fact, a Dealer just 'won' the BBJ over the weekend by losing with TTTTx after he took an EO.

Not too many managers jumping into the play as of yet. But don't get caught up (mixed up) in a role as a manager and having an (owner) interest in the operations. Yes, a manager doesn't want to look bad if an event has an overlay and they were/are responsible for putting the event on the calendar. It still comes down to whether or not roles get crossed up during the event when you want to consider this discussion. GL

I guess that depends upon the reaction of players. Are you less likely to play because of this? What are your concerns about them playing? If it hurts their numbers even more, they'll stop doing it. If most people don't think it's a big deal, it'll continue.

That's really all that matters from a customer service point of view. Do you know why they're playing? Maybe they just see a low turnout tournament and think they have a good chance against a smaller field (as opposed to any other reason you could come up with)

If by “stop doing it” you mean stop offering a guarantee or that tournament in general, I agree.

What’s the big deal? If they are playing with their own money, it shouldn’t matter. If they’re not playing with their own money and don’t keep the money if they win, then that’s messed up. I doubt that’s what is happening though.

Thank you for clarifying manager versus owner I wasn't thinking about it that way. I was thinking the manager might have a vested interest in not hitting the guarantee.

For the most part it has been dealers and managers but there have been a few times where the owner has jumped in to play in a guaranteed tournament.

I think what Was different about this situation was it was a short handed table and 3 players bought in two being staff With 15 minutes to go in the r. And they were basically trying to chop as soon as registration ended.

i used to think this was highly unethical then I came to the realization after playing places that do the other end of the spectrum (no guarantees or absurdly low guarantees cancel guarantees when they're not met or the tournament) that it is good for poker.

A guarantee in a live poker tournaments a little different then online used to be.... you don't play certain tournaments with high guarantees in hopes of overlays because outside satellites or a large event (where they might eat the loss) casinos usually do everything they can to avoid it. The only overlay I remember where they didn't void it and it was worth it was the shrp in hollywood 10million guarantee and that tournament has never been the same after that miss (i didn't play in them but i think party poker live millions events had some too??? but they were doing the same thing described in OP????). I remember probably 5 where they got out of the guarantee through slimier ways then described.

There's always a little chatter, and none more or less than normal this year, about Players who late reg Day 2s or even jump out of line in an effort to enter the tournament with the 'best' chance at cashing or accumulating 'cheap' POY points.

You can certainly debate this mentality with an ICM twist but as long as any Player steps away from the operation of the tournament the moment they enter it that will open the door up to plenty of opinions.

Not sure the blind level or BBs, but a WSOP ME Final Table Player did actually late reg Day 2 this year ... the first time they've ever allowed it. GL

If the room is funding those entries from the promo fund (plenty of examples of this happening elsewhere) then yes, it's unethical whether the players work for the room or not. If they're using their own money then it's the same as any other player jumping into a tournament they might not normally enter because they see overlay.

Rooms will almost always let dealers leave early if there are more on the clock than are needed. It saves them money.

Dealers and managers playing in their own room is a different issue. Nevada and some other places allow this, many do not. I'm not a fan personally but if the room allows it you can either play there or not.

It is probably the owner buying these guys in with some kind of deal where they split any winnings some way or another. This way he is still funding the guarantee out of his pocket, but with a chance to get something back from it.

I have had a brand new poker tour come through my place before with a big guarantee that they were responsible for and before registration closed, the owners were in circling the cash games and offering to buy some of those cash players into the tourney with some kind of split deal so they weren't just straight losing that money.

Is there anything wrong with it since you are talking about employees playing? I don't think so. Unless there is some rule about employees not being allowed to play, what's wrong with it? He is staking ppl in his own event.

Agreed .. It's not like an auctioneer planting a few in the crowd to drive up prices/excitement. It's more like hedging an investment to potentially reduce a certain loss. GL

I don't see a problem with it.

The tournament guaranteed a prize pool.

If it's your expectation that, IF the tourney doesn't attract enough natural players, that those that did play would be entitled to the overlay. This is generally how it's been done and I can see how and why that expectation is built.

But all that is guaranteed is the prize pool size.

I see little problem other than if you entered a tournament with the hope that there would be overlay

Definitely shady but not against the rules. Basically just below the level of an angle shot on the shadiness scale bit less because there are actual rules against it.

The difference being you might get a floor to come over and rule against an angle shooter.
But the floor isn't going to rule against itself in the tournament example.