A dude at the casino last night made me start this topic.

Personally, I had never seen anything like this. I have seen guys get way too drunk and make horrible bluff attempts, or call down middle pair, but I have never seen anything like what I saw last night...

Playing 1/3 at a casino, this one guy who seemed normal to start got progressively more drunk as the night went on. He started to get to the point where he was just talking non-stop and slurring his words, singing like an idiot, and just being a horrible person at a poker table.

Except for one thing...he was literally giving people money like he was santa claus. Calling down 100 dollar bets on the river with Q high...bluffing 25 into a 115 dollar pot with nothing....and he just kept drinking.

He would bust out, hit the atm, and come back with another 500. We all were taking turns taking pots from this guy, all we needed was low pair or sometimes Ace high.

He was probably in for 1500 or 2000 bucks. They did last call for alcohol at 2am, and he was very clearly going to his car to pour his own liquor into a giant cup he was drinking out of for the rest of the night.

My question: at some point, shouldnt the casino stop this? This guy was obviously an alcoholic and had serious issues. Lord knows where he got all of his money. But a few things bothered me.

1. This was not the case of a drunk gambler. Alcohol and casinos obviously go hand in hand, and they want drunk people to bet because they don't know what they are doing, but this was like 100 levels above that normal drunk stuff. This guy was making no sense with his words. I almost felt bad to be a part of if, but if i left, somebody else would just sit in my seat.

2. There is no hotel at this casino, so this guy was obviously driving home as soon as the game was done.

3. Maybe there is no room for feelings like this in a poker room, but I legitimately feel like the casino floor should have cut the guy off or had him taken away for disorderly conduct (for his own good, he wasnt hurting anyone but himself).

I dont konw if he has kids, a wife, etc...my guess is if he ever had that stuff he probably lost them with this kind of behavior.

It was just very disturbing...sometimes I worry do I drink too much or do I "need" to play poker a bit too much, and then guys like him show me what it really is like to have an actual problem.

So my question is, is there any casino obligation to protect a guy ike that from himself?

Does a fast-food restaurant have an obligation to refuse service to someone who is clearly life-threateningly obese? Does a convenience store have an obligation to turn away a patron who continues to chain-smoke despite clearly having a serious respiratory disease? Does a bar have an obligation to cut someone off who is clearly drinking to feed an addiction rather than for enjoyment?

Some might say yes to all or some of these. Personally, I say no to all of them, and especially in the case of gambling. A guy wants to get ****faced and throw piles of money around. Who are we to say no? It's his body, his money, and his time, and casinos were made for these kinds of activities. I think it's out of line to obligate a cardroom to differentiate between someone having fun and someone getting wasted and going kamikaze with his life savings. It's unreasonable to hold an establishment responsible for its adult patrons' decisions.

That said, lack of obligation doesn't change what's right, and what's best for the game and the business. Suppose that this was way beyond any kind of recreation, and that guy wakes up the next morning hungover and catastrophically broke. He will probably dread this cardroom for a long time, if the incident doesn't outright sink him financially. That's obviously not good for the cardroom either, so it's in its interest to do damage control if a patron goes nuts at the table.

(On the question of morality, it's a toss-up for me as to whether it's wrong to take advantage of this guy. It just depends, and there's no one answer. But this seemed much more geared toward questions of policy.)

I remember something similar happening when I was watching people play roulette at a local casino. A lady who obviously had severe gambling/alcohol/ mental health problems proceeded to lose around 4-5k in the span of not even 30 mins. She kept telling the casino employee how she'd lost her rent money and how angry her husband would be if she didn't get it all back, meanwhile she's loading 200-300 at a time and just keeps drinking. Really killed the buzz at that area too, she would tug her hair and have a little freak out every time she proceeded to dump money. Pretty sad sight imo.

I can see why the casino doesn't interfere in these matters, too much money can be made, and if the person is able bodied enough to carry out the bets then they really have no obligation to watch out for the personal well being of individuals. Even if the guy in your story was going to end up driving, I'm sure once he dusted all his money off at the casino and vacated the casino property they could care less. Really sucks, but that's the gross part of poker, not only being in the presence of real degeneracy, but directly profiting from it. I'm actually half surprised the casino didn't kick him out of the poker room at an attempt to get him into a pit game lol

Imagine playing the higher stakes, same scenario, except the player blows 10-20k in one night. For all you know that guy just blew his life savings, yet that's what you play for.

You make some assumptions that you really can't make.

From seeing a guy get drunk one night you can't assume he is an alcoholic or that he has serious issues.

Nor can you assume he is driving home. Perhaps he has a ride or will be taking a cab.

Now beyond that. You don;t tell us where the casino is located There may be (and likely are) legal requirements that the casino not allow an intoxicated person to gamble, and certainly not to serve alcohol to someone who is already intoxicated. It might be illegal for them to allow him to bring in his own alcohol.

San Jose:

And in most states, the ABC regulations usually require that they stop serving people who are clearly drunk.

Right, the losing money part is not the casino's business but serving alcohol to clearly drunk people is and applies to bars also, I think. But, since this is the topic, I'm going to relate one of my favorite stories:

Years ago, at Casino Arizona, we had a 15-30 Stud game. I showed up one night and the only seat was to the right of a stranger who had all of the chips. There are 2 ways to have all of the chips: Play bad and get lucky or play good and get lucky and there are more ways to play bad. It took one hand to see what was going on. Every time the action was on him he'd bet or raise, nothing else and he had a drink in his hand. Of course he was getting huge action and winning nearly every hand, a real ride up on the variance rocket. Every time the waitress came over he'd order a double scotch. Then the inevitable: He started to lose and when he'd gone through 3/4 of his chips he reached into his pocket and pulled out a piece of paper.

The front of the paper was headed 'Tucson Alcoholics Anonymous' (Tucson being about 1.5 hours south) w/ a list of names that he started calling. He turned the paper over and it said 'Tucson Gamblers Anonymous' and he called some of those numbers also. Then he started winning again, his phone started ringing, he wouldn't answer, I mentioned the ringing phone, he said he didn't want to talk to those people, so I dropped it.

A bit later the waitress came over and he said something like 'Imddghirugh.' She says 'What?' He said 'kkwoduyyf'! She says 'What?' So I say that he wants a double scotch. It's CAZ policy to kick you out at that point and I saw her talking to a manager but I also noticed the casino manager (who knew me a bit) standing there and went over and told them that they couldn't let him get into a car, it would be the same as murder so they just cut him off.

I prob saved somebody a really bad time.

Only in the most extreme cases. And when I say extreme I am saying .01 or .001 of the patronage that comes in where you can break the custom of the kind of examples that Jimulacrum alluded to in his first paragraph.

From my experience, as an alcohol server for nearly 8 years, I have never refused a sale to a customer that I know has a problem. And I would consider many customers had problems, coming in day after day buying a bottle of spirits. But there was this one case, she would easily drink a box of wine in a day and then proceed to passout and when she passed out at night in the middle of what is usually a busy road during the day and the ambulance had to be called out where she was diagnosed with alcohol poisoning - that was that I was going to refuse her service the next time she came in even if she was sober. But luckily I had left the business so never had to enforce that decision.

This is the correct answer. There are two forms of liability. The drunk can try to claim that the room pushed him or her into drinking. That's very difficult to prove in court, but it is possible. The more dangerous liability comes from serving a drunk individual who later gets in an accident. Unfortunately for the people working at the casino, the **** in that case rolls downs to them. There will be a policy that follows the law stating that it is every employee's responsibility to enforce it. The reality is that the employee will be punished for not being customer service orientated if they do something about it on a regular basis. Not surprisingly, most decide that the number of drunks>>number of accidents caused by them and just let it slide.

What the casino is required to or should do is an issue of itself. As you don't mention where you were in particular there's no way to know what they are required to do. (Though from your description of the place and your name, I could probably guess where you were) Businesses will do what they can get away with which is what their patrons allow to happen. But if you don't think they are doing what they should, you have a choice to make as to wether you will contiune to patronize them.

As for your first point, you have a choice to make. Asking what the casino's obligation is is one thing but what is your moral obligation here? What did you do to help this person you saw as being in trouble? Did you tell him to stop drinking? Did you voice your concerns to the other players at the table? Did you call the floor and raise your concern for his health and well being? Perhaps they cannot take action until 'officially' requested to by a customer. You obviously didn't mind helping him part with his money as you didn't get up to leave. Claiming you stayed because someone else would just take the seat is a cop out in my eyes. At the end of the day, your staying there and not trying to stop it says as much about you and your issues as it does his.

I think your second paragraph is utterly ridiculous. I am a patron it is not my job, and maybe it isn't the casinos either that is my question.... I also don't think it is a copout to say that if the guy is donating money I might as will be the person he donated to... What good would letting somebody else clean up off of him do?

And I'm also not going to be the person who visibly tells the floor to take away the guy who everybody is getting stacks off of. That is not my responsibility, I am just a customer... But as a human being I legitimately felt bad for this guy

From an insurance standpoint this is called vicarious liability. They are definitely negligent is serving an obviously intoxicated person.

Sent from my LG-LS980 using 2+2 Forums

Whether it is your job is irrelevant to the question of your moral responsibility.

I remember playing with one of those drinkers on a mission like 4 years ago. He was getting loud but not belligerent and generally kept it together well enough to keep playing. Shortly before passing out he was like "Yeah, so my unit is going to Afghanistan tomorrow"

He wanted to get as drunk as he possibly could, it's probably best that he did it in a room full of people rather than alone in his room.

In Vegas they generally only stop you if you throw up, pass out, can't follow the game, or start insulting people. I'm kind of ok with that.

So it sounds like your answer is 'My job there is to make a profit. If I make a profit from someone I consider to be a danger to themselves that's okay in my book'. If you don't walk away or can't take a moment to at least ask the floor what the policy is there, it seems you are not really feeling too bad for the guy at the end of the day. If you're worried that others at the table will think badly of you for doing what is arguably the right thing by another person, you might have your priorities a little skewed. Therefore it seems you consider your moral responsiblity to be zero in this case.

And that makes you a bad human in this situation in my book.

As I said in my first paragragh before, there is what the casino should do, is required to do, and what the patrons allow them to get away with. You seem to want another entitiy, the casino, to make some decision. If an official is not made aware of the concerns of one or more patrons to a particular situation, how can they be made to act on whatever their policy might be?

Poker is an amoral activity. The minimum standard of behavior is complying with the rules and laws. People can have higher standards. Therefore, I respect (not necessarily agree) that someone states, "I'm making a living and if someone wants to spew off 1000BB in 1/2 hour, I'm not going to stop them." I respect someone who states, "If someone literally doesn't understand what is going on around them, I'm going to do what I can to help them get out of the situation. In the end if I can't help them, I won't profit from it."

What I don't understand is saying, "Gee somebody should stop this, it is wrong, but I'm not going to take any action myself to do so."

Its not my job. Nor is it any other players.

But is it the casinos? That is my question. Quit acting like you guys are poker jesus and get off your high horses.

The issue for me is not whether the person may have an addiction; it's whether an individual is so incapacitated that he can't really consent to any type of activity, business transaction, gambling wager, etc.

Great counterargument, it really demonstrates that you read the responses that people took time to write for you.

Nor is it the casino's.

Lol at calling people who has a different moral code than you being on high horses.

This. The argument goes beyond what is or isn't one's "job". It's a morality argument - there's no right or wrong answer.

At the poker table, players benefit from such an incapacitated person; in the pits, the casino does. I don't think a casino has any more or less ethical obligation than a fellow player does. Whatever answer you feel is most appropriate should be the same for both casino and fellow players.

If all of the 'holier-than-thous' want to give up their seat while they ask the floor or ownership where the responsibility/liability/civic duties lie here, then I will gladly take their seat. It will go into my journal accordingly, as bb/hr or bb/100 and hopefully positive. I don't see it as any different than seeing a table full of pros and deciding not to play there.

This is the prototypical table selection setup: one walks around the room taking mental notes of chipstacks and behavior and drawing on previous encounters--all in hopes of finding the guy ordering double scotches or getting sloshed before his tour of duty. If you aren't then maybe you aren't being responsible to yourself and your own duty to find the best opportunities to turn a profit.

This argument typically turns into "but I just want to play the best poker against the best players in order to further my game and increase my skills/experience." Sure, I'm all for pushing your limits and testing your skills versus the best, but I'll never say no to easy money. And also, 100% agree with "if I leave because I find it reprehensible to take this drunk man's money, somebody else will just swoop in to take my spot." DON'T GIVE UP THAT SPOT!

I know this post reads as scumbaggish to some, but it's either money with my name on it, somebody else's if I walk, or even worse [gag] the pit game's.

The drunk is an adult and is responsible for his own actions that led him there. I don't have a problem with people wanting to play against him. Hell, I've been that drunk guy many times, and I blame nobody but myself when I lose money because of it.

Sorry for the derail, but I hope the drunk didn't try to drive himself home. Should the casino have some obligation to make sure that didn't happen (as in give him a room or call a cab for him)? Just asking out loud.

OP said the institution he played at did not have a hotel. The cab thing, I think is more of the overlapping bartender/server duty to not serve a visibly intoxicated person. Once he's pouring his own outside, I don't really know who's hands it's in--but I'd like to think that a person who felted him would call the cab as a thank you once the ATM says it's at the limit.

(In all seriousness though, I don't think they have any obligation if he can safely make it off the premises, like somebody else said earlier. Especially since he was pouring his own after last call, it wasn't their poison that contributed.)

So it's ok to take money from people because they are stupid/ignorant, but if they are drunk/mentally ill than suddenly we crossed a threshold violating some moral honor code.

If you step into the ring with a professional boxer and challenge him to a fight wagering money on yourself - is it dishonorable for him to defeat you if you show up drunk and barely coherent? No. The boxer is a professional who fights his best against anyone that he thinks he has an edge on. His job is to win. The casino staff are professionals performing their work in a profession that was deemed legal as a result of the democratic process.

I wouldn't even agree with the statement that fixed odds games are rigged. A rigged game implies that there is some sort of deception occurring which is influencing the results in the casino's favor. No. There is no hidden information. All the terms of the deal are clear as crystal for you, and will be explained if you ask.

If that woman's husband trusted his mentally unsound wife with all his finances, that is his decision that he has to live with. If I make a crack head my joint holder on my checking account, I shouldn't be suprised to find my funds missing one day. He should have done his due diligence and protected his assets.

**** em. If they won a stack off you with their 93o I guarantee they wouldn't feel **** for you. Your in the casinos spot, and they smile and watch idiots and degenerates walk out winners all the time.

I honor my agreements, I take care of my family, I pay my taxes, and vote in favor of social programs for the poor and unfortunate. If some fool doesn't take advantage of them and squanders his wealth I could care less.