RR-- You say Vegas isn't a great poker market...where is the best poker market to get a job as a dealer right now?? I've been dealing forever in Houston and I'm sick of the chance of robbery or raids or whatever. These games get so big, that it just attracts too much attention. I'm dealing the WSOP this year, but I would like to deal after (in Vegas or someplace else). Where is the best place to go?

And you are right, the game does "slow down'' for you after a while, hell, I can deal 10/20 PLO with my eyes closed, but I like to be around it and I love my job.

The three markets that I would recommend (in no particular order) are Arizona, LA, and Black Hawk CO. The poker in Vegas has improved a lot with the poker boom. Prior to the boom Vegas was possibly the worst market for poker. I have heard really good things about Northen Cal, but I have no firsthand knowledge of what is going on up there. Generally places where they make poker their business are better then places where poker is an afterthought.

The same thing the floor people do . . .

Fair enough. Your right. I do strive for things that others don't care for...and that is my knock. I judge people a little quickly. I'll take that hit.....

The second part...I have to defend myself.
I think it's because I have run into soooo many disgruntled dealers in my life I can't stand it anymore! I don't not hire people because of age or too much experience...that's not even close to the truth. I don't hire people because they have a bad attitude. And if I had to hire 100 dealers blindfolded (which is what you are practically doing when you open a new room in a new city)...I'll take the newbies out of school....they are less likely to have a bad attitude towards the casino life. Working nights, weekends, holidays, etc is a tough life...and doing it for years makes you a little hard.
You can comment that I'm wrong....but deep down you are thinking in your mind right now of dealers you know that fit this description. And all I'm saying is...I am trying to avoid that guy. And if hiring someone inexperienced, that will within a few months be plenty good enough...and I lessen my risk for a bad attitude....that's the direction I'm going.
And apparently I am not alone in my thinking (as per one of your previous posts about new hires).

Respectfully.....Alydom

True. But they have a little better resume...makes them more valuable.

Woops... you're doing it again. They don't have a "better" resume, they have a "different" resume. RR above described an example of a poker floor with one of those "better" resumes who knew NOTHING about the game.

And I understand your concerns with disgruntled dealers. I don't know how to tell disgruntled from experienced on a resume. Hence the interview process. Which admittedly is easy to fake for many who've done a few interviews. Hard problem. But if you just summarily excuse anyone with 10 years of experience, you are probably breaking the law if the applicant is >39.

When it comes to hiring floorpeople, shifts, tournament directors....I am spot on. You can't b.s. your way thru that interview with me.
Ever meet someone who says they know a lot about poker? How long does it take to figure out their full of crap? About 20 seconds?

Now if human resources is doing the hiring....anything is possible!

Well, I certainly don't want to break the law by not hiring old farts >39...hey wait a minute, I'm 42!

Does anyone know if they drug test for the wsop and if they take hair or urine?

I don't know the answer to this, but I'm going to feel pretty hopeless about the world if I find out that they test dealers for drugs but not for actual poker dealing ability.

While you have described CET's usual hiring practice ..... they do not do preemployment drug tests for the WSOP. I am told that when Harrahs took it over they wanted to drug test, but someone was able to convince them they could not get enough staff if they did.