Title says it all. This player was even bad with hand rankings, well-dressed, and not caring too much about the outcome, aside from feeling a little embarrassed about his lack of understanding of the game. MAWG, perfect English, no visible impairments. **Keeps rebuying $200**

The dealer says "You should probably move to 2/4 limit until you learn how to play. This game isn't for you."

The player leaves, and half the table is upset and the other half is not. I'm stone-faced and silent.

I may feel compelled to interject with my view, but I won't taint the responses upfront.

Should a piano have fallen on this dealer after a lighting strike from the poker gods?

The piano and lightning should probably be a written warning, and it should come from management, not the poker gods.

It's as inappropriate for a dealer to suggest a table change - be it upward or downward or for skill reasons or behavioral reasons - unless it was solicited.

If the dealer thinks that someone isn't having fun, I wouldn't oppose them alerting the floor, who would come by and make sure that the player understands all their options. The end result may be the same - the player leaves the table - but the process is more transparent.

Why would he get a written warning? He’s clearly acting in the best interest of the casino. They want players to lose their money slowly with pots staying as close above max rake as possible.

In a perfect world, he feeds the limit rake for a couple minutes and then loses the rest of his gambling budget in the pits. Players losing their money too fast in the poker room is bad for business. That’s probably the main reason why most smaller games are capped.

It's in the part of my post that you deleted when you quoted?

Dealers - or casino employees in general - shouldn't give unsolicited advice on what games to play. If something goes wrong the casino is likely to be the target of the person's ire.

Just like if a dealer or floor or server pressures someone into drinking.

Don't think the dealer should have done that , BUT it might be a room policy that is not openly discussed. If so, then I can see why the dealer would do it.

You mentioning sitting "stone-faced and silent" kind of infers you were on team Pissed Off. Apologies if I read that wrong.
I get that these opportunities are mana from the poker gods to the 1-2 grinder but I applaud the dealer here, on the proviso that he acted in the interest of the player more so than in the interest of the casino.
I just think the line has to be drawn somewhere.
Obviously in the main dealers shouldn't be deciding who is or isn't capable of managing themselves but these guys see regs targeting fish, bum hunting, changing seats, using whatever tricks they have to get their hourly, and unless the dealer in question does this kind of thing on a regular basis it just feels like he's seen enough questionable behaviour for the day/week/lifetime and was compelled to act. Good on him. He's human.

I'm glad you're hiding your feelings on the subject.

I am guessing that this player was slowing down the game massively because he didn't know what he was doing, which has been known to tilt dealers. It might make a difference if the remark was unsolicited or in response to a question but, in the latter case, it maybe could have been phrased differently as an option that the player may do instead of what the player should do.

As someone who often plays PLO, I won't give an obvious newbie any useful strategic advice, but I will sometimes make sure they know that two cards in their hand must play because I think that losing because they don't know the rules is more likely to cause them to never try omaha again and I'd rather shear a sheep multiple times than dine on mutton.

Fair. Next.

It is an area where you need to accept that the room and you have different objectives. The room wants the player to stay and return. They are always there, so the longer the player plays, the more rake is received. You have this one shot to get the money. You aren't always going to be there when he is playing. Since the room owns the space and pays the support people, they get to decide.

You could complain, but all you're going to get is some lip service from the floor. The dealer is going to be told out back, "don't pay any attention to him, you did the right thing."

I dunno. To all those who say the dealer did a good and compassionate thing:
should every blackjack dealer tell every potential player they shouldn't sit because the game is -EV?
should waiters suggest water over coke and salad over cheeseburgers to fat customers?

It's one thing if the player is impaired. Either they're drunk or intellectually incapable of understanding what's going on. Then sure the dealer/server has a moral reason to interject. Otherwise I think they should stay out of it. I don't want a dealer suggesting a player who's good or appear rich play higher either.

I've seen players who were so new that they seemingly don't know the basic rules of the game. Like a guy who when told "It's $15 to call" apparently doesn't know he has the option to fold. As a player or dealer it's perhaps okay to gently suggest after the hand "you know you can fold right?". Maybe even a gentle "perhaps you want to brush up on the rules of the game". Poker after all isn't like many of the carnival games they're used to playing that don't involve actual decision making. Beyond that though let the customer do what the customer wants to do.

Are you sure?

Guy loses $200 at 1/2 NL, gets told to move to 2/4 LHE by a casino employee, somehow manages to lose $300 there, and you don't think he'll be mad at the casino?

There's no possibility the guy overestimates his skill at poker and for whatever reason thinks he's doing fine at the table, and takes offense at the suggestion he can't hack it at this table?

Probably doesn't apply to the OP, but if people at 1/2 NL are one race and people at 2/4 LHE are predominantly another, and a new player at 1/2 NL who matches the race of the LHE table gets suggested to move, you don't think there will be accusations of a race component?

i misread the title as Beginner Spewing Chips @1/2NL, Dealer Advises Him to Sit@ 2/4NL

Would anyone have a problem with that?

Players need to learn how to entertain the whale at all stakes. Instead, they complain online after he leaves.

At cash plo, it is very common for a player to sit at the short feeder table and get confused when he is dealt four cards. If he says he wanted nl, the true "players" all give tidbits of advice to try to have him stay.

I would have told the player "his money will last longer but you cant go all in like on tv over there" in response to the dealer rather than sit stonefaced and silent.

I usually agree with you, callip. But not here.

This is an issue that can relate to problem gambling. Now, granted, these are pretty low stakes. But a cardroom could very well be within its rights in advising someone playing a high stakes game to move down, if management thinks the person is losing money he or she cannot afford to lose.

Saying it in front of the rest of the table bothers me a little. I would think the proper procedure would be to have the floor talk to the person away from the table. But "you really shouldn't be playing this game" is part of the system of checks and balances against problem gambling and casinos can definitely say that to someone if the person is a big enough loser.

This discussion has meandered a bit into hypothetical areas that don't necessarily apply to the individual situation in my OP. So I'll ask:

How is this different from a dealer doing the same thing to someone who knows the mechanics of the game but not the strategy, and spews off buy-in after buy-in for hours? (We've all seen this guy.) Dealers never tell this guy to get up. Given the answer to this, how does it affect your view on the situation?

Also, what if this weren't poker? Would the pit boss be happy if a BJ dealer did this?

How do you identify problem gambling? What about my OP indicated problem gambling here?

He kept his mouth shut at the table. After that he's welcome to his opinion. Though I would never assume to tell the Poker Gods how to work their mysterious ways (Karma?).

That was a bit of subtle humor. Usually people post things here because they're unhappy with the outcome and want to know if they have a good reason to be.

The other 99 out of 100 times he’ll lose a solid part of his buy-in to the 2/4 rake trap instead of a 1/2NL reg. Pretty sure the casino is OK with him being upset that one time.
If the dealer encouraged a player to switch to another game where the casino can rake a higher percentage of his buy-in? Why should the pit boss be unhappy about that? He should like employees who look out for the bottom line of the business.

As a dealer, I can promise you that no dealer is thinking about which way is the best way for a player to lose the most money to rake over time. This dealer is probably feeling sympathy for the guy and feels that 2/4L is a better fit for him as it's more beginner friendly. That being said, I would never tell a player what to do with their money, they knew they risked to lose it once they came to the casino. It's also very unprofessional to say anything.

Just to be clear, the fact that it is sometimes hard to identify problem gambling (true) doesn't mean that casinos have no responsibility to prevent it.

ALL casinos have mechanisms in place to sometimes back players off, move them down, or even exclude them. That is part of the deal they make to obtain a public license. How often they should do this or what form it should take is a legitimate question (and as I said, on that narrow point, I definitely don't want dealers to tell the player this in front of the other players).

But on some level, telling someone they really shouldn't play in a particular game is well within the powers and rights of a casino, and the fact that it might prevent some other players from making money off the person isn't really a compelling reason not to do it.

Lawdude, you are on point if a player is being talked to by someone in casino management, but I don't think a poker dealer qualifies here.

Another possibility. Obviously I'm guessing.

Don't discount a line of thought by the dealer which went: "This **** is slowing my game to a crawl and it's costing me money."

Dealer should obviously not say anything as described, because he can alienate and upset the player. Dealer's job is to keep the game running smoothly, not to become an active participant at the table.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

Exactly. If the casino decides someone shouldn't be playing, they should be banned from playing by a manager, not told to move to another table by a dealer.