London B&M Casinos - Good and Bad

chuchu59

gambling addict
PABnonaccred
CAG
PABinit
Joined
Sep 26, 2004
Location
SOMEWHERE IN ASIA
The most ridiculous thing happens at Baccarat where if there is a tie,you cant get your money back and must wait until there is an outcome ie.either banker or player.
 

GrandMaster

Dormant account
Joined
Jan 21, 2004
Location
UK
gfkostas said:
Just came to my mind.The Hard Rock casino in Leicester square is quite good and also with nice cheerfull atmosphere.Service is fine.Can you endure the asians way of playing though :cool:.I was ready to penetrate with my knife once an asian who got angry at me because I chose to stand on 13 against dealers 2.He was placing bets behind me all the time....eeehhh behind my bet i mean ;) . he never done it since then though.I had to show him whos in charge :p
I have seen it done, but I still don't understand why anyone would let a random stranger make decisions affecting his money. There are a few people like Clayman I could probably trust, but I would certainly not let anyone try the Hood System 3000 with my money. :)
 

gfkostas

Ex-Bonus Whore
Joined
Sep 3, 2003
Location
London
GrandMaster said:
I would certainly not let anyone try the Hood System 3000 with my money. :)


lollll :lolup: I second that


Spearmaster if you ever manage to ger yourself in Crockfords,Ritz club,Les ambassadeurs,FIFTY i would be grateful if you could tell me your experience there and how much you would rate those casinos in terms of service.Thanks
 
Last edited:

spearmaster

RIP Ted
Joined
Jan 12, 2001
Location
Heaven
The first two I could probably wangle invitations to - but to be honest I visit London once a year for meetings and this year it doesn't look like I'll have any time for casino visits :(
 

Clayman

Dormant account
Joined
Mar 12, 2004
Location
Pennsylvania, USA
spearmaster said:
It's good that the casino lets the player in the seat control the cards...In Macau, however, the person who has bet the most money controls the cards, probably by tradition rather than policy...
in fact I don't even look at them except when I expect them to double up their bet on a split or a double.

Is the "piggybacker" required to split when the seated player does or does he have the option of not splitting in which case his bet would revert to the first post-split hand of the seated player? I think this may be how it works in Canada.

If the piggybacker is not required to split when the seated player does, opportunities for collusion exist by the minimum-betting seated player making sacrificial plays for the bigger-betting piggybacker. A reduction in HA of up to 0.2% can be realized in this fashion. Perhaps that's why Macau requires the bigger bet to control the play decision.

For instance, if he doesn't have to, the piggybacker would be crazy to split 8,8 vs 10 if he can just play a hand with an 8 as the first card. In other cases, the seated player would actually make incorrect splits to pass the opportunity of playing the first card to his partner. For instance the seated would always split 2,2 with the piggybacker only going along with it against the 4,5,6.
 

spearmaster

RIP Ted
Joined
Jan 12, 2001
Location
Heaven
In Macau, the person with the most money bet makes the decision - and everyone follows. I would presume that if someone didn't have the money to follow, he would allow the big brother (big money player) to take the bet.
 
Top