Prop play for $8.75/hr

[3mptyseat]

that story was from my rookie year too. I have seen some crazy stuff and wasted a good portion of my 20's reading Dick Francis novels (originally on paperback, more recently on kindle for iphone) and 2 plus 2's latest. I have never known a 'shill'. At least, I never knew that I knew a 'shill', if in fact I have known one. If 'shilling' goes on here in Northern California, it does so without the frown and badge of the 'proposition player'. But, I guess its possible. I am a prop player online as well, and its strictly forbidden to discuss the situation, details, etc, period. You can't tell anyone ur a prop. And you can't be mean, those are the rules. For some reason I feel like there is a breech of trust on the house's part when it comes to having such players. I see why they have them, and I see why they don't disclose the fact, but I still don't like it.
Anyway, one of my points was that shilling may very well take place in card clubs here in Nor Cal and elsewhere, and much like the props online, no one who is a 'shill', a non cheating one obvi, is permitted to talk about it. Any thoughts?
I can't see it being legal with the cities that issue the licenses for the dealers, the floormen, and the props, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen...

If this seems incredibly out of nowhere, it is. I was just trying to make some folks laugh in a heated thread that was based on an off base claim by a member,IMHO. And as tangents go, Here we are... the link to my post from that thread is here...>https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/inet-playthrough-not-changing.41405/

 

[PokingStars]

A shill plays with the casino's money, therefore he is playing for the casino. I don't like it. I just plain don't like it.

 

[3mptyseat]

A shill plays with the casino's money, therefore he is playing for the casino. I don't like it. I just plain don't like it.

Yup, that's the diff between a shill (casinos $) and a prop (players $) If u read this thread, I was given a education on these semantic differences...

Why don't you like shills? I mean, I don't think they are very common, but assuming the casino wanted to stake someone, i don't see any difference between that scenario and one where the staked 'horse' gets his BR from say, a wealthy gambler trying to offset his losses at the tiles by investing in a consistent winner.
I guess the obvious exception would be that the 'shill' as an employee might know the other reg's intimately. Of course the 'shill' would also know the dealers and chip runners well too, opening the door for a conspiracy. But the fact remains, any unethical behavior would still be pretty hard to conceal, esp. over a long stretch of time...
Probably a moot point anyway though. I don't know any casinos that use 'shills' here in California. And any player on the table who is a current employee of the house or carries a city gaming license from another casino in the same town is required by ordinance to wear a badge advising people of his/her status as an employee which brings even more attention and critical speculation on the player by conspiracy theorists/losing players at the table.
I guess my question is, since its not 1868 riverboat poker, why do u object to house backed players at the tables?

 

[rockycatt]

Yup, that's the diff between a shill (casinos $) and a prop (players $) If u read this thread, I was given a education on these semantic differences...

Why don't you like shills? I mean, I don't think they are very common, but assuming the casino wanted to stake someone, i don't see any difference between that scenario and one where the staked 'horse' gets his BR from say, a wealthy gambler trying to offset his losses at the tiles by investing in a consistent winner.
I guess the obvious exception would be that the 'shill' as an employee might know the other reg's intimately. Of course the 'shill' would also know the dealers and chip runners well too, opening the door for a conspiracy. But the fact remains, any unethical behavior would still be pretty hard to conceal, esp. over a long stretch of time...
Probably a moot point anyway though. I don't know any casinos that use 'shills' here in California. And any player on the table who is a current employee of the house or carries a city gaming license from another casino in the same town is required by ordinance to wear a badge advising people of his/her status as an employee which brings even more attention and critical speculation on the player by conspiracy theorists/losing players at the table.
I guess my question is, since its not 1868 riverboat poker, why do u object to house backed players at the tables?

here's a thought why id object = because a fella playing with others money stands to loose nothing he wont loose a penny if he calls a re raise from a set of aces [no fear ] and he holding a double pair then because he calls
he sucks out a boat on the river

using his own roll he very may well fold to a Allin from my set AAA

comments please respectfully R C

 

[ShayDrew]

here's a thought why id object = because a fella playing with others money stands to loose nothing he wont loose a penny if he calls a re raise from a set of aces [no fear ] and he holding a double pair then because he calls
he sucks out a boat on the river

using his own roll he very may well fold to a Allin from my set AAA

comments please respectfully R C

I agree 100% and that situation can be seen so many times - the pocket Tens pre flop get shoved all in when its the house's money, but not when its your own etc etc - that is what makes poker a great game especially no limit as unless you have a neverending bankroll these decisions can make or break you - but if you take the fear away (Casino's Money) what have you got to lose? So you play very differently.

 

[3mptyseat]

I agree 100% and that situation can be seen so many times - the pocket Tens pre flop get shoved all in when its the house's money, but not when its your own etc etc - that is what makes poker a great game especially no limit as unless you have a neverending bankroll these decisions can make or break you - but if you take the fear away (Casino's Money) what have you got to lose? So you play very differently.

You have ur job as a shill to lose. Thats the easiest answer.

First off, I think I see ur point; house money could make a game juicier than it would be other wise. But one would have to reason that any shill making choices with the staked money would be under scrutiny from the house to make profits with the stake. So, if u consider that most players are attempting to likewise make profits, I don't see how a shill makes a difference on the game...

More over, I am wondering about the set of Aces scenario Rocky? If I am calling a big bet with 2 pair from a player holding AA and an ace on the board, the no pair of the board would save my hand. In fact, a pair of the board would give the AAA a better boat than I could have. The situation u might have been considering is a set over set scenario. For example, I am holding TT and the other player holds AA. The flop comes TAK, now I could draw to quads with a T on either of the remaining streets, but that is the only way I can beat the AAA besides a flush.

Anyway, I appreciate ur feed back. I know a lot of people would not like shills playing at the table. And I know it fosters mistrust. Which led me to wonder why? But I can't really think of a reasonable answer...

 

[rockycatt]

a staked player may very well play the way he thinks his staker wants him to opposed to the way he maY play with his own $$ you must have seen them players getting quizzed by the stakers when they bust out of a attractive position

its not about trust with me because trust broken = deceit /cheat no'

its like the same to me i want to play against a UN influenced player = no stake or helping software program ie poker office or such

the game isn't pure any more gangs join up to mtt;s

telephone cheats at sit and goes chip dumping and it out there the sites agree that there constantly policeing to ferret them out

comments please R C

 

[3mptyseat]

a staked player may very well play the way he thinks his staker wants him to opposed to the way he maY play with his own $$ you must have seen them players getting quizzed by the stakers when they bust out of a attractive position

its not about trust with me because trust broken = deceit /cheat no'

its like the same to me i want to play against a UN influenced player = no stake or helping software program ie poker office or such

the game isn't pure any more gangs join up to mtt;s

telephone cheats at sit and goes chip dumping and it out there the sites agree that there constantly policeing to ferret them out

comments please R C

My comments are just on the amount of staked money that is out there. From sites like chipmeup to stakemychips to thedonkeyfarm there are stakers and horses every where and thought u may not realize it and some may not like it, it's leagal and there is nothing wrong with it in principle. As I have stated, I have know a number of pro type players that were such bad gamblers in every other square inch of the casino that they were nearly always on a stake. Others I have known (a few of which I have staked myself) are careless but knowledgeable players when they have their own money on the table and yet, they are brilliant and profitable when on a stake...
So I dont know, I am still waiting to hear a good opponent stance against shills of the legal variety and staked play in general...