Here in Florida, we don’t put too much stock in the ruling of a single judge. Monday’s decision against “designated-player” card games at pari-mutuel poker rooms, for example, won’t have any immediate effect, and by the time the courts have sorted things out, the legislature might have already acted.
Administrative Law Judge Suzanne Van Wyk, specifically addressing a poker room in Jacksonville, Florida, said this type of game violates the state’s ban on banked card games. “As currently operated, the designated player is a player in name only. The existing operation of the games does no more than establish a bank against which participants play,” Van Wyk wrote in a 54-page ruling.
But the card rooms in Florida that offer Ultimate Texas Hold ‘em, 3-Card Poker, and similar games likely will continue, because attorneys indicate an appeal is coming.
The ruling went the way it should have. But had the state’s Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering not blundered in 2012 by approving the games, the card rooms would not have gone to the expense of bringing in special tables, reconfiguring their floor space, and hiring staff. Still, the lawyers for the racetrack casinos argued that because the state gave its approval, mistakenly or not, the games were legal. Perhaps an appeals court will find the argument more convincing.
The racetrack casinos also can rightfully cry politics: the state, not coincidentally, filed to shut down the games in December just as the Seminole Tribe and Florida Governor Rick Scott were announcing an agreement that could have brought $3 billion in revenues to the state over a seven-year period. (That agreement died in the Florida Legislature without a vote.)
Because Florida card rooms don’t break out their revenues by type of game, there is no public record of how much money the “designated-player” games have made. But let’s estimate: the card rooms made $147 million total in the fiscal year ending June 30, with only about half of them offering the games that the lawsuit addressed. And the card rooms that did have these games ran them on only a few tables, compared to a roomful of Texas Hold ‘em action.
So perhaps somewhere between five and ten percent of poker room revenues – let’s call it $15 million per year – was potentially affected by the ruling. That assumes that if the games vanished, those who played wouldn’t switch to other games, like putting down $300 to play $2-$5 no-limit poker instead. All that being said, you can’t really blame the racetrack casinos for battling for every dollar they can, especially in South Florida, competing against the Seminole casinos.
The concept of games continuing while legalities are being worked out is a familiar to Florida gamers, including the tribe. A five-year, $1 billion state compact with the Seminoles, for exclusive rights to table games, expired on July 31, 2015, but blackjack, baccarat and other table games have continued at Seminole casinos. That’s because the tribe has filed suit against the state, arguing that legislators have not negotiated in good faith. (The Seminoles are holding the money that would rightfully go to the state in escrow while the lawsuit plays out.)
It’s also important to understand context. The banked card games lawsuit and the Seminoles good-faith complaint are two significant matters that legislators cite as delays for rewriting state gambling laws. They reason that it’s not urgent to hammer out compromises and approve a compact when it all could come undone anyway, especially with a third lawsuit pending that could bring slots to at least six Florida counties, ending a monopoly the Seminoles have outside of South Florida. (Right now, only Broward and Miami-Dade counties, that is, the Fort Lauderdale and Miami markets, can have slots at pari-mutuels.) Perhaps the capital of Florida should be renamed Incremental Change.
Because allowing designated player games in the card rooms was a mistake by the state, judge Van Wyk slammed the idea that they were legal. “Given the strict statutory prohibition against gambling, the intricate regulatory scheme imposed, and the narrow carve out for cardrooms, the games cannot be allowed to continue to operate in the current manner,” Van Wyk wrote.
She also neglected to say that except for Florida card rooms, the aforementioned games are found in casino pits, next to blackjack and baccarat. There’s a reason for the exception: these games involved players going against the house, which is verboten in Florida, Seminole gaming excepted.
“If a mannequin was sitting in the designated player’s seat, or you just put a Coke can there, the games would play no differently than if a living, breathing, human being was sitting there. They’d play the exact same way. Literally, all the designated player does is sit next to the chips,” Department of Business and Professional Regulation lawyer William Hall said during a hearing in the case on June 1. ”Can that person legitimately be called a player?” (I love that quote, but where was this clarity four years ago when the state was making its decisions?)
What’s the bottom line? Short of lawmen storming card rooms and making mass arrests, the Monday ruling doesn’t mean much because an appeal is on the way. That’s just how we roll here in Florida.
