On an early Saturday morning, the surveillance agent performing a routine audit of player ratings from the previous day compared the rating information listed on the rating card to the video. Again, the information didn’t match what he could see on the video from the game. The player listed on the card as playing first spot on BJ Six and wagering an average of $500 a hand from 9PM to midnight, simply wasn’t there. The agent checked the video from the game for the previous 24 hours with no luck. After speaking to his supervisor, they decided to look for the player on the other blackjack games that the floorperson who’d completed the card had been assigned to. Maybe the floorperson was just confused. Again, no such player was found.The surveillance agents then pulled all the rating cards completed by that floorperson for the previous month. They found rating cards submitted daily for the same player. Of the hundreds of hours rated, the player was never located on video for any of the alleged play.When Surveillance checked that player’s account, they found that she was a top-ranked player with considerable value in her account. Her comp record indicated that she redeemed her points as soon as they became available.Surveillance checked their player records and spoke with table game management; no one knew who this particular player was, nor had anyone else rated her play.Further investigation determined that the female player was the girlfriend of the floorperson. The floorperson simply falsified her play on the rating card, thus earning her unearned points for her account. They fraudulently obtained cashback and comps, and had done so for over a year. Unfortunately, continued investigation located ten more floorpersons who were also falsifying ratings for their “friends and family.” The casino lost tens of thousands of dollars in cash, food, alcohol, rooms, and show tickets to this fraud. All of the involved floorpeople were fired and controls were put in place to prevent, hopefully, such fraud from reoccurring.The above scenario actually happened, and still does in casinos across the country on a regular basis.Over the course of my career as a Director of Surveillance, I’ve spent a lot of time investigating internal theft and fraud that occurred in player rating programs and players clubs. I’ve learned that the rating process and system is extremely vulnerable to employees looking for an easy way to steal from their employers, and that a single case of fraud can cost a company millions of dollars!Unfortunately, these types of thefts continue to occur, and I believe it is because we just don’t pay enough attention to what our employees are doing with our reward programs. While both the rating of players and the players club itself are matters of concern, in this article I will focus primarily on the vulnerabilities and issues involved in the rating of players in Table Games.Nowadays, the rating of players is one of, if not the primary function, of floor personnel. We want players rated in order to market to them and reward them accurately for their play. Players also want to be recognized and rewarded accurately for their play.But, as we’ve seen, there is a dark side to player ratings. I believe there are two concerns with respect to player ratings:1) the potential for fraud due to lack of controls and accountability, and2) that we don’t rate many players accurately in the first place.Floorpersons miss many player wagers, time in/out, buy-ins, and wins/losses that they must later reconstitute from memory, dealer input, or even worse, balance the rating to the float, ultimately entering an incorrect, if not fictitious, player rating in the system.Additionally, because the information going in is inaccurate and/or incomplete, the potential for an employee to commit fraud increases, as well as his/her ability to hide the fraud.Another concerning issue is that a number of players who qualify to be rated aren’t ever approached by a floorperson at all. They usually leave after a while, maybe to another casino where their play is better appreciated.I can tell you that in every rating audit I’ve been involved in, the vast majority of ratings we reviewed were found to be inaccurate. Not always fraudulent, but usually inaccurate. While we know that we can’t be perfect, we should try to be close.See Chart 1 below, illustrating a summary of a player rating audit.So, what can we do to both reward our players fairly and accurately, and protect our casino from the theft and fraud that will occur if we don’t pay attention to it?Use the following guidelines to immediately improve your rating program:
- Ensure specific and authorized formulas are used by all games personnel to rate players. Whatever your formula and/or procedure (if you don’t have one, get one) for determining a player’s average bet, skill level, or time in/out, make sure that it is being used. A lot of floorpeople out there are making it up as they go along. This is true for all games.
- Review ratings submitted for accuracy. I realize that we can’t review every rating, but we can review every rating above a certain amount, say $200 or more. Of course, that amount can be adjusted for each casino. When a pit supervisor reviews and signs off on such ratings, the potential for rating fraud will decrease and accuracy will increase.
- Ask IT to review the computer access to your rating system in order to ensure that only authorized personnel at the appropriate security level can access the system. Remove any generic logons and passwords.
- Request the Surveillance Department, if they aren’t already, to audit player ratings on a regular basis. Doing so will identify floor personnel who require additional training or motivation, and send a clear message to the staff that ratings are critical to the property’s success and must be completed properly.
- Question the use of refused name ratings. Surveillance sees a lot of ratings for “Refused Name” players. While we do see some refused names who don’t want to be rated for reasons of their own, most of the refused names were never approached by a floorperson in order to get rated. Often the floorperson missed or ignored the action, and now must rate the player to balance the table float. Without a name, the player becomes a refused name player and a missed opportunity.
- Hold your games personnel accountable for failing to rate players correctly. Rating properly is an important component of a property’s marketing and reward programs, and is a fundamental duty and responsibility of every table games floorperson.The above recommendations and constant vigilance are the key to protecting your rating program.
Chart 1 BJ-11 BJ-04 Players Observed 64 245 Players rated 54 169 Refused Name 10 10 Not Approached 2 39 Player not approached % 3.1% 15.9% Not Rated 9 83 Minutes of Unrated Play 128 2751 Minutes of Play Rated 2823 10020 % of play unrated 4.5% 27.5% Average minutes of unrated play per player 14 33 Buy-In Errors Frequency 12% 14% Average Error $359.00 $224.00 Average Bet Errors Frequency 7% 25% Average Error $32.00 $19.00 Win/Loss Errors Frequency 28% 24% Average Error $110.00 $189.00
