No Bust Blackjack Strategy: Does it Work?
Here are some answers to frequently asked questions about the agreement between Gov.
Why are the Mashantucket Pequots allowed to have a casino when they are illegal elsewhere in the state?
Supreme Court and the U.
Congress determined in the late 1980s that Indian tribes may offer high-stakes versions of any wagering allowed elsewhere in the state in which the tribes are located.
It had no slot machines, because they are not allowed elsewhere in the state under any circumstances.
So, how can the governor now say slot machines are allowed at Foxwoods?
The tribe video blackjack at foxwoods the governor are relying on cases in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Arizona.
There, judges have ruled that allowing arcade games such as "Space Invaders", that video blackjack at foxwoods high-scoring players with free games, is sufficient precedent to allow video slots on reservations.
In addition, the state's pact allowing gambling on the Pequot reservation lists video slot machines among the permitted games.
The pact included a moratorium on the installation of such games until the tribe and the state resolved a dispute about whether to permit video slots.
The video blackjack at foxwoods, Weicker and tribal lawyers said, simply has been resolved.
And the moratorium has been lifted.
Can the governor make such a deal without legislative approval?
This is one of the most important questions lawmakers who support casinos are asking.
The answer appears to be yes, according to lawyers.
One reason may be that the original agreement allowing the tribe to run a casino grew out of an arbitration process, after a finding that Connecticut failed to negotiate in good faith.
Had the original video blackjack at foxwoods been negotiated between the governor's office and the tribe, it might have required legislative approval.
But because the first document never was voted on by the legislature, the lawyers contend that changes don't need legislative approval either.
Bureau of Indian Affairs must review all state-tribal gaming contracts and amendments to video blackjack at foxwoods contracts.
Why don't they have to approve this deal?
The state and the tribe claim this is not an amendment, because the compact already listed slot machines among the permitted games at Foxwoods.
The compact also provided a mechanism for lifting the moratorium on slots.
The Bureau of Indian Affairs generally frowns on agreements that require tribes to share gambling revenue with states.
Why does this deal seem acceptable?
Here's where it gets technical.
The federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act strictly limits the ways tribes can use net gambling revenues.
And in the past, the Bureau of Indian Affairs has rejected compacts that called for sharing net revenues with states.
read article revenues.
After that, the payment is based on a formula giving the state 25 cents of every dollar collected by the Foxwoods slot machines.
If revenues fall short of expectations, the state can take up to 30 percent of the gross.
Under what scenario could the payments stop?
If slot machines are legalized elsewhere in the state, the deal is video blackjack at foxwoods and payments can stop immediately.
Hidden Camera in Casino and Blackjack Practice
$1 blackjack has arrived in my neck of the woods, Foxwoods, so I've been reading postings here and on other forums about the game which ...
In my opinion you are not right. I can defend the position.
I can not participate now in discussion - there is no free time. I will return - I will necessarily express the opinion.
I think, that you are not right. I am assured. Write to me in PM, we will talk.
I congratulate, a brilliant idea
Excuse, that I can not participate now in discussion - it is very occupied. I will be released - I will necessarily express the opinion on this question.
In my opinion you commit an error. I suggest it to discuss. Write to me in PM, we will talk.
Now that's something like it!
It is remarkable, very amusing opinion
I apologise, but, in my opinion, you are not right. I am assured. Let's discuss it.
I here am casual, but was specially registered at a forum to participate in discussion of this question.
I think, that you are not right. I am assured. I can prove it. Write to me in PM, we will talk.
I have thought and have removed this phrase
In it something is. Thanks for the help in this question. I did not know it.
Rather excellent idea and it is duly
In it something is. Earlier I thought differently, thanks for the help in this question.
I apologise, but, in my opinion, you commit an error. Let's discuss. Write to me in PM.
It is remarkable, it is the amusing information
The phrase is removed
I consider, that you are not right. I am assured. Let's discuss.
Something so does not leave anything
I am final, I am sorry, but you could not give little bit more information.
In my opinion it is not logical
Very useful question
In my opinion you are mistaken. Let's discuss it. Write to me in PM, we will communicate.
Excuse for that I interfere � At me a similar situation. Let's discuss.
I apologise, but, in my opinion, you are mistaken. Let's discuss it. Write to me in PM.
I join. I agree with told all above.
It is remarkable, very amusing piece
It is very a pity to me, that I can help nothing to you. But it is assured, that you will find the correct decision.
I can not take part now in discussion - it is very occupied. I will be free - I will necessarily express the opinion.