|Ante-up in order to play...or cheat|
I couldn't believe that this was actually happening, but it is! And it doesn't seem to have any negative effect on table-games players, mainly that they still come to these casinos in droves.
But does the ante requirement effect table-games protection?
It actually does...and it helps casinos protect themselves from cheats! Though I doubt more than a few casino table-games personnel realize this.
The fact that all bets made without the player having put up the ante beforehand are declared "no-bets" makes certain casino scams more difficult to achieve, especially professional casino pastposting scams where a pro team uses a "claimer" who did not actually bet the pastposted chips he or she is claiming to have won.
A good example of this would be on a roulette team where a mechanic (person who manipulates chips) pastposts a high-denomination casino chip on a number in roulette and another person, the claimer, claims the winning bet was his. If that claimer did not put up an ante bet before claiming the pastposted winning bet, he would not be paid due to the violation of the ante requirement.
Notice I said that the ante requirement makes some casino scams "more difficult to achieve." I did not say that it eliminates them. Skilled professional casino-cheats find ways for their claimers to put up antes even if they are not actually making the pastposted bet. One way would be to have the claimer actually make a legitimate big bet on another section of the roulette layout and pay the $1 maximum ante per spin, and therefore he'd be able to claim the pastposted bet without it being voided for ante-violation.
Conversely, the ante requirement has little or no effect on run-of-the-mill casino-cheating scams.