JAN 1 5 2003 

Charles Enyart, Chief 

Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma 

P.O. Box 350 

Seneca, MO 64865 

RE: Blackjack in Oklahoma 

Dear Chief Enyart: 

In an opinion letter dated July 9, 1999, the NIGC General Counsel advised that the tribes in 

Oklahoma could offer pitch and blackjack tournaments as a class II gaming activity under the 

Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) if the tournaments were played in a manner consistent 

with Oklahoma law. A number of tribes in Oklahoma have now introduced "Tournament 

Blackjack" into their gaming facilities. However, in many gaming facilities, actual play is 

substantially different from the proposal for tournament play set forth in the letter requesting 

the advisory opinion.' Many tribal gaming facilities are offering blackjack without apparent 

regard for whether all play is, in fact, confined to a tournament format. 

I provide this opinion letter to emphasize the importance of restricting blackjack play to an 

actual tournament format. I remind tribes that to qualify as Class 11, all play including play 

in preliminary rounds must be conducted as a tournament. Play not in a tournament format 

is a Class III gaming activity requiring a tribal-state compact. Conducting a non-tournament 

blackjack game in Indian country could also subject the operator to criminal prosecution 

under 18 U.S.C. $1166. 

''The tournament format proposed by the Tribes was summarized in the opinion letter: 

The proposed card game tournaments will involve the play of pitch, gin and blackjack at tribal 

gaming facilities. The proposal calls for patrons to pay an entry fee and receive tokens for use 

in card play. The tokens do not represent money. They are a means for keeping score and are 

not "cashed out," that is, redeemed for money, as would be the case with chips at a casino. 

Prize winners will be determined in tournament play by elimination. The gaming operation 

will collect an administrative fee to cover the expense of operating the tournaments. 

The house will not compete or participate in any way as a player which might win or lose; 

although, the gaming operation will be awarding the advertised prizes to successll tournament 

participants. 

See Classification Opinion Letter fiom Barry W. Brandon, General Counsel, NIGC to Richard J. 

Grellner (July 9, 1999). 

NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS 1441 L St. NW, Suite 9100, Washington. DC 20005 Tel: 202.632.7003 Fax: 202.632.7066 WWW.NlGC.GOV 

REGIONAL OFFICES Portland, OR; Sacramento, CA; Phoenix, AZ; St. Paul, MN;Tulsa, OK 
Charles Enyart, Chief 

January 15,2003 

Page 2 of 4 

Tournament qualifying play presents a particular problem. As an example, in a legitimate 

tournament, play can encompass a number of rounds for which a player pays a fixed 

tournament entry fee to play. Through the process of elimination during qualifying rounds, 

the number of players is reduced until a tournament winner is determined based on most 

points accumulated. In many tribal gaming facilities, however, play of blackjack during 

the qualifying period for the tournament involves placing a "bet" or a "wager7' in what is a 

"banked" card game. Players win or lose amounts according to the bets they have placed.2 

The chips or "tokens" used during the day-to-day operation of the game represent actual 

money, as with chips at a casino. This daily play is not focused on achieving points in an 

actual tournament but only on winning money at the particular ongoing blackjack game. 

In these circumstances, the gaming operation earns revenue from commissions on bets and 

6om its own participation in the game, not primarily from the tournament enrollment fee. 

Merely because the house's winnings are kept in an "escrow" account separate fiom other 

revenues and used for a specific purposes including the payment of player prizes does not 

change the fact that the house is a participant in the game and can and does %in." Play in 

this manner during the qualifying rounds means that the blackjack game can no longer be 

considered a legitimate tournament. 

IGRA lists "blackjack" and "21" as specific examples of banking card games that are not 

included within Class 11 and are therefore Class Moreover, a card game may be 

classified as Class I1 only if it is either explicitly authorized by the state, or it is not explicitly 

prohibited and played legally somewhere in the state. Section 941 of Title 21 of the Oklahoma 

Statutes expressly prohibits "poker, roulette, craps or any banking or percentage, or any 

gambling game played with dice, cards or any device for money, checks, credits or any 

representation of value." Thus, as a general matter, banked blackjack games are prohibited 

under Oklahoma law and can therefore not be a Class LI gaming activity. 

The July 1999 classification opinion letter regarding Touniament Blackjack was based 

principally on Section 981 of Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes that provides an exemption 

fiom the general prohibition against gambling by excluding from the definition of the term CLLP+ 99 +hP r\nrt.:,,:..m+:rr, :... LL....lrl:- -, ,,,:-..tl:- A-37 ---- L -- (<A I- --- 3 -~l. -.. 
Charles Enyart, Chief 

January 15,2003 

Page 3 of 4 

shows and contests where the participants qualify for a monetary prize or other recognition.'* 

In the opinion, the NIGC General Counsel was careful to distinguish between conducting 

actual "tournaments7' and casino-style blackjack play.s Only legitimate tournament play is 

lawll in Oklahoma. 

Another problem area is the use of a "player prize pool" fund to award prizes. In a legitimate 

tournament format, a participant pays an entry fee and competes with others for a prize that 

may be, or may include, a specific sum of money. The prize is established before entry fees 

are accepted. Entry fees are revenue to the tournament sponsor who has no particular interest 

or stake in who wins. A portion of the total entry fees paid does not become the prize 

although, fiom an accounting standpoint, the net revenue of the sponsor fiom entry fees may 

be reduced by the value of the prize. In the blackjack tournament play found in many tribal 

gaming facilities, however, a "player prize pool" fund is established fiom tournament entry 

fees and fiom the house "win" during qualifying rounds. Winning players are paid fi-om this 

hd. The use of a blackjack player prize fund in these circumstances also serves to remove 

the blackjack game £kom the tournament exemption established in Section 981 of Title 21 of 

the Oklahoma Statutes because the activity is now a "bet."6 

These player prize pool hds are often maintained outside the normal accounting for gaming 

revenue thereby creating a further difficulty. Our understanding is that some tribes have 

accumulated substantial sums of money in player prize pools and that some tribes may use 

the player prize pool to fund gaming facility expenses such as a marketing and entertainment. 

Because these funds are not typically subject to internal controls or strict accountability 

procedures, they become a target for misuse or theft. 

21 OS 981 provides in pertinent part: "A bet does not include.. .offers of purses, prizes, or premiums to the 

actual participants in public and semipublic events, as follows, to wit: Rodeos, animal shows, expositions, fairs, 

athletic events, tournaments and other shows and contests where the participants qualify for a monetary prize or 

other recognition. This subparagraph Mer excepts an entry fee from the definition of a '%bet" as applied to 

enumerated public and semipublic events." As discussed in the earlier letter, this statutory exception fonns the 

underlying basis for concluding that tournament blackjack play is permitted as a class 11 gaming activity for 

tribes in Oklahoma. 

We cautioned in the July 1999 opinion letter: "In operating such class I1 card games, care must be taken to 

ensure that the tournament format does not become a sham and that the games are in fact being played as 

tournaments within the meaning of 2 1 OS 8 98 1 ." 

See Oklahoma Attorney General Opinion 99-5 dated March 29, 1999 [Participants' entry fees held as a pool to 

be paid to the winner as a prize caused %money hunts" to be considered gambling. However, as a general matter, 

when a person or association spoisors or conducts contests for "purses, prizes, or premiums," and the moneys 

paid to such person or association for the right of participation become part of the person or association's general 

assets, and the "purses, prizes, or premiums" are paid out to contestants without regard to such contriiutions, 

such activities will not be considered a "-bet."]