Go Go Claw

I wonder if by having the progressive increment on winning plays only, the casino can avoid having to roll-over amounts in excess of the max, as the progressive would be considered funded by the casino, not the players.

Remember when you would swear that a claw game, “Cheated,” by dropping the desired object intentionally?

Well, according to some patents I found (but not necessarily for this)…and as we know from the rules, it does drop it intentionally. However, it’s in a casino, so it’s not cheating.

“Display for the entertainment and excitement of the player.”

What’s that? You can’t use the verbiage, “To trick,” in a patent?

Quote: Mission146

Remember when you would swear that a claw game, “Cheated,” by dropping the desired object intentionally?

Well, according to some patents I found (but not necessarily for this)…and as we know from the rules, it does drop it intentionally. However, it’s in a casino, so it’s not cheating.

“Display for the entertainment and excitement of the player.”

What’s that? You can’t use the verbiage, “To trick,” in a patent?

you arent wrong



paging Zcore to tell us how these machines most likely dont have these settings allowed

OH and the main thing - most of the laws i have read always include that main caveat - whereas they can deviate from the laws "if stated in the rules" ... ill try to find a real legal example of what i mean when im not at work

Here's food for thought. We know the claw/ball thing is just for show and that the game decides whether you win or lose the moment you make the wager.

The game has a provision for awarding the win even if the claw fails to deliver a ball to the winning area.

What happens if a round is supposed to be a loss but a malfunction causes the ball to drop into the winning area by mistake?

Quote: sabre

Here's food for thought. We know the claw/ball thing is just for show and that the game decides whether you win or lose the moment you make the wager.

The game has a provision for awarding the win even if the claw fails to deliver a ball to the winning area.

What happens if a round is supposed to be a loss but a malfunction causes the ball to drop into the winning area by mistake?

I was thinking about that.

From this patent or a substantially similar patent, I gathered that the machine communicates to the claw that the ball is supposed to be dropped on a play that has been determined to lose.

It makes me wonder when in the process that takes place and if there would be some way to cause that communication not to happen. That would almost certainly be illegal, of course, so I would obviously not recommend such a course of action, but it does have me curious.

To answer your question, the only way to know would be for a ball to make it to the winning area and the player NOT get paid. Any ball that makes it and the player does get paid would have to be assumed that was supposed to happen.

Heatmap,

Thank you for sharing that video!

I guess the moral of the story is: If it’s a game, it probably cheats.

Heatmap, props for the zcore reference. Made me chuckle.

Quote: linksjunkie

If anyone wants to see this in action there is 2 minute video on YouTube.

Search “go go claw slot”

People definitely clueless

Let me save the forum the trouble of searching.


Direct: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMmkFFt-P9o

It's a clever concept. You have to admit it.

Skill game? Here's your skill game suckers!

I just wrote up a page on the game, Cash Grab. You can see I decided to refer to the game as Cash Grab as opposed to Go Go Claw.

As always, I welcome all comments, questions, and corrections.