Gamblit Poker
Poll
 | 2 votes (8.33%) | ||
| | 1 vote (4.16%) | ||
| | 4 votes (16.66%) | ||
| | 2 votes (8.33%) | ||
| | 13 votes (54.16%) | ||
| | 3 votes (12.5%) | ||
| | 6 votes (25%) | ||
| | 6 votes (25%) | ||
| | 1 vote (4.16%) | ||
| | 2 votes (8.33%) |
24 members have voted
December 5th, 2016 at 8:34:53 AM
permalink
I don't make a thread for every new game I see at the Cutting Edge show, but this one merits an exception.
After the election, I'm in no position to make predictions, but I think this game could be huge. At the show it generated a lot of energy and there was never a shortage of players. I found it very fun, social, and engaging.
A drawback is that there is a fixed bet size for the main wager and it does take 2-3 minutes between rounds. At low Antes, if I can call the primary wager that, it may not pull in much money per hour. At high Antes it could attract ringers who sit there all day and win almost every time, discouraging recreational players. Of course, you could argue that has somewhat happened with poker in general and it still is a fundamental part of any big casino. Even if it doesn't pull in its weight in revenue per square foot per hour, it generates an energy, which will be good for the whole floor. I'm sure the Derby game at the MGM doesn't pull in much per hour and is a big space hog, but it is still good business, I would argue, to keep it around.
I'm happy to say I won a couple bets on whether it would win/show for best game at the show. It did.
The question for the forum is what do you think will become of Gamblit Poker? Vote for all you agree with.
After the election, I'm in no position to make predictions, but I think this game could be huge. At the show it generated a lot of energy and there was never a shortage of players. I found it very fun, social, and engaging.
A drawback is that there is a fixed bet size for the main wager and it does take 2-3 minutes between rounds. At low Antes, if I can call the primary wager that, it may not pull in much money per hour. At high Antes it could attract ringers who sit there all day and win almost every time, discouraging recreational players. Of course, you could argue that has somewhat happened with poker in general and it still is a fundamental part of any big casino. Even if it doesn't pull in its weight in revenue per square foot per hour, it generates an energy, which will be good for the whole floor. I'm sure the Derby game at the MGM doesn't pull in much per hour and is a big space hog, but it is still good business, I would argue, to keep it around.
I'm happy to say I won a couple bets on whether it would win/show for best game at the show. It did.
The question for the forum is what do you think will become of Gamblit Poker? Vote for all you agree with.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
December 5th, 2016 at 8:51:50 AM
permalink
I think this will be a great game for players and AP's alike. I had about 2 paragraphs written out, but if this game does take off I don't want to share a few strategy maneuvers that I already see (one that would help the example hand shown and another that is separate from what we see). So overall I'll just say this: I think this is a fun new version of poker that will get some hype initially no matter what, and whether it pulls its weight against poker or not will be determined later. All that I'll add to the rest is I can see a tremendous amount of skill being involved in this game too (which may not be too apparent at this point), which is why I like it.
p.s. I hate the name. Gamblit (I assume because gambling and the "lit" up buttons?)... Should be something more simple like Gambit Poker, or something that's at least not a combination of words.
p.s. I hate the name. Gamblit (I assume because gambling and the "lit" up buttons?)... Should be something more simple like Gambit Poker, or something that's at least not a combination of words.
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
December 5th, 2016 at 9:24:56 AM
permalink
Disclaimer- I had fun playing the game at the show. So it is definitely fun. But as far as a practicality opinion, see below.
1) The revenue issue was one of the big concerns, that you already expressed. On top of the lack of revenue generation, the game can not be cheap to lease (two digital displays, a card reading shoe, a custom table and I'm assuming regular maintenance/testing). Therefore, it will be a minimal profit issue with a capped win, IMO (this is why many poker rooms are slimming or disappearing quickly).
2) How does a game get started? The base game must be played with a minimum of two players, therefore the game can not get started with a single player. I recall some saying that they are banking on friends walking up to the table together to try it out. I don't see friends coming up to a table and simply draining 10% each hand. Additionally, at a small facility, that rarely ever has a table fill up, would this really be very exciting to win 1.8 to one odds on a win (assuming a table of 3)?
3) I foresee a number of hardware and player dispute issues. That will only be seen over time, if they do exist.
4) I see a bunch of collusion issues. Two or three players play together. Once one makes his hand, the remaining two simply act as blockers during the burn down. It is very easy to do, by figuring out what cards are hurtful to the team and only picking those, to guarantee a win. This will be the big issue with the regulators IMHO.
There are some others....
I just don't see how this is practical for live play. Again, I had a lot of fun playing, so I'm not saying anything negative about the game itself. I think this does great in convention type settings where you have a minimum of three people walking up to the table at the time.
Just my thoughts... When the time comes and it does hit floors, I feel a number of folks will have a lot of fun with #4.
1) The revenue issue was one of the big concerns, that you already expressed. On top of the lack of revenue generation, the game can not be cheap to lease (two digital displays, a card reading shoe, a custom table and I'm assuming regular maintenance/testing). Therefore, it will be a minimal profit issue with a capped win, IMO (this is why many poker rooms are slimming or disappearing quickly).
2) How does a game get started? The base game must be played with a minimum of two players, therefore the game can not get started with a single player. I recall some saying that they are banking on friends walking up to the table together to try it out. I don't see friends coming up to a table and simply draining 10% each hand. Additionally, at a small facility, that rarely ever has a table fill up, would this really be very exciting to win 1.8 to one odds on a win (assuming a table of 3)?
3) I foresee a number of hardware and player dispute issues. That will only be seen over time, if they do exist.
4) I see a bunch of collusion issues. Two or three players play together. Once one makes his hand, the remaining two simply act as blockers during the burn down. It is very easy to do, by figuring out what cards are hurtful to the team and only picking those, to guarantee a win. This will be the big issue with the regulators IMHO.
There are some others....
I just don't see how this is practical for live play. Again, I had a lot of fun playing, so I'm not saying anything negative about the game itself. I think this does great in convention type settings where you have a minimum of three people walking up to the table at the time.
Just my thoughts... When the time comes and it does hit floors, I feel a number of folks will have a lot of fun with #4.
Last edited by: mrsuit31 on Dec 5, 2016
.
December 5th, 2016 at 9:28:49 AM
permalink
Its an interesting game that is definitely fun to play - I love the button smashing mechanic.
The current rake of 10% is pretty steep for an AP. At a full table of 6 players one would need to win slightly more than 1 in 4 hands to break even.
From the casino's perspective a full table could produce as much hourly revenue as a $1/$2 NLHE game. It's hard for me to picture people playing Gamblit Poker for 8+ hours which makes it unlikely to see this table full outside of peak hours.
They told me at the show the name was a work in progress and may change before its placed anywhere.
The current rake of 10% is pretty steep for an AP. At a full table of 6 players one would need to win slightly more than 1 in 4 hands to break even.
From the casino's perspective a full table could produce as much hourly revenue as a $1/$2 NLHE game. It's hard for me to picture people playing Gamblit Poker for 8+ hours which makes it unlikely to see this table full outside of peak hours.
Quote: Romesp.s. I hate the name. Gamblit (I assume because gambling and the "lit" up buttons?)... Should be something more simple like Gambit Poker, or something that's at least not a combination of words.
They told me at the show the name was a work in progress and may change before its placed anywhere.
Views are my own...
December 5th, 2016 at 9:39:36 AM
permalink
This I would think would raise another concern. The button idea is great, but as mrsuit pointed out people will surely complain they hit it first when they didn't, etc. Past that, my concern will be the drunks playing this game and literally pounding the button as hard as they can (possibly breaking it). How do they plan to stop this? Tell everyone that sits down "Hit the button normal not hard!" or something? What about people "in" to the game and are so excited they want to hit it fast and F = MA, so they end up hitting it hard? If I hit the button "hard" a few times will I get the tap? "No more gamblit poker for you, sir."Quote: TheoHuxtableIts an interesting game that is definitely fun to play - I love the button smashing mechanic...
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
December 5th, 2016 at 9:58:20 AM
permalink
Quote: RomesThis I would think would raise another concern. The button idea is great, but as mrsuit pointed out people will surely complain they hit it first when they didn't, etc. Past that, my concern will be the drunks playing this game and literally pounding the button as hard as they can (possibly breaking it). How do they plan to stop this? Tell everyone that sits down "Hit the button normal not hard!" or something? What about people "in" to the game and are so excited they want to hit it fast and F = MA, so they end up hitting it hard? If I hit the button "hard" a few times will I get the tap? "No more gamblit poker for you, sir."
The "bubble craps" games seem fairly sturdy and should give some precedent for how to handle chronic button smashers.
Quote: TheoHuxtableThe current rake of 10% is pretty steep for an AP. At a full table of 6 players one would need to win slightly more than 1 in 4 hands to break even.
Also - my math was way off. I should've said 1 in 5.4 hands to break even. This seems much more attainable for an AP.
Views are my own...
December 5th, 2016 at 10:07:07 AM
permalink
Another question I have is: How long after the card is dealt do players have to decide to take it? 3 seconds? No specific time and the dealer just is instructed to burn if it looks like no one wants it? I could see more disputes if there were some kind of onscreen timer and the screen went "red" after the time to take the card was up. What happens if a player verbally declares I want that but barely misses the button hit, etc?
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
December 5th, 2016 at 10:56:57 AM
permalink
Quote: RomesAnother question I have is: How long after the card is dealt do players have to decide to take it? 3 seconds? No specific time and the dealer just is instructed to burn if it looks like no one wants it? I could see more disputes if there were some kind of onscreen timer and the screen went "red" after the time to take the card was up. What happens if a player verbally declares I want that but barely misses the button hit, etc?
It's about ~3 seconds before the dealer burns the card. If I recall, there's a clearly displayed timer on one of the monitors. Verbal declarations should be totally non-binding as the game moves so quickly it'd be near impossible to adjudicate.
Quote: mrsuit31) I see a bunch of collusion issues. Two or three players play together. Once one makes his hand, the remaining two simply act as blockers during the burn down. It is very easy to do, by figuring out what cards are hurtful to the team and only picking those, to guarantee a win. This will be the big issue with the regulators IMHO.
Once a player has made a 3-card hand the game will lock out any remaining players with a 0% chance of winning given the remaining card pool. This mitigates most of the possibility of colluding players strategically spamming the big red button.
Views are my own...
December 5th, 2016 at 10:58:59 AM
permalink
Some random thoughts, some of which people already mentioned, but you want initial impressions.
Buttons not working will screw this game. Drinks will get spilled a lot at this table with competitive button smashing, people will pound and break them.
Collusion is huge. A team playing against others can claim a card they don't need in their lesser hand that would fill a non teamers hand. Maybe dealing the first card face down can combat some of this, as it would keep your competition from seeing what you're waiting for. Example from the video of person getting 3oak on the last card; someone else can grab that card, leaving the straight as the best hand.
There must be some rule known to the players about how many more cards will be dealt once someone completes their hand. Say 3 people teaming against 3 non-players. Once any of them gets a hand, the other two could just blind - grab cards, especially those known to be the last two. They would kill other people's chance of making a hand, ir at least greatly affect the calculated odds.
The whole game assumes honest intent and independent play. I don't think that can be assumed in any game played for money.
I think the game takes too long per round for the house to make any money. And the rake, while necessary is very high. Good for a party pit, not good for serious play. The sidebet seems countable.
Buttons not working will screw this game. Drinks will get spilled a lot at this table with competitive button smashing, people will pound and break them.
Collusion is huge. A team playing against others can claim a card they don't need in their lesser hand that would fill a non teamers hand. Maybe dealing the first card face down can combat some of this, as it would keep your competition from seeing what you're waiting for. Example from the video of person getting 3oak on the last card; someone else can grab that card, leaving the straight as the best hand.
There must be some rule known to the players about how many more cards will be dealt once someone completes their hand. Say 3 people teaming against 3 non-players. Once any of them gets a hand, the other two could just blind - grab cards, especially those known to be the last two. They would kill other people's chance of making a hand, ir at least greatly affect the calculated odds.
The whole game assumes honest intent and independent play. I don't think that can be assumed in any game played for money.
I think the game takes too long per round for the house to make any money. And the rake, while necessary is very high. Good for a party pit, not good for serious play. The sidebet seems countable.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
December 5th, 2016 at 11:36:03 AM
permalink
Quote: TheoHuxtableOnce a player has made a 3-card hand the game will lock out any remaining players with a 0% chance of winning given the remaining card pool. This mitigates most of the possibility of colluding players strategically spamming the big red button.
If one or two of the team players are sitting with one card, there hand will always be able to get a trips or straight flush, not to mention the times when a straight or flush is the top hand and can be beat by a bigger straight/flush, which will most likely be a decent percentage of the time. While after that team member takes the blocking card, he will then often be removed by the "cant win rule", but then the other teammate/s will be there for another block/s. Imagine 4 players doing this at a table. The other 2 will have virtually no realistic chance at ever winning. Most of the time, the possible money cards will be a small number and two or three blocks will lock the game down.
Babs, I believe the deck is shuffled after every hand..... No countability issue. However, the lower the number of people at the table, the lower number of cards come out for the side wager (I believe the payouts change per the number of players, due to the decreasing number of cards that come out).
.
December 5th, 2016 at 11:38:33 AM
permalink
removed, duplicate.
.
December 5th, 2016 at 1:11:55 PM
permalink
Sigh, I lost one of the bets Mike mentioned.
As much as I had fun playing the game at the conference, I really don't see it ever finding its way into a casino. And I would have thought enough other attendees would also think that way, causing it to not be in the top three finalists in the competition. That it won, convinces me that the other voters cast their vote based upon the fun factor, and ignored the real problems on an install.
Well, since it won first place, and a field trial is one of the prizes, I'll amend my belief to be that it won't pass the trial.
I'm also concerned about any possible ADA (American Disabilities Act) issues. After all, a player with any type of physical handicap would be playing at a disadvantage.
For the record, I DID have fun. And I could see how much fun it would be for a group to play together. Of course, that fun was greatly reduced when I saw the rake on the main bet.
Additionally, those of us playing together were betting huge amounts on the side bet - and hitting.
If it were real money, I doubt I'd be betting that much.
To answer some of the questions that cropped up:
The buttons appear more robust than the typical slot machine buttons - or typical video game or pin ball buttons - but I'm also concerned about button malfunctions.
There is a scanner at the lip of the shoe, and a slight delay as the dealer is pulling each card so that when he turns it is the same moment when it appears on the display.
As each card is exposed, there is a timer on screen. When time runs out, the card is discarded.
Once someone fills their hand, there is a count down of the remaining cards to be offered. I'm not sure if this number is dependent upon the number of players, but each time I played (with a full table of 7 players), there were 8 more cards to come.
The side bet paytable is like a triangle. 7 players, 7 paylines. 6 players, 6 paylines. Etc.
I'm tempted to bet Mike on the outcome of the field trial, but I doubt we'd get good info on the results. Besides I'd rather put my money on SuperBowl NFL Championship prop bets. Are those out yet?
As much as I had fun playing the game at the conference, I really don't see it ever finding its way into a casino. And I would have thought enough other attendees would also think that way, causing it to not be in the top three finalists in the competition. That it won, convinces me that the other voters cast their vote based upon the fun factor, and ignored the real problems on an install.
Well, since it won first place, and a field trial is one of the prizes, I'll amend my belief to be that it won't pass the trial.
I'm also concerned about any possible ADA (American Disabilities Act) issues. After all, a player with any type of physical handicap would be playing at a disadvantage.
For the record, I DID have fun. And I could see how much fun it would be for a group to play together. Of course, that fun was greatly reduced when I saw the rake on the main bet.
Additionally, those of us playing together were betting huge amounts on the side bet - and hitting.
If it were real money, I doubt I'd be betting that much.
To answer some of the questions that cropped up:
The buttons appear more robust than the typical slot machine buttons - or typical video game or pin ball buttons - but I'm also concerned about button malfunctions.
There is a scanner at the lip of the shoe, and a slight delay as the dealer is pulling each card so that when he turns it is the same moment when it appears on the display.
As each card is exposed, there is a timer on screen. When time runs out, the card is discarded.
Once someone fills their hand, there is a count down of the remaining cards to be offered. I'm not sure if this number is dependent upon the number of players, but each time I played (with a full table of 7 players), there were 8 more cards to come.
The side bet paytable is like a triangle. 7 players, 7 paylines. 6 players, 6 paylines. Etc.
I'm tempted to bet Mike on the outcome of the field trial, but I doubt we'd get good info on the results. Besides I'd rather put my money on SuperBowl NFL Championship prop bets. Are those out yet?
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
December 5th, 2016 at 2:22:16 PM
permalink
Regarding the collusion comments, I don't see this being a big issue as long as they keep the bet level low, like $10 or less. However, there still could be some colluding anyway, much as there can be cheating at cards games like bridge with no money at stake.
Pertaining to that issue and players breaking the game by pounding on it, I tend to think a human being should be present to police it. Of course, that will eat into profits. I would consider that a cost of doing business until the game becomes monkey proof.
Nyah!
I'm not an attorney, but it sounds rather ridiculous to me that a handicapped person could claim discrimination regarding this game. A blind person could claim that in regular poker because he couldn't see other players for purposes of picking up tells. Never mind the problem of knowing what his own cards are.
Pertaining to that issue and players breaking the game by pounding on it, I tend to think a human being should be present to police it. Of course, that will eat into profits. I would consider that a cost of doing business until the game becomes monkey proof.
Quote: DJTeddyBearSigh, I lost one of the bets Mike mentioned.
Nyah!
Quote:I'm also concerned about any possible ADA (American Disabilities Act) issues. After all, a player with any type of physical handicap would be playing at a disadvantage.
I'm not an attorney, but it sounds rather ridiculous to me that a handicapped person could claim discrimination regarding this game. A blind person could claim that in regular poker because he couldn't see other players for purposes of picking up tells. Never mind the problem of knowing what his own cards are.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
December 5th, 2016 at 2:29:52 PM
permalink
Quote: Wizard...I'm not an attorney, but it sounds rather ridiculous to me that a handicapped person could claim discrimination regarding this game. A blind person could claim that in regular poker because he couldn't see other players for purposes of picking up tells. Never mind the problem of knowing what his own cards are.
http://berksmontnews.com/article/BM/20151118/NEWS/151119904 Hal Lubarsky.
Last edited by: Ibeatyouraces on Dec 5, 2016
DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!
December 5th, 2016 at 3:09:25 PM
permalink
That period screwed up the link. Try this:
http://berksmontnews.com/article/BM/20151118/NEWS/151119904
http://berksmontnews.com/article/BM/20151118/NEWS/151119904
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
December 5th, 2016 at 3:53:55 PM
permalink
Which two people voted to free Cascadia?
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
December 5th, 2016 at 4:56:07 PM
permalink
Quote: WizardRegarding the collusion comments, I don't see this being a big issue as long as they keep the bet level low, like $10 or less. However, there still could be some colluding anyway, much as there can be cheating at cards games like bridge with no money at stake.
Collusion would be a huge issue and would be an absolute AP players dream if the bets were actually large enough. Even if the limits were only 10 bucks, depending on the rake (drop?). Even in that last hand. If you have a hand that does not beat the person you are colluding with, or even if it does but just barely, you can now go on the defensive and just try to block anyone from taking cards that beat friend's hand. There would be opportunities to play defensive a lot it seems. It seems to me that you would be drawing dead often, but be very live to ruin the hand of an opponent trying to beat your partner. I imagine you could come up with some pretty sophisticated strategies of which person should do what. Allowing the better hand make their hand while one or two other people play defense.
Still sounds like fun. Also I think third base would be able to see the card just a fraction of a second quicker while it is in the dealers hand, but maybe not.
casino's money disappears
the execs worry when the wizard is near
He turns tears into joy
Everyone's happy when the wizard walks by
December 5th, 2016 at 5:38:58 PM
permalink
Since the system already knows every player's cards and actions, it should be quite possible to program red flags for collusion. Like frequently taking cards that can't help you, especially if this is done is correlated to another particular player winning. I'm sure the colluding players would try to figure out what sets off the red flags and then use camouflage. I don't know much about the casinos response and responsibilities about collusion in real poker, but maybe something can be learned from that.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
December 5th, 2016 at 7:13:06 PM
permalink
Me. I'm one.Quote: WizardWhich two people voted to free Cascadia?
You usually have weird options for the last choice, and I wasn't looking too closely, and my Spanish spelling is no good...
I thought it said Free Quesadilla.
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
December 5th, 2016 at 7:19:33 PM
permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBearThat period screwed up the link. Try this:
http://berksmontnews.com/article/BM/20151118/NEWS/151119904
Thanks. Hitting the space bar after pasting automatically adds the period from my phone. I fixed it.
DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!
December 5th, 2016 at 8:06:29 PM
permalink
Seems like a fun game to try and play with your friends at a weekly poker game, not in the casino. Collusion and needing to play with multiple players would be considerable drawbacks.
December 5th, 2016 at 9:35:32 PM
permalink
Quote: WizardSince the system already knows every player's cards and actions, it should be quite possible to program red flags for collusion. Like frequently taking cards that can't help you, especially if this is done is correlated to another particular player winning. I'm sure the colluding players would try to figure out what sets off the red flags and then use camouflage. I don't know much about the casinos response and responsibilities about collusion in real poker, but maybe something can be learned from that.
True.
But having a game that requires reactive policing to keep it safely playable is a major drawback, as opposed to a new game that has inherent game protection, all other things being equal.
This is the "dump and die" aspect of game protection for new games: casinos don't want to take on this risk if present, and more are making game protection a requirement, or are at least aware of it. It's not enough to be catchy and dealable, it has to also be safe. Steve How could review this for Gamblit.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
December 6th, 2016 at 3:51:58 AM
permalink
Very interesting and unique, like a cross between Three Card Poker and Whac-a-Mole. The concept is surprisingly refreshing, and possibly revolutionary.
December 6th, 2016 at 8:12:27 AM
permalink
Quote: TheoHuxtableFrom the casino's perspective a full table could produce as much hourly revenue as a $1/$2 NLHE game. It's hard for me to picture people playing Gamblit Poker for 8+ hours which makes it unlikely to see this table full outside of peak hours.
One thing I did want to add... While playing the game at the show, I asked if this was meant for the floor or the poker room"? The answer was that this is meant for the floor. Therefore, the statements regarding making the same amount of money as a 1/2 game, doesn't really make any difference. The only relevant question is will this make as much money as another table game such as BJ, 3CP, Miss Stud etc....?
Last edited by: mrsuit31 on Dec 6, 2016
.
December 6th, 2016 at 9:48:52 AM
permalink
Quote: beachbumbabsCollusion is huge. A team playing against others can claim a card they don't need in their lesser hand that would fill a non teamers hand. Maybe dealing the first card face down can combat some of this, as it would keep your competition from seeing what you're waiting for. Example from the video of person getting 3oak on the last card; someone else can grab that card, leaving the straight as the best hand.
The video makes this game look very fun. I wonder, noted shortcomings aside, some casino may use this game to test many of the durability concerns people have expressed with the button. As we know, if this is half successful, there will be a million two imitations.
I don't like the fixed ante -- and I suspect people who are 'hot' will get frustrated by not being able to increase bet size.
I don't think I would play this game WITHOUT partners to collude. I mean I would love to play without partners, but if you look around and cannot spot the sucker...
December 6th, 2016 at 9:54:55 AM
permalink
This machine will be great for the get drunk lose money slow and have fun crowd. So I would be the loud button smashing idiot on this machine.
I want a free cheese quesadilla!
I want a free cheese quesadilla!
December 6th, 2016 at 1:10:18 PM
permalink
Quote: IndyJeffreyI wonder, noted shortcomings aside, some casino may use this game to test many of the durability concerns people have expressed with the button.
In reality, it is the Gaming Commission's lab that will be the ones to test this, prior to its entry onto the floor....
.
December 6th, 2016 at 1:26:31 PM
permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBearThat period screwed up the link. Try this:
http://berksmontnews.com/article/BM/20151118/NEWS/151119904
Being blind is still a major disadvantage. You could also look at the reader and try to read his lips or Guage his reactions. Plus, you know exactly when the blind guy is learning about the cards.
Other disabilities prevent players from protecting their hands and they just have to hope their neighbors make an effort to not see their cards.
Others might struggle more to conceal their reactions, or what they are looking at.
There's only so much you can do. If the disabled persons can get to the game and participate, that seems to be reasonable.
December 6th, 2016 at 5:54:51 PM
permalink
Heads up even at $10 a hand VS a slow/bad player could be fairly valuable. I can imagine someone sitting there waiting for a sucker to sit down.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
December 7th, 2016 at 6:59:58 PM
permalink
This game looks super fun, but as presented, I would never play it, fearing the collusion angle.
I think the collusion aspect could be fixed, but it would be at the expense of player interaction - specifically, the game should look like an e-poker table such that each player has a display where you can see your card and you can see which cards are in other players' hands, but you wouldn't know who has which cards.
I think the collusion aspect could be fixed, but it would be at the expense of player interaction - specifically, the game should look like an e-poker table such that each player has a display where you can see your card and you can see which cards are in other players' hands, but you wouldn't know who has which cards.
January 25th, 2017 at 7:00:18 AM
permalink
Has anyone seen this in action anywhere yet?
.
March 28th, 2017 at 1:19:19 PM
permalink
The electronic version of this game went live at Planet Hollywood today
Views are my own...
March 28th, 2017 at 1:49:02 PM
permalink
Quote: TheoHuxtableThe electronic version of this game went live at Planet Hollywood today
Thanks Theo
.
March 28th, 2017 at 2:25:43 PM
permalink
Quote: TheoHuxtableThe electronic version of this game went live at Planet Hollywood today
Thanks for letting us know. I'll have to check it out.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
March 28th, 2017 at 2:26:39 PM
permalink
Does Merrill Heatter get a cut? He may have a trademark on card games using the word "gambit."
For those of you who missed that one, he created a blackjack-based TV game show called Gambit that ran on CBS for a few years in the 1970s (it premiered the same day as The Price is Right and The Joker's Wild); a few years after CBS cancelled it, NBC brought it back, moved it to Las Vegas, and called it Las Vegas Gambit. GSN had a tweaked version, still produced by Heatter, called Catch-21.
For those of you who missed that one, he created a blackjack-based TV game show called Gambit that ran on CBS for a few years in the 1970s (it premiered the same day as The Price is Right and The Joker's Wild); a few years after CBS cancelled it, NBC brought it back, moved it to Las Vegas, and called it Las Vegas Gambit. GSN had a tweaked version, still produced by Heatter, called Catch-21.
March 28th, 2017 at 2:53:46 PM
permalink
If I have 88 and another player has 66, and a 6 comes out, I'm grabbing that card (most likely). Trying to make the best of your own hand isn't necessarily optimal, I don't think. I'd have to look at the rules some more, but I think you could do quite well with some collusion and common sense.
March 28th, 2017 at 3:40:23 PM
permalink
Electronic version? Are you saying it's completely electronic?Quote: TheoHuxtableThe electronic version of this game went live at Planet Hollywood today
I'm staying at PHo when I come for the 360 Vegas Vacation Memorial Day. If it's still there, I'll bring some people to try it...
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
March 28th, 2017 at 3:45:23 PM
permalink
Not exactly sure how to post pictures, but yes it is a completely electronic (touch screen instead of big red buttons) version of what was at cutting edge.
http://imgur.com/a/0SSFp
http://imgur.com/a/0SSFp
Views are my own...
March 28th, 2017 at 4:43:41 PM
permalink
Quote: ThatDonGuyDoes Merrill Heatter get a cut? He may have a trademark on card games using the word "gambit."
For those of you who missed that one, he created a blackjack-based TV game show called Gambit that ran on CBS for a few years in the 1970s (it premiered the same day as The Price is Right and The Joker's Wild); a few years after CBS cancelled it, NBC brought it back, moved it to Las Vegas, and called it Las Vegas Gambit. GSN had a tweaked version, still produced by Heatter, called Catch-21.
Gambit or Gamblit? This one has the "L".
This looks like the 4 person version vs. the 6 person version with a live dealer which was what won the TG Conference in November.
March 28th, 2017 at 8:25:40 PM
permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBearElectronic version? Are you saying it's completely electronic?
I'm staying at PHo when I come for the 360 Vegas Vacation Memorial Day. If it's still there, I'll bring some people to try it...
Electronic version (Gamblit).
Stephen Au-Yeung (Legend of New Table Games®) NewTableGames.com
March 28th, 2017 at 9:33:04 PM
permalink
Hopefully I'll be able to give it a shot!
March 30th, 2017 at 8:32:07 AM
permalink
Although there's not much info that we don't already know, the Field Trial generated an article in CDC Gaming Reports:
http://www.cdcgamingreports.com/planet-hollywood-hosts-test-run-for-first-las-vegas-skill-based-games-2/
Congrats!
http://www.cdcgamingreports.com/planet-hollywood-hosts-test-run-for-first-las-vegas-skill-based-games-2/
Congrats!
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
March 30th, 2017 at 9:32:29 AM
permalink
What, think you could best me in this version of poker too? Right this way to my table Mr. Axel ;-).Quote: AxelWolfHeads up even at $10 a hand VS a slow/bad player could be fairly valuable. I can imagine someone sitting there waiting for a sucker to sit down.
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
March 31st, 2017 at 6:22:34 PM
permalink
Is the electronic version the same rules as the table game version, just limited to four players?
Same rake?
Same draw card competition?
Same "can't win" player lockout rule?
Same burndown?
Etc....?
Same rake?
Same draw card competition?
Same "can't win" player lockout rule?
Same burndown?
Etc....?
.
March 31st, 2017 at 7:30:46 PM
permalink
I received an email from Total Rewards about "Las Vegas’ First Interactive Video Gaming Experience". Along with basic description and photos is a link to their blog post that has more description, more photos and a video.
YouTube suggested this video next
Quote:The games are in the trial phase now but once they earn regulatory approval look for them at Caesars Palace, The LINQ Hotel & Casino and Harrah’s Lake Tahoe. Harrah’s Resort Southern California will be the first to debut them in California. Eventually there will be 200 of these tables throughout Caesars Entertainment properties in the United States.
YouTube suggested this video next
April 2nd, 2017 at 3:14:57 PM
permalink
Quote: mrsuit31Is the electronic version the same rules as the table game version, just limited to four players?
Same rake?
Same draw card competition?
Same "can't win" player lockout rule?
Same burndown?
Etc....?
From what I could tell in this game each player starts with two random cards and then you all begin drawing until someone makes a 5 card hand. This triggers the "burndown" and has the "can't win" locking rule.
Views are my own...
April 3rd, 2017 at 8:29:24 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardI don't make a thread for every new game I see at the Cutting Edge show, but this one merits an exception.
After the election, I'm in no position to make predictions, but I think this game could be huge. At the show it generated a lot of energy and there was never a shortage of players. I found it very fun, social, and engaging.
A drawback is that there is a fixed bet size for the main wager and it does take 2-3 minutes between rounds. At low Antes, if I can call the primary wager that, it may not pull in much money per hour. At high Antes it could attract ringers who sit there all day and win almost every time, discouraging recreational players. Of course, you could argue that has somewhat happened with poker in general and it still is a fundamental part of any big casino. Even if it doesn't pull in its weight in revenue per square foot per hour, it generates an energy, which will be good for the whole floor. I'm sure the Derby game at the MGM doesn't pull in much per hour and is a big space hog, but it is still good business, I would argue, to keep it around.
I'm happy to say I won a couple bets on whether it would win/show for best game at the show. It did.
The question for the forum is what do you think will become of Gamblit Poker? Vote for all you agree with.
I have both flash and java turned off in IE so all I see if a blank box.
Link for those that have my settings:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Y12_YNhQUU
the 1st thing that came to mind from the video is why do you even need a human dealer?
why cant this be all electronic?
Craps is paradise (Pair of dice).
Lets hear it for the SpeedCount Mathletes :)
April 3rd, 2017 at 8:48:00 AM
permalink
Quote: 100xOddsQuote: WizardI don't make a thread for every new game I see at the Cutting Edge show, but this one merits an exception.
After the election, I'm in no position to make predictions, but I think this game could be huge. At the show it generated a lot of energy and there was never a shortage of players. I found it very fun, social, and engaging.
A drawback is that there is a fixed bet size for the main wager and it does take 2-3 minutes between rounds. At low Antes, if I can call the primary wager that, it may not pull in much money per hour. At high Antes it could attract ringers who sit there all day and win almost every time, discouraging recreational players. Of course, you could argue that has somewhat happened with poker in general and it still is a fundamental part of any big casino. Even if it doesn't pull in its weight in revenue per square foot per hour, it generates an energy, which will be good for the whole floor. I'm sure the Derby game at the MGM doesn't pull in much per hour and is a big space hog, but it is still good business, I would argue, to keep it around.
I'm happy to say I won a couple bets on whether it would win/show for best game at the show. It did.
The question for the forum is what do you think will become of Gamblit Poker? Vote for all you agree with.
I have both flash and java turned off in IE so all I see if a blank box.
Link for those that have my settings:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Y12_YNhQUU
the 1st thing that came to mind from the video is why do you even need a human dealer?
why cant this be all electronic?
The video depicts the live table game version. That is different from the game that went live in Vegas, which is fully electronic and a five card game versus the three card live game in the video from Cutting Edge...
.
April 3rd, 2017 at 9:37:55 AM
permalink
Quote: mrsuit31The video depicts the live table game version. That is different from the game that went live in Vegas, which is fully electronic and a five card game versus the three card live game in the video from Cutting Edge...
uuggg...
Wiz, can you mention in your OP that there are TWO versions of this game (live dealer and all electronic)?
waiting for write up/video of the electronic version...
edit:
Gamblit gaming released a trailer 4days ago for their e-Glamblit poker game.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfcr3aXAFao
warning- I thought it was corny and did NOT help me in any way know much about the game.
edit2:
better video on how e-Gamblit poker is played from cbs news:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2K_mMTMTSI
Last edited by: 100xOdds on Apr 3, 2017
Craps is paradise (Pair of dice).
Lets hear it for the SpeedCount Mathletes :)
April 10th, 2017 at 1:51:37 PM
permalink
Nice article. Congrats.
https://m.lasvegassun.com/news/2017/apr/07/skill-based-games-early-returns-encourage-gamblit/
https://m.lasvegassun.com/news/2017/apr/07/skill-based-games-early-returns-encourage-gamblit/
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
