Differences between Fortune Pai Gow Poker and Emperor's Challenge
Quote: UCivanHow do they differ? Besides one from Shuffle Master, one from Galaxy Gaming, their payout tables are similar. Isn't there a patent infringement issue? One Station casino wants to go with Emperor's Challenge instead of Fortune Pai Gow. I wonder why, could not be for the different leasing fees.
Which Station wants to go completely to Emperor? Sunset has tables of both, so does Fiesta Henderson. Usually the Emperor's Challenge version is associated with the EZ PaiGow game. That's a little faster and easier to deal, with a slightly higher house edge as well. I could see wanting to move to that layout to see if the hold increased.
Quote: UCivanOne Station wants to replace an "undesirable poker" table game to Emperor's Challenge, not "to go completely". Emperor's Challenge has only 4.17% HE, lower than Fortune Pai Gow, per WOO.
That depends on the paytables. Fortune is under 4.17% here in MN, but I get your point.
Quote: UCivanMay be it's because of the EZ Paigow and Paigowdan.
I hope so. One less dream about Sata...er...Roger Snow taking the dream away:-)
Quote: UCivanHow do they differ? Besides one from Shuffle Master, one from Galaxy Gaming, their payout tables are similar. Isn't there a patent infringement issue? One Station casino wants to go with Emperor's Challenge instead of Fortune Pai Gow. I wonder why, could not be for the different leasing fees.
In most cases, the paytable is exactly the same, with one HUGE difference... The Royal Flush/Royal Match on Fortune is replaced with the Royal Flush/Suited Ace King. I think it changes the odds by a hand or two, certainly not a noticeable difference. Since that's the only patented hand that Shufflemaster can lay claim to (I think they own all Royal Match games), they can offer the same paytables (I think, don't quote me on that though).
Brand A = Shufflemaster,
Brand X = Galaxy,
Commission Pai Gow poker is public domain, as are side bets for Pai Gow poker.
Different companies (Shufflemaster, Galaxy, DEQ) have different and proprietary progressive jackpot options.
Also, EZ Pai Gow (NON-commission) is patented, and is the base Pai Gow product of the Cannery Group, a competitor to Stations in the Las vegas locals' market.
There is no issue on infringement between A and B?Quote: PaigowdanThey are basically the same game, and the odds on all the paytables are exactly the same. AK suited and natural = KQ suited and natural in frequency. House edge on the base game after commission are also exactly the same. It a brand thing.
Brand A = Shufflemaster,
Brand X = Galaxy,
Quote: UCivanThere is no issue on infringement between A and B?
None, except for using and selecting between trademarked and branded products in this case.
Indeed, some - a few - casinos use a generic one-spot Pai Gow game (with no Fortune or Emperor's etc., logos) for free.
People expect to see the "top-shelf" branded and trademark products, which cost very little more in light of the monthly drop.
And they want to see and to have to the patented/proprietary Progressive jackpots available to them.
Well, we changed for that reason and because Galaxy's service was horrible. :P
Quote: brianparkesThe only real difference between the game is the "Insurance" side bet. Galaxy's version is based on whether or not your hand is an Ace high or lower, and Shufflemaster's is whether or not the dealer's hand is Ace high or lower.
I didn't know SMI had a version of Fortune with an Insurance bet- is this a new option? Every Fortune table I've ever played at only had the standard fortune bet...
They even just added a horrible side bet to Four Card Poker called the Bad Beat wager. It pays off if a situation where both your hand and the dealer's are at least 2 pair or higher. If you have 3 of a kind and dealer has a straight flush, the 3 of a kind is considered a "Bad Beat" and that side wager is paid odds on it. If the hands are reversed, it still pays for the lower of the 2 hands. It is a crappy wager because the house edge is a friggin 20.3%. I work for casinos and even I think that is quite absurd.
Quote: brianparkesAt least it's approved in WA state. Ever since the state approved games to have a 3rd wager for each spot (example: Spanish 21 now has a match option for the up and undercard), pretty much all the games have had a 3rd wager introduced. Therefore Pai Gow games have the normal Fortune spot and a 3rd spot (usually based on making an Ace high or worse, either in your hand or the dealer's).
They even just added a horrible side bet to Four Card Poker called the Bad Beat wager. It pays off if a situation where both your hand and the dealer's are at least 2 pair or higher. If you have 3 of a kind and dealer has a straight flush, the 3 of a kind is considered a "Bad Beat" and that side wager is paid odds on it. If the hands are reversed, it still pays for the lower of the 2 hands. It is a crappy wager because the house edge is a friggin 20.3%. I work for casinos and even I think that is quite absurd.
Thanks for the info. I can see how adding the insurance bet would be beneficial for SMI as their main competitors have such a bet and people seem to like it.
With regard to the 4-card "Bad Beat" bet, that's outrageous! I was surprised and encouraged with the analysis of the Rabbit Hunter Bad Beat side bet- quite the opposite of the above.
