Hoppin Hotness Revised
September 1st, 2012 at 5:02:41 PM
permalink
Quote: allinriverkingI just don't understand some of the attitudes from some of the members on here. I thought this was a professional forum.
Hang in there Allinriverking, as was stated, there are all kinds of personalities on here and sometimes the typed word can be misinterpreted. The majority here are trying to give you honest feedback.
Many have some pretty good experience in game development a few with games actually on casino floors. It is hard to get that type of independent feedback any where else, the only exception being SHFL's Focus Group.
As I read back over the thread, I think your biggest challenge is going to be that the craps table is already a myriad of betting options. The Fire and Small/Tall/All have met with dealer resitance as they require additional tracking of rolls besides simply marking the point even though both bets are still tracking two-dice sums.
What you have done is explored the possbility of using one die numbers. I admire the work and the effort. Collectively, I think the Forum is telling you that tracking single die outcomes alongside playing the main game of craps is a tough sell to the group for a variety of the stated reasons.
I don't know that it works, but someone else suggested that maybe your one die hi-lo point concept is a whole new game unto itself. If all you had to explain was that concept on not the rest of the craps game, perhaps that has potential. Maybe this is "Hi-Lo Craps" or instead of Hopping High Low. There are lots of questions as to whether that adds anything that regular craps doesn't offer, but it is another thought.
Bottom line is I don't think you are going to get a lot of encouragement here with a concept that adds another multi roll bet to regular craps focused on individual die results. The two multi-roll side bets tracking two dice outcomes are having a hard enough time getting installs themselves. I wish you all the best.
September 1st, 2012 at 5:36:40 PM
permalink
How about just the Firebet lammer method.Quote: allinriverkingThe "V" stands for the Roman numeral 5. Instead of counting a bunch of 1 lammers at end, you count one "V"(5) and any "ON"'s with(or lammers with the number 1 can be used instead of "ON"'s).
Large lammers with 5,6,7,8 and 9 on them. Only 2 sets needed.
Once it hits 5, stop with the small, ugly "on" lammers and go BIG with fancy winner lammers.
Use the "on" lammers for the first 4 hits but use the larger 5-9 to show the winners.
Some good...
This bet actually will have more bets resolved than the Firebet or the All, Tall and Small bets that are just one bet made per shooter.
This bet is resolved with every 7 not with every shooter.
11.7 resolved bets per shooter per 100 rolls for the above 2 bets (Fire and ATS)
vs
16.7 resolved bets per 100 rolls and some shooters can hit a winner Hop Point multiple times in the same hand, something the other two bets can not do.
Another way to make this even more marketable, where a new layout would not be needed.
Use a digital counter, two of them. One marked Lo Hop Point and the other Hi Hop Point
The first digit could be the point and the second the count.
Just like the shooter roll counter at the Fremont in Las Vegas
Example of the Lo-Hop Point Counter
This will get everyone asking about what it is.
The other suggestion, have someone make a java or flash version of Craps with your bet so people can play it.
Value in show and tell
Steve at Discount Gambling would do a great job, IMO
If you can make one, do it.
I still like the idea of the word HOP
It is a grabber
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
September 1st, 2012 at 6:26:00 PM
permalink
" Quote: allinriverking
I just don't understand some of the attitudes from some of the members on here. I thought this was a professional forum.
Almost all of your customers will be non-professionals. You should be able to separate the wheat from the chaff.
If you want ATABOYS , you are in the wrong forum. If you want varied opinions and a mixture of expertise along with
the occasional nut job, stick around and benefit !
I just don't understand some of the attitudes from some of the members on here. I thought this was a professional forum.
Almost all of your customers will be non-professionals. You should be able to separate the wheat from the chaff.
If you want ATABOYS , you are in the wrong forum. If you want varied opinions and a mixture of expertise along with
the occasional nut job, stick around and benefit !
September 2nd, 2012 at 2:53:33 AM
permalink
Quote: 7crapsHow about just the Firebet lammer method.
Large lammers with 5,6,7,8 and 9 on them. Only 2 sets needed.
Once it hits 5, stop with the small, ugly "on" lammers and go BIG with fancy winner lammers.
I was using Roman Numerals to not make it more confusing with a lammer reading 1-6 on it, I didn't want to have to switch them out also when it goes from 5 to 6, but actually they could just stay in the square until paid, great thought there. Although using two sets of the following labeled lammers would work great
1 - ON
4 - Roman Numeral one's
1 - Roman Numeral 5
Quote: 7crapsSome good...
This bet actually will have more bets resolved than the Firebet or the All, Tall and Small bets that are just one bet made per shooter.
This bet is resolved with every 7 not with every shooter.
11.7 resolved bets per shooter per 100 rolls for the above 2 bets (Fire and ATS)
vs
16.7 resolved bets per 100 rolls and some shooters can hit a winner Hop Point multiple times in the same hand, something the other two bets can not do.
The bets are resolved with a seven out or when the player makes their main point. And any 2, 3, 7, 11 or 12 doesn't affect mini points when coming out. Only once the main point is established would a roll of 2, 3, 7, 11 or 12 affect the bet if it contains the hi or lo point in its outcome.
September 2nd, 2012 at 3:09:52 AM
permalink
Hoppin' Hotness bets benefit players - over All bets and Fire bets because
- they have better hit frequency (full math working on)
- multiple payouts (All bets don't per bet, they are hit or lose)
- a seven out could actually cause one of Hoppin' Hotness bets to win (Fire and Alls lose if they haven't already reached their goal)
- winner seven on come-out roll doesn't cause my bets to lose, as does with Alls
Hoppin' Hotness bets benefit casinos - over All bets and Fire bets because
- more bets resolved per hour on average
- aiming for slightly higher house edge than Alls
Hoppin' Hotness bets benefit dealers - over All bets and Fire bets because
- higher hit frequency (more dealer bets won, even if it is a lower payout)
- more bets resolved per hour means more of these bets can be made every hour.
- easy to deal (just add lammers to correct side when corresponding mini point rolls, other than the first lammer marking the mini point all other lammers can just be thrown into the correct square, no need to stack them on anything specific as long as they are in their square.)
- they have better hit frequency (full math working on)
- multiple payouts (All bets don't per bet, they are hit or lose)
- a seven out could actually cause one of Hoppin' Hotness bets to win (Fire and Alls lose if they haven't already reached their goal)
- winner seven on come-out roll doesn't cause my bets to lose, as does with Alls
Hoppin' Hotness bets benefit casinos - over All bets and Fire bets because
- more bets resolved per hour on average
- aiming for slightly higher house edge than Alls
Hoppin' Hotness bets benefit dealers - over All bets and Fire bets because
- higher hit frequency (more dealer bets won, even if it is a lower payout)
- more bets resolved per hour means more of these bets can be made every hour.
- easy to deal (just add lammers to correct side when corresponding mini point rolls, other than the first lammer marking the mini point all other lammers can just be thrown into the correct square, no need to stack them on anything specific as long as they are in their square.)
September 2nd, 2012 at 4:30:20 AM
permalink
Hopping hotness will confuse new craps players even more than they already are,and piss off established players. But that's just my opinion, not being as tied in to it as you.
A falling knife has no handle.
September 2nd, 2012 at 4:38:03 AM
permalink
Quote: MoscaHopping hotness will confuse new craps players even more than they already are,and piss off established players. But that's just my opinion, not being as tied in to it as you.
I deal the ATS bets all day long, the extra effort required for my bets, will be the same as the ATS bets require.
September 2nd, 2012 at 4:54:17 AM
permalink
MATH IS HARD!
September 2nd, 2012 at 5:27:45 AM
permalink
Quote: allinriverkingI deal the ATS bets all day long, the extra effort required for my bets, will be the same as the ATS bets require.
If you already knew the answer, that it was a great new bet, then why did you ask the question? Sorry to sound a little miffed, but really: if it's a great bet no matter what anyone says, then ignore us and go market the thing, get it on to the felt.
A falling knife has no handle.
September 2nd, 2012 at 7:53:55 AM
permalink
Quote: allinriverking- winner seven on come-out roll doesn't cause my bets to lose
That's a contradiction to what you've said previously.
Either that, or once again, I'm confused.
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? 😁
September 2nd, 2012 at 8:19:41 AM
permalink
" More than the Luck needed for DJs Poker for Roulette " Well, Teddy, you are establishing a benchmark. LOL
But Riverboat Roulette will soon replace it, and probably do so for many years to come.
But Riverboat Roulette will soon replace it, and probably do so for many years to come.
September 3rd, 2012 at 1:00:21 AM
permalink
Quote: MoscaIf you already knew the answer, that it was a great new bet, then why did you ask the question? Sorry to sound a little miffed, but really: if it's a great bet no matter what anyone says, then ignore us and go market the thing, get it on to the felt.
I'm just saying, the biggest complaint that I have received about any new bets for dice that require tracking of some type of lammer is just that. If that is all, then to me it's not a deal breaker to move forward.
September 3rd, 2012 at 1:06:55 AM
permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBearThat's a contradiction to what you've said previously.
Either that, or once again, I'm confused.
Sorry to confuse you DJ. When I changed it to the way, in which the mini points reset with each new main point established is when I changed it that a seven coming out it wouldn't lose. This is because now the mini point bets have to win before the next come-out roll, which makes it harder to win as it is. When the math is done, I will decide finally which is the best route to have come-out seven cause mini point bets to lose or not. This will all be up to the hit frequencies, each way creates.
September 6th, 2012 at 3:16:10 AM
permalink
Payout table is done
2-marks = 1:1
3-marks = 2:1
4-marks = 3:1
5-marks = 5:1
6-marks = 10:1
7-marks = 25:1
8-marks = 50:1
9-marks = 100:1
10 or more marks = 250:1
Hit Frequency is 26.38%
House Advantage is 8.01%
2-marks = 1:1
3-marks = 2:1
4-marks = 3:1
5-marks = 5:1
6-marks = 10:1
7-marks = 25:1
8-marks = 50:1
9-marks = 100:1
10 or more marks = 250:1
Hit Frequency is 26.38%
House Advantage is 8.01%
September 6th, 2012 at 1:04:45 PM
permalink
The final rules are?
Example from WinCraps:
#1; COR 2-5
LO-P = 2; HI-P = 5
No Game Point
Bets do NOT lose
LO-P count = 1
HI-P count = 1
#2; COR 2-3
Game Point = 5
LO-P count = 2
HI-P count = 1
LO-P is already an even money winner
Are the payouts X to 1 or X for 1?
#3; 2-6
LO-P count = 3
HI-P count = 1
#3; 1-4
LO-P count = 3
HI-P count = 1
Game Point5 won
Both LO and HI points are resolved because the Game Point was resolved on a win
HI-P lost
LO-P won 3:1 and still up for next COR
Example from WinCraps:
#1; COR 2-5
LO-P = 2; HI-P = 5
No Game Point
Bets do NOT lose
LO-P count = 1
HI-P count = 1
#2; COR 2-3
Game Point = 5
LO-P count = 2
HI-P count = 1
LO-P is already an even money winner
Are the payouts X to 1 or X for 1?
#3; 2-6
LO-P count = 3
HI-P count = 1
#3; 1-4
LO-P count = 3
HI-P count = 1
Game Point5 won
Both LO and HI points are resolved because the Game Point was resolved on a win
HI-P lost
LO-P won 3:1 and still up for next COR
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
September 6th, 2012 at 4:06:58 PM
permalink
Quote: 7crapsThe final rules are?
Example from WinCraps:
#1; COR 2-5
LO-P = 2; HI-P = 5
No Game Point
Bets do NOT lose
LO-P count = 1
HI-P count = 1
#2; COR 2-3
Game Point = 5
LO-P count = 2
HI-P count = 1
LO-P is already an even money winner
Are the payouts X to 1 or X for 1?
#3; 2-6
LO-P count = 3
HI-P count = 1
#3; 1-4
LO-P count = 3
HI-P count = 1
Game Point5 won
Both LO and HI points are resolved because the Game Point was resolved on a win
HI-P lost
LO-P won 3:1 and still up for next COR
No...
Comeout roll if any 7, any Craps or yo nothing happens to bets, because no point has been established.
Comeout roll - point is established, example 6 easy 6(4, 2)
"ON" lammer is placed on the 2 inside the LO-MINI POINT BET square, "ON" lammer is placed on the 4 inside the HI-MINI POINT BET square.
Every roll thereafter that is not a 7 or makes the point(main) and either the 2 or 4 is in the roll, a marking lammer will be placed inside proper betting square.
every roll thereafter that is a 7 or the point(main) is made and either the 2 and/or 4 is in the roll, a marking lammer will be placed inside proper betting square(s); and then bets are resolved. Paying any that have two or more marking lammers(not including "ON" lammers) and taking any that do not.
September 6th, 2012 at 4:35:41 PM
permalink
The water is getting clear.
Example:
New Shooter
#1; COR 7 (2-5)
No Game Point Established therefore
No Mini Points established
(mini points only established when a Game point is established)
Bets do NOT lose, a push.
That means the house edge can be calculated per roll and per bet resolved.
Q. Can a player now remove the bets if wanted?
Wife and dinner are waiting.
I would think so.
#2; same shooter, COR 5 (2-3)
Game Point = 5 marked
LO-P = 2 marked
HI-P = 3 marked
LO-P count = 0
HI-P count = 0
#3; 8 easy 8 (2-6)
LO-P count = 1
HI-P count = 0
#4; 5 winner (1-4)
Game Point5 won for the pass line bets
LO-P count = 1
HI-P count = 0
Both LO and HI points are resolved because the Game Point was resolved on a win
HI-P bets all lost
LO-P bets all lost
Are the payouts X to 1 or X for 1?
Example:
New Shooter
#1; COR 7 (2-5)
No Game Point Established therefore
No Mini Points established
(mini points only established when a Game point is established)
Bets do NOT lose, a push.
That means the house edge can be calculated per roll and per bet resolved.
Q. Can a player now remove the bets if wanted?
Wife and dinner are waiting.
I would think so.
#2; same shooter, COR 5 (2-3)
Game Point = 5 marked
LO-P = 2 marked
HI-P = 3 marked
LO-P count = 0
HI-P count = 0
#3; 8 easy 8 (2-6)
LO-P count = 1
HI-P count = 0
#4; 5 winner (1-4)
Game Point5 won for the pass line bets
LO-P count = 1
HI-P count = 0
Both LO and HI points are resolved because the Game Point was resolved on a win
HI-P bets all lost
LO-P bets all lost
Are the payouts X to 1 or X for 1?
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
September 6th, 2012 at 5:14:02 PM
permalink
7craps
question 1 answer yes as well players may increase their bets or place new ones before point is established
payouts are to 1
question 1 answer yes as well players may increase their bets or place new ones before point is established
payouts are to 1
September 6th, 2012 at 5:37:23 PM
permalink
Thank You
With this current version it also looks that the Lo-Point could never be a 6 as that can only be a 6-6 COR and that will not establish any point (game or mini)
The HI-Point could never be a 1 as a 1-1 COR does not establish a point.
Looks to be a very simple version.
Establish all 3 points at the same time.
Resolve all 3 points at the same time.
How about different pay tables? I am sure you have different ones.
IMO, a side bet that pays even money, not much thrill there.
Without doing the math, the 2 hits at 1:1 should be the most common payout.
Could get a bit boring.
With this current version it also looks that the Lo-Point could never be a 6 as that can only be a 6-6 COR and that will not establish any point (game or mini)
The HI-Point could never be a 1 as a 1-1 COR does not establish a point.
Looks to be a very simple version.
Establish all 3 points at the same time.
Resolve all 3 points at the same time.
How about different pay tables? I am sure you have different ones.
IMO, a side bet that pays even money, not much thrill there.
Without doing the math, the 2 hits at 1:1 should be the most common payout.
Could get a bit boring.
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
September 6th, 2012 at 5:57:36 PM
permalink
Allin, post the hit rate by payout and this will help answer the "will it get boring" comment. The rates are expected to decrease dramatically as they go up and often 99% of the hit rate on a side bet is made up of the first 3 payouts, but it will give a sense of the volatility.
And well done simplifying this one.....I don't know if I am a believer yet, but you are certainly making a stronger case for the concept with this version. Good work!
And well done simplifying this one.....I don't know if I am a believer yet, but you are certainly making a stronger case for the concept with this version. Good work!
September 6th, 2012 at 6:28:03 PM
permalink
there are other paytables that start out at 5 to 1 but starts from 3-5 hits pay the 5 to 1 and increase from there at 5 to 1 increases per additional hit will post that later at work now on Android
September 6th, 2012 at 9:33:41 PM
permalink
After reading this thread in it's entirety, i beg to ask, Who's On First ?
September 7th, 2012 at 1:48:07 AM
permalink
Quote: ParadigmAllin, post the hit rate by payout and this will help answer the "will it get boring" comment. The rates are expected to decrease dramatically as they go up and often 99% of the hit rate on a side bet is made up of the first 3 payouts, but it will give a sense of the volatility.
And well done simplifying this one.....I don't know if I am a believer yet, but you are certainly making a stronger case for the concept with this version. Good work!
93% of the hit rate is made up of the first 3 payouts...
September 7th, 2012 at 2:55:40 AM
permalink
Quote: buzzpaffAfter reading this thread in it's entirety, i beg to ask, Who's On First ?
Buzz,
You have witnessed the evolution of a game in it's (hopefully) final making, with keeping some of the same claims claimed in the previous provisional patent application.
Final Rules
Come-out roll
Any 7, Yo(11) or Craps(2, 3 or 12) rolls - Nothing happens to the mini-point bets; players may place new mini-point bets, add to or reduce existing mini-point bets and/or take down their mini-point bets at this time. Roll outcomes include the following: (6-1, 1-6, 5-2, 2-5, 4-3, 3-4, 6-5, 5-6, 1-1, 2-1, 1-2 and 6-6).
Any (main) point established, establishes a lo and hi mini-point; lo mini-point is the lowest die rolled and hi mini-point is the highest die rolled. An "ON" lammer is placed on top of the number, inside corresponding betting square, that corresponds to the outcome of the proper die rolled. Roll outcomes include the following: (3-1, 1-3, 4-1, 1-4, 5-1, 1-5, 2-2, 3-2, 2-3, 4-2, 2-4, 6-2, 2-6, 3-3, 5-3, 3-5, 6-3, 3-6, 4-4, 5-4, 4-5, 6-4, 4-6 and 5-5). Example: (5-4) rolls, the lo mini-point is 4 and the hi mini-point is 5. Mark the 4 inside the lo mini-point bet betting square with an "ON" lammer and mark the 5 inside the hi mini-point bet betting square with an "ON" lammer.
Subsequent rolls
Any roll outcome, other than a 7 or (main) point maker - Place an "I"(Roman Numeral 1) lammer inside the lo mini-point bet betting square if the lo mini-point is in the roll outcome and one in the hi mini-point bet betting square if the hi mini-point is in the roll outcome. Once there are 5 "I" lammers inside a betting square, a single "V"(Roman Numeral 5) lammer is placed in their place. Example: (5-4) rolls come-out roll, a (5-1) rolls, a "I" lammer is placed inside the hi mini-point bet betting square.
Any 7 rolls or make the (main) point - Place an "I"(Roman Numeral 1) lammer inside the lo mini-point bet betting square if the lo mini-point is in the roll outcome and one in the hi mini-point bet betting square if the hi mini-point is in the roll outcome. Once there are 5 "I" lammers inside a betting square, a single "V"(Roman Numeral 5) lammer is placed in their place. Resolve all bets before coming out again. Example: (5-4) rolls come-out roll, a (5-2) rolls, a "I" lammer is placed inside the hi mini-point bet betting square and the bets are resolved; in this scenario both the lo and hi mini-point bets lose because the lo mini-point rolled 0 times and the hi mini-point only rolled 1 time.
Pay Table
Mini-point made 2 times - 1 to 1
Mini-point made 3 times - 2 to 1
Mini-point made 4 times - 3 to 1
Mini-point made 5 times - 5 to 1
Mini-point made 6 times - 10 to 1
Mini-point made 7 times - 25 to 1
Mini-point made 8 times - 50 to 1
Mini-point made 9 times - 100 to 1
Mini-point made 10 or more times - 250 to 1
Hit Frequency 26%
House Advantage 8%
First 3 payouts make up 93% of the hit rate.
First 5 payouts make up 99% of the hit rate.
Alternate Pay Table
Mini-point made 4 times - 5 to 1
Mini-point made 5 times - 15 to 1
Mini-point made 6 times - 25 to 1
Mini-point made 7 times - 100 to 1
Mini-point made 8 times - 150 to 1
Mini-point made 9 times - 200 to 1
Mini-point made 10 or more times - 250 to 1
Hit Frequency 4.6%
House Advantage 7.9%
First 3 payouts make up 93% of the hit rate.
First 5 payouts make up 99% of the hit rate.
Alternate Pay Table
Mini-point made 3 times - 5 to 1
Mini-point made 4 times - 5 to 1
Mini-point made 5 times - 5 to 1
Mini-point made 6 times - 15 to 1
Mini-point made 7 times - 30 to 1
Mini-point made 8 times - 75 to 1
Mini-point made 9 times - 125 to 1
Mini-point made 10 or more times - 250 to 1
Hit Frequency 10.98%
House Advantage 8.03%
First 3 payouts make up 93% of the hit rate.
First 5 payouts make up 99% of the hit rate.
September 7th, 2012 at 7:54:59 AM
permalink
Allin,
Not sure how this works in your math or how it is scored from a mini point perspective. Question is how are hard ways scored for the mini points when they occur after the come out roll?
Example:
Come out roll is 3-6 establishing a low mini of 3, and a high mini of 6.
Next roll is 3-2, one "I" lammer placed on low mini
Next roll is 3-3.....how many additional lammers are placed on low mini? The answer should be two additional lammers in my mind.
It would make the hard ways a significant roll for your mini points and add some real excitement when a player gets to add two lammers to count. Perhaps you have already incorporated this concept but if not, you could use it to increase hit rate on alternate paytables.
The 26% hit rate on the first pay table is too high in my opinion for a side bet and the 1-1 inital payout level is too low a reward. Maybe you can make the hit rates go up on the last alternate pay table to at least the 15% level with the hard ways paying two lammers and maintain greater than 3-1 as your lowest payout.
In any event, just a thought. You may already have hardways post come out roll equating to two lammers if they represent either the low or high mini point, but I thougth I would ask.
Not sure how this works in your math or how it is scored from a mini point perspective. Question is how are hard ways scored for the mini points when they occur after the come out roll?
Example:
Come out roll is 3-6 establishing a low mini of 3, and a high mini of 6.
Next roll is 3-2, one "I" lammer placed on low mini
Next roll is 3-3.....how many additional lammers are placed on low mini? The answer should be two additional lammers in my mind.
It would make the hard ways a significant roll for your mini points and add some real excitement when a player gets to add two lammers to count. Perhaps you have already incorporated this concept but if not, you could use it to increase hit rate on alternate paytables.
The 26% hit rate on the first pay table is too high in my opinion for a side bet and the 1-1 inital payout level is too low a reward. Maybe you can make the hit rates go up on the last alternate pay table to at least the 15% level with the hard ways paying two lammers and maintain greater than 3-1 as your lowest payout.
In any event, just a thought. You may already have hardways post come out roll equating to two lammers if they represent either the low or high mini point, but I thougth I would ask.
September 7th, 2012 at 8:09:33 AM
permalink
Is this new version just one bet or two separate bets? If two, how is it different than a single-die version of Shuffle Master's "Sharp Shooter" bet?
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
September 7th, 2012 at 8:38:01 AM
permalink
My understanding is it adds only 1. Could be the exception to the rule.Quote: Paradigm...a low mini of 3,
Next roll is 3-3.....how many additional lammers are placed on low mini?
The answer should be two additional lammers in my mind.
The hit rate is about the same as 3 Card Poker, both the main and Pair Plus.Quote: ParadigmThe 26% hit rate on the first pay table is too high in my opinion for a side bet and the 1-1 inital payout level is too low a reward. Maybe you can make the hit rates go up on the last alternate pay table to at least the 15% level with the hard ways paying two lammers and maintain greater than 3-1 as your lowest payout.
At first thought, I did not like the 1to1 payout.
But this makes one bet win and one lose a push when betting both. (about 32% of the time - sim data)
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
September 7th, 2012 at 8:42:23 AM
permalink
I see it as two separate bets. It plays nicely that way.Quote: MathExtremistIs this new version just one bet or two separate bets? If two, how is it different than a single-die version of Shuffle Master's "Sharp Shooter" bet?
About 12.5% of the time both are winners at the same time.
Looks to be close to a single die version of SM SS bet.
Maybe that is the idea.
Replace the Firebet (owned by SM) with the "Sharp Shooter" and the Lo-Hi Hop Mini Point bet.
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
September 7th, 2012 at 10:45:59 AM
permalink
Quote: 7crapsI see it as two separate bets. It plays nicely that way.
About 12.5% of the time both are winners at the same time.
Looks to be close to a single die version of SM SS bet.
Maybe that is the idea.
That's fine as an idea but it doesn't bode well for patentability. It'd be like saying "I've invented an 8-sided dice version of the passline where the point can be any number from 5-8 or 10-13, and you lose when you 9-out." It might be fun and have different odds but probably wouldn't get past an obviousness check. See MPEP 2143.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
September 7th, 2012 at 10:58:25 AM
permalink
ME is usually right on with patentability issues.....Allin you are going to have to get some guidance on this from your lawyer. No sense in spending time on idea you can't protect.
Of course I say that while knowing getting any non-electronic patent issued on even a brand new game concept is a wait in process at this point with Bilski!
Of course I say that while knowing getting any non-electronic patent issued on even a brand new game concept is a wait in process at this point with Bilski!
September 7th, 2012 at 11:00:34 AM
permalink
The long and winding road for this bet.Quote: MathExtremistThat's fine as an idea but it doesn't bode well for patentability.
ME,
Is not the Firebet and the Sharp Shooter bets basically the same thing?
They pay on a number of points hit by the same shooter.
There must be a difference since, as you know,
one counts only unique points hit and the other all the points hit.
So this new bet just adds 2 more points and pays on them.
I see it as way different from the Firebet and Sharp Shooter bet.
Of course, it could be a judgement call.
September 7th, 2012 at 11:13:04 AM
permalink
Quote: 7crapsThe hit rate is about the same as 3 Card Poker, both the main and Pair Plus.
At first thought, I did not like the 1to1 payout.
But this makes one bet win and one lose a push when betting both. (about 32% of the time - sim data)
7Craps, agree the hit rate is similar to 3CP Pair Plus, but my point here was that in Craps you already have a plethora of betting options. In 3CP all you have is main bet and PP.
For another bet to make it on the already crowded craps table you want it to be lower hit rate (10-15%) particularly if you have some 3-1 or 5-1 payouts. You can go much lower on hit rate <5% if you start paying out at 25-1, but Fire and the All/Small/Tall already have that niche covered.
Seems like HH is trying to find that niche between very low hit rate and only high payouts and the main betting options on Craps. He can get there with a formula of 10% - 15% hit rate with low frequent payouts of 3-1 or 5-1 and still be able to squeeze in the 100-1 or greater payout on the high end.
That is where I see this bet as having a chance......it has to offer something different and to me that is multi roll outcome, winning 1.5 out of 10 bets with most wins in the 3 to 5 unit range (higher than the odds on the 4 & 10) but the potential of a 100+ unit win less than 1% of the time (likely less than .5% of the time).
September 7th, 2012 at 11:23:32 AM
permalink
editedQuote: allinriverking
Pay Table
Mini-point made 2 times - 1 to 1
Mini-point made 3 times - 2 to 1
Mini-point made 4 times - 3 to 1
Mini-point made 5 times - 5 to 1
Mini-point made 6 times - 10 to 1
Mini-point made 7 times - 25 to 1
Mini-point made 8 times - 50 to 1
Mini-point made 9 times - 100 to 1
Mini-point made 10 or more times - 250 to 1
Hit Frequency 26%
House Advantage 8%
First 3 payouts make up 93% of the hit rate.
First 5 payouts make up 99% of the hit rate.
I just ran a quick 1 million trial sim
Hit Frequency the same
house edge about -07.53%
my results.
# Hits Prob
0 0.363535
1 0.371756667
2 0.154818333
3 0.064125
4 0.026491667
5 0.01116
6 0.004811667
7 0.001948333
8 0.00077
9 0.000356667
10+ 0.000226667
here is my WinCraps code if some want to see it
When . . .
Initializing Auto-Bet
then . . .
Bet $ 0 on all Chip-Stacks
Go to "end"
While . . .
Last roll was a come-out roll
A point is established on any number
then . . .
Bet the lowest of: die 1 on Chip-Stack # 1
Bet the lowest of: die 2 on Chip-Stack # 1
Bet the highest of: die 1 on Chip-Stack # 2
Bet the highest of: die 2 on Chip-Stack # 2
Go to "end"
'log each die total
While . . .
A point is established on any number
or while . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
then . . .
Bet the lowest of: die 1 on Chip-Stack # 11
Bet the lowest of: die 2 on Chip-Stack # 11
Bet the highest of: die 1 on Chip-Stack # 12
Bet the highest of: die 2 on Chip-Stack # 12
'LO
While . . .
A point is established on any number
Chip-Stack # 1 is equal to Chip-Stack # 11
or while . . .
A point is established on any number
Chip-Stack # 1 is equal to Chip-Stack # 12
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 0
'HI
While . . .
A point is established on any number
Chip-Stack # 2 is equal to Chip-Stack # 11
or while . . .
A point is established on any number
Chip-Stack # 2 is equal to Chip-Stack # 12
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 3
'LO game point resolved
While . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 1 is equal to Chip-Stack # 11
or while . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 1 is equal to Chip-Stack # 12
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 0
'HI game point resolved
While . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 2 is equal to Chip-Stack # 11
or while . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 2 is equal to Chip-Stack # 12
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 3
'tally Lo hits
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 0 is equal to $ 0
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 20
Go to "reset"
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 0 is equal to $ 1
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 21
Go to "reset"
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 0 is equal to $ 2
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 22
Go to "reset"
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 0 is equal to $ 3
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 23
Go to "reset"
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 0 is equal to $ 4
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 24
Go to "reset"
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 0 is equal to $ 5
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 25
Go to "reset"
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 0 is equal to $ 6
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 26
Go to "reset"
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 0 is equal to $ 7
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 27
Go to "reset"
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 0 is equal to $ 8
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 28
Go to "reset"
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 0 is equal to $ 9
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 29
Go to "reset"
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 0 is greater than $ 9
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 30
Go to "reset"
reset
'tally Hi hits
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 3 is equal to $ 0
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 40
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 3 is equal to $ 1
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 41
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 3 is equal to $ 2
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 42
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 3 is equal to $ 3
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 43
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 3 is equal to $ 4
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 44
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 3 is equal to $ 5
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 45
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 3 is equal to $ 6
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 46
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 3 is equal to $ 7
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 47
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 3 is equal to $ 8
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 48
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 3 is equal to $ 9
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 49
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
Chip-Stack # 3 is greater than $ 9
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 50
When . . .
A point is decided "for" or "against" any number
then . . .
Add $ 1 to Chip-Stack # 10
Bet $ 0 on Chip-Stack # 0
Bet $ 0 on Chip-Stack # 1
Bet $ 0 on Chip-Stack # 2
Bet $ 0 on Chip-Stack # 3
Bet $ 0 on Chip-Stack # 11
Bet $ 0 on Chip-Stack # 12
end
When . . .
'change value
Chip-Stack # 10 is equal to $ 300000
then . . .
Stop Auto-Rolling / Hyper-Drive
The WinCraps auto-bet file to download (as a .zip)
hop-points-4.zip
September 7th, 2012 at 11:36:14 AM
permalink
ALLINRIVERKING
No disrespect meant, just that the thread had wandered all over the place.
But your game seems to be in a much better place now.
No disrespect meant, just that the thread had wandered all over the place.
But your game seems to be in a much better place now.
September 7th, 2012 at 11:38:21 AM
permalink
Quote: MathExtremistThat's fine as an idea but it doesn't bode well for patentability. It'd be like saying "I've invented an 8-sided dice version of the passline where the point can be any number from 5-8 or 10-13, and you lose when you 9-out." It might be fun and have different odds but probably wouldn't get past an obviousness check. See MPEP 2143.
I would agree with you, were if not for one notable exception to obviousness. Remember Double Action BJ? It had 2 spots for a player.
That's all, that it's !
September 7th, 2012 at 12:58:47 PM
permalink
Quote: buzzpaffI would agree with you, were if not for one notable exception to obviousness. Remember Double Action BJ? It had 2 spots for a player.
That's all, that it's !
But was it patented? There are *lots* of games in the market that aren't patented...
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
September 7th, 2012 at 12:59:48 PM
permalink
ABSOLUTELY PATENTED
September 7th, 2012 at 1:02:25 PM
permalink
" A method of playing a blackjack game that will enable a blackjack player to make the second initial 21 wager and play the second initial hand on any deal of the cards."
See, sometimes I know what I am talking about. Not often, but sometimes.
Patent number: 5280915
Filing date: Dec 21, 1992
Issue date: Jan 25, 1994
Very popular in Colorado due to $5 max bet.
See, sometimes I know what I am talking about. Not often, but sometimes.
Patent number: 5280915
Filing date: Dec 21, 1992
Issue date: Jan 25, 1994
Very popular in Colorado due to $5 max bet.
September 7th, 2012 at 1:10:22 PM
permalink
Quote: guido111The long and winding road for this bet.
ME,
Is not the Firebet and the Sharp Shooter bets basically the same thing?
They pay on a number of points hit by the same shooter.
There must be a difference since, as you know,
one counts only unique points hit and the other all the points hit.
There's a difference, yes, but I'm also not sure that the Sharp Shooter bet has any patent protection on it. Of course, Shuffle Master's market-dominating position means they don't necessarily need patent protection on a game to be successful with it. Their business is much broader than just table game side bets, and they can achieve business-line synergies that a typical independent game inventor cannot.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
September 7th, 2012 at 1:13:14 PM
permalink
" Their business is much broader than just table game side bets, and they can achieve business-line synergies that a typical independent game inventor cannot. "
Translation : SMI is the 800lb Gorilla in the room !
Translation : SMI is the 800lb Gorilla in the room !
September 7th, 2012 at 1:17:36 PM
permalink
Quote: buzzpaff" A method of playing a blackjack game that will enable a blackjack player to make the second initial 21 wager and play the second initial hand on any deal of the cards."
See, sometimes I know what I am talking about. Not often, but sometimes.
Patent number: 5280915
Filing date: Dec 21, 1992
Issue date: Jan 25, 1994
Very popular in Colorado due to $5 max bet.
That's fascinating -- I hadn't seen that before. However, standards for obviousness under 35 USC 103 are very, very different now than they were in 1994. See: http://anticipatethis.wordpress.com/2008/02/23/the-evolution-of-mpep-2143-prima-facie-case-of-obviousness/
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
September 7th, 2012 at 1:19:48 PM
permalink
Quote: MathExtremistThat's fascinating -- I hadn't seen that before. However, standards for obviousness under 35 USC 103 are very, very different now than they were in 1994. See: http://anticipatethis.wordpress.com/2008/02/23/the-evolution-of-mpep-2143-prima-facie-case-of-obviousness/
Thats what lawyer's do. One lawyer in a small town will starve. 2 lawyers and both will become rich.
Just seems to me if something is so obvious, why the hell had nobody ever done it before !
September 7th, 2012 at 7:03:42 PM
permalink
Is "Double Action BJ" still alive? A casino pays nothing for the traditional BJ, but has to pay a fee to "Double Action BJ", plus the cost of non-standard layouts, if licenses. How many players (in terms of %) play 2 hands? It's a nice patent to brag about, but is it still in the market place?
September 7th, 2012 at 8:00:52 PM
permalink
I believe there might be a table in Blackhawk. But from 1990 to 2010 there were from 10 to 20 tables in Blackhawk and Central city. I believe the fee was $250-$300. There were also that many Triple Action tables . Those had an asinine rule that you could not take even money on Bj , but must actually insure each one separately ?
Double action and Mult-action basically disappeared when the limits were raised to $100. So did Streak at first, but on my last visit , there were 6 Streak tables at Ameristar and 3 at The Lodge.
That fact is a tribute to Stacey Perry of Mao gaming , more than the side bet itself. The signage at table level is top nutch and in various colors of LED lighting. The signs say " STREAK BLACKJACK" as though Streak the game itself and not a side bet.
Evidently the benevolent dictator is not the only inventor/ distributor with an A game !
Double action and Mult-action basically disappeared when the limits were raised to $100. So did Streak at first, but on my last visit , there were 6 Streak tables at Ameristar and 3 at The Lodge.
That fact is a tribute to Stacey Perry of Mao gaming , more than the side bet itself. The signage at table level is top nutch and in various colors of LED lighting. The signs say " STREAK BLACKJACK" as though Streak the game itself and not a side bet.
Evidently the benevolent dictator is not the only inventor/ distributor with an A game !
September 8th, 2012 at 3:25:50 AM
permalink
Quote: ParadigmAllin,
Not sure how this works in your math or how it is scored from a mini point perspective. Question is how are hard ways scored for the mini points when they occur after the come out roll?
No, I didn't want the bets to receive marks to easily. As well, the marks are marked for per roll that mini-point occurs, not per die rolled. It could create an alternate payout though.
September 8th, 2012 at 3:58:52 AM
permalink
Quote: MathExtremistIs this new version just one bet or two separate bets? If two, how is it different than a single-die version of Shuffle Master's "Sharp Shooter" bet?
It is two separate bets.
It's different because it is tracking the outcome of each die separately; not combined.
It's different because there is 3 ways in which these bets are resolved; not 2. A push can resolve my bets on come-out, making the point or seven-out also resolves these bets. Sharp shooter can push on come-out and seven-out resolves bet; making the point doesn't resolve bet.
It's different because a seven-out can advance the bet to win; not stop the bet in it's tracks.
It's different because when a second, third, fourth, etc. (main)point is established it doesn't count towards the goal of the bets winning; because it's the beginning of the bet, not the middle.
It's different because two payout tables are used(instead of one), payout table is based on how the bets are resolved. If the bets are resolved due to a seven-out, payout table (A) is used. If the bets are resolved due to making the (main) point, payout table (B) is used. This allows for a lower hit frequency when the bets are resolved by a seven-out; with higher starting payouts. This allows for a higher hit frequency when the bets are resolved by making the point; with lower starting payouts. This gives the best of both worlds to players. If you look at payout tables when a player gets to a specific number of hits, they want a seven-out. Example there are 5 hits, if a seven-out occurs the payout is 15 to 1, and if the point is made the payout is only 5 to 1; 3 times the payout can be received. This part can be omitted.
It's different because chance determines which mini-points are needed; not just any points or each different point needed.
Pay Table A
Mini-point made 4 times - 5 to 1
Mini-point made 5 times - 15 to 1
Mini-point made 6 times - 25 to 1
Mini-point made 7 times - 100 to 1
Mini-point made 8 times - 150 to 1
Mini-point made 9 times - 200 to 1
Mini-point made 10 or more times - 250 to 1
Hit Frequency 4.6%
House Advantage 7.9%
First 3 payouts make up 93% of the hit rate.
First 5 payouts make up 99% of the hit rate.
Pay Table B
Mini-point made 2 times - 1 to 1
Mini-point made 3 times - 2 to 1
Mini-point made 4 times - 3 to 1
Mini-point made 5 times - 5 to 1
Mini-point made 6 times - 10 to 1
Mini-point made 7 times - 25 to 1
Mini-point made 8 times - 50 to 1
Mini-point made 9 times - 100 to 1
Mini-point made 10 or more times - 250 to 1
Hit Frequency 26%
House Advantage 8%
First 3 payouts make up 93% of the hit rate.
First 5 payouts make up 99% of the hit rate.
Payout table A will be used 60% of time and payout table B will be used 40% of the time. This is close to 50/50, something for all. This wasn't explained earlier because people were confused enough; and I hope it doesn't open another can by bringing it up now. This is something that is not possible on ATS, Fire, Sharp or Double dee because they are only resolved with a seven and not also when a point is made.
These are all claims made in the provisional and I have been assured by legal council the uniqueness(non-obvious) rules have been met because claims are not the next steps of evolution of existing games and that there is more than one different idea used in the game than just simply changing one rule. Also the chance for success is greater due to changes made; casino will have more resolved bets per hour and for players there is a higher hit frequency.
September 8th, 2012 at 4:22:24 AM
permalink
Thanks Guido for the work you have done, a member on here gave me probabilities, of which I am going to ask if it alright to say who it is before I post it. I also have a friend who is suppose to work on it further, but has only given me ballpark probabilities that are similar to 7craps (thanks also 7craps). Everyone is within tenths of a percent differences. I have a couple investors looking at this now, if I decide to take this further with them I would have GLI write something up; so that the results will be certified.
September 8th, 2012 at 5:20:16 AM
permalink
Here are the probabilities for 0 to 10(or more) hits. ie: player places a bet during the comeout roll. 7 , 11 or craps: nothing happens. point established: (1,4) everytime a 1 is rolled is a hit on mini low(just 1 for snake eyes), anytime a 4 is rolled is a hit on the mini high (just 1 for a hard 8). The bet gets resolved on either a 7 out or point made and you would count any hits if applicable ie 1,6 would be low 3,4 would be high and 1,4 would count for both.
0.36385950579062
0.372291384917473
0.154046108700769
0.063948450991247
0.026636393447297
0.011133706948359
0.004670609814547
0.001966636430374
0.000831255397302
0.000352730590097
0.000263216971915
The above was performed by Miplet(thanks much).
0.36385950579062
0.372291384917473
0.154046108700769
0.063948450991247
0.026636393447297
0.011133706948359
0.004670609814547
0.001966636430374
0.000831255397302
0.000352730590097
0.000263216971915
The above was performed by Miplet(thanks much).
September 8th, 2012 at 8:48:17 AM
permalink
Quote: allinriverkingIt's different because two payout tables are used(instead of one), payout table is based on how the bets are resolved. If the bets are resolved due to a seven-out, payout table (A) is used. If the bets are resolved due to making the (main) point, payout table (B) is used.
Allin, if I understand this correctly, the payout table used will depend on if a 7 or the point is rolled first. Is that correct?
If it is, I highly recommend you combine the paytables in to one paytable used on either the Point or a 7 is rolled. Dealers hate having to memorize/use new paytables and it is best to have some "key" that can be used to help dealers easily remenber the payouts without having to consult the paytable. Dealers have enough to keep track of without having to look up a payout.
You have made some big steps forward in simplification with this concept. Multiple pay tables based on whether a 7 or the Point is rolled, IMHO, is reason alone to sink the concept and a huge step backward in the simplification process.
September 8th, 2012 at 9:30:48 AM
permalink
This does not make any sense to use 2 paytables.Quote: allinriverkingPayout table A will be used 60% of time and payout table B will be used 40% of the time. This is close to 50/50, something for all. This wasn't explained earlier because people were confused enough; and I hope it doesn't open another can by bringing it up now.
What is your idea behind this??
edit: I read it. This still makes no sense. Why want the 7out for one bet. The pass and come do no want the 7 out. The place bets do not want a 7 out. Players want winners. Your side bets are just that. A side bet. Not the main course.
With Every point roll (a roll where the game point is established) the LO and HI can increase.
On a 7out the LO and HI can increase
On a point winner the LO and HI can increase
Sure more points are resolved by a 7out but how each bet gets to its hit value is always the same.
I see no reason for 2 pay tables depending on what event caused the resolution of the bet.
I think a casino would also agree not to have 2 pay tables.
edit:9:04pm
As to miplet's calculations, He is the man. Right on. Read his next post.
I get in a very short simulation
0.363535
0.371756667
0.154818333
0.064125
0.026491667
0.01116
0.004811667
0.001948333
0.00077
0.000356667
0.000226667
Yep, one error in my code. I was not counting the hits on the 7out and point winner.
I remember that this was the original way.
Damn, I new I was supposed too.
This bet is fun to play. The high hit frequency is fun.
Now betting limits and pay tables.
Can this bet replace the Fire bet or even the All,Tall,Small?
Enjoy
I updated the wincraps file for any that want to use it to code this
