Dealer Bluff
The game is currently offered at Wynn Las Vegas and Thunder Valley (two tables) in Northern California. Dealer Bluff is unique because it fully integrates the card shuffler into the play of the game. The shuffler, in this case the i-Deal, reads the dealer's hand and makes a bet of either 1x, 2x or 3x the player's ante; players in turn may fold, call or re-raise. The dealer's betting matrix is designed to act like a real poker player would: Betting more when strong and betting less when weak, but occasionally mixing it up with a bluff or slow play. The matrix does not consider player hands--only the dealer hand--when making a bet.
For what it's worth, this is either the No. 1 or No. 2 favorite of the entire SHFL table game intelligentsia, myself included.
For more info, read this post from www.wizardofodds.com:
https://wizardofodds.com/games/dealer-bluff/
Free Bet Blackjack
House Money Blackjack
House Money Baccarat
6 Card Fortune Pai Gow Poker
Face Up Stud Poker
Straight Jack Progressive
Raise it Up
Three Card Mulligan
Ultimate Texas Hold'em
Mississippi Stud
Three Card Poker
Four Card Poker
Stop by and say hi.
--Roger
I stopped by. I don't remember seeing Dealer Bluff. Or am I getting senile ? ? ?
Any chance this makes the free-play/demo page?
So, it's only at Thunder Valley (Calif.) and Red Rock.
Quote: jonI recall how ticket-in-ticket-out initially failed at the MGM in the early 1990's.
Wow, I never knew that. It's pretty crazy that it didn't succeed the first time. TITO is one of the biggest slot innovations ever, imo. Playing coins can be a fun change of pace now, but coins are definitely filthy.
Staff is key to talking a new game up to players and if the dealer enthusiasm isn't there for it, the game better be lights out easy, intuitive and fun. Not sure Bluff is "easy and intuitive" and probably needs the dealer to help the players along at the beginning (i.e. explaining sometimes the machine bluffs but most times it doesn't, etc.). With no direction from the dealer and a name like "Dealer Bluff", I wonder if new players facing a 3X said "yeah right, that's a bluff" and called or raised only to get smacked down quickly.
Also, you potentially had 9 units on the table if you play both side bets and re-raise 3X on a dealer 3X initial raise. At a minimum, you are at 5 units to be in to the end playing both side bets. That is a tough hurdle when you are learning a new game, but can be exciting once you know what you are doing!
I like the game as well, so sorry to see it not gaining traction.
Quote: jonThat's really a shame. (Of course I'm biased), but I think with Dealer Bluff SHFL has put out one of the most innovative table games in the history of table games. Some players just don't take well to new technology. I recall how ticket-in-ticket-out initially failed at the MGM in the early 1990's.
I will admit I thought TITO sucked when it first came to Colorado. My wife worked at Lady Luck and the metal coin trays were 2 to 3 feet below the coin slot. So when anyone cashed out, you could hear Clang Clang all over the place, especially from $1 slots. Lots of foot traffic in the summer back then, with people carrying buckets of coins from casino to casino.
Now there is no hard count team, young ladies dispensing wrapped coins in the aisle, etc.
But how does the shoe reading physical cards being dealt in Three Card Poker make TCP with an iShoe = a slot machine?
The shuffling machine is still randomly shuffling the cards once it confirms they are all present in the deck. The physical location in the deck of each card which is randomly shuffled determines which cards you recieve.
There isn't an RNG that determines which cards are in each 3 card packet and then the shuffler sorts the cards to make that outcome.
Intelligent shoes used in TCP seem very different to me than the RNG function in a slot machine.
Quote: ParadigmI get this comment as it relates to Dealer Bluff where the computer system and RNG are making a decision that impacts the game. I do think you need to trust SHFL that there is not collusion going on between the RNG function and the iShoe in Bluff, which I believe to be true cause Pacman has indicated that is the case.
But how does the shoe reading physical cards being dealt in Three Card Poker make TCP with an iShoe = a slot machine?
The shuffling machine is still randomly shuffling the cards once it confirms they are all present in the deck. The physical location in the deck of each card which is randomly shuffled determines which cards you recieve.
There isn't an RNG that determines which cards are in each 3 card packet and then the shuffler sorts the cards to make that outcome.
Intelligent shoes used in TCP seem very different to me than the RNG function in a slot machine.
In the 3 card poker shufflers, the cards can be sorted by the machine, it puts them in chronological order at the end of the night... By that, I don't trust a machine that can manipulate the cards as such. This means there is more than a RNG running those shufflers.. This goes for the same as MS Stud. I only play on a MS stud game in which cards are shuffled by machine then dealer cuts and hands out one card at a time to players. I want to feel i'm playing against a dealer, not a machine.
1. The patent issued: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=8387987.PN.&OS=PN/8387987&RS=PN/8387987
2. We received a report from Red Rock Station that the game's performance has improved. Not out of the woods yet, but at least we can see some light betwen the trees.
Quote: PacmanKind of a good day in the life of Dealer Bluff.
1. The patent issued: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=8387987.PN.&OS=PN/8387987&RS=PN/8387987
2. We received a report from Red Rock Station that the game's performance has improved. Not out of the woods yet, but at least we can see some light betwen the trees.
How was a patent issued on a table game for this? Wasn't UPSTO stop issuing patents on table games? Congrats on getting this.
Quote: AceCrAAckersHow was a patent issued on a table game for this? Wasn't UPSTO stop issuing patents on table games? Congrats on getting this.
One of the inventors is a patent lawyer. Go figure.
2. I like dealer's bluff. It really gives a bit of a poker room aspect, - best as you can - to a table game. No longer are you playing against a 100% blind s.o.b. to a dealer. Nothing quite like it, but many don't get it or trust it yet.
Quote: AceCrAAckersHow was a patent issued on a table game for this? Wasn't UPSTO stop issuing patents on table games? Congrats on getting this.
I looked at the patent link, and read that the game was approved for electronic versions - which the U.S.P.T.O. is indeed granting for electronic version of felt games. This is current standard procedure until the Bilsky snafu is resolved.
-------------------------------
To quote:
A method to play a wagering game using cards, the method comprising: providing a physical deck of playing cards; receiving an ante wager from a player; dealing, using a hand forming scanning shuffler, player's cards which form all or part of a player's hand and dealer's cards which form all or part of a dealer's hand; determining a dealer's action using the values of the dealer's cards which are determined using an electronic processor but not the player's cards, the dealer's action being determined by the electronic processor by using a table comprising predefined dealer's card categories, respective dealer's actions, and weighted probabilities, and electronically displaying the dealer's action; receiving a player's choice of action, the player's choice of action being chosen from a set of actions comprising play and fold; providing predetermined rules that provide: a) if the player's choice of action is fold, then the player loses the ante wager; b) if the player's choice of action is play, then a play wager is received from the player, the play wager being determined based on the dealer's action and the ante wager and play wager are resolved based on a relationship between the player's hand and the dealer's hand; and implementing the predetermined rules.
---------------------------
Currently, ALL casino felt-based games are nominally now described such as , - and to be approved for patent - as an "electronic format equivelant" of EXACTLY the same live-table casino processes, - where the patent requests that it is for the nominal electronic versions ONLY. Which is to say, if a HUMAN can carry it out, it is not practical, novel, or patentable. This has been going on in the American patent office for about four years, where "layout-felt" (physically and manually dealt) casino games are to be described by an electronic equivelant procedure, and are approved ONLY on a "software engineering basis," for lack of a better description.
Well, if you are going to have ANY innovation you might as well have one that mimics a real person. I just think that the teeming millions wandering around casinos are largely already offput by games being "agin them" and don't want some mysterious black box being even more agin them.Quote: PacmanThe dealer's betting matrix is designed to act like a real poker player would: Betting more when strong and betting less when weak, but occasionally mixing it up with a bluff or slow play. The matrix does not consider player hands--only the dealer hand--when making a bet.
Quote: ParadigmKeep in mind that the live version of Dealer Bluff requires the use of a computer (read machine) so this game is patentable even under Bilski and USPTO's current interpretation on 101 patentable material.
1. a dealer-peek or shaker version of the game would not have been, if described non-electronically, and
2. fully dealer capable games of manual games have electronic descriptions and clauses added to them
Trademark protection and electronic versions of live games is really all we have to go on until the USPTO changes its position. Like you said Dan, this change from the USPTO will come in time.
Quote: PacmanKind of a good day in the life of Dealer Bluff.
1. The patent issued: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=8387987.PN.&OS=PN/8387987&RS=PN/8387987
2. We received a report from Red Rock Station that the game's performance has improved. Not out of the woods yet, but at least we can see some light betwen the trees.
Great news. I'm much more encouraged about the performance uptick. There was never any question (in my mind) about obtaining IP protection, current PTO practices notwithstanding.
I'm still contemplating other structures, btw. I don't think 6 card stud is the best possible format.
Quote: PacmanBad news for Bluff: Wynn is removing it, and Green Valley Ranch decided against installing it.
Roger, I was at the Wynn about a week ago and the game was still there. Did they change their mind?
Quote: jonRoger, I was at the Wynn about a week ago and the game was still there. Did they change their mind?
I was there Friday and I didn't see it.
Pacman, I think the following question will help many "independent" game developers if you don't mind answering it. How does SHFL guarantee its income stream if it does not not know whether a game is up or down at WYNN? The possibilities are: (1) DB has been sold to WYNN, so SHFL does not care if the game is on or off (2) WYNN has prepaid the fees, so SHFL does not care (3) DB is on free trial (4) DB is free to WYNN (5) SHFL will charge WYNN for the days it's on the floor at the end of the billing period (6) WYNN and SHFL are partners (?)Quote: PacmanI was there Friday and I didn't see it.
Quote: UCivanPacman, I think the following question will help many "independent" game developers if you don't mind answering it. How does SHFL guarantee its income stream if it does not not know whether a game is up or down at WYNN? The possibilities are: (1) DB has been sold to WYNN, so SHFL does not care if the game is on or off (2) WYNN has prepaid the fees, so SHFL does not care (3) DB is on free trial (4) DB is free to WYNN (5) SHFL will charge WYNN for the days it's on the floor at the end of the billing period (6) WYNN and SHFL are partners (?)
I want to answer your questions, but I am not certain what they are.
Quote: UCivanPacman, I think the following question will help many "independent" game developers if you don't mind answering it. How does SHFL guarantee its income stream if it does not not know whether a game is up or down at WYNN? The possibilities are: (1) DB has been sold to WYNN, so SHFL does not care if the game is on or off (2) WYNN has prepaid the fees, so SHFL does not care (3) DB is on free trial (4) DB is free to WYNN (5) SHFL will charge WYNN for the days it's on the floor at the end of the billing period (6) WYNN and SHFL are partners (?)
UCivan,
Distributors charge a set fee per table per month.
Quote: UCivanThat I know, but what is it with WYNN; seems like one day on and next day off???
Seems pretty clear the game was pulled between 2/25 and 3/1.....
Hoping the Red Rock install keeps looking up. Go Pacman, Jon & ME!
Quote: ParadigmSeems pretty clear the game was pulled between 2/25 and 3/1.....
Hoping the Red Rock install keeps looking up. Go Pacman, Jon & ME!
Don't forget Yoseloff. He's on the patent too.
Quote: ParadigmYou are right....guess I didn't peg him for a member here that would read this thread, but I could be off there as well :-)!
Look out for the handle "Dr. Evil."
Dan, Does Galaxy Gaming pay inventors monthly? How about DEQ, are you getting paid monthly?Quote: PaigowdanUCivan,
Distributors charge a set fee per table per month.
Quote: UCivanDan, Does Galaxy Gaming pay inventors monthly? How about DEQ, are you getting paid monthly?
You are asking Dan to disclose his personal business dealings on a public forum.....I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for an answer!
Well, Dan may surprise you. He spoke about his retirement, his wife, his income after retirement and his health insurance on the forum before. Let's not judge him, yet, and let him talk or not talk, please. I was not asking how much money he makes. I asked about Galaxy Gaming and DEQ; these are for may inventors who are seeking a good distributor. Game may sell, but inventors want to get paid promptly. So if distributors charge casinos per table per month, do they pay inventors monthly?Quote: ParadigmYou are asking Dan to disclose his personal business dealings on a public forum.....I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for an answer!
Quote: UCivanWell, Dan may surprise you. He spoke about his retirement, his wife, his income after retirement and his health insurance on the forum before. Let's not judge him, yet, and let him talk or not talk, please. I was not asking how much money he makes. I asked about Galaxy Gaming and DEQ; these are for may inventors who are seeking a good distributor. Game may sell, but inventors want to get paid promptly. So if distributors charge casinos per table per month, do they pay inventors monthly?
Usually monthly or quarterly, depending on the contract. I've had both. The license between a game inventor and a distributor is a separate agreement from the lease between a distributor and an operator.
I license my games to SHFL.
SHFL determine the monthly lease rate based on market conditions
I receive a quarterly report detailing the lease fees collected by SHFL from the casinos
I am paid a % of the total lease fees collected on a quarterly basis
Quote: UCivanSwitch, That is a sound deal. Thanks. I know of one distributor selling a hot game and paying the inventors nothing yet (for 5 months now.). Do U want to know which distributor and which game? Cannot say here.
Are you the inventor? If not, you may not have all the details. If you are the inventor and that wasn't what you agreed to, have your attorney re-review the contract and advise you. If you don't have an attorney and you're signing licensing deals without proper counsel, well...
Quote: UCivanWell, Dan may surprise you. He spoke about his retirement, his wife, his income after retirement and his health insurance on the forum before. Let's not judge him, yet, and let him talk or not talk, please. I was not asking how much money he makes. I asked about Galaxy Gaming and DEQ; these are for may inventors who are seeking a good distributor. Game may sell, but inventors want to get paid promptly. So if distributors charge casinos per table per month, do they pay inventors monthly?
This is no biggie. I won't talk about my own exact financial figures, but general industry practices are all right, and that's what people want to know - how it is handled. Inventors are generally paid monthly a percentage of what each table is charged by the distributor to the operator.
1. You'll get a spreadsheet that'll show, for instance, the install ("East Side Cannery," "Venetian," etc.) column A; # of units in column B; The official rate, column C, ($795, $995, $350, whatever); your % rate, column D (15%, 20%, 25%, etc); your income, Column E; Comments in Column F ("Installed August 15, 2012"), with totals on the bottom of units, and your income.
2. And a check for that amount.
Expect to receive 15% to 25% of gross if a game is signed.
Some distributors are manufaturer's, and if signing an exclusive agreement, they may insist of a clause that you assign the patent to them upon 200 installs or so, so that they are not 'over the barrel' in terms of you re-signing if they make the game successful; the rate and income remains permanent and locked-in per all units and future units at the same rate, or there's a buy-out clause. Additionally, if the units drop below a certain level (the same 200 or so), the patent reverts back to the inventor.
For the situation above, I heard of one unnamed and very small distributor, now defunct, who defaulted/stiffed the game designers due to corporate red ink. The Big Three (SHFL, Galaxy, and DEQ) do not do this, and pay timely and properly.
As an aside, I appreciate all the guidance and open discussion the distributors provide out here. It keeps me from filling up inboxes with too many questions...
Quote: 21RevolutionHow are distributor agreements working in the midst of all the challenges with getting patents approved?
Same as before the Bilsky swamp.
Firstly, just about all table games are submitted and approved as electronic versions, which are respected industry-wide as applicable to felt patent at this point, as we await the resolution. If the felt patents get approved in the end, then ALL distributors who ripped off other vendor products, knowingly or unknowlingly are going to have their heads handed to them for infringement, - this is aside from propping up the original version with all those additional sales. This enforces the Good Neighbor or Gentleman's agreement surrounding this issue. When all are residing in glass houses, a rogue thowing stones could have his own house shattered and ransacked. This isn't a truce, it's unity, of sorts.
And if all felt patents become invalid, then NO distributor can rip off another distributor anyway - as the casinos themselves woud just cease paying royalties to ANY and ALL distributors concerning table games.
Quote: 21RevolutionFor example, what happens if there is an agreement and then the non-provisional patent application gets rejected? Also, if you have a provisional, do the distributors play a part in doing all they can to get the non-provisional approved?
If signed with a distributor, they'd be crazy to violate in bad faith an agreement with an inventor or supplier. Remember, "Rejected because of Bilsky" means pending to be approved, UNLESS the patent was also rejected or invalidated because it infringed another patent itself, etc., that is to say, "it is not novel to the Art."
Quote: PaigowdanSame as before the Bilsky swamp.
Firstly, just about all table games are submitted and approved as electronic versions, which are respected industry-wide as applicable to felt patent at this point, as we await the resolution.
I strongly recommend keeping a live continuation application to all applications about to issue with just electronic claims, so the felt claims can be inserted into the continuation application when this USPTO madness comes to an end. Since nobody else has, I am going to be appealing a felt gaming application all the way to the supreme court (if need be). The USPTO needs to be slapped.
Quote: jonI strongly recommend keeping a live continuation application to all applications about to issue with just electronic claims, so the felt claims can be inserted into the continuation application when this USPTO madness comes to an end.
Yes, excellent recommendation.
Quote: jonSince nobody else has, I am going to be appealing a felt gaming application all the way to the supreme court (if need be). The USPTO needs to be slapped.
You actually have company on this! PM me !!...
