Raving Table Games Conference 2014

by the way, it is legal in New Jersey as it stands. I read the New Jersey rules online. You can find them pretty easy by doing a search for the game.

ZCore13

Is Switch Hands Blackjack live anywhere yet? I would be interested to hear how the dealers are doing with it and if the flow of the game is affected?

I love the concept but worry that the dealers may have a hard time calculating and counting the 20% of the main bet for the side bet. I had a game concept about 15 years ago that also had a 20% fee and got feedback that it might be too difficult for the dealers to figure out without slowing down the game.

Quote: DRich

I love the concept but worry that the dealers may have a hard time calculating and counting the 20% of the main bet for the side bet. I had a game concept about 15 years ago that also had a 20% fee and got feedback that it might be too difficult for the dealers to figure out without slowing down the game.

Craps dealers have to calculate such percentages all the time. Blackjack dealers must also bet getting experienced calculating a 120% win on a blackjack.

Quote: DRich

Is Switch Hands Blackjack live anywhere yet? I would be interested to hear how the dealers are doing with it and if the flow of the game is affected?

I love the concept but worry that the dealers may have a hard time calculating and counting the 20% of the main bet for the side bet. I had a game concept about 15 years ago that also had a 20% fee and got feedback that it might be too difficult for the dealers to figure out without slowing down the game.

There's not much calculating in it. It's $1 for every $5 or portion of $5. So a $16 wager counts as $4 since the bet exceeded the $15 threshold.


ZCore13

Quote: Zcore13

This is my review of top 3 winning Table Games at the 2015 Raving Table Games Conference. These reviews are from the perspective of a Table Games Manager. I’ll share some of my thoughts as I played the games and afterwards thinking about them. Most if not all of the games at the show were fun to play, but that does not mean they would be a game I would choose to put on the floor. The wizard did a good job in giving the basic descriptions of the games, so I’m not going to re-do his efforts on that. I’ll add more games over the next week as time allows me to.

ZCore13

Would U be willing to share your thoughts, as an operator, on non-winning games? There are no losers.

Quote: Zcore13

Aces Faces Poker (Second Place Winner)

I believe someone could sit in the middle of the table and see at least 2 others peoples cards around them, maybe even more. Once you see how many Aces and Faces there are in people’s hands, that will give you a tremendous clue as to how many the dealer could have. With that knowledge it would seem you can adjust the strategy of when it’s best to play against the dealer and when it’s best to fold. If one could collude with the whole table, I’m pretty sure the game would be closed down in a matter of days.

As the game stands now, I would not put this game on my floor under any circumstances. I would have been put in a tough spot had it won the competition since my property is one of the prizes for an installation for the winner.

ZCore13

If you like to see some specific examples... And it still took second. SMH!

Would work online though...

Quote: mrsuit31

Flaws:(beatable)

player 1- holds 3 (faces or aces, doesnt even matter which specifically)
player 2- holds 2
player 3- holds 4
player 4- holds 1
player 5- holds 2
player 6- holds 3

15 of 16 out, dealer can only possess 1 if any... Everyone knows they will win so no reason to fold. Only person here that needs to make a judgement on his card is player 4

on the flip side

Player 1- holds 1
player 2- Holds 1
Player 3- holds 2
Player 4- holds 2
player 5- holds 2
player 6- holds 2

10 out of 16 dealt. dealer hold at a minimum of 3 faces or aces. EVERYONE FOLDS AND DOESNT PLAY

Another scenario

Player 1- holds 6
player 2- Holds 6
Player 3- holds 1
Player 4- holds 1
player 5- holds 1
player 6- holds 1

all 16 dealt out. dealer cant have any, players 3, 4, 5 and 6 play, knowing they cant lose.

Great stuff, Zcore; I encourage you to continue with the others. Thanks for taking the time.

My favorite game was Change it 21. In that game, you could pay half of your wager to replace one of your cards. To compensate, they paid 6:5 on blackjacks, which I don't like. Assuming they had the math correct, they couldn't pay 3:2, so I understand the decision.

Pick 'Em Blackjack is easy to understand and would be fun enough. The house edge on the 18 and 19 are about 2% and the 17 is much higher, so that does counter some of the countability.

I didn't care for Aces Poker Faces - I also kept thinking it was just like High Card Flush. Other players did seem to get into it. High Card Flush doesn't excite me either.

Quote: Zcore13

This is my review of top 3 winning Table Games at the 2015 Raving Table Games Conference. These reviews are from the perspective of a Table Games Manager. I’ll share some of my thoughts as I played the games and afterwards thinking about them. Most if not all of the games at the show were fun to play, but that does not mean they would be a game I would choose to put on the floor. The wizard did a good job in giving the basic descriptions of the games, so I’m not going to re-do his efforts on that. I’ll add more games over the next week as time allows me to.

Pick’em Blackjack (First Place Winner)

Interesting game with some proof the concept works since “The 18 Bet� has current installs and is one of the choices in this “pick’em� version. I like that regular blackjack play is not affected by the side bets. I don’t like side bets that change the way the main game is played. Players are dealt cards and play blackjack as normal with their dealt cards. The side bet hands use the cards pre-printed on the layout. 17 is a face card and a 7, 18 a face card and a 8 and 19 a face card and a 9. Cards from the shoe are not used for these hands and there is no hitting them.

I don’t have any statistics to prove it, but it would seem the game could be counted. Starting with 17, 18 or 19 obviously takes some of the chance out of the player hand. It can’t bust. So if the deck is full of face cards I would think that’s not the time to place these bets.

This could be concerning, so I am pretty sure I would limit the side bet amounts. I don’t think I would allow the normal bet spreads ($5 - $250 or $25 - $1,000 for example) to apply to the side bets, but because the payouts are only 3:2, 1:1 and 1:2, higher dollar players are not going to have much interest in the side bets. Players playing $100 -$1,000 a hand are not going to care about a 1:2 $25 side bet wining $12.50. On the other hand, I think lower limit players will have fun starting with these hands and can see players choosing to play their main hand and all the side bets at the same time.

Another slight concern is that players can’t misplay their hands when playing the additional hands. Part of the reason Casinos win lots and lots of money on a game that has a house edge of under 1% (closer to .5% in many cases) is that players don’t play correctly. There is no way to misplay starting with a 18 or 19 although maybe the fact that choosing to start with a 17 is a misplay in itself, that might negate the others.

I’m not even sure if I should consider this a side bet game. It’s really just allowing players to play additional hands of blackjack. I might consider throwing a progressive on it as well. This would give players a shot at a larger payout for things like winning all 4 hands, maybe if all 4 or 3 or something like that are all the same color. We’ll see how things go over the next month or so.


Aces Faces Poker (Second Place Winner)

This game surprised me. I did not have it in my top 3. The fact that it’s basically a copy of High Card Flush, the 2012 Raving Winner, set it back in my mind. Playing it was pretty fun, but as I mentioned, I have to be concerned with other aspects as well. This game is highly countable. With only Aces and Face cards serving as useable cards, I believe someone could sit in the middle of the table and see at least 2 others peoples cards around them, maybe even more. Once you see how many Aces and Faces there are in people’s hands, that will give you a tremendous clue as to how many the dealer could have. With that knowledge it would seem you can adjust the strategy of when it’s best to play against the dealer and when it’s best to fold. If one could collude with the whole table, I’m pretty sure the game would be closed down in a matter of days.

As the game stands now, I would not put this game on my floor under any circumstances. I would have been put in a tough spot had it won the competition since my property is one of the prizes for an installation for the winner.


Switch Hands Blackjack (Third Place Winner)

As was the Wizard, I am surprised this concept has not been used before. Very simple to describe to a player and very easy to learn and play. If you make the side bet you place $1 for every $5 on the main bet. You get dealt two hands. One face up and one face down. You then choose if you want to keep the two cards you have and can see versus the dealers up card or switch to the face down unknown hand.

For the house, the 20% fee is taken whether you actually switch hands or not. The giveback on that is that all suited and same color blackjacks pay 2-1 if you played the side bet. One thing I liked from a Management view is that this game puts a huge dent into, if not completely ends the worries about counting. The hands that are dealt face down and not used are never exposed.

That being said, the game didn’t excite me all that much and with 2-1 being the highest possible payout on the table, there was no real wow factor for me. I think players want to play side bets where they have a chance to win larger amounts of money than what they can normally win playing the main game. When I look for new games I look for some excitement, something that makes a player say "wow" when you teach them the game. I also like the community feeling some games allow the players. This one just didn't have any of that for me.

ZCore13

Well thought out explanation and reason for putting/ or not putting it in your casino. I wish other casino managers would do what you do. Even if I disagree with you, I would respect your position.

Without being able to bet the table max, I do not see the first place winner getting much traction. I would not want to play it. If I was counting, I believe I can exploit this bet. Without doing an actual simulation I would not know for sure.

Ace/ Face is too countable.

Third place is another BJ variant. Not very exciting. IMHO

Quote: CrystalMath

My favorite game was Change it 21. In that game, you could pay half of your wager to replace one of your cards. To compensate, they paid 6:5 on blackjacks, which I don't like. Assuming they had the math correct, they couldn't pay 3:2, so I understand the decision.

Pick 'Em Blackjack is easy to understand and would be fun enough. The house edge on the 18 and 19 are about 2% and the 17 is much higher, so that does counter some of the countability.

I didn't care for Aces Poker Faces - I also kept thinking it was just like High Card Flush. Other players did seem to get into it. High Card Flush doesn't excite me either.

The big concern I would possibly have with that game is it might be an infringement on Zappit Blackjack from Geoff Hall, which is very similar mechanically. However, I don't KNOW it's infringing, and make no claim on Geoff's behalf; he and the experts would have to look at it.

Quote: beachbumbabs

The big concern I would possibly have with that game is it might be an infringement on Zappit Blackjack from Geoff Hall, which is very similar mechanically. However, I don't KNOW it's infringing, and make no claim on Geoff's behalf; he and the experts would have to look at it.

Babs, are you trying to say your seeing games getting copied..... Noooooo, that doesn't happen anymore lol.

Quote: beachbumbabs

The big concern I would possibly have with that game is it might be an infringement on Zappit Blackjack from Geoff Hall, which is very similar mechanically. However, I don't KNOW it's infringing, and make no claim on Geoff's behalf; he and the experts would have to look at it.

They are actually quite different. My first thought when I saw the game was that it would be similar to Zappit. Actually, the third place winner, Switch Hands Blackjack, was more like Zappit than this one.

In Zappit:
The player doesn't pay to zap the cards.
Only hands of 15, 16, and 17 may be zapped.
Zapping a hand replaces both cards.
This game uses a push 22 rule.

In Change it 21:
Player pays 1/2 of bet to exchange one card.
I think it can be used on any hand.
No push 22 rule (which would be a clear infringement). Instead, it pays 6:5. Thankfully, they call it "21" and not "Blackjack."

Quote: UCivan

Would U be willing to share your thoughts, as an operator, on non-winning games? There are no losers.

Yes. I wanted to put the 3 winning games up first, but I'll do a bunch more over the next few days. Hectic day at work after being gone 4 days.



ZCore13

As I was assisting eTableGames at the show & I know he is still in Vegas wrapping up loose ends, here is a description of Four Card Split Poker:

1) Player makes a 4 Card Blind bet and two Ante Bets.
2) Player and dealer each receive 4 cards. One of the dealer's cards is exposed.
3)The players 4 Card Blind bet is subsequently resolved based on their four dealt cards. Player must have pair of Tens or Better to hit the pay table or the Blind is lost. Straight and Flush hands are required to use all four cards, the emphasis for this will become more apparent.
4) After the resolution of the 4 Card Blind Bet, the player will split their hands to form two hands for the 3 Card Poker phase of the game. If the player splits his hand into two hands of 2 cards, he will be dealt one additional card for each hand. If he splits his hand into a 1 card hand and a 3 card hand, the 1 card hand will be dealt two additional cards. Essentially, after the split, both hands receive cards until they each contain 3 Cards. The only forced rule on splitting is that any three card flush or higher hand must be set as a "natural" three card winner with the remaining singleton placed in the other hand.
5) "Natural" 3 Card winners are paid immediately according to an odds pay table.
6) The player must decide to "Play" all other split hands and make an additional wager equal to the Ante wager prior to receiving their draw cards. Alternatively the player may fold one or both hands after the split decision is made.
7) The dealer will reveal their three down cards and make their best 3 card poker hand from their four cards. If the dealer does not have a Queen high or better, all player's ante bets push and only the "Play" wagers are in play.
8) Player's three card hand is compared to the dealer's hand and best hand wins even money. If the player wins with a 3 Card Flush or higher, odds are paid on the Play bet.

The game was pretty interesting to me in that it allowed the player to split into two hands and then draw cards to the split hands. You could load up one of the hands with a high pair & a low singleton and put a middle card like a 10/Jack in the other hand and hope to draw and beat the dealer. Or if the singleton was a 2-4, you simply folded the Ante for the other hand and made a "Play" wager on your strong hand. There were decent pay outs on the 4 Card Blind pay table (2 Pair 6-1, 4 Card Straight 8-1, Three of a Kind 12-1, 4OAK 300-1, 4 Card Royal 800-1) and the 3 Card Odds pays for drawn hands were similar in range to a Pair Plus Pay Table.

Z may have some additional comments on the game from an operator's perspective, I won't speak for him, but he did comment that the game had some potential.

The game was not entered in the competition as it was submitted so late and the 21 game cap on the competition had already been reached.

Interesting game. Is 4 Card Split played anywhere?

Not yet......game was literally brand new for the Raving Show. I am sure eTableGames is going to be following up with opportunities that came up as a result of the Show and other marketing efforts.

Quote: Wizard

I just finished a first draft of my latest blog entry -- Raving Table Games Show 2014.

Please have a look and leave your comments. Also, which is your favorite game of the show this year?

Wizard or others, How do I find "Raving Table Games Show 2014" within "http://wizardofodds.com"? Also, how about the videos for the games shown at Raving's? Are they still in the works? Thanks in advance.

Quote: UCivan

Please have a look and leave your comments. Also, which is your favorite game of the show this year? Wizard or others, How do I find "Raving Table Games Show 2014" within "http://wizardofodds.com"? Also, how about the videos for the games shown at Raving's? Are they still in the works? Thanks in advance.

You can find anything with the search box. The videos are still in the works. Be patient on that.

Below is my review of 2 games at the 2014 Raving Table Games conference that I thought had a chance of being in the top 3, if not for some issues. Again, this is from a Table Games Management perspective. As a player, I play all sorts of games. I pretty much try anything I see and have fun.


4 Card Split

I think this game might have made the top 3 had they been able to enter the game into the competition. The owner said that he got the math back and wanted to enter the competition after the date allowed for entrants.

4 Card Split is basically Three Card Poker with a bunch of twists. To start you place 2 antes and a blind bet. You are then dealt 4 cards and the dealer is dealt 4 cards, with one of the dealers 4 cards face up for all to see. You now decide how you want to play your 4 cards into 2 different Three Card Poker hands. You can put 3 in one hand and 1 in another or split them 2 and 2. If you make a 3 card hand of a flush or better you don't even have to play against the dealer with that hand, it's an automatic winner on the Blind Bet and your Ante is pushed back to you for that hand. No dealer qualifying or comparing to their hand. You can then play your second hand with the one remaining card or fold you ante. My guess is if your card is a face card and the dealers up card is lower it should be played.

The odds paid on the Blind bet are:

Flush - 2:1
Straight - 2:1 (which I would probably want to raise to 3-1 and lower one of the higher payments to compensate if I could)
3 of a Kind - 8:1
Straight Flush - 15:1
Royal Flush - 40:1

If there is not a 3 card winning hand right off the bat you then choose to play or fold your hands. To play you match your ante wager with a raise wager of equal amount. To fold you discard one to 3 cards and lose your ante. Any hand that you play will receive the amount of cards you need to make a Three Card Poker hand. One of the interesting things I found about this game was that if you are dealt a hand of let's say A, Q, J, 5 (rainbow), against an up card of a Q for the dealer, how do you play it? Keep the Ace Queen Jack and have a really good chance of winning one hand but folding the other, or keep just the Ace or Ace Five and have a strong second hand of Queen Jack. It seemed to me there is a lot of player choice, which players like.
After you decide on which, if any, hands you will play and receive the cards to create your final hand, the dealer then exposes the rest of their hand and makes a Three Card Poker hand. Queen high qualifies and the hand is compared to players hands just like Three Card Poker, with ante and raise bets being paid even money on wins.

If I had a bigger Pit I would seriously consider this game. I'm struggling right now thinking I could replace Three Card Poker with this game and save a lot of money on the monthly lease and still have a very good Three Card game. The question is does a Pit need Three Card Poker just for the name recognition alone to grab novice Table Games players and die hard Three Card Poker players? To me this is a better game (as are a few other versions that have come out after the original) than Three Card Poker. The dilemmas of being the boss.


Power Parlay Blackjack

I thought this game had great potential and it was lost in a confusing presentation and rack card. Disclaimer: I was showed this game 6 months prior to the show and made suggestions on how I thought the game could be simplified and made easier to understand and had high expectations for it if the changes were made.

Most of the people I talked to during and after the show said they were confused by the game and that it took too much effort to figure it out. My thought is generally that you have 30 seconds or less to explain the game to someone enough that they are comfortable not looking silly when they play their first hand. The inventor is a very smart guy, but sometimes games have to be ¡§dumbed down¡¨ to be able to be successful in a casino. The most popular table game ever, Three Card Poker, could be played correctly by a child.

The premise of this game is regular Blackjack for your first 2 cards and then you decide if you want to continue to play against the dealer as normal or "bail out" and play against a pay table, with the dealers final outcome playing no factor in your hand. If it was explained that way and played that way, to me it's a winner. In regular blackjack, if a player has a 14 against a dealer face card, they pretty much concede their money is gone. So to be able to stop playing against the dealer and now play against a pay table is like getting a tax refund. Anything is better than paying or getting nothing.
If the above was how it was explained and how it played, all would be good. Here is exactly how it is written and explained on the rack card, including all punctuation.

How to Bypass:
1. Book your wager and draw your first two-cards! If you like your chances; Play against the Dealer's hand, as always...
2. Or, Bypass. Bypass the Dealer's hand; And play into the Prop-Box's pay table!

Paying: All Stiff-Hands, 2/card 10 & 11 count-hands, and Split Aces
Betting: Match play stiffs, Double and/or Triple to win, on all others. Players drawing to: 17, 18 or 19 may Bypass to play. Player EV is -0.265% under the present base rules of play.


How to Power Parlay:
1. First receive a Blackjack or Power 20, upon a new hole-count hand.
2. Then, after their initial payoff; Split and Replay the two-cards into the Prop-Box. Next re-wager; and draw a card for each hand. Repeating Blackjack pays 3-2!

Re-playing: Blackjack and Power 20 hands.
Re-betting: As Match, Double or Triple downs; and draw one-card. Players drawing to: 18 or 19 keep-half of their total-combined bet! Power 20's are reciprocal wagers once paid. Player EV is: 0.597% & 3.33% respectively.

Thank God there was no test after that. Excellent concept, horrible execution in my opinion. Too bad.

Z, recall the Blind Bet in 4 Card Split was actually a 4 Card reconciliation where you had to have a pair of tens or better within the initial 4 card hand to hit the pay table/not lose it. If you had the natural 3 card flush or better within the 4 cards, you had to play that as one of your two 3 card poker hands and you were instantly paid on your Ante bet and did not have to beat the dealer's hand or make the raise bet....in fact you couldn't make the raise bet.

Power Parlay was brutally executed as you indicated......and while the inventor is clearly an intelligent guy, he was a bit too over the top as a salesman in my opinion. It was tough for me to leave the table after I was done trying to understand the bet after 15 minutes of trying to understand my options and figure out what was best to do in the 3 - 4 hands I played.

Also the pay tables that you "opted" into playing against were just as tough as trying beating the dealer....I think you needed to hit 18 to push and 19+ to get paid......plus I think you only got one hit card. Imagine getting dealt a hard 13 against a dealer Ten upcard. So you opt not to play the dealer but "bail out" and play against the pay table. You got one hit card and the following are losers: Ace, Two, Three, Four, Nine, Any Ten.....you pushed if dealt a 5 and were paid if dealt a 6, 7 or 8. I may have the details wrong here but it appeared that bad to me (e.g. a 3/13 change of hitting the pay table). I just was never enticed to "Power Parlay" but maybe I just didn't get the game.....which is a problem, because I believe I am more in tune with figuring out new games than the average table games player.

Quote: Paradigm

Z, recall the Blind Bet in 4 Card Split was actually a 4 Card reconciliation where you had to have a pair of tens or better within the initial 4 card hand to hit the pay table/not lose it. If you had the natural 3 card flush or better within the 4 cards, you had to play that as one of your two 3 card poker hands and you were instantly paid on your Ante bet and did not have to beat the dealer's hand or make the raise bet....in fact you couldn't make the raise bet.

Power Parlay was brutally executed as you indicated......and while the inventor is clearly an intelligent guy, he was a bit too over the top as a salesman in my opinion. It was tough for me to leave the table after I was done trying to understand the bet after 15 minutes of trying to understand my options and figure out what was best to do in the 3 - 4 hands I played.

Also the pay tables that you "opted" into playing against were just as tough as trying beating the dealer....I think you needed to hit 18 to push and 19+ to get paid......plus I think you only got one hit card. Imagine getting dealt a hard 13 against a dealer Ten upcard. So you opt not to play the dealer but "bail out" and play against the pay table. You got one hit card and the following are losers: Ace, Two, Three, Four, Nine, Any Ten.....you pushed if dealt a 5 and were paid if dealt a 6, 7 or 8. I may have the details wrong here but it appeared that bad to me (e.g. a 3/13 change of hitting the pay table). I just was never enticed to "Power Parlay" but maybe I just didn't get the game.....which is a problem, because I believe I am more in tune with figuring out new games than the average table games player.

Yes, you are right on that little caviot on 4 card split. I think ou are also right on your assessment of the possible outcomes of your example hand on Power Parlay Blackjack. As I mentioned, poor execution of a good concept. Some minor changes to the play and possibly a name change and I think it has some potential. There has to be some a little more value to the escaping the main game against the dealer. The player is already most likely starting with a 12-16, so maybe give them something back for 17-19 and reward them a bit more for drawing to a 21 or 20. And let them draw more than once. The math would have to be reworked of course, but I'm sure someone smarter than me could figure it out.


ZCore13

I had a hard time understanding Power Parlay. There is far too much going on. In addition to spending 10 minutes at the booth, I have their full marketing package, and I still can't exactly figure out how the game is played.

The way I understand the bypass option is that the player can take a stiff hand, 10 value hands, 11 value hands, or split aces and put them into the "Bypass Prop Box." The player then has the option to wager 1x additional on stiff hands and up to 3x additional on 10 value hands, 11 value hands, or split aces. If the player draws to 17, 18, or 19, the player wins 1 to 2. If the player draws to 20 or 21, the player wins 1 to 1. I cannot find any documentation that says whether or not the player can draw more than one card.

I think they could turn this into something good, but it needs to be much easier to understand.

This is a bold move, but would anyone who is familiar with Money$uit 31 care to shed any light on how you think I may have done in the competition, had I been able to enter...?

Quote: mrsuit31

This is a bold move, but would anyone who is familiar with Money$uit 31 care to shed any light on how you think I may have done in the competition, had I been able to enter...?

I sent you a private message. I know there was one "31 style" game this year, maybe two. I'll have to go through more of my information. I'll post a few more reviews as well.


ZCore13

Quote: Zcore13

I sent you a private message. I know there was one "31 style" game this year, maybe two. I'll have to go through more of my information. I'll post a few more reviews as well.


ZCore13

Thanks Z, just saw that message.

I'm aware of the 31 game that was on the floor, although it has absolutely nothing to do with the existing game of 31. They had actually reached out to me for help early on. After finding out the game details far into the process, it then became apparent why they wouldn't tell me about the game details.

However, there game is virtually the complete opposite of Go For It, the golf based game that Bally had picked up and displayed on the floor at G2E. That game, players are dealt two cards then decide to play and receive there final two cards. The objective is to obtain a lower scoring hand than the dealer as if you are playing a heads up round of golf.

I'll respond more directly to your PM in a few.

Thanks Z, as always.

Quote: mrsuit31

This is a bold move, but would anyone who is familiar with Money$uit 31 care to shed any light on how you think I may have done in the competition, had I been able to enter...?

M$31, you know I am a fan of your games, but I think the voting in Ravings Competition is skewed towards traditional vs. novel game ideas. One of the three stressed criteria is the "commercial success or viability" of the game. It is simply much easier to vote for a BJ or Poker game when weighing that criteria in the voting. I don't think a new game concept like "31" has a chance at making the podium not based on the quality of the game, but simply because a new game concept can never be thought of as commercially less risky than a traditional casino game based concept.

The positives for bringing a game like M$31 to the show or any game for that matter is the availability of casino contacts that will come by for a 5 minute or more demo to look and see if you have something they like. They may not vote for the game based on the criteria, but they certainly may come away thinking "that game may work for my players".

Bottom line is the competition is an important part of exhibiting at the Show, but I think those that exhibited and didn't even get into the competition likely gained a lot of contacts and potential trial possibilities from being present.

Quote: Paradigm

M$31, you know I am a fan of your games, but I think the voting in Ravings Competition is skewed towards traditional vs. novel game ideas. One of the three stressed criteria is the "commercial success or viability" of the game. It is simply much easier to vote for a BJ or Poker game when weighing that criteria in the voting. I don't think a new game concept like "31" has a chance at making the podium not based on the quality of the game, but simply because a new game concept can never be thought of as commercially less risky than a traditional casino game based concept.

The positives for bringing a game like M$31 to the show or any game for that matter is the availability of casino contacts that will come by for a 5 minute or more demo to look and see if you have something they like. They may not vote for the game based on the criteria, but they certainly may come away thinking "that game may work for my players".

Bottom line is the competition is an important part of exhibiting at the Show, but I think those that exhibited and didn't even get into the competition likely gained a lot of contacts and potential trial possibilities from being present.

I get it, it's the same mindset as was evident at the SHFL convention we went to. Especially when dealing with trying to absorb so many games in a short period of time, it's hard to pull someone into a new way of thinking. The video/game demo combo on the website seems to be doing well.

I'm definitely going to try and get there next year.

Quote: Zcore13

4 Card Split

I think this game might have made the top 3 had they been able to enter the game into the competition. The owner said that he got the math back and wanted to enter the competition after the date allowed for entrants.

4 Card Split is basically Three Card Poker with a bunch of twists. To start you place 2 antes and a blind bet. You are then dealt 4 cards and the dealer is dealt 4 cards, with one of the dealers 4 cards face up for all to see. You now decide how you want to play your 4 cards into 2 different Three Card Poker hands. You can put 3 in one hand and 1 in another or split them 2 and 2. If you make a 3 card hand of a flush or better you don't even have to play against the dealer with that hand, it's an automatic winner on the Blind Bet and your Ante is pushed back to you for that hand. No dealer qualifying or comparing to their hand. You can then play your second hand with the one remaining card or fold you ante. My guess is if your card is a face card and the dealers up card is lower it should be played.

The odds paid on the Blind bet are:

Flush - 2:1
Straight - 2:1 (which I would probably want to raise to 3-1 and lower one of the higher payments to compensate if I could)
3 of a Kind - 8:1
Straight Flush - 15:1
Royal Flush - 40:1

Zcore, Thanks for the suggestion. We have developed another set of payouts where the Instant Payout for 3-Card Straight, one of the Naturals, is 3 to 1. This means Instant Winners and Drawn Winners have one same payout table. Obviously, we have to reduce the top payout and those for 4-Card Blind. However, the overall payouts are still very balance and appealing. This way the dealer does not have to remember two numbers. It was a great improvement.

Do you think "3 Card Natural", once defined, is easily comprehensible as "3 Card Instant Winner"? It's cool to invent new terms. Some math guys like to use "Natural" instead of a simplistic blackjack in writing their BJ reports. Sounds sophisticated.

Quote: etablegames

Some math guys like to call a blackjack, Natural. Sounds sophisticated.

It's not limited to math guys. The term "Natural" for a Blackjack is a long-standing, traditional term for a Blackjack.

Quote: Paradigm

I don't think a new game concept like "31" has a chance at making the podium not based on the quality of the game, but simply because a new game concept can never be thought of as commercially less risky than a traditional casino game based concept.

The positives for bringing a game like M$31 to the show or any game for that matter is the availability of casino contacts that will come by for a 5 minute or more demo to look and see if you have something they like. They may not vote for the game based on the criteria, but they certainly may come away thinking "that game may work for my players".

Bottom line is the competition is an important part of exhibiting at the Show, but I think those that exhibited and didn't even get into the competition likely gained a lot of contacts and potential trial possibilities from being present.

I completely agree.

Look at the past top 3 contestant winners at Ravings, it's always a BJ, Poker, or roulette based concept.

We are one of the few that had the fortune to show our game at Ravings and that is how we got our start of being placed on the casino floor. In my opinion, it does not matter if you place at Ravings, what matters is if you catch the eye of a Director of Table Games.

Quote: TaxmanCPA

I completely agree.

Look at the past top 3 contestant winners at Ravings, it's always a BJ, Poker, or roulette based concept.

We are one of the few that had the fortune to show our game at Ravings and that is how we got our start of being placed on the casino floor. In my opinion, it does not matter if you place at Ravings, what matters is if you catch the eye of a Director of Table Games.

Yea I get it. I'm going to try and get there next year.

Quote: Wizard

Wizard or others, How do I find "Raving Table Games Show 2014" within "http://wizardofodds.com"? Also, how about the videos for the games shown at Raving's? Are they still in the works? Thanks in advance.

Quote: Wizard

You can find anything with the search box. The videos are still in the works. Be patient on that.

Videos of some Ravings games are now on youtube, (created by Michael Shackleford), but not every game. Maybe Wizard is being selective. I don't know.

Quote: UCivan

Videos of some Ravings games are now on youtube, (created by Michael Shackleford), but not every game. Maybe Wizard is being selective. I don't know.

Can you post a link, please. I cant find them...

Here you go:

Michael Shackleford's videos The titles are "How to play...", not "Raving's game"

Quote: UCivan

Here you go:

Michael Shackleford's videos The titles are "How to play...", not "Raving's game"

Thank you for that.

My assistant Heather has released five videos so far from the Raving Table Games Conference. You can find them listed in my videos page. Below is just one example of On a Roll Dice Poker.

Were there only 5 games in the Raving's show?

Quote: UCivan

Were there only 5 games in the Raving's show?

I said she released five videos "so far."

Quote: UCivan

Were there only 5 games in the Raving's show?

If I recall correctly, there were 21 games in the competition, and another 5 or so non-competing.

Wizard has posted more videos for the games presented at the Raving's

Raving's Games

Nicely done!!! Thanks, Wizard.

Quote: UCivan

Nicely done!!! Thanks, Wizard.

Thanks and you're welcome.

Quote: Zcore13

pick'em Blackjack won 1st place. Aces Faces poker got 2nd. Switch Hands Blackjack 3rd.


ZCore13

Where can I play Pick'em Blackjack? Is it placed anywhere?

Quote: UCivan

Where can I play Pick'em Blackjack? Is it placed anywhere?

I am working on bringing it in right now. If all goes well it will probably be around June. I'm not sure if it's anywhere else yet. I'll ask the owner for a list if it is.


ZCore13

Quote: Zcore13

I am working on bringing it in right now. If all goes well it will probably be around June. I'm not sure if it's anywhere else yet. I'll ask the owner for a list if it is.


ZCore13

Z, you spoke highly of a new game called 4 Card Split which seems to be a fun game on Wizard. Do U have it?

Quote: RoyalBJ

Z, you spoke highly of a new game called 4 Card Split which seems to be a fun game on Wizard. Do U have it?

No. He's not licensed in Az and has no distributor in the State at this point. He took my suggestion and changed the game a little. It's a really good game.

ZCore13