Finally, this opinion may be controversial, but I'd at least consider hiring shills to play it. Preferably female. Most players hate to be the guinea pig on a new game so it is very helpful to see other players on the game already.
What works best here in my opinion, is someone at the table with chips that is able to play a few hands and explain the strategy decisions they are making while playing their hand.
What this overcomes is a player walking up to an empty table asking about the game and then not totally getting the game concept from the dealer's explanation alone. That is when the "I don't want to be a guinea pig with my own money at risk" syndrome is most present. There is nothing like being able to see a few hands played after the dealer explanation to "get" the game concept and then make a decision that you are willing to risk your own money on the shiny new game (then just pray that those next three hands go well for the player, cause it is the only shot you have!).
The problem is that rarely will a property allow you to play your own game, so hence the need for an additional body to be that player. They don't need to be constantly playing the game...that will cost you a lot of money. They just need to be present, ready to play and willing to say "Watch me play a few hands and I'll show you how to play the game correctly" when you get an inquisitive player that walks up to the table and says "How do you play this game?"
While I agree with PGD on not "babysitting" your game and that a game does have to stand on its own, there is nothing wrong with priming the pump here as the deal staff are just starting the field trial. The deal staff and the game will need to stand on their own and within 30 days, all the deal staff should have the dealing procedures down (because there will be errors in the first 30 days and you want those corrected) and have a script down on how to the best explain the game to new players. Between Day 1 and Day 30 during peak business hours for the property, you watch for dealing procedural errors, tweak that script as you learn what does and doesn't work when explaining the game and address every other hiccup that is encountered.
Keep in mind that an Over Under bet is a foreign concept to many table game players (not everyone is a knowledgeable sports bettor) and as I recall, your game has a "dead range" where both the over and under bets will lose...that is a foreign concept to even sports bettors (there is no bet that is Patriots over 45/Patriots under 38...the known bet is Patriots over/under 42). If your game does indeed have the "dead range" that is going to be foreign (or "alien" as PGD likes to say) and will also be a objection to the game play so you will need to have an answer to that query ("you mean I couldn't have won either way if the card total is in this range?")
With the deal staff up to date and in full comprehension of the game specifics by day 30, that is when you need to let the "little birdie fly on its own". Unfortunately 99 out of 100 birdies are going to flap their wings twice and crash down 60' from the nest to their death...but you already know that :-)!
While I understand the desired effect of chumming the waters, is hiring props or shills allowed by the law in all jurisdictions?
I can't speak for every jurisdiction, but in Nevada you're not supposed to manipulate the outcome of a field trial.
As far as the chances go, yes, I am aware that 99 out of 100 fail. But you can't hit a home run without an at bat and at least I appeared to have achieved that. It's been a long time coming too. I kept the idea as just a thought in my mind for 20 years. In 1996 while attending Penn State my roommate and I determined that we figured out how to beat BJ. Looking back it's utterly embarrassing but I think all of us did stupid things at the age of 19. At any rate, we devised a system that I don't entirely remember but I recall it being one of those systems where you increase your wager as you lose and the only way for it to fail is if you lost 8 hands in a row. I suppose I hadn't learned the meaning of mutual exclusivity yet. Rightfully so, the gambling gods ensured we lost 8 in a row within the first 20 minutes of our trip. Since it was a bus trip that left 7.5 hours of not being able to gamble or even buy a soda. We lost it all. So as we sat there in utter disgust I just watched people play BJ for the entire time. I watched new players make mistakes and pay for it dearly. I'm not talking about the money they lost either. The stares and comments from the other players that felt robbed from the poor decisions the new blood made were off the chain mean. I'd watch what you could tell were new players buy chips, get embarrassed, and lose miserably. I wondered how many of them never played a table game again after such an experience. That's when I came up with Casino Over Under. I felt that new players should have an easy game they can actually win a good bit by playing optimally w/o a cheat sheet. There is a dead zone and I agree it doesn't exist in sports gambling but it did in the pools conducted by the RIverside High School boosters club in Taylor, PA back in 1982. My grandfather had me playing pick'em at the age of 6. I remember if the total on the game was 45 the o/u would be under 44 and over 46. I had no idea that was terribly unfair nor did I realize that I would never see it on football cards for the rest of my life.
So there's the story no one asked for but I told anyway. I kept the idea quiet b/c I never had the means to actually try and pull it off. Now that I have and I made it this far it's all gravy from here. I can't wait to see my game in a real casino. It's going to be one heck of cool experience I am sure. (Then that feeling will dissolve like everything else and I will be freaking out trying to do everything in my power to help the game and if the bird doesn't fly I will be flipping crushed. lol)
Casino War fairly EZQuote: kobalj
I felt that new players should have an easy game they can actually win a good bit by playing optimally w/o a cheat sheet.