Hit It Again Roulette

From another thread:

Quote: Paigowdan

New area is NOW ONLINE here. GO DISCUSS "HIT IT AGAIN," DAVE!

WE'RE ROLLING....

As Dan and some others of you know, I came up with a side bet idea for Roulette which I call Hit It Again.

I have a website that totally describes it: http://hit-it-again-roulette.com

Basically, you make a $1 bet that the next spin will match the current result. If that happens, you win $20. Yeah, I realize that if you had just bet the number, you'd win $35. However, if you get TWO repeats, then you win $250. Since a typical gambler would probably only press the bet by about $3-$5, this $250 is considerably more than he would have done on his own. If a third repeat comes along, then the payout is either $5,000 or 4% of a progressive jackpot. If there are four repeats, the payout is $100,000 or the full progressive jackpot.

I designed the patent around the concept, but did not make any specifics about the payouts. The above payouts are examples only, the actual payouts, and option to have a flat payout or progressive, will be completely up to the casino, or game distributor.


What do you think?

FYI: There is already a 4 page discussion of it: https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/2311-hit-it-again-roulette-progressive-side-bet/.

However, in restarting the conversation, I prefer you to make any new comments here.

As a non roulette player, how many players are permitted at any single table? If, let's say, its 6, then as soon as a full jackpot is hit, the casino may have to put up at least 100k times 6 (600k) if in the next few minutes it happens again. Other progressive jackpots seem to start far lower than 600k. Is this unlikely but possible significant short term loss something that casinos would scoff at? As a side comment, have you estimated how many fewer rolls per hour administering this side bet would cause? If I was the casino owner that would be the second question I would ask (after house edge). Overall I think the concept of your proposal is good. I definitely could see it attracting players who yearn for 'the big one'. Good luck.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Basically, you make a $1 bet that the next spin will match the current result. If that happens, you win $20. Yeah, I realize that if you had just bet the number, you'd win $35. However, if you get TWO repeats, then you win $250. Since a typical gambler would probably only press the bet by about $3-$5, this $250 is considerably more than he would have done on his own. If a third repeat comes along, then the payout is either $5,000 or 4% of a progressive jackpot. If there are four repeats, the payout is $100,000 or the full progressive jackpot.

I want to be clear about the rules before commenting -- are you saying that you make the bet, and then if the next spin is equal to the spin just prior to when you made the bet, you're at the 20-1 level? And then, if the spin afterwards is another repeat, you're at the 250-1 level but if not then you get paid 20-1 anyway?

If so, I like it. It's different than a parlay where you wouldn't get paid anything if you missed the last repeat. And kudos for putting up the section of your website that talks about how to press your wins to achieve equivalent awards, because it demonstrates that beyond the first few repeats it's not actually possible due to the table max. Offering your game will still require breaking through the aggregate payout limit, but that's part and parcel of a jackpot side bet.

I've developed a similar multi-spin roulette proposition which I'll introduce in another thread, but yours shares several very important properties, properties I think you should use in marketing your bet:

1) It's a jackpot side bet. Jackpots for table games are a big deal right now and have been for a few years. They're getting easier to administer, especially when using electronic systems.

2) It's a community side bet. That is, everyone who bets it is rooting for the same outcome. Community gaming is a big buzzword right now. It explains part of the success of the Fire Bet, the continual popularity of the craps pass line in general, and many slot machine vendors have started building multi-player community bonus rounds into their games. Roulette is, by its nature, a solo proposition. You're betting against the wheel, and only if someone else happens to put their chips on yours are you really jointly interested in the outcome. A progressive bet like this gets everyone cheering for the same thing. When was the last time you heard cheering at a roulette table?

Good luck!

Soopoo -


Regarding your short term loss concern:

You ARE right that every player at the table playing it will get the same payout, and that it's not shared.

And you're right that consecutive hits would be a significant hit on the casino, but it's also unlikely.

If the casino chooses to use the progressive jackpot, my recommendation is to seed it at $50,000. But even if they go with the flat rate $100,000 payout and pay $600K, it will be extremely rare for the level 4 to hit twice in quick succession.
From my website, Misc page:

Quote:

Hitting four repeats happens, on average, once every 2,085,136 spins. If a typical casino has 5 roulette tables open 12 hours per day with 60 spins per hour, the casino will have about 1,315,000 spins per year. This means the Level 4 jackpot will occur at that casino roughly every 19 months. Similarly, Level 3 occurs once every 54,872 spins, or about every 15 days in that casino.

FYI: I got the 60 spins per hour from this WOO page, that estimates 60 spins per hour with 3 players. That chart only goes to 6 players (35 spins per hour). I think most roulette tables have 8 different chip colors, so a max of 8 players. For no particular reason, I used with the Wiz' 3 player 60 spin number. I could not find any statistic about the average number of tables or hours per day, so I guessed those.

You're right that that kind of short term loss would be significant, but it's also unlikely.


Regarding slowing the speed of the table:

This should not slow the table down at all. Unlike other side bets that need time to evaluate on every hand and every player, with this, in most cases, there's nothing extra to do. When it hits, the players are not paid right away. The dealer could cut the winning chips while players are placing their next bet. If it's not a level 2 repeat, the winners can be paid very quickly, since the payoffs are already cut & stacked. If there is another repeat, again, the dealer can cut and stack the level 2 payout.

Only once it gets to a level 3 or level 4 payout does the game come to a halt when paying - because it would be over the W-2G threshold. But, since that happens only about once every 15 days, it's OK.




MathExtremist -


1 - Yeah, you don't get paid until the final level is achieved. If you hit Level 1, you don't get paid immediately. If there's another repeat, then you're at level 2. Otherwise you then get your level 1 money. Only the highest level is paid. Also it's not 20:1 or 250:1. It's 20 FOR 1, 250 FOR 1. Similar to the jackpot bet for Caribbean Stud or Let It Ride, the bet is scooped before resolution.


2 - Aggregate payout limit. Hmmm. I hadn't considered that. Is that something that the Gaming Commission puts in place, or a casino thing? The very nature of this bet, that every participant gets the full amount, means that an aggregate payout limit would not be possible - unless it's set considerably high, and for a specific amount per person, not per table.

From my website Progressive Payout page:

Quote:

While it is unlikely, it is hypothetically possible for the 5 repeats required for Level 4 to not occur for very long periods. Assuming the Level 3 payoff remains at an average occurrence every 54,872 spins, then after an additional 100 Level 3 payoffs, the 4% amount will be only $1 less than the $9,053.88 increment. I.E. At that point, the Jackpot has almost stabilized. After another hundred Level 3 payoffs, it will stabilize at only 1¢ less than the increment.

$9,053.88 is 4% of $226,347. I wouldn't object to a max payout of $250,000 per player. After all, this will never be an issue, unless the level 4 hits after a very long duration of not hitting level 4 OR level 3.


3 - Community side bet / buzzword. That hadn't occurred to me. I'll put that in the materials I'm preparing for my meetings with game distributors.



Thanks, both of you. Any other comments? Anybody else have some thoughts on this?

Quote: DJTeddyBear

2 - Aggregate payout limit. Hmmm. I hadn't considered that. Is that something that the Gaming Commission puts in place, or a casino thing? The very nature of this bet, that every participant gets the full amount, means that an aggregate payout limit would not be possible - unless it's set considerably high, and for a specific amount per person, not per table.

I'm pretty sure it'd be per person, but I know they have them at least on the dice tables. Something about "maximum aggregate odds payout is $5000" or whatnot. Keno does the same thing. You'd have to check with the casino. To my knowledge, it's not a regulatory matter, but again, that could vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

Dave,
You've got 1,400 hits from gamblers on your "hit it again" Roulette idea between the two threads...
This Is A Statement To You, - that It Is Good.

But "Alphabetic Roulette" has a "repeat same number" progressive bet that sounds a lot like this. They might have the patent secured. We don't know.
DO see:
http://alphabeticroulette.com/prog.html
call or email...

Also see:

under www.uspto.gov "quick search,"
under "quick search" patent number, enter 5743798
I am copying here a public document on a progressive Roulette jackpot that was approved in 1998, twelve years ago, on a progressive Roulette bet concerning a bet that is on a repeating number occurring 4 times consecutively.

Dave, this is trouble...


United States Patent 5,743,798
Adams , et al. April 28, 1998

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apparatus for playing a roulette game including a progressive jackpot


Abstract
A roulette game including a progressive jackpot includes a plurality of coin acceptors to enable players to place an optional progressive jackpot wager. Players place game wagers on a numbered layout imprinted on a table surface by using different colored chips assigned to each player. A control system includes an optical sensor head for detecting the speed and position of the ball in the roulette wheel, as well as the number of revolutions of the wheel. The control system displays on an electronic sign a progressive jackpot amount, winning numbers, and a random bonus jackpot. Players win the progressive jackpot by betting on the same winning number four times in a row. The electronic control system of the game, in conjunction with a dealer console, maintains an accounting of wagers placed, winning numbers, and amounts paid. The apparatus also includes a sound system for generating various sound effects at different stages of the game to enhance player excitement and appeal. A motorized chip conveyer assembly disposed beneath the table surface forms a chip return track underlying the coin acceptors for the purpose of returning chips or tokens placed as jackpot wagers to the dealer.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inventors: Adams; Terry Allen (Coconut Creek, FL), Har-Nov; Yosef (Margat, FL), Jones; Donald W. (Parkland, FL), De Raedt; Peter R. (Wijnegem, BE), Stein; Jeremy Francisco (Wilton Manors, FL), West; Jonathan Charles (San Diego, CA), Woodruff; Michael Wade (Ft. Lauderdale, FL)
Assignee: Progressive Games, Inc. (Ft. Lauderdale, FL)

Appl. No.: 08/724,535
Filed: September 30, 1996

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Current U.S. Class: 463/17 ; 273/142B; 273/142E; 273/274; 273/309; 463/27
Current International Class: A63F 5/00 (20060101); G07F 17/32 (20060101); A63F 3/00 (20060101); A63F 005/02 ()
Field of Search: 463/17,27,26,12,13 273/292,309,274,138.1,138.2,142E,142B



Full link is here:
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=5743798.PN.&OS=PN/5743798&RS=PN/5743798

This was filed April 28, 1998. It might sadly cover your good idea.
Do research with Mr. Newman...

The Alphabet Roulette's 00 version is interesting in that it performs better than a full parlay. I can't see a casino going for that, or for a player to risk their money for something that is only marginally better than a full parlay.

Whether or not their patent is similar to what I'm doing is something for the lawyer to figure out.


Ditto for the other item you posted. Isn't that the same thing as the item you emailed me about a month ago? If so, their patent focuses on the apperatus and electronics, and not so much on the bet itself.

Again, this is something for the lawyer to consider.


I'm gonna ask him about both of these things, but first I'd like to set up the WoV lunch date. Read your email for my concerns about that.

Thanks

Quote: DJTeddyBear

The Alphabet Roulette's 00 version is interesting in that it performs better than a full parlay. I can't see a casino going for that, or for a player to risk their money for something that is only marginally better than a full parlay.

Dave - you are correct about that. Thay have ZERO games installed, and that is saying something loud - that it is NOT a threat to you or anyone's Roulette game that is based on "normal, healthy" numeric roulette . Their patent, I also assume, covers only the freaky "alpha" letter repeats, and might not be transferable as an infringement to you and your version. You need to take notes, and verify this with Newman or Kantor when you are in Las Vegas latter this month.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Whether or not their patent is similar to what I'm doing is something for the lawyer to figure out.

Yes - very true. It would be very wise for you to get a "clean bill of health" on this issue from a bona-fide gaming patent attorney! By ALL means GET THIS DONE AT THIS POINT!! Saying, "It is for the lawyers to do" does not mean you have gotten it done.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Ditto for the other item you posted. Isn't that the same thing as the item you emailed me about a month ago? If so, their patent focuses on the apperatus and electronics, and not so much on the bet itself.

Yes, I read their patent, and did they NOT specify this in the "all important claims section," perhaps as a patent error on THEIR part - so that can leave you in the clear. BUT you have to make sure of this, because many patent judges allow mid-body descriptions to "count" as formal claims.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Again, this is something for the lawyer to consider.

Yes, indeed it does, Dave. Will you sit down with Mr. Newman [ or Mr. Kantor, or ANY gaming patent lawyer in such a league] to make SURE of these patent issues??!! While YOU are in Las Vegas, - DO get a checkout with a patent doctor!

Quote: DJTeddyBear

I'm gonna ask him about both of these things, but first I'd like to set up the WoV lunch date. Read your email for my concerns about that.

Thanks

If you had read both of your strongly competing Roulette patents - they are both "self-limiting" - leaving YOU the opportunity to work this out and clean this issue up.

If you do not do this, then if your game becomes a success, someone can come to YOU and say, "Hey, YOU have infringed MY patent, and I will sue your game and win!" Believe me, if YOUR game makes MONEY, then THIS will happen, but not before - because that doesn't matter if money is NOT YET involved in these competing games. [Games are "not competing" if neither one makes money to sue over yet, that's how it works.] If you think that that day will come, then take steps now to stop that day from coming upon you.

Will do! Looking forward to it!

DJTeddyBear,

I really support your idea and think that it will succeed. I know a bunch of roulette high rollers that believe that roulette is a game envolving lots of physical phenomenons and that there`s a huge chance that past numbers hit again. (Same with colors, columns, etc)
I talked to them and they were very much interested in playing your side bet.
Good luck! Courage!

Quote: aluisio

DJTeddyBear,

I really support your idea and think that it will succeed. I know a bunch of roulette high rollers that believe that roulette is a game envolving lots of physical phenomenons and that there`s a huge chance that past numbers hit again. (Same with colors, columns, etc)
I talked to them and they were very much interested in playing your side bet.
Good luck! Courage!

Thanks.

I keep hearing that. I hope the game distributors feel the same way!

Good news!

At least one distributor is interested.


In another thread, PaiGowDan named the 'Big Four' in the casino game field: ShuffleMaster, DEQ, GamingNetwork and GalaxyGaming. Even before he named them, I've been attempting to contact these companies to set up a meeting, etc.

Without saying who, I have a confirmed meeting with one of the Big Four for next week. The person I spoke to said he had been on my website several times and is very interested. That sounds VERY promising!

I'm still working on the other three with hopes of setting up at least two more meetings while I'm in town next week.

I seem to recall about 10-12 years ago being at the Stratosphere playing Roulette and you could bet on a number coming up multiple times. Wish I could remember more details, but this was back when I was new to gambling and wasn't paying attention and didn't know what I was doing.

Yours sounds slightly different, as betting on the same number coming up twice is different than betting that the same number from the last spin will come up on the next spin.

That's news to me. But it doesn't matter.

The Hit It Again idea died a quick death.

At my meeting with the distributor, they pointed out that the concept really isn't that good for several reasons:

On the surface, feeding $1 to win $20 at Level 1, at an average of once in 38 spins, frankly, sucks. But this bet is nothing more that a pre-defined progression of pressing the bet, that can, on paper, exceed the table limits. But that's not enough to make it in the casino.

A surprise to me, the biggest problem with the Hit It Again idea, was the large payout. At first I thought they were arguing the validity of the math. It turns out that they know something about the casino industry that I don't know. No surprise there, but once they explained it, it made perfect sense.

Quite simply, casinos do not like to let go of a large sum of money all at once.

Last, if there were no table limits, and a gambler was manually betting and pressing, he probably wouldn't press it quite so much, again, limiting how much the casino pays out.

With all these negatives, a casino wouldn't want to pay an inventor for the idea.

---

FYI: These points were mentioned in a different thread about this bet.