Razzle Dazzle Carnival Game

Razzle Dazzle is the term for a carnival game I'm in the process of analyzing. Here are the general rules.

1. The cost per play started at a posted price, let's say $1. The board would usually be in the form of a football field, with the object to travel 100 yards.
2. The player rolls 8 marbles onto a 11 by 13 grid, containing 143 holes.
3. Each hole would be assigned a certain number of points from 1 to 6.
4. The points would be added for hole a marble landed into.
5. A board would designate the number of yards the player would advance according to the sum of the marble points.
6. If the player had 29 marble points then he would have to double the cost per play for the rest of the game, but would be given one extra prize if he reached 100 yards.
7. When the player reached 100 yards he would win all his accumulated points.

The trick to the game was the player earned no yards for 18 to 38 points. The player falls into this range 99.3% of the time. Same trick as the field bet in craps, but MUCH more egregious. Assuming no cheating, by the time the player traveled 100 yards he would owe the carnie an average of 3 * 10^118 dollars. That is greater than the number of atoms in the known universe.

From what I have read, to not totally discourage the player, the carnie would lie about the number of points earned the first several times, launching the player quickly down the field. Then, as he got close to the end zone he would start to play fair, and the player would be forking over his money as he probably wondered why he suddenly was getting nowhere.

I've personally seen this game at California carnivals as a kid. The last time I saw it was last year in San Felipe, Mexico. I think that most states have been cracking down on the carnival game business, especially games entirely of luck, which is the reason I haven't seen it in this country for a while. I applaud such regulation, I might add.

All that said, I have some questions for the forum.

1. Have you played the game?
2 If so, what was the prize?
3 Could smaller consolation prizes be earned along the way to 100 points?
4 Did the carnie spot you any free yardage or cheat in your favor towards the beginning of the game?
5 Any other comments or observations you would care to make?

I haven't seen this particular game, but I am curious about the distribution of scores amongst the 143 holes on the marble board. Are there only a few 6's and many 1's?

I remember reading about something like this in John Scarne's book on gambling. The numbers and holes are adjacent and not well-defined in terms of location, so it's hard to tell which number goes with which hole. The carny would add the marble values very quickly, usually in pairs (ie "These two make 8, plus another 7 for 15, 18, 20, and two more here for 31."), making mistakes in favor of the player, or himself, as necessary.

I'll have to look it up, but the game I read about wasn't exactly like this, but very similar. There was a look-up table for values, with half-points available for certain marble totals. After a blast-off start, the game became increasingly difficult, costing more and more. If the player couldn't pony up to continue, the carny would "sell off" the current game to a shill, who would put up the necessary dough and take home the prize.

Unfortunately, I haven't had any personal experience with it. The closest thing I had was at the State Fair one year, where a carny flashed about $40 at me as a prize to play a $2 game of billiards, where I had to sink 4 balls in 4 shots. It was creepy the way he approached me and tried to hawk the game, and no matter how too-good-to-be-true it sounded, I didn't want to get involved.

I've vague memories of a game where you slid marbles onto holes arranged in a triangle, with points marked on each hole. I think the board was slanted down. This was a children's game found in fairs, sometimes in schoo fundraisers, and it was played for prizes like piggy banks or other small, ceramic stuff. If a marble slid to the bottom without getting into a hole, it got no points.

So nothing like what you're asking, but maybe such marble and hole games are more popular accross Mexico. I'll ask around.

At a street festival in NYC 30 years ago a friend (now a successful hedge fund guy) played a similar sounding game. He rolled 5 balls down a track and the carny guy quickly added the score and said sometghing like, wow, you get 40 of the 100 needed! Once he started paying to roll it became clear that there were not going to be anymore wins when the scores were actually tallied. I am guessing it cost him $20 to figure out that he had been had. I do not recall the prize but it was probably $1000 or so. There were no smaller prizes. After I thought whether this was illegal. I am not so sure. The only subterfuge was giving the player points he did not earn. Not succeeding on all subsequent rolls was fair given the rules of the game, which were followed.

Quote: SOOPOO

After I thought whether this was illegal. I am not so sure. The only subterfuge was giving the player points he did not earn. Not succeeding on all subsequent rolls was fair given the rules of the game, which were followed.

It is immoral and it should be illegal. The game operator is missrepresenting the initial score, therefore he's comitting fraud. It doesn't matter if it's in favor of the player or not, the intent is to get the player to spend mroe money on a game he can't win.

It would be ok if the carny said "Oh, you only got seven yards. Tell you what, I'll let you have forty yards free of charge if you keep playing." This way there's no deceit involved, and if the player keeps going he only has himself to blame.

Since I posted this I wrote up a draft of my simulation results in a future Ask the Wizard column. I show the number of squares for each point value there. They weight the 3 and 4 heavily, to keep the player close to the mean, where he doesn't advance.

Let's say a state did allow any carnival game in which the rules were fairly disclosed. I agree with Nareed it would still be highly unethical to lie in the player's favor. One of the casinos on my blacklist I put there for letting players win in free mode.

Quote: Wizard

Since I posted this I wrote up a draft of my simulation results in a future Ask the Wizard column. I show the number of squares for each point value there. They weight the 3 and 4 heavily, to keep the player close to the mean, where he doesn't advance.

Let's say a state did allow any carnival game in which the rules were fairly disclosed. I agree with Nareed it would still be highly unethical to lie in the player's favor. One of the casinos on my blacklist I put there for letting players win in free mode.

I have never seen a carny game that didn't involve some form of deception. In many cases, the deception was in misrepresenting how difficult the game was due to the way the game was presented. An example is the basketball toss, where if you manage to obtain the proper vantage point (difficult at best), you discover that the basket is not round, but oval-shaped. You can usually obtain an empirical gauge of how difficult the game truly is by watching others repeatedly fail at it, however.

I do think that ANYTHING in the gamut from borderline to outright fraud ahould not be tolerated, but there are two reasons why it is, in fact, tolerated in carny games: they are often used to benefit some noble cause such as a charity, and there is a social trope that carny games DO cheat in some fashion, so anyone playing them supposedly deserves what he gets.

I think they are getting better. The smart operators seem to have realized customers will be happier, and they will make more money, if there is a decent probability of winning, and you give the customer a 10-cent junky toy if he wins, after paying you $1-$2 to play. That is how it pretty much is at the Circus Circus and Excalibur arcades. When I was shooting pictures at the Excalibur with model Nichole I challenged her to lots of games, and she mopped the floor with me. You mentioned the basketball toss. She got two throws and made both of them. For that she won the monkey holding a banana you see in this picture:



My point being is it is a lot more fun to have a 50% chance to win something you don't even want than a 0.01% chance to win something decent. There is fun in the thrill of victory, regardless of how worthless the prize.