New Wizard of Odds Videos

I just posted a batch of new videos. Let me know what you think.

Blackjack FAQ
Blackjack Strategy
Dan Lubin Interview
Magic Trick

We did the Magic Trick video while Dan was out picking up lunch. After Angela did it on him he begged us for the secret. As the considerate soul that I am, I told him to wait until the video was out. So, Dan, you wait is finally over.

Great videos, audio sounds better.

Very interested in seeing the Magic Trick! Oh my!

(And thank you for talking about the third base issue), God, these people annoy the crap out of me at casinos. They are all high and mighty and go oh you shoulda hit on that 15. Morons. Keep up the great work!

Quote: The Wiz

99% of Blackjack players don't have the time or inclination to memorize that (basic strategy)"

And 85% of all statistics are made up on the spot. :)

Quote: s2dbaker

And 85% of all statistics are made up on the spot. :)

Especially in my case :-).

That brought back some memories from when I was a kid. I've been doing that trick (albeit, slightly different technique) for 30 years. Good one, Mike.

From the original thread:

Quote: fremont4ever

For blackjack:

Q: 3:2, 6:5 - what's the big deal?

Q: Are there any side bets worth playing?

Q: What difference does it make if the cards are dealt face up or face down?

Two out of three's not bad (I didn't review the strategy video). Thank you for this. Though to be truthful, I already knew (almost) all the answers and was concentrating on your lovely assistant.

I used to do that card trick with a different ending.

Instead of creating four piles, I would flip over one by one the first 12 cards into a scattered pile.

I would then take the remaining deck and place it on the table. (Remember the chosen card was already FACE UP in the pile.)

Then while tapping the deck, I would say "I'll bet you that the next card I TURN OVER will be the card you chose".

When we agreed on the amount of the bet, I would reach into the pile and turn the chosen card FACE DOWN.

Who's the acter playing Dan Lubin? He's quite believable.
Get the real Dan to lose a hundred pounds so he won't
be shy about being on camera.

Quote: Wizard

We did the Magic Trick video while Dan was out picking up lunch. After Angela did it on him he begged us for the secret. As the considerate soul that I am, I told him to wait until the video was out. So, Dan, you wait is finally over.

It does occur to me that the third layout of three rows of seven is purely mechanical. As a variation you could lay them out the third time upside down, ask the mark to guess which column it's in. Them complete the trick with the fan pattern.

The advantage of this variation, is the observant mark may notice that the chosen card is in the middle of the third layout, and may catch on that the card is already picked.

But I like your advice, particularly about "saying as little as possible" at the fan pattern section. If you talk to much and say "we'll accept/discard you're choice" the mark may catch on to the fact that their choices are irrelevant.

Quote: pacomartin

the mark may catch on to the fact that their choices are irrelevant.

although I already knew this trick, I like the way you finish it. I actually got duped into some amazement, even though I knew the first part of the trick!

Re the videos, it really shows how important it is that the sound be good! What a difference! That radio show you show up on could learn a thing or two from that [altho it also has been somewhat better in this regard lately]

Quote: EvenBob

Who's the acter playing Dan Lubin? He's quite believable.
Get the real Dan to lose a hundred pounds so he won't
be shy about being on camera.

That was me all right. Do I detect a note of jealousy?
Bob, You're just lonely as you show in your own video. (See it!)

Quote: odiousgambit

although I already knew this trick, I like the way you finish it.

Well in some ways it is two unrelated tricks. One section determines the card, and the second section is basically a four part misdirection routine. The second section is a little hard to do in practice. Despite the Wizard's warning not to say anything, I found that I wanted to say things like "you've chosen to keep these cards". Since my mark kept cards three times in a row, her last choice was to remove a card.

I suspect it might be better to develop a diversion so that the person doesn't notice that sometimes you are keeping and sometimes removing the cards they point at.

Quote: pacomartin

... I suspect it might be better to develop a diversion so that the person doesn't notice that sometimes you are keeping and sometimes removing the cards they point at.

When my dad taught me this trick about 60 years ago, he did it almost as the Wizard showed, except in the second portion he did not follow the "don't explain what you are doing" portion. Instead, he did much as pacomartin suggested and used a bit of a diversion.

When he dealt the piles of four, he dealt five piles (20 of the 21 cards) and dramatically threw the last one away -- "We don't need this one!" Then, he asked the guest to pick two of the five piles. When they did, he removed two piles, saying, "One chosen and one not chosen."

Second try at "pick two piles", he could repeat this "one chosen and one not chosen" unless the guest chose both of the two remaining piles that did not include the important card (1 chance in 3). In that case, he would remove both. This technique usually left the guest with the impressions that (1) they were making the decisions and (2) they understood what was going on -- one I chose and one I didn't. Of course, both impressions were false.

When there was one pile left, the technique was repeated: choose two cards and we remove one chosen and one not chosen; then pick one of the remaining two. Either remove it or remove the other, and the guest still has the impression they made all of the decisions.

Quote: fremont4ever

I already knew (almost) all the answers and was concentrating on your lovely assistant.

Oh, there was a sound track? I didn't notice.
All joking aside, she is indeed very attractive and its good to have a woman in a gambling video not be an utter bimbo or have to pretend to be an utter bimbo.

Now as far as this 3:2/6:5 stuff goes. Yes. The most important factor is 3:2 and no laundry list of other whimsical options will make up for the casino "cheating" us of the 3:2 payout, but here I see no reason why the math should be avoided. It would be only a brief comment to compare the two on either a dollar or percentage basis. Don't play at a 6:5 table unless you are choosing a Party Pit is an impressive statement but an additional comment about a Twenty Dollar Bettor in One Hour ... etc.

Quote: FleaStiff

as far as this 3:2/6:5 stuff goes

If the 'bets push on dealer 22' catches on more, it will be the one to look out for, all other player gimme's be damned!

Quote: pacomartin

Well in some ways it is two unrelated tricks. One section determines the card, and the second section is basically a four part misdirection routine.

Indeed. Often when I do this I get the comment at first, "I've seen this before." When Angela did it on Dan he remarked that she was triangulating. Angela did a good job deflecting the comment. When I get something like that I say something like "stick with me, I bet you haven't seen the ending." Most people when they get to the end of part 1 just say the card. I think you get much more mileage out of part 2. I'm not saying anyone else's technique in the second part is wrong. Good magicians make a trick their own and customize it to what they feel works best. Personally, I like to rush through it and let the victim stew in his/her own juices, wondering what is going on.

I finally had a chance to watch them.

Again, no comment about the things that have already been mentioned about the other videos. It's obvious these were created around the same time as the others.



Blackjack FAQ:

Third Base: You touched upon but didn't really point out, one valid reason for avoiding sitting at third base. If you make a mistake that "hurts the table," you're gonna get blamed. The point missed is this: Although the math says it doesn't matter, do you really want that kind of stress?

Insurance: Never take even money? Here's the ONE time you should: If you're at a 6:5 table, and the dealer mistakenly offers even money, take it. Admittedly, it should never happen, but mentioning it could have opened the door to discussions about dealer mistakes


Blackjack Strategy:

No critique, except that I find it humorous that Angela, the novice, is betting blacks, while Mike, the expert, is betting reds.


Dan Lubin interview:

One point that Dan totally missed was the provisional patent.


Magic Trick:

Good trick. Impressive that Dan made a remark "She's triangulating" but was still impressed upon completion. Angela is a good student.

Quote: pacomartin

It does occur to me that the third layout of three rows of seven is purely mechanical.

No it's not.

The first layout, the victim picks a card and then indicates one of the columns. This narrows it down to 7 cards.

The second layout narrows it down to 2 or 3 cards.

The third layout narrows it down to the card selected.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

No it's not.

The first layout, the victim picks a card and then indicates one of the columns. This narrows it down to 7 cards.

The second layout narrows it down to 2 or 3 cards.

The third layout narrows it down to the card selected.

do this trick just pretending not to know a picked card, with the card you picked the only one face up, and you can see how it works.

Quote: Wizard

I just posted a batch of new videos. Let me know what you think.

Blackjack FAQ
Blackjack Strategy
Dan Lubin Interview
Magic Trick

We did the Magic Trick video while Dan was out picking up lunch. After Angela did it on him he begged us for the secret. As the considerate soul that I am, I told him to wait until the video was out. So, Dan, you wait is finally over.

Blackjack FAQ:
Shirt looks like its 3sizes too big for you. i noticed that a few min into the video after i stopped staring at Angela's boobs :p

Quote: DJTeddyBear

I finally had a chance to watch them.

...
Dan Lubin interview:

One point that Dan totally missed was the provisional patent.

Dave, I always start with provisional patents, and I was indeed refering to provisional-type patents; a provisional patent is a valid patent filing.

Looks like I am about $49,937 short of funds necessary. DAMN !!

Quote: DJTeddyBear

No it's not.
The first layout, the victim picks a card and then indicates one of the columns. This narrows it down to 7 cards.
The second layout narrows it down to 2 or 3 cards.
The third layout narrows it down to the card selected.

EDIT: You are correct.
-------------------------
I have thought of a variant for entertaining two ladies. Instead of casting it as a "magic trick", present it as a challenge to match wits with an expert card counter with a photographic memory. The trick would work along these lines:

(1) The Wiz lays out the 21 cards in the column, and challenges the brunette to quickly memorize the cards (give her a few seconds), then have the blonde choose her card and say what column contains the card. Grab the column of 7 cards while telling the brunette that it is more challenging to try and memorize the 14 cards that DO NOT contain the chosen card. Giver her a few seconds to memorize the 14 cards.

(2) Gather the cards and lay them out in three columns and have the blonde choose her column for the second time. Repeat again for a third time. Immediately grab that column once chosen and begin your misdirection dialogue. The Wizard announces that he has eliminated all but one card which must be the "chosen card". The Wizard challenges the brunette to name the card. Naturally, she protests that she doesn't have a photographic memory, and she can't remember all those cards.

(3) At this point, the Wizard says that through long study of blackjack, he knows that the brunette has the images of the correct card implanted in her subconscious and he will draw it out using her extra sensory perception. However, her ESP isn't strong enough to handle all 21 cards at one time, so he must make smaller choices for her. He deals the piles of four and asks the brunette to waive her hand over the columns and "feel the emanations" coming from the cards and choose a column. As before the Wizard knows where the correct card is located.

(4) Finish the card trick normally, with the final reveal being the brunette showing the blonde her correct card. The only thing the blonde has to do is to remember what card she chose.

----------------
- The only flaw is if the brunette actually does have a photographic memory. Then she will be able to name the chosen card. But that is a problem with the trick in general. Fortunately, there are very few people with photographic memories.

Quote: pacomartin

.... It can be done with the cards face down, and it is completely unnecessary to have the mark point out the column as the answer will always be "the middle column".

The minimum information you need is two answers from the mark. After that everything you do is misdirection.

I think you are mistaken. In fact, I think that when the Wizard demonstrated the trick to the young lady, on the third try she had to identify that her card was in the right column, not the middle one.

Quote: Doc

Quote: pacomartin

.... It can be done with the cards face down, and it is completely unnecessary to have the mark point out the column as the answer will always be "the middle column".

The minimum information you need is two answers from the mark. After that everything you do is misdirection.

I think you are mistaken. In fact, I think that when the Wizard demonstrated the trick to the young lady, on the third try she had to identify that her card was in the right column, not the middle one.

You're right. I am stupid. Sorry.

Quote: 100xOdds

Shirt looks like its 3sizes too big for you. i noticed that a few min into the video after i stopped staring at Angela's boobs :p

You have to hand it to the Wiz. How many men do you know who can tell their wife that they will be working with this woman and get away with it. This is why Mike is the hero of civil servants everywhere (he used to be a civil servant for those of you who didn't know).

Quote: pacomartin

You have to hand it to the Wiz. How many men do you know who can tell their wife that they will be working with this woman

Why are you assuming he told her.

Quote: EvenBob

Why are you assuming he told her.

Mike is completely incapable of any kind of deceit, except as required when he is gambling.

Quote: pacomartin

Mike is completely incapable of any kind of deceit, except as required when he is gambling.

I'm not big on lying. Then again, my wife doesn't need to know the boring details of everything I have to do in the name of work every day.

Quote: pacomartin

This is why Mike is the hero of civil servants everywhere (he used to be a civil servant for those of you who didn't know).

Thanks and true. In my 10 years as a civil servant the number of people I know who voluntarily left for the private sector was zero. My last couple weeks many people congratulated me on escaping.

For the fans of Angela, I added some pictures of her to my odds site. Here in one from the blackjack page.

Quote: Wizard

I'm not big on lying. Then again, my wife doesn't need to know the boring details of everything I have to do in the name of work every day.

I said you were honest. I didn't say you were an idiot. My friend always said to me that his wife didn't mind where he got his appetite, as long as he always ate at home.

Quote: Wizard

my wife doesn't need to know the boring details of everything I have to do in the name of work every day.

'in the name of work'... The sacrifices, the sacrifices...

Quote: pacomartin

You're right. I am stupid. Sorry.

Not stupid, just mistaken. I suspect that you might have tried doing the trick with an extra layout of the 21 cards. On the fourth layout (and all subsequent) the person's card would indeed wind up in the middle column.

Quote: pacomartin

You have to hand it to the Wiz. How many men do you know who can tell their wife that they will be working with this woman and get away with it.

Not that he would hide anything, but I don't think the Wizard discusses much of his business with her -- I think he has said that she has little knowledge or interest in what it is he does in his work. If she had enough interest that he would discuss his work associates with her, I don't think there should be any issues. I can see it now: "Honey, I've made some videos of myself and this woman (showing still photo) doing some of the things I like to do." Then he shows the magic trick video.

Quote: Doc

I think he has said that she has little knowledge or interest in what it is he does in his work.

I think that is very common. One of my friends was out at sea to do a relatively routine test, when the Chinese Navy did something very provocative with one of their submarines (you may have read about it). I decided to call his wife (who I didn't know) to tell her that her husband would be several weeks late coming home, but I couldn't tell her why or how long as it was classified. Also, I didn't know how long he would be gone, as no one was sure what the Chinese Navy was doing.

I thought I was being nice, but I just confused and upset her.

Afterwards he told me that his wife had no idea what he did for living and she had no interest. He appreciated my attempts to be considerate, but she didn't care.

Quote: Paigowdan

Dave, I always start with provisional patents, and I was indeed refering to provisional-type patents; a provisional patent is a valid patent filing.

Can you elucidate a little on the $50,000 ? I think in the area of casino games, one might be able to do a patent search himself. As for a patent, $5,000
ought to get you a competent attorney for a patent. A provisional patent can be done by onself with some NOLO books, but you must be willing to gamble at that point. How much of the other $45,000 goes to mathematical analysis, regulatory approval?
And despite who you use for the math, won't the distributor want them verified by their in-house experts.
Just asking Buzz

Quote: buzzpaff

Can you elucidate a little on the $50,000 ? I think in the area of casino games, one might be able to do a patent search himself. As for a patent, $5,000
ought to get you a competent attorney for a patent. A provisional patent can be done by onself with some NOLO books, but you must be willing to gamble at that point. How much of the other $45,000 goes to mathematical analysis, regulatory approval?
And despite who you use for the math, won't the distributor want them verified by their in-house experts.
Just asking Buzz

Yes, if you get the math done for $10,000, and the legal work done for $6,000 complete, let's say, the total cost will be $16,000. This would be exceptional to start.
This assumes:
1. There are NO revisions to the patent or the math from a game re-design. You designed a game that was spot on mathematically (House edge was 2.0% to 3.9% for the flat bet, the multi-payout paytables for the side bets were 7.0% HA ~1.0%, there was NO game protection or dealer slowdown issues, and the games description you provided covered every work-around angle to legally protect your game from copying or cloning your game.)
2. That the game is your FIRST game or first version, AND it is your first version with NO changes that was accepted straight away by a distributor who loved it, called it the "next Three-Card Poker," it was 100% perfect as it was in its initial design, and signed it up straight away with you without any haggling over percentage with you.
3. That you are able to write all the documentation yourself (namely, a how to play card and a product description and floor supervisory guide.)
4. You had NO expenses in building a prototype development table, because you were able to perfectly deal and be a "mental choreographer" of all the dealing motions in your mental view, - and how it affected and protected the issue of game protection.
5. There was no expenses for computers or TI calculators because the game design you did fell into perfect math paramaters by a fluke of nature, so the initial design and game rule sheet (which you had also written perfectly) was able to guide the mathematican to verify and rubber-stamp the math without ANY revisions for $10,000 or less.
6. You live in Vegas, so there are NO travel expenses to game distributors and a wide variety of willing casinos and people who would give free and excellent industry advice.
7. Your distributor is willing to pay for "Game Supplier application expenses" and related fingerprinting and background checks for certain gaming jurisdictions like Washington State, which require a separate licensing process for game design entites below the distributor level.
8. Plus the legally required separate and physical office location (one room office in a complex at Tropicana and Pecos = $350/month), not a P.O. Box or your home address.
9. Incorporation of an LLC, hiring a tax accountant and setting up Quickbooks and an ADP payroll account to pay suppliers and investors, etc.


My first game was about $45,000 in expenses before signed with DEQ. My subsequent ones are about $15,000 for complex ones (Poker hands of eight cards and patents), and $8,000 for subsequent easy ones that are Baccarat/BJ/craps side bets, because I can get all the work done down to the "final" version with all the industry experience, math experience, provisional patent self-writing experience, equipment, and then submit a worked out and mathematically (algebraic) accurate game sepcification for a mathematician's computer simulation run to "rubber-stamp" it basically, and can self-write a provisional patent that my gaming lawyer approves and submits with some added legalese.

Edit: I mentioned the $50,000 without "micro-detail," as getting the patent and the math done were the major and manditory expenses, assuming you have a good design that is workable, as it would required some adjustment 99% of the time. It is a good base number in 2012 dollars for getting a game out. Follow-up games in terms of game cost savings weren't discussed or relevant, because you've already "made it to the promised land" by that point and can take it from there, knowing the ropes.

I think Dan is pretty close on the $50K. I think the number is actually higher depending on how much of a professional image you want to project to game distributors/casino DTG's.

I would add the following to Dan's list:

Game Logo design/Layout design - all requiring multiple revisions
Letterhead/business cards/marketing materials/demo materials
Layout Art and Layout Production - I believe you do need a layout in a final version if you are going to be taken seriously by Distributors/Casinos
Website Design & Demo Video or Online Version of Practice Game
Travel is a big number as you look at going to conventions, meeting with consultants, distributors, visiting gaming markets you may want to market to, etc.

I think the big key that Dan has identified is that on your first game idea there is a huge learning curve and seemingly constant revisions as you try and get things just right. All the revisions cost you money in changes to math work, legal work, layout design, etc.

As you go through a revision of a game or work on your second game you end up being dramatically smarter about the entire process and will end up doing it much cheaper and more efficiently.

I certainly can not argue with any of the above 2 posts. But one thing did surprise me.

"There was no expenses for computers or TI calculators because the game design you did fell into perfect math paramaters by a fluke of nature, so the initial design and game rule sheet (which you had also written perfectly) was able to guide the mathematican to verify and rubber-stamp the math without ANY revisions for $10,000 or less."

If anything, I would have expected the figures for Math work and legal fees to be reversed. $10,000 seems high unless you are venturing into a new game area. No disrespect meant to ME, Dorothy Gayle, or any one else on this site. Just that I was surprised
at the Math costing twice the legal fees, that all. Just being honest, not critical.
Doubt the Wiz remembers, but over a decade ago he offered to put his name above a simple math equation A x B x C x D = E for $200.
Looks like I passed up a bargain! LOL

Looks like this is my only hope, unless I hit the lottery .

Snow says it’s not necessary for an inventor to have anything more than a simple idea for a game for Shuffle Master to be interested.

“Sometimes the germ of an idea is enough for us to make a deal,” he says. “That way, I can sit down with the developer, the way I guess a record producer would sit down with a singer, and try to make something that has commercial appeal. However, it’s likely that we would offer more money for a completed game than for one that is just a loose concept.”

Of course, there is no guarantee Roger's successor shares his philosophy. I do know the submission form has a lot more legalese now than in the past.