Changing Payout Rate?

[Bobby Bowling]

Hi,

I'm new to Pachislo, in fact I've never had my hands on one or even seen one in person but that will all change shortly. Besides personal entertainment and possibly selling machines for home use, I'm considering placing machines into commercial service in my state which does not allow gambling except for state sponsored lottery.

Impossible, you might say but IÂ’ve done considerable research into my stateÂ’s gambling statutes and case law, in fact IÂ’ve submitted an amicus brief to my State Attorney General for consideration in a pending opinion on the legality of poker tournaments. Due to the skill involved in these machines, I believe they can be employed as-is, tournament style just as there are golf, bowling, dart, Bridge, and a multitude of other tournaments of skill and luck which are legally conducted on a daily basis in my state. The statutes and case law hold that it is not the game which determines if gambling transpires but rather the nature of how the game is played. For instance, golfers can legally compete in tournaments for valuable prizes but those same golfers would commit gambling if they played each other for some arbitrary thing of value.

While I believe tournament play a viable option, I prefer to employ these machines as they were designed, where every player competes against their machine rather than other players. This is also legally possible if I can limit the payout to no more than 10 times the amount played in a single game, or $5, whichever less, in non-cash prizes. I understand these machines are set to payout no more then 15 times a single play. I could overcome the 10x payout limit by cashing in tokens on a three to two basis. For instance, a player redeeming six 25-cent tokens would receive a $1 Wal-Mart (or whatever) gift certificate. Of course the machines would have to be limited to accepting no more than 50-cents per play (10 x .50 = 5.00). This would be no problem if tokens were sold for 10-cents and used in a machine that accepts up to three tokens; however, to play for higher values the machines would have to be limited to accepting less than three tokens.

My questions for you experienced with Pachislo are these: Can these machines be limited as to the number of tokens accepted, and can the payout be adjusted to less than 15x? If not readily, can someone like delphicoder help me understand the architecture of these machines a little? I have considerable experience in microprocessors, programming, and reverse engineering; and already have the equipment needed.

[Utopia1dc]

Just out of curiousity...what state are you trying to do this in?

[Bobby Bowling]

Just out of curiousity...what state are you trying to do this in?

Texas

Here is a letter I just mailed to a county prosecutor:

James P. Finstrom
County Attorney
102 W Austin St,
Jefferson, TX 75657

Dear Sir:

I am considering a business venture in your jurisdiction which I believe requires your approval as it skirts on gambling.

I wish to employ Japanese gaming machines known as Pachislo “skill-stop” slot-machines. I’ve done considerable research into Texas gambling statutes and case law in preparation for an amicus brief I recently submitted for consideration by the Attorney General’s Opinions Board for pending opinion 0305-GA and believe I can employ these machines in a legal manner in two ways.

Before discussing the manner of employment I should explain the operation of these machines. These are unlike the machines in use in American casinos. First, these machines accept tokens only and cannot be readily converted to accept coins. Like US machines, play is begun by the operation of a lever or button which starts the wheels spinning but unlike US machines, the reels on these do not stop automatically by chance, each reel must be individually stopped by the player via a button. This places an element of skill into the game. The skill level on these has six settings which change the speed at which the reels spin. The maximum payout is limited by Japanese law to 15-times the value of a single play. (I am aware of the 10-times or $5 limit in non-cash prizes per single play imposed by Texas statute on amusements (PC § 47.01(4)(B).)

The first mode of employment I am considering is direct employment. I hope to be able to modify these machines to limit them to the 10x/$5 statutory limit; however, I believe I can employ these as-is by limiting the payout artificially. These machines are capable of accepting three tokens maximum per play. If tokens were sold for 10-cents each but redeemed for gift certificates or other non-cash prizes at a rate of three to two, the maximum a player could win is $3 (.30 x 10) per single play in non-cash prizes. I believe this falls within the statutory limit.

The second mode of employment I am considering is conducting tournaments. In tournament play, contestants compete against other contestants, not the game. It is not the game which is played but rather the nature of play which determines if gambling transpires (see Wolz v. State, 33 Tex. 331; 1870 Tex. LEXIS 142). For instance, golfers may win valuable prizes in tournaments but those same golfers would commit gambling if they played each other for some arbitrary thing of value. Each contestant in a tournament possesses an equal opportunity for chance so it is the skill and equal opportunity for luck of the contestants which determines the winner; this is so in any sport. Some courts have held that any luck involved in a game renders it illegal; this would make virtually any game played for money illegal, including golf, bowling, dart, and Bridge tournaments. However, most courts have opted to weigh for a preponderance of skill over luck. In tournament play, each contestant has an equal chance for luck. I believe this places the preponderance on skill.

Please advise me of the legality of my proposed venture.

[TANK]

SEE: MEMBER 666 AND HE TALKS LIKE A LAWYER!!! ARE YOU THE DEVILS SON?? Seriously, welcome aboard!! and good luck with your venture!! there are a number of arcades in florida that payoff in giftcards of $10.00 of less thereby skirting the anti-gambling laws. this has been discussed here before so do a search for other topics along this line.

[keesterdog]

he's not the devil's son, he's the devil's advocate

[slotter]

DANG TANK! You are good! You make me laugh. :lol: :lol:

Will be quite interesting to see what the reply is from the County Attorney, BB. Keep us informed! :smt023

[Bobby Bowling]

Thanks TANK,

IÂ’m glad to be aboard. Hopefully I can be as helpful as I see most of you here are.

I'm not a lawyer--yet. I am a 52-year-old pre-law senior majoring in criminal justice.

Many retail outlets in Texas legally employ "eight-liners," a video poker game. The basic difference (besides the game itself) is that these pay out tickets which are redeemed for non-cash prizes. One advantage these have which the courts have ruled legal is that any payout which exceeds the 10:1 legal payout is rolled over to another game.

I don't know if the prosecutor will go for the tournament option. I may have to file a civil suit against him or wait for the Attorney General's opinion on poker tournaments which is due in May.

On a related note, I've also been corresponding with my state representative. He seems very confident that casino gambling will be approved by the legislature in its next session. They've got to come up with a means of school finance and raising taxes or imposing a state income tax would likely spell defeat for any legislator promoting such.

Ironically, I'm not a gambler and don't have any desire to actually employ these machines commercially myself. (I live an hour's drive from Louisiana casinos but have only been three times in the 15 or 20 years since their opening, spending more in the restaurant than I risked in the casino.) My interest is in gambling laws, which was peaked by a friend asking how eight-liners are legal, that she would like to open some sort of gambling-like enterprise involving Texas Hold'em Poker. I told her I'd look for a loop-hole. It took me all of three minutes, two and a half of those spent getting to the statutes, to find a loop-hole you can fly a squadron of 747's through. The definition of "bet" is the very first item in the gambling statutes. A bet does not include games of skill. This is why tournaments like I mentioned are legal. It took considerable research, and contrary to a gambling lawyer I corresponded with, all of the statutes and case law uphold my assertions. Of course this lawyer was defending an article he had written stating that poker is not a game of skill. I've never heard a word from him after quoting Texas case law that poker is a game of skill (see Gaudio v. State, 1994 Tex. App. LEXIS 3411).

[Tulsa]

I thought that Texas was totally open on slot machine ownership? Matter of fact, I'm pretty sure of it. You can own the American slots too.

[slotter]

I thought that Texas was totally open on slot machine ownership? Matter of fact, I'm pretty sure of it. You can own the American slots too.

You said what I was thinking, but I've been gone now for 13 years from TX.

[gwarzin]

You've got some things wrong in your letter explaining pachislos to state officials. The 6 level settings do not change the skill level by changing the speed of the reels. The 6 levels change the payout by altering the odds of getting any particular payout.

I also wouldn't rely too much on the idea that that stop buttons make it a skill-based machine. Skill only comes into the equation during certain stages of play. Most of the time the payout is really determined by a random number generator, just like US slots.

The problem in most states, like here in Indiana, is that the laws describing a "gambling device" and the laws making gambling illegal aren't quite the same. That is, you could have a device that could be used for gambling (a deck of cards) that doesn't fall under the definition of a gambling device.

On the other hand you could have a device (pachislo) that you don't intend to use for gambling that does fit the definition of a gambling device and thus would be illegal, even if you didn't use it for gambling.

In Indiana the law if just vague enough that the state has apparently decided to turn a blind eye to pachislos. But, it they decided to strictly apply the law they could make a strong case that pachislos are gambling devices.

I don't think your idea would fly in Indiana. Good luck in Texas. I'd love to see the response you get to your letter.

[Bobby Bowling]

I thought that Texas was totally open on slot machine ownership? Matter of fact, I'm pretty sure of it. You can own the American slots too.

Yes, Texas is open for all slots for home use; however, I'm talking about putting them into commercial use--as in casino.

[Bobby Bowling]

gwarzin,

The skill level of the machines is immaterial as far as the law in Texas. I probably shouldnÂ’t have mentioned it but that is what I read, that the skill level is simply a change in reel speed. It made sense, the faster the reels spin, the higher the difficulty.

By limiting the payout by modification or artificial means to 10-times the amount played these machines will be classified as amusements just like pinball machines (assuming non-cash prizes are awarded such as gift certificates). Skill is irrelevant in this case. I have no doubt this will be given the nod by the prosecutor. Tournaments are another story. How much skill does it take to win an auto race which ends on the first lap due to rain? Texas courts have ruled every endeavor in life involves some degree of luck. In tournament play each contestant has an equal chance for luck; therefore it is skill and this equal opportunity for luck which determines the winner—just as in any sporting tournament.

[gwarzin]

So, what you're saying, is that in Texas, it doesn't matter if no skill is involved. You could be using a roulette wheel, as long as it was a tournament and people were playing against each other for the prize, and not gambling against the house for a direct payout, AND the payout was below the legal limit, right?

Here in Indiana they get a bit more picky. You might get away with a pinball machine, because there is some element of skill involved. You'd never get away with a slot machine, because it's all luck. You've pretty much got to show that the degree to which skill is involved is enough to actually have a significant effect on the outcome.

They even get more picky on some technical aspect of how the machines work. But don't get me started. I think most gambling laws are made up by legislatures that either don't have a clue about what they are doing, or have a vested political interest that has little to do with the "morality" of gambling.

[Bobby Bowling]

So, what you're saying, is that in Texas, it doesn't matter if no skill is involved. You could be using a roulette wheel, as long as it was a tournament and people were playing against each other for the prize, and not gambling against the house for a direct payout, AND the payout was below the legal limit, right?

No, not quite right.

Skill is not a factor if the machine qualifies as an amusement, ie. the 10:1 or $5 max payout in non-cash prizes for a single play of the game. This is why eight-liner video poker machines are legal in the state.

Skill comes into play in tournaments. Any game machine is either a gambling device or an amusement so skill must be involved in order to take it out of that realm. How much skill is needed? The courts insist a preponderance. Please read my earlier posts about "preponderance."

Yes, I believe that roulette and blackjack, games in which the "house" normally gets a "cut" (the evil our statutes seeks to eliminate) can be played tournament style without violating Texas anti-gambling statutes. In this case the house does not get a cut, competitors compete against one another and the "promoter" pays the winners for thier skill and luck. An article I wrote explains this concept in greater detail. Here's a link: http://www.stupidtalkinghead.com

Ironically, raffles (ie. football pools, etc) used to be legal in Texas as long no one got a cut but somewhere along the line our legislators decided otherwise. I suspect it was because the state was not getting a piece of the action more so than moral reasons but that is just my opinion.

On a somewhat related note, I'm preparing a breach of contract suit against my former university. One of my grounds is for involving me in illegal gambling promotion and engaging in organized criminal activity. Under their "professional criminal justice supervision" an illegal raffle was held.

[pachi_sloter]

There have been companies that have converted pachislo machines for commercial use as ticket redemption machines. Gamesco is one of them. I knew of another company a few years back but I can't find a link so they may have gone out of bussiness.

Gamsco Ticket Redemption Slot Machine Page:
http://www.gamsco.com/tktred.htm

[Utopia1dc]

BB-

You sound like a very litigious dude. Would you like to represent me against my Homeowners Assos. for my supposed "illegal" fence. My neighbor is on the Board, and he is a pompus as$! :lol:

[Bobby Bowling]

BB-

You sound like a very litigious dude. Would you like to represent me against my Homeowners Assos. for my supposed "illegal" fence. My neighbor is on the Board, and he is a pompus as$! :lol:

I'd be glad to help if I could but I'm unfamiliar with PA law. It is the type of situation you described that puts me in my litigious moods and prompted my embarking on a quest for a law degree at such a ripe old age—you have to fight fire with fire.

Just remember, turnabout is fair play. Study your homeownersÂ’ covenants. A$$holes like that are usually hypocrites to the Nth degree. Harass him with the same covenants. I donÂ’t believe in starting crap but IÂ’m not going to lay there while some hypocrite tries to spoon feed me crap with a shovel. ThatÂ’s when I go into action.

Moral: DonÂ’t phuck with me, I wonÂ’t phuck with you. Phuck with me, you better have a semi full of Vaseline.

[Utopia1dc]

BB-

Good luck with your venture and keep us posted. As far as my neighbor (Board Member), he hasn't spoke to me since September and I haven't received a letter of violation since then either. Usually they stop harrassing me during the winter months (too cold I guess). I have had my fence up for almost 2 years...I keep telling them that if they want it gone or me to pay their "fine"....Take me to court!!! A judge would laugh them out of court...Their claim is lame...They don't like my style of fence (but it meets, in my opinion, all the characteristics defined in the bylaws)? I also told them not to press their luck with me (I only fenced in part of the yard). If they push me, I told them I would put the fence all around to the boarder of our property and paint his side orange and black stripes (Flyers colors), as the bylaws don't have any rules on the color of the fence!!! :lol:

[Bobby Bowling]

If they push me, I told them I would put the fence all around to the boarder of our property and paint his side orange and black stripes (Flyers colors), as the bylaws don't have any rules on the color of the fence!!! :lol:

I like your style!! It sounds like someone I know intimately :wink: .