Mr. Porter,
(Please excuse the length of this response. I will work on my brevity
and "the separation of topics" in my future postings.)
Regarding informed speculation, I would expect a retired or defunct
slot (video poker) machine to be removed from the premises unless
they are keeping it for spare parts. There are ways of finding out if
a removed machine is still on site or has left
the premises.
I BELIEVE THAT INFORMATION CAN BE EXPLOITED THROUGH JUDICIOUS USE OF
THE NEW JERSEY OPEN PUBLIC RECORDS ACT (OPRA).
I have only read portions of the Slot machine Installation and
Removal Manual published by the NJ Casino Control Commission but I
learned quite a bit from the paragraphs that I scanned. (It is on the
CCC website.)
It says in pertinent part that the CCC supervising inspector for the
casino must receive ADVANCE WRITTEN NOTIFICATION of the scheduled
dates of arrival or removal of new (and used) machines as well as any
inter-casino transfers or relocation to storage areas. The inspector
must be on duty when this is performed and the whole operation must
be monitored by CCTV.
The notification is a preprinted form with room for the machine
number and check-off boxes
for: installation, removal, relocation
or transfer. The form must also include a statement of the machine's
theoretical payback percentage.
The NJCCC seal on the side of the machine is to be recorded.
Additional procedures include breaking the security tape over the
EPROM chip if the machine is being removed to an out-of-state
location. Installed machines are to be identical in all respects to
the sample provided to the (Division of Gaming Enforcement) DGE/CCC
Laboratory for testing.
IF PERIODIC OPRA REQUESTS ARE MADE FOR COPIES OF THE APPROPRIATE
CCC FORM, THE REQUESTOR WOULD HAVE ADVANCE NOTICE OF THE REMOVAL OF
CERTAIN MACHINES AND THE INSTALLATION OF OTHERS. HE WOULD ALSO KNOW
IF THEY REMAIN IN THE STORAGE INVENTORY OR IF THEY WERE TRANSFERRED
TO ANOTHER CASINO or out-of-state. HE COULD ALSO (POSSIBLY) DERIVE
PAYBACK PERCENTAGES FOR BONUS GAMES SUCH AS TRIPLE TROUBLE OR
GOLDMINE POKER.
Knowing the location of a machine does not guarantee its use or the
availability of a particular pay table at the new location but the
expense of an inter-casino transfer (moving it to another casino or
to a storage room instead of off to the junk pile) suggests the
possibility it will be used at its new location. Once we know where
it is sent, we can start looking for it there. If you had to
speculate where an aging machine might be used, where would you guess
that would be? I would guess a nickel slot parlor or a lower end
casino: The Claridge or Coyote Kates slot parlor in Ballys WWW. (A
change of EPROM chip at the new location would also generate
additional CCC paperwork for our "tracking purposes" and become
available under OPRA.)
I have read opinions posted on vpFREE stating that only the slot
director (and not the slot attendants or slot mechanics) truly knows
the payback percentage on the slot machines installed in the casino.
But, if CCC forms are obtainable under OPRA and the form must include
a statement of the machines' theoretical payback percentage, then
ANYONE can obtain this knowledge IF THEY POSSESS THE MACHINES' SERIAL
NUMBER OR CCC I.D. NUMBER.
Furthermore, the theoretical payback for multi-game (predominantly
VP)
machines could be derived from the known variables....
Lets say a Bally's Gamemaker is set to only one denomination
(Quarters for example) with a player menu offering six different
games. One of those games is EITHER Red, White and Blue video slots
with an undefined return OR Goldmine Poker with an undefined (Bonus)
return for the full house. The return for the five other Video Poker
games have published paytables upon which the theoretical return can
be mathematically derived. Assuming that each game
accounts for 1/6th of the theoretical return, can we pro-rate 5/6th
of the return based upon the VP paytables for the defined games and
subtract it from the theoretical payback percentage reported to the
CCC and derive the return for the remaining game only (i.e. RWB Video
Slots or Goldmine Poker)? DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE?
OF COURSE THIS THEORY ONLY WORKS IF... only a single game is
undefined and not multiple games [(RWB and Goldmine) or (Triple
Trouble and Goldmine)] AND the theoretical return percentage required
by the CCC is based upon the actual games presented on the player
menu. IF NOT, then the information would not be derivable or if it
were still derivable, the derivation would be based upon ALL of the
games programmed into the machine and itemized on the CCC Form, not
merely the games selectable from the player menu. However, the latter
scenario seems to defeat the purpose of reporting the theoretical
return percentage on a multi-game machine. The theoretical return
percentage (for all games) is only attainable if all of the games are
offered as a selectable option to the player. Any blacked out games
(unselectable) should require the casino operator to adjust the
published theoretical return percentage to reflect only the actual
games offered.
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@...>
wrote:
William E. Bate wrote:
> "Gone for Good" sounds like an opinion or a conclusion instead of
a
> fact.
I would call it very informed speculation. The paytable shows every
sign of it being "proprietary" to the retired and defunct Bally
Gamemakers (at least I don't believe it's ever been reported on any
other machine).
I think it's a safe call that IGT machines offer only 10/7 DB as a
near approximate (100.17 ER).
One should usually shy away from saying "never" in an absolute sense
(i.e. "never say never"). Given a scarcity of paytables in AC this
strong (they do appear from time to time), I'd be willing to bet
money
ยทยทยท
on this, giving the taker much stronger than even odds (we'll define
"never" as 5 years, ok? 
- Harry