|
|
Munchkins is a five reel, fifteen payline, and one hundred and fifty coin slot machine with a wild symbol, a scatter symbol, a Free Spins bonus game and a Gamble bonus game. Three or more Scatter symbols displayed on the reels activate the Free Spins bonus game, and you are awarded twenty free spins. All the bets and paylines played in the twenty free spins are the same as the spin that triggered the Free Spins bonus game. All wins during the twenty free spins are doubled. If three or more Scatter symbols are scattered on the reels during a Free Spins bonus game, you are awarded another twenty free spins. The extra twenty free spins are added to the remaining number of free spins.
PLAYING IT SMART by ALAN KRIGMAN
Multi-line Machines Add a Meaningful Choice to Slot Play .
The slot machines dominant in the '90s gave players little flexibility for tailoring games to meet meaningful personal preferences. Differences like symbols on the reels were cursory, and serious options were accordingly limited. True, there was a pick of denomination -- $0.25, $0.50, $1, and so on. Another choice was giant jackpots with infinitesimal chances of hitting, modest meed with merely minuscule prospects of prosperity, or somewhere in between. And there were alternatives that few folks ever fathomed, like machines where extra coins bought more confusing ways to win as opposed to bigger returns and bonuses.
The nickel and other multi-line machines now proliferating at punting palaces across the ever-widening wagering world offer solid citizens additional diversity. This, more significant in shaping session performance than most slot fans yet fathom. For a particular amount dropped into the hopper of hope per round, it's the trade-off between more money on fewer lines or the converse.
Slot machines differ among games, to the extent that two devices may look identical, yet don't necessarily have the same inner workings. Further, the relationship between what players do and what they get involves the unpredictable intervention of chance rather than the certainty of cause and effect. So a painstakingly precise analysis entailing the probabilities and payoffs of one particular machine won't apply exactly to another. Intuitive understanding of what to expect, among any proficient gambler's greatest talents, is far better served using a simplified model.
For this purpose, picture a hypothetical five-line nickel machine. Make believe it takes up to five coins per line and has only one return level -- $0.15 for every $0.05 bet on a winning line. Experienced bettors know this means you win 2-to-1, a nickel earns you a dime, since the $0.15 includes your own money -- the $0.05 bet you didn't lose. Say you're comfortable risking $0.25 per spin. You could do it in various ways, the extremes being a quarter on one line or a nickel on each of five lines.
If the chance of winning were 31 percent, this game would have a payback of 93 percent. About average for the nickel slots.
The 93 percent return isn't affected by your decision to play one line at quarter or five at a nickel each. But, the net wins and losses per spin, and the chances associated with them, do change.
Betting $0.25 on a single line, you have 31 percent chance of winning $0.50 and the complementary 69 percent chance of losing your quarter. Betting $0.05 on each of five lines, probabilities and profits are as shown in the following list.
Chances of various wins and losses on hypothetical machine, betting $0.05 on each of five lines
no of probability net profit hits or loss
0 15.64% lose $0.25
1 35.13% lose $0.10
2 31.57% win $0.05
3 14.18% win $0.20
4 3.19% win $0.35
5 0.29% win $0.50
These figures demonstrate how distributed bets dampen expected ups and downs. Shifting the total from one bet to five drops forecast $0.25 losses from 69 to 15.64 percent, and only 50.77 percent of all spins are projected to lose anything. Big wins are also fewer -- the chance of earning $0.50 is below one percent with $0.05 per line, versus 31 percent betting all-or-nothing. But, a nickel win in the multi-line mode is expected slightly more often than $0.50 going for broke, and the other payoffs bring the overall shot at winning something to 49.23 percent.
Smaller bankroll swings characterizing each round of multi-line play ultimately keep players in the game longer on a given stake. Say you start with $50 and bet $0.25 per spin. The chance of being in action for at least 2,000 spins, about three hours of fast fingering, is 78.8 percent with a quarter on one line. It's higher, 98.5 percent, with a nickel on each of five lines. Sumner A Ingmark, celebrated songster of the slots, said it like this: You cannot win if you don't play, So temp'ring risk may save the day
(c) 2001, ICON/Information Concepts Inc.
.
Fruit Fiesta is a 3-reel, 3 line
progressive slot. Coin size is $0.25. Max bet is 3 coins equals to $0.75
which is needed to be eligible to win the progressive jackpot.
This slotmachine has a smaller coin size than other
progressive slots. The $0.25 makes it suitable for a large
public. Because the machine gets played a lot the jackpot can
still increase to a huge amount. The largest ever Fruit Fiesta
paid out at over a $150,000!.
Slot machine as we know them today are the result of the machine manufacturers applying new technology to one of the most popular forms of gambling.
I think we should all remember that exposure to any form of gambling should be limited to responsible adults of legal age.
Slots have been described as captivating by many gamblers who choose this type of gambling as their game of choice. Advertisers have been banned from using sublime seduction to induce the consumer. It is about time that slot machines be very carefully examined by experts to determine exactly what the gamblers find to be captivating about the slots.
Defining Slots-For-Tots.
The new Millennium has begun with a new controversy for legal gaming: whether some slot machines might be unduly attractive to children.
The issue became news in October, 1999, when the Nevada Gaming Commission (ANGC@) made public its growing unhappiness over gaming devices with cartoon themes. In December, the NGC circulated proposed regulations. On January 27, 2000 the NGC met and adopted amendments to NGC Regulation 14, prohibiting slot machines with themes derived from products marketed to children.
The mass media loves stories like this. Headlines of AChildren At Risk!@ always sell papers, especially tabloids. Television news shows want action and color: one slot machine is worth a thousand talking heads. Even radio could get in on this story, throwing out familiar names, like Betty Boop7 and South Park7.
Gambling is a sexy issue, so long as it does not get too complicated. It also gives rise to strong emotional reactions, especially from its opponents, the Aanti's.
The enormous success of Wheel of Fortune7 led manufacturers to look for other well-know brand-names. The issue over age-appropriate gaming devices was inevitable, since so many of our best-loved trademarks come from our childhood: Monopoly7, The Three Stooges7, Elvis Presley7. The whole point of branded slots is to tap in to our warm, fuzzy feelings of nostalgia. Such selling-by-association is certainly nothing new: movies like Star Wars7 may make more money from toys and other products than from the movie itself. But it is relatively new to legal gambling.
Regulators face a myriad of problems when an issue like kiddie-theme slots is raised in the press.
It would be natural to think the first question to be resolved is whether the problem really exists This is not as easy as it seems. Exactly how does one discover whether children are being unduly enticed into gambling by machines with themes?
What is the standard? Would it be enough to show that merely one child in the country put money into a particular slot machine? How do we prove that the child would not have made the bet, but for the lure of the brand name?
It is very difficult to show that something is true beyond any doubt, like the claim that certain games create underage gambling. But it is nearly impossible to prove the opposite, that something is not true. What evidence would you use to show a slot machine is not unduly attractive to children?
Since we are forced to deal with probabilities, should regulators be concerned if there is only a slim possibility the claim is true? For a politically explosive issue like this, regulators will, often unconsciously, follow the path with the least downside risk to themselves.
If regulators ban certain slots that should not have been banned, the loss to casinos, manufacturers and players is small and difficult to measure. But, if they allow a device they should have outlawed, there is the possibility of scandal B such as pictures of kids playing slots on national T.V. B that will raise questions about the regulators' own competence.
Although there may be a bias in favor of imposing new standards, in the name of protecting children, there is also a bias against making any new rule. The first question a good regulator, or lawyer representing an interested party, will ask is whether these regulators have the power to issue regulations such as these.
Major constitutional challenges make news. But the day-to-day world of making regulations involves questions of procedure and delegation.
What procedures should the regulators use to guarantee due process -- that all interested parties have a fair and equal opportunity to have their say -- not just now, but when new machines are invented in the future? The easiest format is to allow presentations of evidence and arguments at hearings open to the public.
The delegation doctrine is also fundamental to our democratic system. Regulators are appointed, not elected. The only power they have is the specific, limited power given them by the legislature or governor.
The NGC found a law passed by the Nevada Legislature to justify its action. Section 463.350 of the Nevada Gaming Control Act makes it a crime for a licensed operator to allow anyone under 21 to gamble. The NGC declared its new rules Awill further the enforcement of 463.350 by establishing standards for gaming device themes.
Is it necessary to have a prohibition on these games at all? Regulators of riverboat casinos, which can easily prevent any child from boarding, will probably find it unnecessary to issue new rules about gaming themes. In other cases self-regulation will work: You are not going to see any Pokemon slot machines.
How does a regulator define what games are prohibited? A rule that simply lists cartoon characters and other kiddie attractions, obviously will not work: there are too many and they are constantly changing.
The NGC had to take three pages to describe what themes it was making illegal. The regulators used a mix of general statements and specific examples. Banned are themes Abased on a product that is currently and primarily intended or marketed for use by persons under 21." These include TV programs, cartoons, books, board games, movies and video games less than 21 years old with AG@ and similar ratings.
Exceptions are allowed where Athe theme is attractive to adults because of its nostalgic appeal.@ The regulators also gave themselves the power to Arestrict the time, place and manner in which an approved gaming device may be displayed.@ And they grandfathered-in Aany themes that were used in connection with gaming devices@ already approved.
Being a regulator may seem like child=s play, but usually it is hard work.
[Professor Rose can be reached at his Web Site: www.GamblingAndTheLaw.com]
.
|
|
 |
