U.S. patent application number 13/082341 was filed with the patent office on 2011-10-13 for simulated gaming using prior game outcome.
Invention is credited to Gary Stephen Shuster.
Application Number | 20110250974 13/082341 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 44761329 |
Filed Date | 2011-10-13 |
United States Patent
Application |
20110250974 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Shuster; Gary Stephen |
October 13, 2011 |
SIMULATED GAMING USING PRIOR GAME OUTCOME
Abstract
A method and apparatus for providing a simulated game of chance
uses a predetermined set of outcomes determined by a gaming machine
for a game of chance based on a first specified wager amount or
amounts per game and a specified total number of games, using a
simulator. The predetermined set of outcomes may be determined at
the gaming machine more than a specified period of time prior to
providing the simulated game. The simulator provides simulated
games of chance in response to user input specifying second wager
amounts independently of the first wager amount or amounts, in
which the results of the simulated games are determined from the
predetermined set of outcomes. The simulator adjusts the number of
permitted simulated games in response to the second wager amounts
and results of the simulated games so that an aggregate outcome of
the simulated games corresponds to the predetermined set of
outcomes.
Inventors: |
Shuster; Gary Stephen;
(Fresno, CA) |
Family ID: |
44761329 |
Appl. No.: |
13/082341 |
Filed: |
April 7, 2011 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
61321664 |
Apr 7, 2010 |
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
463/43 |
Current CPC
Class: |
G07F 17/32 20130101;
G07F 17/3232 20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
463/43 |
International
Class: |
A63F 9/24 20060101
A63F009/24 |
Claims
1. A method comprising: storing, at a simulated gaming device, a
predetermined set of outcomes determined by a gaming machine for a
game of chance based on a specified series of games having a
defined wager amount per game and a specified total number of
games; receiving, at the simulated gaming device, user input
indicating wager amounts for corresponding simulated games of
chance; and adjusting a number of permitted simulated games and
results of the simulated games in response to the user input and to
the predetermined set of outcomes for the specified series of
games, so that a net outcome of the simulated games corresponds to
a net outcome of the predetermined set of outcomes for the
specified series of games.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising determining that the
defined wager amount per game in the specified series is a constant
value.
3. The method of claim 1, further comprising determining that the
defined wager amount per game in the specified series is a variable
value.
4. The method of claim 1, further comprising calculating a limit
for a next wager amount of the simulated game, based on net outcome
of prior simulated games and the net outcome of the predetermined
set of outcomes.
5. The method of claim 1, further comprising providing output
simulating a game of chance having an outcome, wherein the outcome
is determined so that an aggregate outcome of the simulated games
corresponds to the predetermined set of outcomes for the specified
series of games, while being different from any individual one of
the predetermined set of outcomes.
6. The method of claim 1, further comprising adjusting an apparent
wager amount for one or more of the simulated games so that a net
outcome of the simulated games corresponds to a net outcome of the
predetermined set of outcomes for the specified series of
games.
7. The method of claim 1, further comprising adjusting a number of
permitted simulated games and wagers of the simulated games in
response to a user-specified preference for the simulated games as
a whole.
8. The method of claim 1, further comprising allocating the
predetermined set of outcomes to two or more players using the
simulated gaming device.
9. The method of claim 8, further comprising providing output
simulating a mixed game of chance and skill having an outcome
dependent in part on individual playing skill of the two or more
players.
10. The method of claim 9, further comprising determining the
outcome based on the predetermined set of outcomes and skill-based
input from the players, so that an aggregate outcome of the
simulated games corresponds to the predetermined set of outcomes
for the specified series of games.
11. The method of claim 1, further comprising determining the
predetermined set of outcomes at least in part by executing a
short-term transaction in a volatile tradable instrument in
response to receiving an investment amount, using an automated
trading engine.
12. An apparatus, comprising a processor coupled to a memory, the
memory holding instructions that when executed by the processor,
cause the apparatus to: store a predetermined set of outcomes
determined by a gaming machine for a game of chance based on a
specified series of games having a defined wager amount per game
and a specified total number of games; process user input
indicating wager amounts for corresponding simulated games of
chance; and adjust a number of permitted simulated games and
results of the simulated games in response to the user input and to
the predetermined set of outcomes for the specified series of
games, so that a net outcome of the simulated games corresponds to
a net outcome of the predetermined set of outcomes for the
specified series of games.
13. The apparatus of claim 12, wherein the memory holds further
instructions for providing output simulating a game of chance
having an outcome, wherein the outcome is determined so that an
aggregate outcome of the simulated games corresponds to the
predetermined set of outcomes for the specified series of games,
while being different from any individual one of the predetermined
set of outcomes.
14. The apparatus of claim 12, wherein the memory holds further
instructions for allocating the predetermined set of outcomes to
two or more players using the simulated gaming device.
15. The apparatus of claim 14, wherein the memory holds further
instructions for providing output simulating a mixed game of chance
and skill having an outcome dependent in part on individual playing
skill of the two or more players.
16. The apparatus of claim 15, wherein the memory holds further
instructions for determining the outcome based on the predetermined
set of outcomes and skill-based input from the players, so that an
aggregate outcome of the simulated games corresponds to the
predetermined set of outcomes for the specified series of
games.
17. An computer-readable medium holding instructions configured to
be executed by a processor to cause a computer to: store a
predetermined set of outcomes determined by a gaming machine for a
game of chance based on a specified series of games having a
defined wager amount per game and a specified total number of
games; process user input indicating wager amounts for
corresponding simulated games of chance; and adjust a number of
permitted simulated games and results of the simulated games in
response to the user input and to the predetermined set of outcomes
for the specified series of games, so that a net outcome of the
simulated games corresponds to a net outcome of the predetermined
set of outcomes for the specified series of games.
18. The computer-readable medium of claim 17, further holding
instructions for providing output simulating a game of chance
having an outcome, wherein the outcome is determined so that an
aggregate outcome of the simulated games corresponds to the
predetermined set of outcomes for the specified series of games,
while being different from any individual one of the predetermined
set of outcomes.
19. The computer-readable medium of claim 17, further holding
instructions for allocating the predetermined set of outcomes to
two or more players using the simulated gaming device.
20. The computer-readable medium of claim 17, further holding
instructions for providing output simulating a mixed game of chance
and skill having an outcome dependent in part on individual playing
skill of the two or more players.
Description
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION
[0001] This application claims priority pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
.sctn.119(e) to U.S. provisional application Ser. No. 61/321,664,
filed Apr. 7, 2010, which application is specifically incorporated
herein, in its entirety, by reference.
BACKGROUND
[0002] 1. Field
[0003] The present disclosure relates to methods, systems and
apparatus for wagering on games of chance, and more particularly to
gaming that includes a simulated gaming session using a prior game
outcome.
[0004] 2. Description of Related Art
[0005] Gaming, meaning wagering on games of chance, is regulated to
various degrees in different jurisdictions. Such regulatory
differences may generate travel for the purpose of visiting
jurisdictions with less regulation of gaming where various forms of
gaming are generally available, herein called a "gaming
jurisdiction." Generally speaking, people who visit a gaming
jurisdiction (for example, Las Vegas) are unable to continue to
game upon their return to a jurisdiction where gaming is illegal or
more tightly regulated, herein called a "non-gaming jurisdiction."
Exceptions to this limitation may include, for example, multi-game
Keno tickets and sports or horse-racing wagers wherein money is
wagered while the gaming participant is in the gaming jurisdiction
but the wager outcome is determined based on events taking place
after the gaming participant returns to a non-gaming jurisdiction.
In the case of these exceptions, the gaming participant must
typically return to the gaming jurisdiction in order to collect the
winnings, and does not participate in game play after leaving the
gaming jurisdiction.
SUMMARY
[0006] The present disclosure describes, among other things, a
system, apparatus, and method for bringing the gaming participant
into actual, apparent, or simulated control of the gaming outcome
in a different location from the location where the wager is
initially placed, while preventing the actual, apparent or
simulated control activity from resulting in any new wager being
placed in the different location. The disclosure further describes,
among other things, a system, apparatus and method for short-term
investing that is performed through a computer-implemented
interface simulating a gaming activity. No network connection is
required in some embodiments of the systems, apparatus, or methods
described herein. Simulated game play in the non-gaming
jurisdiction may be conducted using a gaming outcome already
determined in the gaming jurisdiction, and not reported to one or
more players participating in the game until play of the simulated
game is completed in the non-gaming jurisdiction. The simulated
game may facilitate participation of multiple players, each of whom
has placed a wager and played a corresponding game in the gaming
jurisdiction. The simulated game is played to obtain a result that
corresponds to the result or results of one or more games of chance
already played in the gaming jurisdiction. Here, "simulated game"
means a quasi-game process in the non-gaming jurisdiction that is
conducted so it appears to its participants to be a game of chance,
however, outcomes of the game that depend on chance have already
been determined by a prior game or games in the gaming
jurisdiction. Therefore, the simulated game may be performed in
places or under circumstances where a game of chance is not
permitted by law, such as in a non-gaming jurisdiction. In some
embodiments, specialized hardware and/or software may be used to
implements the inventive concepts disclosed herein.
[0007] In an aspect, the present technology includes a method
executable at a client device functioning as a game simulator for
operating in non-gaming jurisdiction. The method may be implemented
using computer program instructed held in a computer-readable
medium configured for causing a computer to perform operations of
the method. The method may include storing, at a simulated gaming
device, a predetermined set of outcomes determined by a gaming
machine for a game of chance based on a specified series of games
having a defined wager amount per game and a specified total number
of games. The method may further include receiving, at the
simulated gaming device, user input indicating wager amounts for
corresponding simulated games of chance. The method may further
include adjusting a number of permitted simulated games and results
of the simulated games in response to the user input and to the
predetermined set of outcomes for the specified series of games, so
that a net outcome of the simulated games corresponds to a net
outcome of the predetermined set of outcomes for the specified
series of games.
[0008] In an aspect, the pre-games may be defined using constant
wager amounts. Accordingly, the method may further include
determining that the defined wager amount per game in the specified
series is a constant value. In the alternative, the specified
series of games may include a variable wager amount to generate
pre-game results. In such cases, the method may include determining
that the defined wager amount per game in the specified series is a
variable value.
[0009] To ensure that the simulated game play does not use apparent
wager amounts that cannot win, or that will result in an
unrealistic proportion of wins or losses under constraints of the
predetermined set of outcomes, the method may further include
calculating a limit for a next wager amount of the simulated game,
based on net outcome of prior simulated games and the net outcome
of the predetermined set of outcomes. Accordingly, the method may
include adjusting an apparent wager amount for one or more of the
simulated games so that a net outcome of the simulated games
corresponds to a net outcome of the predetermined set of outcomes
for the specified series of games. In addition, the method may
include providing output simulating a game of chance having an
outcome, wherein the outcome is determined so that an aggregate
outcome of the simulated games corresponds to the predetermined set
of outcomes for the specified series of games, while being
different from any individual one of the predetermined set of
outcomes. The user may thereby enjoy the experience of gaming while
actually not playing a game of chance. Instead, the net outcome of
the simulation is determined by the predetermined set of outcomes
from the earlier game of chance. The method may further include
adjusting a number of permitted simulated games and wagers of the
simulated games in response to a user-specified preference for the
simulated games as a whole.
[0010] The method may support multiplayer competitive simulations
in which outcomes are predetermined by a prior game of chance. In
such cases, the method may include the simulator allocating the
predetermined set of outcomes to two or more players using the
simulated gaming device. In addition, the method may include
providing output simulating a mixed game of chance and skill having
an outcome dependent in part on individual playing skill of the two
or more players. The method may further include determining the
outcome based on the predetermined set of outcomes and skill-based
input from the players, so that an aggregate outcome of the
simulated games corresponds to the predetermined set of outcomes
for the specified series of games.
[0011] In a separate aspect, the method may include determining the
predetermined set of outcomes at least in part by executing a
short-term transaction in a volatile tradable instrument in
response to receiving an investment amount, using an automated
trading engine. This may enable simulation of a game of chance
using a series of outcomes from a trading engine that executes
trades in a tradable financial instrument. Therefore the user may
be spared the need to travel to or otherwise transact with a gaming
jurisdiction to generate the predetermined set of outcomes.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0012] FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating aspects of a system
and process for operating a simulated game of chance using an
outcome from a prior actual game of chance.
[0013] FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating aspects of a system
for providing a simulated game of chance using an outcome from a
prior actual game of chance.
[0014] FIG. 3 is a block diagram illustrating aspects of a system
for providing a simulated game of chance using outcomes from one or
more trading markets.
[0015] FIG. 4 is a flow chart illustrating a method for performing
by a post-game or simulated gaming apparatus.
[0016] FIG. 5 is a flow chart illustrating a method for performing
by a post-game or simulated gaming apparatus.
[0017] FIG. 6 is a flow chart illustrating additional aspects of
the method shown in FIG. 5.
[0018] FIG. 7 is a block diagram illustrating a simulated gaming
apparatus.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0019] The present disclosure describes, among other things, a
system, method and apparatus for bringing the gaming participant
into actual, apparent, or simulated control of the gaming outcome
in a different location from the location where the wager is
initially placed, while preventing the actual, apparent or
simulated control activity from resulting in any new wager being
placed in the different location. Referring to FIG. 1, a gaming
participant may participate in a process 100 that includes the
participant wagering a sum of money all at once in a gaming
jurisdiction 101 where gaming is allowed, utilizing a
special-purpose gaming device 102. The process 100 may further
include the gaming device 102 immediately or quickly determining an
outcome 104 of the wager, whether calculated statistically, as the
outcome of a single play, as the aggregate of a plurality of
(preferably high-speed automated) individual gaming outcomes such
as slot machine plays, or otherwise, while not revealing the
outcome 104 to the gaming participant. The process 100 may further
include recording 106 the outcome determined by the gaming device
as a credit recorded for the benefit of the gaming participant. For
example, the process 100 may include recording the outcome 104 in
an escrow account for the player, in a coded credit slip "win
card", in a refundable credit with the casino, or otherwise. The
process 100 may further include informing the gaming participant of
the outcome determined by the gaming device at some later time and
in a different location 105, using a game simulator device 108
comprising hardware and/or software operating with or without a
network 110 connection, or a physical article such as set of
scratch-off tickets (not shown). The process 100 may optionally
include transferring the credit amount to an account designated by
the gaming participant, or otherwise paying out any credited
winnings, in response to completing the informing step. The game
simulator device may comprise a special-purpose machine 108, for
example, one designed to appear and operate like a slot machine, or
a general-purpose computer 112 running specialized software such as
may be recorded on a computer-readable medium 114.
[0020] The process of informing the gaming participant of the
outcome may include use of software on a computer 108 or 112
operated by the gaming participant. Encrypted data encoding the
outcome may be input into, or transmitted to the computer, and
received for use by the software. The data may instruct the
software as to how the gaming participant wishes to learn the
results of the prior gaming activity, or the gaming participant may
input such instructions via a user interface. For example, the
gaming participant may select a "slot machine play" option from a
user interface screen, and then repeatedly play a simulated slot
machine generated by the software on the participant's computer to
learn the outcome of the prior game of chance. Consequently, the
outcome of the game of chance, while already fixed and complete
within the fully legal context of a casino or other such permitted
location, would nonetheless appear to the gaming participant as if
the result of a simulated gaming activity taking place in
real-time. The simulated wagers may be made to precisely match the
wagers that went into the generation of the gambling results, but
could also be matched to other games or wagering amounts by
allocating the total amount won among the various simulated
wagers.
[0021] While regulatory requirements should be reviewed to
determine what modifications may be necessary to achieve legal
compliance, the preceding example is believed to comply with
regulatory requirements of all U.S. jurisdictions with respect to
gaming, at least in that gaming contracts entered in a state where
the contract is permitted cannot be invalidated in other states,
according to the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S.
Constitution.
[0022] Winnings that are won while legally gambling in a casino or
similar environment during the preceding actual game of chance are
sometimes referred to herein as the "pre-gamed outcome[s]". Results
of simulated wagers made subsequently for the purpose of learning
the result of some or all of the pre-gamed outcome are sometimes
referred to herein as the post-gamed outcome[s]. The simulated
games used to generate the post-gamed outcomes are sometimes
referred to herein as the "post-games". Post-games are simulated
games to the extent that the post-games Outcomes are predetermined
by the pre-gamed outcomes.
[0023] In some embodiments, the method and systems disclosed herein
may be modified to enable selection by the gaming participant of
parameters for determining the pre-gamed outcomes, which parameters
may be selected in a manner that makes the pre-gamed outcomes more
closely match the gaming type, amount, payout table and other
desired characteristics of the post-gamed outcomes. pre-game
machine 102 and post-game machine 108, 112, may be configured with
software and hardware permitting designation of the parameters by
the gaming participant. For example, machine 102 may be equipped
with a touchscreen 116 configured for user input.
[0024] Parameters may include flatness or variability of the pay
table, number or wagers or amount of each wager or other values
that together influence or determine the statistically expected
game result. For example, while useful for setting other
parameters, the player's designated amount for each bet in
combination with the type of payout table can used to achieve a
particular level of statistical smoothing of the pre-gamed
outcomes, and therefore the ability of the post-games and post-game
outcomes to emulate that smoothing, that the gaming participant
prefers. The pay table and the individual wager amount, relative to
the total wager amount, together determine the variability to be
expected from the machine. The statistical return over an infinite
number of plays represents the Casino's expected profit, and in
this case we will use as an example a 95% statistical return. At
one extreme, even given a highly skewed pay table whereby a wager
either loses or wins 1,000 times the amount bet, so the wager wins
once every 1,052 times, $100,000 wagered one penny at a time would
return between $94,000 and $96,000 in all but the most extremely
statistically anomalous circumstances. Similarly, very high wager
amounts spread over correspondingly few wagers will yield highly
unpredictable results even using a relatively normalized pay table.
It is to be understood that the pay table and the wager size
relative to the total wagered result in statistical payout
likelihoods that fall on a spectrum. For example, a moderate wager
amount and a highly skewed pay table may result in similar returns
to those expected from a high wager amount with a moderate pay
table. Thus, it is possible to utilize pre-gamed outcomes from one
combination of pay table skew and wager amount to enable a range of
desired post-gamed outcomes, matching various combinations of pay
table skew and wager amounts. Thus, for example, a use who wishes
to increase their post-game bets from $1 per game to $5 per game
may be accommodated by varying the pay table for the pre-game.
[0025] To give a concrete example of how inappropriately chosen
pre-gamed outcome parameters can frustrate the enjoyment or
flexibility of the post-games, imagine a gaming participant who
bets $1,000,000 but picks the extremely risk-averse parameters of a
dollar per wager and somewhat flat pay table. With a 95%
statistical return, the pre-gamed outcome would almost certainly be
between $900,000 and $1,100,000. If that gaming participant later
seeks to play a post-game where the bet size is $1,000 and the pay
table is highly skewed, the gaming participant would know with near
certainty that he could not achieve the 2,000-1 payout that is part
of the skewed pay table. This would decrease the enjoyment the
gaming participant experiences, because the pay table would be
flatter in reality than it appears (put another way, the post-game
results are never random in the aggregate, because they must
reflect the pre-gamed outcomes, but it would appear as if the
post-game device were cheating if some of the listed pay table
outcomes were in fact impossible to achieve).
[0026] One way to facilitate variable relative wager sizes in the
post-game may be to generate multiple pre-gamed outcomes using
different parameters at the first gaming device 102, and to select
an appropriate one of the pre-gamed outcome sets in order to better
match post-game parameters selected at the simulated gaming device
108. Another method may be to adjust an apparent statistical return
during different portions of the post-games. For example, the user
may desire to have a spouse play the post-gamed "penny slots" at a
low wager, flat pay table level presenting less variability than
the parameters used for the pre-gamed outcomes. In conjunction with
this, the post-game machine may reduce the apparent statistical
return to 75%, some of the "wins" that should otherwise be realized
in the post-games may be deferred and therefore available for later
use in achieving a higher payout than would otherwise be possible
for a higher wager amount. Similarly, if pre-gamed outcomes were
generated at a higher variability level than can sustain a low bet
amount, flat pay table post-game, the returns for those post-games
or earlier or later post-games may be "banked" in order to achieve
flexibility to accommodate the desired post-game profile. The
apparent statistical return could, in other cases, be adjusted to
increase or decrease the apparent performance of the
post-games.
[0027] Similarly, if a gaming participant desires to end on a "high
note", they could elect to lower the apparent return over some
range of the post-games, enabling an otherwise impossible net
positive statistical expectation for some others of the post-games.
Thus, for example, if the gaming participant has bet $1,000 in $1
increments to generate the pre-gamed outcomes, he may elect to play
the first 900 $1 post-game bets at a 50% statistical return,
causing a much higher win rate on the last 10% ($100) of post-game
simulated gaming.
[0028] A gaming participant expressing a desire to wager in low
increments and a flat pay table is generally asking for a return
closer to the statistical return, whereas a gaming participant
expressing a desire for high wager increments and a more variable
pay table seeks higher potential returns and accepts a higher risk
of larger losses. While gambling within a casino allows the gaming
participant to adjust these parameters "on the fly", in some
embodiments of the present pre-game/post-game system, the gaming
participant's preferences are determined in advance, during the
pre-game session. In the alternative, or in addition, the gaming
participant may specify generation of a plurality of alternative
pre-gamed outcomes using different parameters to accommodate a
desire for different pay tables when outside of the casino. The
pre-game machine 102 may generate these alternative outcomes using
different parameters for each, including the alternative outcomes
as part of the outcome data 104.
[0029] In the alternative, or in addition, the gaming participant
may pre-instruct the pre-game machine 102 to immediately determine
a first game result based on a first wager amount, and to continue
to resolve (but not reveal) each subsequent game result immediately
upon the prior bet's being revealed at the simulator 108 or 112,
such that each game is not played in response to user input at the
simulator machine, but is instead based on the participants
pre-existing instructions for the pre-game machine 102. Optionally,
payouts from this alternative may be restricted to being paid only
in the jurisdiction where the first machine 102 is located.
[0030] In an alternative embodiment, the system 100 is configured
to simulate only the chance element of hybrid chance/skill games,
for example, online poker, involving multiple participants
connecting to the post-game machine from a remote location.
Consider, for example, an 8-player Texas Hold 'Em game variant with
a $10 ante structure in place of the regular blinds structure. Each
participant bets $10,000 using the pre-game device 102 that
immediately determines the results of each bet. The pre-game
machine splits the $10,000 into 1,000 individual $10 bets. For each
bet, the pre-game machine may deal two "hole" cards and calculate
the statistical likelihood of those cards winning against some
defined number (e.g., 8) of other participants in an online Texas
Hold 'Em game in which no further betting takes place. The machine
may then assign a "win" value to the bet by multiplying the bet by
the percentage likelihood of winning by 2 (so a hand with a 70%
likelihood of winning returns $10.times.140%, or $14; a hand with a
25% likelihood of winning returns $10.times.50%, or $5). The
pre-game machine may then record the results of the various bets,
without revealing them to the participants. When the gaming
participants later log onto a server hosting the online poker game
from their respective client post-game machine, the server picks a
bet/result pair from each user's pre-gamed outcomes and determines
the hole cards (and, if necessary or desirable for legal,
regulatory, game-play, or other reasons) the flop, turn, and/or
river, in a manner that reflects makes the likelihood of winning
for each participant match their pre-gamed outcome. Thus, for
example, imagine a hand with only two players, one of which had an
82% chance of winning, and the other an 82% chance of winning. Each
player might be dealt a pair of Aces as their hole cards. Because
their chances were identical, the flop, turn, and river would not
contain four cards of the same suit, and the players would
tie--unless one of them demonstrated lesser skill by folding.
[0031] In the alternative, allocating the chances of winning in a
particular game of a multi-participant combined chance/skill game
may be performed the sum of the pre-gamed outcomes for all players,
and each player calculate the percentage of the total represented
by that player's pre-gamed outcome. Using an example of two
players, including a player with an 82% chance, or $16.40 pre-gamed
outcome and a player with a 40% chance, or a $8.00 pre-gamed
outcome, the total of the pre-gamed outcomes is $24.40, meaning the
first player would be dealt cards corresponding to a 67.2% win
percentage, and the other cards corresponding to a 32.8% win
percentage. To the extent that the precise win percentages cannot
be represented by the possible card combinations, a "round up" or
"round down" mechanism, either identical for all players,
pre-determined for all players, or determined by each player
individually, may be used to alter the pre-gamed outcome to the
minimum extent necessary to accurately reflect that outcome in the
card distribution. Optionally, the rounded-down amounts could be
put into a fund used to round-up other amounts, refunded to the
player, or otherwise disposed of.
[0032] Predetermining the flop, turn, and river at the pre-game
machine may make difficult or impossible the task of matching the
post-gamed outcome to the pre-gamed outcome. To work around this
obstacle, the pre-game machine may generate additional pre-gamed
outcomes to represent additional bets and influence the outcome.
For example, in a limit Hold-Em poker game where only a single bet
and raise are permitted in each betting round, the calculation of
likelihood of winning may be recalculated with each bet or raise,
depending on the pre-gamed outcomes used for the bets. Note that
the pre-gamed outcomes may be selected non-randomly, so that actual
outcomes reflect the outcomes that would be expected if the cards
were dealt randomly. Thus, for example, a player holding A
Diamonds-A Spades playing against a player holding 2 Hearts-7
Clubs, with a flop of A Clubs, A Hearts, 5 Hearts could only lose
if the flop and river were 3 Hearts-4 Hearts (straight flush
beating 4 Aces). The player with A-A in this example should lose
only once every 2,162 times. While the pre-gamed outcomes would be
unlikely to contain a sufficient supply of extreme outcomes to
match these odds, picking pre-gamed outcomes at random would result
in "bad beats" of such a high frequency as to make the game appear
unfair, and certainly less fun. However, picking pre-gamed outcomes
in such a manner would also have the effect of allowing a first
player with very bad cards to effectively force another player to
"use up" his good pre-gamed outcomes while using up the first
player's own bad pre-gamed outcomes. One work-around is to take a
"rake" that is used to achieve statistically probable outcomes even
in the absence of a sufficient range of available pre-gamed
outcomes. The amount raked may optionally be banked and evenly
divided between hands when it is not needed.
[0033] For compliance in jurisdictions where pari-mutuel gaming is
legal in the absence of the house taking a "rake" or percentage of
winnings, one option is to take the "rake" entirely from the
pre-gamed outcome in a jurisdiction 101 that does not restrict the
rake, leaving the remainder of the winnings to be divided on a
pari-mutuel basis without a rake in the post-game jurisdiction 105
where the gaming results are revealed. In the alternative, the
remainder of winnings (i.e., the total amount wagered less the
rake) may be allocated according to the outcome of a game of chance
subsequently operated in the restricted jurisdiction 105.
[0034] One thing that should be appreciated is the relationship of
the pre-gamed outcomes to the actual funds paid out. Because the
pre-gamed outcomes should reflect the statistically accurate game
outcome, the total of the pre-gamed outcomes played in a game
should equal the total of bets made, even if the bets made are
denominated not as the pre-gamed outcomes, but rather as the
denomination wagered in generating the pre-gamed outcomes (the
"Genesis Bet"). The game may be denominated in the same amount as
the Genesis Bet, and payouts may made as if the amounts wagered
were in fact the Genesis Bet amounts. For regulatory, legal, or
game-play reasons, payouts may be made in the actual pre-gamed
outcomes amounts, either for the entirety of the betting or only
for that portion of the betting related to random chance and not
skill.
[0035] Furthermore, amounts won as a result of chance (which would
include, for example, the amount won in a game where only the antes
were bet and no player folded) may optionally be paid to the player
as the actual pre-gamed outcome. In such instances, for example,
the losing player who holds a $0.25 pre-gamed outcome value
nonetheless receives $0.25 from the chance outcome. Alternatively,
pre-gamed outcome bets representing the "Blinds", the antes, other
bets, or some combination, may be calculated as bi-modal or with a
plurality of modes. In the bi-modal example, a "heads-up" poker
match or other heads-up game may be played, in which the post-game
device picks random pairs of pre-gamed outcomes for the players
until it picks a set where one is a "win" and the other is a
"lose". The game server may then deal (internally) hole cards to
the players at random, but also discard the hole cards thus dealt
without revealing to the players until the hole cards are such that
the player with the "win" outcome is statistically more likely to
win. A pre-game machine may generate a number of pre-gamed outcomes
that represents at least several bets, and then in subsequent play
a post-game server may select any bet, raise, or call wager for
each player that comes from the same mode of outcome as the
original bet. For example, a player who holds the "win" outcome in
the original bimodal bet distribution would only use "win"
pre-gamed outcomes during the post-game. In this case, only skill
on the part of the player with the "lose" modality could cause the
"win" modality player to lose. Thus, the entire chance element is
eliminated.
[0036] A similar approach makes possible simulated blackjack
betting in the post-game jurisdiction. Without this innovation, one
problem is that improper play during the post-game would not impact
the outcome, making the game appear boring at best, or rigged at
worse. The player has either a "win" or "lose" bet modality. The
bet modality is reflected in cards that will win if played
perfectly (for so example, the player would hit a 10-6 when the
dealer shows a 10). Improper play could cause the player to lose
(although not necessarily). One legal or regulatory or game play
complication is that the player may play improperly and win a
"lose" modality. Such a complication could be avoided by not
permitting a "win" resulting from improper play to be paid out
other than as an offset to a "loss" that results from improper
play. Because improper play should cause more losses than wins,
such an offset mechanism should function in a manner that does not
alter or detract from the game play experience. Such a mechanism
could similarly be utilized in conjunction with "double down" bets,
"insurance" bets and other betting activity.
[0037] In the alternative, or in addition, the post-game machine
may be configured to allow participants to "lock in" the betting
outcome at certain points during post-game play and/or pay some or
all of the payout based on the statistical likelihood of winning at
that point, whether in conjunction with real money better or
pre-gamed outcomes. For example, after the pre-flop betting is
complete, some of the money bet (for example, 50%) would be set
aside and distributed either (a) to each player according to their
percentage likelihood of winning at that point in the hand, or (b)
to the player with the highest percentage likelihood of winning at
that point in the hand. Alternatively, any raises or bets in
addition to the pre-gamed outcomes portion of the gaming might be
paid out in this manner. In this way, for example, a "no-limit"
game might include a $10 minimum bet, comprised of the pre-gamed
outcome and distributed according to the end result of the game,
and any overage, which is not pre-gamed outcome and which is
distributed according to the extent likelihood of each player
winning at that point in time. Such a distribution mechanism would
entirely eliminate the chance element of the gaming.
[0038] Post-game play may make use of a "captive" player, whether
an artificial intelligence ("AI"), a human player, or some
combination, thereof to alter the distribution of odds so as to
better match the outcome to the statistically expected outcome.
Particularly in the case of games where player error may cause
accumulation of funds in the hands of the "house" (for example, Pai
Gou Poker) the captive player might elect to play the house
position and play it imperfectly. Similarly, a "free-riding"
captive player may be used in poker to fill out the additional
spots at the table. If the free-riding captive wins, the amounts
wagered by other players during the hand won by the captive player
may be credited by the post-game machine to respective ones of the
other players. In the alternative, or in addition, the post-game
machine may credit the amounts wagered only to those of players who
have not folded, or all bets but only distributed evenly among
those who have not folded) are returned.
[0039] In another embodiment 200 illustrated in FIG. 2, one or more
rule sets 212 specifying a participant's preference for wagering in
different games may be defined or selected by the participant, and
received by a gaming machine 202 located in a jurisdiction 201 that
permits gaming. For example, a rule set 212 may specify how may
lines to play in a slot machine, the amount wagered on each line,
the number of games to play per unit of time, and how to response
to any options awarding during play, such as bonus rounds. The
gaming machine 202 may be programmed with an "automated gaming
agent" application for applying the rules during specified games.
Applying, for example, a credit amount 214 available in the
participant's casino account or credit card account read using a
card reader 204, the participant may initiate operation of the
automated gaming agent to wager a specified sum according to the
specified rule set, using any suitable input device, for example a
touchscreen 206. The gaming machine 202 may transmit or display
gaming results 216 to the participant in real-time to a client
device 208 located in another location 205, for example, a location
where gaming is not permitted.
[0040] In many situations a player may wish to provide for a
player-controlled amount of delay between committing a total wager
amount to game play at the game machine 202 and the reporting of
the results by the client 208 in the other location 205. Such time
may be desired, for example, to permit time for the player to
travel from the gaming jurisdiction to the other location. To
facilitate such controlled delay, various events may be defined by
the participant as triggers for initiating play by machine 202, for
example: a time trigger (i.e. 8 pm Monday), a dead-man switch (i.e.
start gambling every night at 8 pm for one hour unless I sign in to
a web page and say "not tonight"), or any other event compliant
with regulatory limitations. The player may, for example, have 20
different gaming devices set to each initiate play, either from a
single account or multiple accounts, upon occurrence of a specified
triggering event or events, for example, a dead-man switch set to
activate periodically, for example, once every thirty seconds. The
player may then use an automatic device, such as, for example, a
software agent operating on or in conjunction with gaming machine
202, to suppress activation of the dead-man switch constantly,
thereby enabling the player to initiate gaming whenever desired by
temporarily disabling the automatic dead-man switch actuating
device. The game play and results 216 may be transmitted live via
computer or television to the remote location 205 where the player
is located, and may be presented to the player by client 208 as if
in response to live inputs from the player to the client 208. For
example, a simulated slot machine client 208 may transmit a signal
218 temporarily disabling a dead-man switch agent on game machine
202, in response to movement of the lever 210, e.g., a lever pull
by the player located in region 205. Disabling the dead-man switch
agent temporarily causes a predetermined game to be played
according to the predetermined rules at the first machine 202, with
results 216 transmitted to the client 208 and displayed to the
player. This process simulates a game as if played on the client
machine in response to the lever pull. However, the commitment to
wager on a game of chance and the deposit of wagering money was
done exclusively at a time and place where it was legal.
[0041] Many gaming machines provide bonus features such as
collective or "progressive" jackpots from networked gaming machines
to provide larger payouts and attract players. A cumulative amount
of the available progressive jackpot is typically displayed at or
on each machine participating in the progressive system. A game
machine providing such progressive jackpots while configured to
provide pre-game play might undesirably reveal pre-gamed outcomes
if a progressive jackpot is won, because the balance of the
progressive jackpot displayed on the machines would drop
immediately. This might effectively prevent players from enjoying
the suspense of "trying for" a progressive jackpot via pre-gamed
outcomes, although a player might not always be sure that the
progressive jackpot was won at a particular machine. One solution
is to simply obscure the progressive amount from the player, such
as, for example, behind a sliding window requiring affirmative
action to see it. Another solution maintains a specialized
progressive jackpot designed exclusively for remote use of
pre-gamed outcomes. When desired to incorporate a more broadly
played progressive jackpot collective (i.e., one based on numerous
participating gaming machines, especially co-located machines), the
obscured result mechanism may be preferable. Alternatively, the
progressive jackpot amount may be computed as a rolling average so
that if it is won, it diminishes but not so quickly or dramatically
as to be obvious to the player. Alternatively, a gaming machine may
play for a plurality of separate progressive jackpots, and the
player is prevented from knowing which jackpot the pre-game machine
is playing for at the time of initiating pre-game play.
[0042] In regulatory environments where permitted, gaming results
may be bracketed within specific time frames, correlated to
specific additional (and in some embodiments, automated) gaming
activity for pre-game play. The pre-game machine is configured such
that the gaming participant can terminate the cascade of additional
gambling events by withdrawing money from a designated gaming
account. The gaming account may be configured similarly to a
certificate of deposit or other investment instrument. To
illustrate, for example: A gaming participant visits the gaming
jurisdiction and wagers $1,000 pursuant to the pre-gaming method
discussed above. Although other mechanisms could be utilized to
determine the point at which the gambling results are considered
complete for each time frame, in this example, the entire $1,000
stake is gambled at once, using (for example) 1,000 spins of a
$0.25 slot machine on a "max bet" setting of 4 coins (so $1 total
per spin). At the conclusion of this high speed gambling event, the
gaming participant has won some amount, in this example $500. The
$500 is then re-gambled in the same manner, this time winning
$1,500. The process is repeated for a set number of times, until
the gaming participant runs out of money (i.e. the stake has been
reduced to zero), until the gaming participant wins a preset amount
(i.e. stop when the stake hits $10,000), or as otherwise instructed
by the gaming participant. Each complete one time run through the
stake (in this example; other demarcation points are also possible)
serves as a demarcation point. The casino and the gaming
participant agree (or have agreed in advance of the gaming
activity) that the gaming participant may elect to redeem the
proceeds of the gambling based on any one of the plurality of
demarcation points, provided that certain conditions are met. For
example, the demarcation points may be tied to moments in time
(i.e. each demarcation point redemption opportunity expires at
midnight on the 10th day after the expiration of the prior
demarcation point redemption opportunity), tied to events outside
the control of the gaming participant (most likely only utilized
when required for regulatory reasons, but not limited to use for
such reasons; an example might be that each demarcation point
expires at midnight on any day that a random number generator hits
a specified number), tied to a failure to redeem in person or by
phone, tied to a failure to withdraw permission to continue to
gamble the proceeds, or to some other trigger.
[0043] One variant includes ceasing pre-game play at or before the
first demarcation point. At the expiration of each demarcation
point, the proceeds are automatically re-gamed based on the last
standing instructions from the gaming participant. If permitted as
a regulatory matter, the gaming participant may simply withdraw the
permission to re-game the proceeds prior to the expiration of any
given demarcation point. This embodiment may optionally be combined
with the use of a mechanism whereby the gaming proceeds are jointly
held, for example, by a resident agent in the gaming jurisdiction
and a Non-gaming jurisdiction resident. With such an agent, the
variant of not pre-gambling past a single demarcation point, though
available without an agent, may become, for regulatory or other
reasons, a useful embodiment. The agent, who may hold a joint
beneficial interest in all of the proceeds, who may hold a
fractional interest individually, who may hold the interest in
trust, or otherwise, is able to remain in The gaming jurisdiction
and therefore personally stop the re-gaming prior to the expiration
of the current demarcation point.
[0044] In theory, and if permitted under the applicable regulatory
regime, the demarcation point in the foregoing system may be tied
to a change in the balance of the gaming account. Thus, for
example, whenever the value of the gaming stake after the next
pre-gaming event changes by more than 5% when compared to the prior
demarcation point, the next demarcation point may be set for a
shorter period of time; by contrast, with a 90% increase, the next
demarcation point may be set further in the future. This permits
gaming participants to set the frequency with which their stake is
re-gambled in a manner that matches their predicted gambling
pattern. For example, a gaming participant who knows he is unlikely
to gamble much after a big win might set a larger wait between
demarcation points.
[0045] The system may also be configured to treat every single
individual gaming event as a separate gambling account or stake. In
such a case, the demarcation point may optionally be set to
correspond with the moment when the gaming participant learns the
result of the pre-gamed outcome. By setting each gaming event as a
separate gambling account or stake, and by linking this plurality
of accounts to a single log-in or other access mechanism, the
gaming participant in our prior example may gamble $1,000 in the
gaming jurisdiction at the $0.25 machine with 4 coins per pull. His
pre-gamed outcomes would result in 1,000 individual accounts, each
of which could be queued for being automatically pre-gamed upon
some trigger, such as, among other things, (a) learning the result
of the prior pre-gamed outcome; (b) expiration of 5 minutes after
learning the past pre-gamed outcome without receiving contrary
instructions; or (c) reaching, or failing to reach, an aggregate
gaming win, loss, or volume level, optionally within a set period
of time.
[0046] In the alternative, or in addition, the gaming machine
located in the first jurisdiction (e.g., region 101 or 201) may be
configured to permit use of pre-gambled funds depending on the
outcome of some other future event such as a Keno game or sporting
event. Just as is currently done, a gaming participant in such a
system may place a plurality of bets on such future events, and
learn the outcomes after leaving the casino or even returning to a
non-gaming jurisdiction. The outcome of the events (particularly
events such as Keno game, as, unlike sports gambling, the outcome
does not also merit news coverage) is unknown to the gaming
participant until he learns the outcome by gambling at a
virtualized gaming device in the remote location 105 or 205. Among
other things, tying the outcomes to a contingent future event may
provide an advantage of enhancing the subjective feeling that the
gaming participant is participating in a game in which the outcome
is yet unknown, or at least gambling on a series of very recent
events, and not just engaged in an extended game to learn the
outcomes of long-concluded events.
[0047] In another embodiment as shown in FIG. 3, a requirement for
the gaming participant to travel to the gaming jurisdiction may be
eliminated via a publically traded entity or instrument 300 that
aggregates a plurality of legally tradable items, such as, for
example, derivatives, global currency, stock, commodity, interest
rate, insurance contracts, options, puts, the VIX or volatility
hedges or funds, and similar items. The entity or instrument may
trade in one or more electronic markets 308, 310 such that the
value of the instrument changes frequently 24 hours a day, 7 days a
week over very short intervals of time; for example, a second or
less. The fund may be managed using a quasi-game interface 302
controlling one or more electronic trading robots 304, 306 in a
manner that is intended to result in very high intra-day, and very
high intra-minute, volatility. The fund may be designed to increase
in value over the long term, while experiencing enormous swings in
value over the short term, so that money invested in the fund over
time enjoys at least a possibility of a positive return. Shares may
be held in a highly leveraged manner, so that they are subject to
very high intra-minute returns or losses. To prevent a loss of
greater than the amount of the stock purchased, the fund may
include hedges or insurance, the gaming participant may be required
to back the purchase with additional capital, or the high end of
the return curve may be used to purchase a hedge against the low
end of the return curve. A plurality of tradable positions in the
relevant markets may be initiated in advance of simulated gaming
activity, in a quantity, amount, and character sufficient to enable
the later desired gaming simulation, trading activity, or
combination thereof.
[0048] Positions in the fund may be initiated through an online
interface implemented in the form of a gaming machine 312, for
example, a slot machine. The investor purchases a number of shares
in a fund (fractional or otherwise) via the machine 312 and pulls
the lever or otherwise initiates a game. By initiating a game, the
investor simultaneously enters a purchase order and a sale order.
In one embodiment, the sale order may be executed first as a "short
sale" followed by the purchase as an immediate "cover". If
necessary to achieve the requisite volatility, the user may place
funds in the gaming machine 312, which funds are used to purchase a
single position (which could be a short sale, a long position,
options, or any other legal investment instrument). The currency
denomination per slot machine "bet" may be used to set the amount
or units of stock purchased. The user then begins pulling the level
on the slot machine, and in response some amount of stock
corresponding to the amount of each "bet" may be sold (or covered,
as the case may be) using the interface 302. The reels of the slot
machine stop on symbols that reflect the outcome of the stock
transaction. For example, if a $1 highly leveraged stock purchase
"bet" resulted in a gain of $3, the line might show as
cherry-blank-blank; if the same "bet" resulted in a complete loss,
the line might show as blank-blank-blank. With the consent of the
purchaser, some rounding down may be done, with the uneven amount
reinvested, or held in reserve to permit rounding up.
[0049] The amount of the relevant instrument traded with each pull
of the level may be randomly picked, or, if necessary for
regulatory reasons or if desired, picked using a table generated by
software on the client device 312 and, at the option of the user,
reviewable and alterable in advance. In this way, the initial $100
buy-in might be played, for example, on a $1 machine as a $0.25
stock purchase without leverage, followed by a $10 stock purchase
maximally leveraged, followed by a $1 stock purchase, etc. Because
the user has the option of not knowing the pattern (although he is
capable of learning it and altering it), the volatility of the
stock mix, the amount of leverage, and the variation in the
quasi-bet transaction amounts may be combined to emulate slot
machines with widely variable pay tables. For example, imagine a
simple slot pay table that pays as follows:
TABLE-US-00001 75% pays 0 15% pays 2-1 9.999% pays 5-1 0.001% pays
10,000-1
[0050] This pay table results in a statistical payout of $0.9995
per dollar wagered. In reality, the pay table will be variable
because the results rely on stock market outcomes (even if based on
a basket of items that are believed to be net positive but so
volatile as to appear essentially random when measured minute to
minute). Some trading commission may be collected with each trade,
which may impact the pay table. Returning to the example pay table,
may be necessary to infrequently make a very highly leveraged, high
dollar purchase. This purchase may be made early in the process so
that if it comes up as a big loss, there are still funds with which
to offset it; optionally, the results of that trade may be used to
reduce the results of subsequent trades in a manner that is made
known to the player only on request. In this manner, a early large
loss on the highly leveraged trade would be experienced as the
player as an extended streak of bad luck.
[0051] If required in certain situations and jurisdictions for
regulatory reasons, the player may be able to set the time between
trades, the monetary amount of trades, the amount, if any, of the
purchase price to be left as an investment rather than immediately
traded, the maximum, minimum, and/or other boundaries for leverage,
and/or some or all of the other parameters that are traditionally
or legally required to be allowed to be selected by a retail
investor in the relevant markets.
[0052] These systems described herein (including the stock, keno
and other systems described above) may be combined in an
interoperable manner with other inventions disclosed herein. For
example, game-independent outcomes (for example, pre-gamed outcomes
generated in the context of slot machines independent of the game
of blackjack--as would be trading and keno outcomes) may be used to
simulate outcomes in additional games. For further example, the
discussion above of elimination of the element of chance from
blackjack by utilizing the game-independent outcome to determine
the chance elements, leaving any losses strictly as a consequence
of improper play may be applied in other games or trading involving
a mixture of skill and chance.
[0053] Another method to use a trading vehicle underlying a
simulated game of chance is to make the stock baskets
representative of performance of specified trades and the
then-current status within relatively volatile investment
instruments. For example, at the outset of a "Texas Hold-em Poker"
tournament (which may, for regulatory reasons, need to be altered,
such as by requiring an "ante" with each deal) (Time 0), every
player pays $1,000 and thereby initiates a series of positions.
Optionally, the values of the positions may be set simultaneously
for all players for all positions, once per tournament, once per
hand, or using whatever other timing mechanism is desired or
required for regulatory purposes. These positions are structured
such that each player has certain positions that take the form of a
complex set of derivatives or hedges relative to the positions of
other players. The players are then dealt cards that represent the
relative values of their positions. The players are permitted to
make an offer, which involves a non-refundable deposit of 100% of
the offer, to buy out the positions previously "bet", or offered on
a non-refundable bid basis, by the other player or players. The
other players each have the opportunity to accept the offer (i.e.
fold), make a higher counter-office (raise), or ask that the
positions be liquidated against each other (i.e. call). The
structure of the positions may be such that the better position
enjoys a 100% ownership of the worse position played. As additional
"cards" are dealt, these are similarly representative of positions.
With each prospective round of trading (which may be represented in
the online poker interface as a round of betting), a computer with
knowledge of the purchase price, value, and other pertinent
information about stock positions at issue (i.e. being represented
in the interface the value underlying "chips" or "bets" of each
player). A computer may calculate the relative values of the
various positions and calculate the relative values of the cards in
the deck. The computer may then deal cards to each player that
approximate, as closely as possible, the relative strengths of the
stock positions being offered. An alternative may comprise dealing
the cards randomly, and then selecting a stock position from the
plurality of positions owned by the player, which position matches
the relative strength of the hand. To the extent that a precise
match is not possible, the disparity can be addressed using the
previously discussed methods, or can simply be left in the player's
investment account (or debited from the account, as the case may
be).
[0054] If regulatory requirements so dictate, or if other reasons
make it desirable to do so, any player may demand at any time to
see the true identity of the underlying instruments. In response to
such a request, any non-refundable amounts contributed by that
player may be designated as forfeited. At that point, further, the
player making the demand would no longer be permitted to
participate in the exchange based only on representative valuations
of the underlying instruments (i.e. cards). At that point, the
system may enable the players to, if they wished, trade the
instruments in a traditional manner, although it is likely that
such trades would be time consuming given the requested review of
the underlying instruments.
[0055] As another example, a player may join an on-line Blackjack
game via a client device. In this example, the applicable server
operates such that the hosting entity, brokerage, an underwriter of
the hosting entity, or other entity (all of the foregoing sometimes
referred to herein as the "house"), exchanges offsetting or
dissimilar positions relative to investment positions taken by the
player. In response to a joining event, the player and the house
may each purchase, at a set time, N positions trading in various
stocks, commodities, or other instruments. Likewise, the player and
house exchange, in advance, the identities of the stocks,
commodities, or other instruments in which they will trade, and may
specify or agree on the investment amounts (i.e. "a series of $5
positions in each of the 100 futures contracts on this list"). Both
the house and the player may agree to hedge the investment of the
other in a manner that results in one or the other position
doubling its value, with the counter-position having no value (for
example, options or short sales with knock-out levels at which
certain of the rights terminate). For example, a position may
involve hedging interest rates, such as a player purchasing a
derivative instrument for N dollars that is worth N+N dollars if
rates rise, or zero if rates fall.
[0056] The initial cards dealt to the player and dealer, together
with the subsequent cards in the deck if played without error,
represent the outcome of the exchange of instruments (for example,
a "push" if the instruments are equal, a player "win" if the
player's instrument has value, a player "loss" if the player's
instrument has no value. Optionally, a portion of the instrument
may be invested in a manner (or the instrument itself may be
structured to have an appropriate probability) that a return of N
plus N plus half of N is possible (i.e. blackjack by the player).
Alternatively, losses from improper play could be used to fund
"blackjack" wins.
[0057] It should be understood that the stocks or other positions
need not be random (although they could be randomly picked).
Instead, it may be desirable to allow the player to actively direct
the investment mechanism, while preventing the player from knowing
the investment choices made by the other players or the house. In
such a situation, the player would know his investments performed
well, and therefore would give greater weight to a "good hand" (or
vice versa). Upon losing to another player even with a good hand,
the player would obtain the "tell" that the other player had
invested that particular instrument well and was likely, therefore,
to have invested other instruments well. The quasi-gaming interface
may require diversity in the instruments invested, so that, for
example, a player can not pick 1,000 identical futures contracts in
gold and therefore make the "game" or representative trading
mechanism less fun or interesting for the other players.
[0058] An additional set of innovations relates in part to the sale
of stock, partnership shares, or some similar interest in an entity
that owns some interest in certain gaming devices. The interest may
be undivided, fractional, time-divided (i.e. the entity obtains the
proceeds during specified times only), or otherwise. The agreement
between the partners (using the LLC example) may require additional
infusion of capital in response to specified losses. The infusion
of capital may take place in a manner split between the owners or
one owner may ask (or pay additional capital or otherwise) for the
right and responsibility to purchase additional capital--or obtain
additional ownership interest or dividends--depending on the
performance of the machines in the aggregate during the time period
at issue. Risk of loss from a very large jackpot may be insured by
a third party.
[0059] In such an arrangement, the owner who agrees to take the
right and responsibility for paying any losses during a set time
period, and to enjoy a disproportionate share of gains during that
time period, may optionally learn the outcome on a periodic basis
by use of a simulated slot machine or other gaming device, which
device returns results (i.e. Bar-Bar-Bar for a winning period of
time) in a manner reflective of the performance of the entity
during that period. The partnership agreement may be written in
such a manner that multiple partners can take responsibility
simultaneously.
[0060] Finally, in exchange for payment of a membership or access
fee, even money gaming may be offered. In such a case, the player
statistically wins one dollar for each dollar gambled. Such a
mechanism may be used in conjunction with the foregoing inventions,
or in conjunction with extent gaming modalities. An "even money"
return may be preserved, even in the event of poor play by the
player, by returning any casino "profits" to the pool of funds
available to pay future jackpots, resulting in a statistical
likelihood of a better than 100% return for any player who plays
error-free. Such even-money gaming may also be accomplished (for
example, if required for regulatory reasons) by donation of any
fees to a non-profit or by operation by a non-profit or state-owned
entity.
[0061] By way of providing a more general example that is
consistent with the foregoing example, a post-game machine, also
referred to herein as a simulated gaming machine or more simply, a
simulator, may perform a method 400 as illustrated in FIG. 4. The
simulator may be a client device in a non-gaming jurisdiction or
other location; or may be a server accessed via a connected client.
Initially, the simulator may receive 402 a predetermined set of
outcomes determined by a machine in a gaming jurisdiction. It is
specifically contemplated that the simulated gaming machine will do
more than merely reproduce the same games and outcomes at another
location. Accordingly, the set of outcomes may be summary in
nature, for example, may specify a total amount wagered, a number
of games played, the amount wagered per game played, and net return
amount. For example, the predetermined set of outcomes may specify
"$1000 total wagered in equal amounts over 100 games played, with a
net win amount of $400. Optionally, the simulated gaming machine
may receive more detailed information such as wins and losses per
game, and/or odds of winning different prize amounts per game.
However, this more detailed information is not required. The
simulator may store 404 the predetermined set of outcomes in a
long-term or short-term memory for use in operating a series of
simulated games.
[0062] Generally, the simulator may offer a menu of various
different simulated games. Assuming that a game type is selected by
the user or otherwise determined by the simulator, the simulator
may receive 406 user input specifying a wager amount for a
simulated game. The simulator may analyze the output set 408,
including, for example, determining a number of games played, and
amount wagered per game. The simulator may determine that the
amount wagered per game to obtain the predetermined outcome set is
fixed. In the alternative, the simulator may determine that the
amount varies from game to game. From this analysis and from a
specified odds and pay table of the selected simulated game, the
simulator may determine 410 a maximum and/or minimum bet for the
simulated bet. These limits may differ from maximum and minimum
bets used to generate the predetermined outcome set. For example, a
maximum bet of $10 used in the pre-game series may support a
somewhat larger or smaller bet in a similar game of the post-game
simulated set, dependent on the simulated odds and pay table for
the simulated game. However, the permitted wager amount in the
post-game should be maintained within certain limits that can
readily be determined from the simulated odds and pay table of the
simulated game. As noted in the discussion above, the simulated
odds and pay table may also be adjusted to accommodate different
wager amounts. However, too much flexibility in simulated odds and
payouts may result in a user experience that does not feel much
like a realistic gaming experience, and may be avoided by imposing
calculated limits on wager amounts in the post game.
[0063] If the wager is out of limit 412, the simulator may adjust
414 the wager amount to within an allowed limit, using any suitable
automatic or user-interactive process. Once the wager is within
limits, 412, the simulator may determine a simulated game result
and output a simulated game outcome. As noted above, the simulated
output may resemble any desired one of various games of chance;
however, the net outcome of the series of simulated games is
constrained by the net outcome of the pre-game series, in that the
simulator ensures that the net total amount lost or won (less any
applicable fees or commissions) is the same for the pre- and
post-game series. The simulator is not required to match the
simulated game outcome to any particular outcome of the
predetermined set of outcomes. Instead, the simulator may provide a
wide range of outcomes to simulate different games of interest to
the user, and may even determine results randomly for some (but not
all) of the simulated games. Accordingly, the simulator may after
each simulated game, determine 418 a current net simulated outcome
for the simulated game series; for example, a cumulative sum of
wins and losses for all simulated games played thus far. At 420,
the simulator may compare the current net outcome to the
predetermined outcome net. It should be appreciated that, because
simulated games may be planned in an entirely predetermined manner,
it is not necessary that the operation 419 and 420, or any
equivalent operation, be performed after outputting each game at
416. In the alternative, these calculations may be made as part of
a deterministic process determining all simulated game results,
even before any simulated game result is output. A difference
between the predetermined net outcome and the current simulated net
outcome may be used to select outcomes for future simulated
games.
[0064] When the difference is zero or less than some threshold, and
a sufficient number of simulated games have been played, the
simulator may determine 422 that the series is finished, and pay,
or facilitate payment, of the remaining balance of the initial
wager amount, plus any net winnings, if any, to the user. For
example, the simulator may transmit a signal to a financial server
in the gaming jurisdiction or elsewhere, which may arrange for a
credit in a designated user account. Conversely, if the simulator
determines 422 that the series is not finished and additional games
need to be played to equalize the net winnings or losses to the
predetermined amount, then the cycle may be repeated at 406. The
simulator may allow the user to specify whether or not a particular
game to be played is the last game in the series, using a user
input signal. To retain a realistic operation, this may be
permitted only after a certain determined number of simulated games
have been played; or in the alternative, it may be permitted at any
time. In response to such a signal, the simulator may adjust the
wager amount and force a game result causing the current net
balance of the simulated game series to equal the predetermined net
gaming outcome, and then terminate the series as described.
[0065] Method 400 illustrates one method of operation for a
simulated gaming apparatus, which may be varied in any suitable way
in accordance with the present application. Method 500, as shown in
FIG. 5, provides a higher-level, more general description of a
method for operating a simulated game server that encompasses
method 400 and several other methods disclosed herein. The method
500 may include, at 502, storing, at a simulated gaming device, a
predetermined set of outcomes determined by a gaming machine for a
game of chance based on a specified series of games having a
defined wager amount per game and a specified total number of
games. The method 500 may further include, at 504, receiving, at
the simulated gaming device, user input indicating wager amounts
for corresponding simulated games of chance. The method 500 may
further include, at 506, adjusting a number of permitted simulated
games and results of the simulated games in response to the user
input and to the predetermined set of outcomes for the specified
series of games, so that a net outcome of the simulated games
corresponds to a net outcome of the predetermined set of outcomes
for the specified series of games. The method 500 may further
include, at 508, providing output simulating a game of chance
having an outcome, wherein the outcome is determined so that an
aggregate outcome of the simulated games corresponds to the
predetermined set of outcomes for the specified series of games,
while being different from any individual one of the predetermined
set of outcomes. The user may thereby enjoy an interactive
experience of gaming including variable wager amounts while
actually not playing a game of chance. Instead, the net outcome of
the simulation is determined by the predetermined set of outcomes
from the earlier game of chance.
[0066] In an aspect, the pre-games may be defined using constant
wager amounts. Accordingly, the method may further include
determining that the defined wager amount per game in the specified
series is a constant value. In the alternative, the specified
series of games may include a variable wager amount to generate
pre-game results. In such cases, the method may include determining
that the defined wager amount per game in the specified series is a
variable value.
[0067] To ensure that the simulated game play does not use apparent
wager amounts that cannot win, or that will result in an
unrealistic proportion of wins or losses under constraints of the
predetermined set of outcomes, the method may further include
calculating a limit for a next wager amount of the simulated game,
based on net outcome of prior simulated games and the net outcome
of the predetermined set of outcomes. Accordingly, the method may
include adjusting an apparent wager amount for one or more of the
simulated games so that a net outcome of the simulated games
corresponds to a net outcome of the predetermined set of outcomes
for the specified series of games. The method may further include
adjusting a number of permitted simulated games and wagers of the
simulated games in response to a user-specified preference for the
simulated games as a whole. For example, by selecting a particular
type of simulated game with a certain maximum wager amount, the
user may essentially indicate a preferred flatness of the pay table
and a minimum number of simulated games to play, in view of a
particular predetermined set of outcomes.
[0068] In a separate aspect, the method may include determining the
predetermined set of outcomes at least in part by executing a
short-term transaction in a volatile tradable instrument in
response to receiving an investment amount, using an automated
trading engine. This may enable simulation of a game of chance
using a series of outcomes from a trading engine that executes
trades in a tradable financial instrument. Therefore the user may
be spared the need to travel to or otherwise transact with a gaming
jurisdiction to generate the predetermined set of outcomes.
[0069] The method may support multiplayer competitive simulations
in which outcomes are predetermined by a prior game of chance. FIG.
6 shows further optional elements 600 that may be implemented for
use by the simulated gaming apparatus in association with method
500 to handle multiplayer situations. The elements 500 and 600 may
be performed in any operative order, or may be encompassed by a
development algorithm without requiring a particular chronological
order of performance. Operations are independently performed and
not mutually exclusive. Therefore any one of such operations may be
performed regardless of whether another downstream or upstream
operation is performed. For example, if the method 500 includes at
least one operation of FIG. 6, then the method 500 may terminate
after the at least one operation, without necessarily having to
include any subsequent downstream operation(s) that may be
illustrated.
[0070] The optional elements 600 may include, at 602, allocating
the predetermined set of outcomes to two or more players. For
example, two players wishing to play a simulated game of poker may
wager equivalent amounts at a pre-game machine in a gaming
jurisdiction to obtain a predetermined set of output results,
allocated to two players. The predetermined set may include the
information as described above. A net outcome of the set may
include, for example, a net amount won by a first player and a
corresponding net amount lost by the second player. The elements
600 may further include, at 604, providing output simulating a
mixed game of chance and skill having an outcome dependent in part
on individual playing skill of the two or more players. For
example, the simulator may output a competitive electronic card
game, such as poker. An outcome may be determined in a conventional
fashion. The optional elements 600 may further include, at 606,
determining the outcome based on the predetermined set of outcomes
and skill-based input from the players, so that an aggregate
outcome of the simulated games corresponds to the predetermined set
of outcomes for the specified series of games. For example, if a
player having a predetermined net losing result begins to
nonetheless win a series of games because of superior playing
skill, the simulator may begin to favor the other player, such as
by assigning better hands to the less skillful player.
[0071] With reference to FIG. 7, there is provided an exemplary
simulator apparatus 700 that may be configured as a client, server,
or standalone computer, or as a processor or similar device for use
forgoing, for providing simulated gaming. The apparatus 700 may
include functional blocks that can represent functions implemented
by a processor, software, or combination thereof (e.g.,
firmware).
[0072] As illustrated, in one embodiment, the apparatus 700 may
include an electrical component or module 702 for receiving user
input indicating wager amounts for corresponding simulated games of
chance. For example, the electrical component 702 may include at
least one control processor coupled to a user interface or the like
and to a memory with instructions for receiving user input for the
specified purpose. The apparatus 700 may include an electrical
component 704 for storing a predetermined set of outcomes
determined by a gaming machine for a game of chance based on a
specified series of games having a defined wager amount per game
and a specified total number of games. For example, the electrical
component 704 may include at least one control processor coupled to
a memory holding instructions and data as specified. The apparatus
700 may include an electrical component 706 for adjusting a number
of permitted simulated games and results of the simulated games in
response to the user input and to the predetermined set of outcomes
for the specified series of games, so that a net outcome of the
simulated games corresponds to a net outcome of the predetermined
set of outcomes for the specified series of games. For example, the
electrical component 706 may include at least one control processor
coupled to a memory holding instructions for performing adjustments
as described herein. The apparatus 700 may include an electrical
component 708 for providing output simulating a game of chance
having an outcome, wherein the outcome is determined so that an
aggregate outcome of the simulated games corresponds to the
predetermined set of outcomes for the specified series of games,
while being different from any individual one of the predetermined
set of outcomes. For example, the electrical component 706 may
include at least one control processor coupled to a memory holding
instructions for performing determining outcomes as described
herein. The apparatus 700 may include similar electrical components
for performing any or all of the additional operations 600
described in connection with FIG. 6, which for illustrative
simplicity are not shown in FIG. 7.
[0073] In related aspects, the apparatus 700 may optionally include
a processor component 710 having at least one processor, in the
case of the apparatus 700 configured as a client, server, or
standalone computer. The processor 710, in such case, may be in
operative communication with the components 702-708 or similar
components via a bus 716 or similar communication coupling. The
processor 710 may effect initiation and scheduling of the processes
or functions performed by electrical components 702-708.
[0074] In further related aspects, the apparatus 700 may include a
network interface or other data transfer component 714. A receiver
or media reader may be used in lieu of or in conjunction with the
network interface 714. The apparatus 700 may optionally include a
component for storing information, such as, for example, a memory
device/component 712. The computer readable medium or the memory
component 712 may be operatively coupled to the other components of
the apparatus 700 via the bus 716 or the like. The memory component
712 may be adapted to store computer readable instructions and data
for performing the activity of the components 702-708, and
subcomponents thereof, or the processor 710, the additional aspects
600, or the methods disclosed herein. The memory component 712 may
retain instructions for executing functions associated with the
components 702-708. While shown as being external to the memory
712, it is to be understood that the components 702-708 can exist
within the memory 712.
[0075] Those of skill in the art would understand that information
and signals may be represented using any of a variety of different
technologies and techniques. For example, data, instructions,
commands, information, signals, bits, symbols, and chips that may
be referenced throughout the above description may be represented
by voltages, currents, electromagnetic waves, magnetic fields or
particles, optical fields or particles, or any combination
thereof.
[0076] Those of skill would further appreciate that the various
illustrative logical blocks, modules, circuits, and algorithm steps
described in connection with the disclosure herein may be
implemented as electronic hardware, computer software, or
combinations of both. To clearly illustrate this interchangeability
of hardware and software, various illustrative components, blocks,
modules, circuits, and steps have been described above generally in
terms of their functionality. Whether such functionality is
implemented as hardware or software depends upon the particular
application and design constraints imposed on the overall system.
Skilled artisans may implement the described functionality in
varying ways for each particular application, but such
implementation decisions should not be interpreted as causing a
departure from the scope of the present disclosure.
[0077] The various illustrative logical blocks, modules, and
circuits described in connection with the disclosure herein may be
implemented or performed with a general-purpose processor, a
digital signal processor (DSP), an application specific integrated
circuit (ASIC), a field programmable gate array (FPGA) or other
programmable logic device, discrete gate or transistor logic,
discrete hardware components, or any combination thereof designed
to perform the functions described herein. A general-purpose
processor may be a microprocessor, but in the alternative, the
processor may be any conventional processor, controller,
microcontroller, or state machine. A processor may also be
implemented as a combination of computing devices, e.g., a
combination of a DSP and a microprocessor, a plurality of
microprocessors, one or more microprocessors in conjunction with a
DSP core, or any other such configuration.
[0078] The steps of a method or algorithm described in connection
with the disclosure herein may be embodied directly in hardware, in
a software module executed by a processor, or in a combination of
the two. A software module may reside in RAM memory, flash memory,
ROM memory, EPROM memory, EEPROM memory, registers, hard disk, a
removable disk, a CD-ROM, or any other form of storage medium known
in the art. An exemplary storage medium is coupled to the processor
such that the processor can read information from, and write
information to, the storage medium. In the alternative, the storage
medium may be integral to the processor. The processor and the
storage medium may reside in an ASIC. The ASIC may reside in a user
terminal. In the alternative, the processor and the storage medium
may reside as discrete components in a user terminal.
[0079] In one or more exemplary designs, the functions described
may be implemented in hardware, software, firmware, or any
combination thereof. If implemented in software, the functions may
be stored on or transmitted over as one or more instructions or
code on a computer-readable medium. Computer-readable media
includes both computer storage media and communication media
including any medium that facilitates transfer of a computer
program from one place to another. A storage media may be any
available media that can be accessed by a general purpose or
special purpose computer. By way of example, and not limitation,
such computer-readable media can comprise RAM, ROM, EEPROM, CD-ROM
or other optical disk storage, magnetic disk storage or other
magnetic storage devices, or any other medium that can be used to
carry or store desired program code means in the form of
instructions or data structures and that can be accessed by a
general-purpose or special-purpose computer, or a general-purpose
or special-purpose processor. Also, any connection may be properly
termed a computer-readable medium to the extent involving
non-transient storage of transmitted signals. For example, if the
software is transmitted from a website, server, or other remote
source using a coaxial cable, fiber optic cable, twisted pair,
digital subscriber line (DSL), or wireless technologies such as
infrared, radio, and microwave, then the coaxial cable, fiber optic
cable, twisted pair, DSL, or wireless technologies such as
infrared, radio, and microwave are included in the definition of
medium, to the extent the signal is retained in the transmission
chain on a storage medium or device memory for any non-transient
length of time. Disk and disc, as used herein, includes compact
disc (CD), laser disc, optical disc, digital versatile disc (DVD),
floppy disk and blu-ray disc where disks usually reproduce data
magnetically, while discs reproduce data optically with lasers.
Combinations of the above should also be included within the scope
of computer-readable media.
[0080] Processes performed by the gaming machines, simulators,
quasi-game trading engines, or client devices described herein, or
portions thereof, may be coded as machine readable instructions for
performance by one or more programmable computers, and recorded on
a computer-readable media. The described systems and processes
merely exemplify various embodiments for operating simulated gaming
using a prior event outcome or trading outcome. The present
technology is not limited by these examples.
* * * * *