Amusement devices: games – Including means for processing electronic data – Credit/debit monitoring or manipulation
Reexamination Certificate
1999-02-12
2001-07-31
Layno, Benjamin H. (Department: 3711)
Amusement devices: games
Including means for processing electronic data
Credit/debit monitoring or manipulation
C463S042000, C463S029000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06267671
ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to rating gaming players as to wagers placed at live card games and, more particularly, to automatically rating players at live card game tables for the issuance of comps.
2. Statement of the Problem
In order to encourage higher gross levels of wagering by players, casino operators often extend complimentary goods and services to players in exchange for more active wagering. This is conventionally known as “comping” and the casino operators award players “comps.” “Comps” can be any redeemable forms of currency and/or currency equivalent typically issued (for promotional purposes) by casinos to their players in exchange for active, table game patronage. Such “comps” include points, club points, premium points, player club points, coupons (e.g., free meals, free shows, free gifts, etc.), comp dollars and/or any other form of redeemable coupon, voucher, cash rebate, good or service.
Certain casinos offer players club cards. Players can insert the club card into a conventional slot machine and as the player plays the slot machine, “tickets” are issued based upon the gross wagers made during the time the player plays the slot machine (e.g., one ticket whenever the accumulative wager equals $50). This is only an example of one standalone comp awarding approach wherein the comp determination and the delivery of tickets are made at the slot machine. The player collects the “tickets” and uses them in exchange for goods or services such as free meals. Other conventional approaches exist in awarding comps.
Generally speaking, a player entitled to “comps” identifies himself/herself upon initiation of a gambling session (i.e., the period during which the player participates actively in a form of gambling). The casino then determines the player's “gross session wager” (i.e., the total currency value put at stake by the player over the course of the gambling session). The casino multiplies the gross session wager by the house advantage (i.e., the percentage of total amount wagered that the casino can expect to win in accordance with the inherent statistical probability of a given game type), thus producing a theoretical expected win (i.e., the product of gross session wager multiplied by house advantage and usually expressed in units of currency). The casino then expresses the theoretical expected win as a currency value and multiplies the theoretical expected win by an internal percentage known as the comp factor (i.e., the percentage of theoretical expected win which the casino is willing to return to players in the form of complimentary goods and/or services—a typical range is fifteen to forty-five percent of theoretical expected win), thus producing available comp (i.e., the product of theoretical expected win multiplied by the comp factor which may be expressed as units of currency or point equivalents). The player then requests goods and/or services in exchange for his or her play at the gaming sessions. The casino determines the value of the goods and/or services requested and the player's available comp and provided that the available comp is sufficient, the good and/or service is delivered. The available comp is adjusted to reflect the value of the good and/or service delivered.
In conventional automated game machines such as slot machines, an accurate determination of available comp conventionally occurs. The player inserts the club card into a card reading device at the gaming machine. The processor in the game machine communicates with a remote game machine management system and updates the specific player file in a system database. The player conducts the gaming session at the gaming machine and during the gaming session, the processor updates the player file with the currency value of each game (i.e., handle pull for a slot machine). The currency values accrue within individual player files, resulting in either periodic or real-time, positive adjustments to the gross wager balance for the player. When a player requests a good and/or service, the values of gross wager and house advantage (fixed percentage in slot machines) are inserted into the theoretical expected win equation. The comp factor (configurable by the casino) is then applied to the theoretical expected win, thus resulting in available comp for the player. The system determines the value of the good and/or service requested, as well as player's available comp. Provided that the available comp is sufficient, the good and/or service is delivered to the player and the available comp balance is decremented to reflect the value of the good and/or service delivered. Typical slot management and casino management systems that operate in the manner described above are conventionally provided in the industries.
When attempting to determine available comp for live card table game players, however, casinos are dependent upon human assessments of both gross wager and house advantage. As a result, casinos approximate these variables. The player notifies casino personnel of his/her presence at the game table and presents a club card. A casino employee takes the club card and inputs it at a remote terminal, thereby updating the specific player file in the table system database. The player conducts the gaming session. A casino employee, usually a pit person, surveys the player's wagering activity periodically, making handwritten assessments of average wager on paper slips or cards. The player concludes the gaming session and leaves. Once a casino employee notices that a player has departed, the handwritten assessments of average wager are summed and divided by the number of manual assessments (e.g., $75+$50+$25/3 games=$50 per game). The casino employee updates the player file with average wager information by inputting it into the system and closes the pending gaming session for the player. The resident system establishes a gross wager by multiplying the observed average wager by session duration and a decisions per hour constant. In order to establish a surrogate measure of a player's gross wager, casinos multiply estimated average wager by both the number of hours played and a decisions per hour constant. This constant represents the casino's best guess as to the average number of decisions made by the average player over the course of an hour. Expressed mathematically, therefore, this process appears as follows: Gross Wager ($)=Average Wager ($)×Time×Decisions Constant. The aforementioned values accrue within individual player files, resulting in either periodic or real-time, positive adjustments to the gross wager balance. When determining theoretical expected win, most represent house advantage with either a “worst case” or a “middle-of-the-road” percentage. In Blackjack, for example, the house advantage against a player of exceptional skill (worst case) is approximately 0.5% whereas the house advantage over a player of poor skill may be as high as 3.0%. Although some table systems do provide for the manipulation of house advantage on an individual basis, this manipulation seldom occurs and house advantage becomes a constant in practice. The predefined comp factor is then applied to the theoretical expected win, thus resulting in available comp for the player. The resident system then determines the value of the good and/or service requested, as well as the player's available comp. Provided that the available comp is sufficient, the good and/or service is delivered and the available comp balance is adjusted to reflect the value of the good and/or service delivered.
A need exists to fully automate the player rating process at a live card gaming table in a casino to accurately rate the player and to reduce labor costs. Without question, player ratings based only on human observations are inaccurate. Supervisors can easily over-assess or under-assess a particular player's rating. Furthermore, the labor costs for the supervisors are expensive.
Systems are conventionally av
Dorr, Carson , Sloan & Birney, P.C.
Layno Benjamin H.
Mikohn Gaming Corporation
LandOfFree
Game table player comp rating system and method therefor does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Game table player comp rating system and method therefor, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Game table player comp rating system and method therefor will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2543112