Casino Watch Focus has reported on a new type of slot machine that initial confused many as to whether it was a slot machine or a harmless entertainment machine. First and foremost, these devices look and function 100% like a slot machine. So why the confusion? These machines actually reveal the results of the next spin before you pay. This lead some, including the manufactures and those who operated the machines, that its not a game of chance, because you know the result, so it cant be gambling. These machines were quickly shut down, but a judge originally ruled that because you know the result, it’s not chance, so they were allowed.
The judge reconsidered the decision after further explanation that you are not paying to see the next spin, but rather you are paying to see the result of the next spin. Its absolutely no different than a slot machine, except the first time you put money in, you know the result. Past that, its always putting money in, spinning, letting chance take over, and seeing if you win. No one would likely leave a spin showing where the next pull would be a winner. So any new player would in all reality be starting the slot machine knowing they are paying to see what the next outcome will be. That decision was appealed, and the new Florida court has unsurprisingly upheld the lower courts ruling, preventing what would be an unimaginable expansion of gambling at every corner should such machines not be considered slot machines that require regulation. The Orlando Weekly reports:
Siding with state regulators, an appeals court Thursday ruled that controversial electronic games played in bars and other establishments are illegal slot machines. A three-judge panel of the 1st District Court of Appeal upheld a circuit judge’s decision that what are known as “pre-reveal” games violate laws preventing slot machines in most of Florida. The panel’s 10-page ruling found, in part, that the games meet the definition of slot machines because they include an element of chance.
The ruling Thursday, quoting a section of state law, said the determination of whether the games are illegal slot machines “turns on whether the user may receive something of value ‘by reason of any element of chance or any other outcome unpredictable by the user.’ The element of chance or unpredictability must be inherent in the machine itself.”
“We hold that the trial court was correct in determining that Version 67 is a slot machine because the element of chance is inherent in it given that it has a preset win/loss ratio … and that the game outcomes are determined by the machine by chance, via an RNG (random number generator), and there is nothing the user can do to affect the outcomes,” said the ruling, written by appeals-court Judge Joseph Lewis and joined by judges James Wolf and Stephanie Ray. “Furthermore, Version 67 is a slot machine for the additional and independent reason that also inherent in it is an outcome unpredictable by the user. While it is true that the user is advised of the outcome of the game at hand ahead of time through the preview feature, the user cannot predict that outcome until it is randomly generated and then displayed by the machine. Nor can the user predict the outcome of Game 2 while playing Game 1.”
For more information on the dangers of gambling, please visit CASINO WATCH & CASINO WATCH FOUNDATION