Talk:Chuck-a-luck

Gambling Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gambling, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gambling on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GamblingWikipedia:WikiProject GamblingTemplate:WikiProject GamblingGambling articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

WikiProject Gambling To-do:

Current collaborations:

Improve an article to FA

Improve an article to A

Help with the Gambling articles needing attention.
Tag the talk pages of Gambling-related articles with the {{WikiProject Gambling}} banner.
The link to the Missouri gambling site is now out of date and needs to be updated.
Japan section reads as though it was written by the gambling industry - quotes of 160% returns are 'citation needed'.

Opening comment[edit]

This article is not entirely accurate. The payouts are often 10:1 on triples, and there are often other bets such as a field bet (as in craps), high/low bets, and even/odd bets. Also, some gaming commissions do allow it, including even the NGC, I believe. According to the Wizard of Odds, it was in Circus-Circus, and I believe it is at Foxwoods in Conneticut. Also some online casinos, which are probably subject to someone. I will improve if I get in the mood some time soon. Notthe9 02:54, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

As of my last trip to Las Vegas (Christmas 2005), there was a lone Chuck-a-Luck table at New York New York, near the bottom of the escalators that lead to the second level acces to the pedestrian bridges. There goes that theory about the Gaming Commission! -- nkovrig, 20 Jan 2006

I had added a section about "Chuck-a-luck illustrates a common fallacy in probability..." [1], but this was removed in recent edits. Was this an accident, or is this outside the scope of the article?

It existed (in much-revised form) until recently, before being removed on the grounds of being "poorly written". I've restored it with some changes (e.g. casino games are mostly by nature "unequal" (i.e. mathematically unfair), so I removed that word as tautologous); if it's "poorly written" it should be cleaned up, not deleted. — 188.29.7.229 (talk) 20:41, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Coin-op machine[edit]

Circa 1990, in British amusement arcades, there was a coin-op machine offering Chuck-a-Luck, although the dice weren't in the usual "birdcage" but were each in its own tube, and were "thrown" by being blown upwards (and tumbled in the process) by jets of air. I think the stake was 10p, which would be about average for British AWP machines at that time. Unfortunately I can't recall anything else about this machine, such as what it was called or who made it. Perhaps if a citation can be found, this could be included in the article? — 188.29.7.229 (talk) 19:37, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"C_3" and "C_9" Chuck-a-luck "variants"[edit]

According to this article's history, the page describing these variants is owned and maintained by the editor who added the link to it; and a Google search I did for "chuck-a-luck" turned up plenty of pages for the game proper, but no evidence that these variants exist anywhere (on the web, at any rate) except that one page and this article.

Hence, per WP:SOAP and WP:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day, I've commented-out these parts of the article. Anyone who can find one or more references to show that these variants are real, and not just violations of the second of those guidelines, is welcome to uncomment them (and add the references); however, if others agree with me that these games are original research and thus don't belong here, they should be deleted. — 188.29.7.229 (talk) 20:58, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]