Ohio Supreme Court: $10 Maximum Prize Value for Skill Games

[The Interpreter]

In Ohio:

* Games must be skill based and not chance...

* Machines cannot payout more than $10 per play (or the equivalent in value):

The Ohio Supreme Court this week reversed the decision of an appeals court, upholding a $10 limit on payouts from skill-based games found in a members-only arcade.

...That means the device may not incorporate any element of chance. The outcome of the game and the value of any prize must be based solely on the player's ability to achieve the object of the game or the player's score.

"Scheme of chance" does not include a skill-based amusement machine. These machines range from games commonly found at fair and amusement park midways and in family fun centers -- such as Skee-ball and Whack-a-Mole -- to more sophisticated skill-based games found in members-only arcades.

Although Ohio law permits the operation of skill-based amusement games, there is a $10 prize-value limit for each play on the machines.

The law specifying the $10 limit was enacted in 2007 in response to a documented "increase in the number of illegal gambling machines around the State of Ohio," state officials said....

http://www.legalnews...0-is-max-payout

I, for one, have never understood why the games in amusement parks are not considered gambling, plain and simple....

[CoastersRZ]

And Coney actually ran into legal trouble way back in the day over their games of skill and reported gambling issues.

It still amazes me how much money people will plunk down on these games and not even think twice about doing so.

[The Interpreter]

At least the Ohio parks now have an excuse for the low value imported crap they offer as prizes...(seldom worth even the price paid by a single player).

It's also really stretching it to claim a player who fools the age/weight/birth date guesser engaged in skill and not chance...

[CoastersRZ]

And what about the games where you toss a ball with the hopes of it landing in a colored cup? That sure seems like chance to me with no skill involved. Regardless of whether it is a game of skill or chance, games bring amusement parks lots of additional revenue. Especially when the prizes being offered are rather cheap.

[The Interpreter]

Note that in Ohio under current law, ALL amusement games MUST require skill on the part of the player...

Arguably, the ball tossing does indeed, but having one's age, weight or birthdate guessed and fooling the guesser is a skill? I cannot imagine making that argument to a state court judge with a straight face!

[CoastersRZ]

Which begs the question, who determines what is considered a game of skill? I know Coney has a game that has the ducks floating in a trough of water. Players pay to select a duck at random. Depending on the marking on the bottom of the duck, they win a prize. What skill is required in that? Sure seems like chance to me.

[The Interpreter]

If challenged, a court of law would make that determination, since it is a legal question. If it were a fact question, the trier of fact (a jury, if there is one) would make that...

[muppetfan1999]

Well at least some games require some sort of skill. (I.E. Driving games, shooting games, skee-ball) But I like the luck games. They're far more easier.

P.S. 200th POST!!!!!!

[The Interpreter]

Of all the skill games in the park, I'd say the one you could practice and get good at, but which is nearly impossible unless you have, is the climb the horizontal ladder thingy. It's comical to watch some of the know-it-alls spin off that thing after the park worker has made it look as easy as Dick Kinzel collecting nickels.

[Oldiesmann]

There is one way you could theoretically consider the "guess your age, weight or birth month" game a game of skill - you can do things to make it look like you weigh more than you really do (such as stuffing a pillow up your shirt). It would be difficult to do so convincingly, and would likely be considered cheating, but technically it's a skill...

[Browntggrr]

I, for one, have never understood why the games in amusement parks are not considered gambling, plain and simple....

Perhaps it is not considered gambling because you win prizes and not money.

[KIfan1980]

The "skill" in age, weight, or date comes from choosing which of the three you'll have the person guess

[d-lo775]

Of all the skill games in the park, I'd say the one you could practice and get good at, but which is nearly impossible unless you have, is the climb the horizontal ladder thingy. It's comical to watch some of the know-it-alls spin off that thing after the park worker has made it look as easy as Dick Kinzel collecting nickels.

Add 3pt. challenge to that list also. I find it extremely humorous to see a certain member of these forums make it look so easy and then watch others who must be thinking if he can do it, I can do it. Then they proceed to throw up 6 air balls and brick the other 6.

[RailRider]

Terpy just like games in amusement parks are not considered gambling, neither is the lottery. My head just hurts trying to figure that out. I always figured if we can have a lottery we can have a casino. Thanfully there are a few coming because votters passed the legislation not the state. Go figure...

[BoddaH1994]

I'm surprised no one's really mentioned the $10 payout. Some of those "Stacker" games in the arcades have prizes worth over $100. I'm guessing that they'll have to go...

[The Interpreter]

So how can they now have prizes like iPods? What happened?

[YoungStud]

That is to lure people into playing.

[The Interpreter]

But how is it now legal? Did the law change?

[LordSkippy]

If I remember correctly, if you do somehow manage to win one of those claw games with iPods as prizes, you don't actually get the iPod - you get some degree of an empty case that can later be traded in for an iPod.

So technically speaking, the "prize" payout could possibly be considered less than $10 in value.

I think.

[The Interpreter]

That borders on preposterous.

[jcgoble3]

Relevant definitions in the law, §2915.01(UU), (VV), and (WW) O.R.C.: http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2915.01v1 and http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2915.01v2 (a new version of the overall section takes effect Wednesday, but the paragraphs relevant to this discussion are not changing)

The way I see it:

• Any programming that causes a machine to refuse to give up a win until a certain amount of money is taken makes it a slot machine and thus gambling.
• Those empty boxes that you get at the iPod claw games qualify as a "redeemable voucher" that can be obtained with a single play, which means legally they cannot be redeemed for a prize exceeding $10 in value and thus those games are illegal.

(insert IANAL disclaimer)

[Gabe]

this is analogus to ebay cracking down on ticket scalping over the years. People just found a way around it. Instead of offering up the tickets themselves as the subject of the auction, they would offer up some token object then add the disclaimer, "and if you win, you will also get tickets to x".

[thedevariouseffect]

There's always a way around EVERYTHING...

[The Interpreter]

And usually a crafty prosecutor can find a way to successfully prosecute subterfuges.

[The Interpreter]

https://lawreviewdrake.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/irvol60-1_fichtner.pdf

Hmmm...