WOO logo

Lack of Freedom of Information Act

Throughout my 15 years running this website, I've consistently championed the principles of transparency and fairness in gambling. I firmly believe that players deserve to be fully informed about the rules governing any public game. While many games clearly outline their rules and present odds, players of slot machines often find themselves in the dark regarding the value of their hard-earned money.

Nevada has a regulation stipulating that any newly introduced game, whether a slot or a table game, must offer a minimum payout of 75%. This means the house edge on bets cannot exceed 25%. Additionally, the Gaming Control Board, referred to as Gaming henceforth, provides detailed reports on the actual casino revenues based on different denominations across various regions. For instance, there’s a comprehensive table displaying the winnings for casinos in Clark County for the year 2012. It's important to note that in this context, the term 'slot' encompasses all types of machines, including traditional reels, video poker, video keno, and electronic versions of classic table games.

Clark County Slot Win 2012

Denomination Casino Win (pct)
$0.01 10.77%
$0.05 5.96%
$0.25 5.74%
$1.00 5.64%
$5.00 5.51%
$25.00 3.97%
$100.00 4.73%
Megabucks 12.89%
Multi-denomination 5.32%
Total 6.58%

Source: Nevada Gaming Control Board, Gaming Revenue Report for December 2012 (PDF, see page 6).

I am convinced that players should have access to much more information than is currently available. This conviction motivated me to spend three months assessing the slot machines in every casino in Las Vegas, leading to the release of my 2002 survey on video slot returns. This survey has been referenced and utilized for years since it was first published by the winner. I must acknowledge that the findings of this survey are becoming outdated. People occasionally ask me if I plan to conduct a new one, but I have no immediate plans to do so. The process would take several months, and I wouldn't gain any financial compensation for my time. Nevertheless, an idea struck me in 2011 for a more efficient method to gather even more insightful data.

On August 8, I found myself strolling around downtown, scouting for fresh games or intriguing topics to write about. The numerous signs at the Las Vegas Club advertising the "loosest slots downtown" piqued my interest. I sought to verify this assertion, but my attempts to contact Jack Budde, the slot machine supervisor at the LVC, were met with silence. I documented my experience in a forum post titled,

Vegas Club asserts they have the loosest slots in the area. After three failed attempts to connect with the Las Vegas Club, I decided to file a complaint with Gaming. On August 15, 2011, I received a call from an agent whose name I unfortunately did not record, who confirmed that the Las Vegas Club's claim was indeed accurate. He mentioned that their assertion had been questioned the previous March. When I inquired about how he had access to this information, he referenced a spreadsheet that tracked actual slot machine returns downtown. Upon requesting a copy of that spreadsheet, he directed me to someone at the headquarters in Carson City. However, that person claimed to be unaware of it. .

As for the Las Vegas Club, I don't have any insights into the investigation that was undertaken by the Gaming Control Board. Ultimately, the situation concluded with the casino modifying its signage, replacing the word 'loosest' with 'best.' This resolution satisfied me, and I expressed my gratitude to Gaming for their efficient handling of the matter. Yet, my desire for that spreadsheet remained.

In the following year, I consulted several attorneys about this issue. Most advised that I could invoke the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), but cautioned that it would be a costly endeavor with a likely unfavorable outcome. Occasionally, I manage to find a kind attorney willing to volunteer their services in my relentless pursuit of transparency in the casino industry, but this time was different.

However, in late 2012, I discussed this issue with one of my many attorneys. He seemed enthusiastic about my cause and was willing to take on the case. We settled on a reasonable fee, and we embarked on our first experience navigating the Freedom of Information Act.

The first step was to approach Gaming with a request for the data we needed — specifically, slot machine return percentages categorized by denomination and casino for every establishment in Clark County that grossed over $1,000,000 in gaming revenue. Unsurprisingly, our request was outright denied. Brandon Phillips The next step involved formally petitioning the courts for access to this information via a writ of mandamus. Put simply, this request is made to the court when the requester believes they are entitled to something under the law. Here’s a copy of the writ.

Our fundamental argument was that the information we were after wasn't expressly protected by Gaming, and therefore, in accordance with the FOIA, we should have access to it.

In response, Gaming submitted a motion to dismiss citing reasons which included (1) our writ was improperly filed, (2) revenue information was necessary to fulfill our request, and that such information was protected, and (3) though they possessed the means to calculate what we sought, that information did not already exist, and they had no obligation to create it. writ of mandamus Contrarily, we argued that (1) our request didn't demand specific details about gaming revenue, and it would be impossible to deduce revenue data from what we were asking, (2) based on my prior experience with the Las Vegas Club, Gaming indeed had this information documented in a spreadsheet, and (3) slot return percentages are a widely accepted metric in the industry, not some obscure statistic. request In reply to our opposition, Michael P. Somps from the Nevada Office of the Attorney General drafted a response to our motion to dismiss. He reiterated the same arguments previously presented by Gaming.

On March 18, 2013, I finally had my court day in front of Judge Mark Denton. Both parties seemed prepared to present their cases. I even donned a suit I hadn't worn since the last time I was at the Venetian, which was seven months prior. However, there seemed to be some confusion in the courtroom about whether we were requesting to dismiss the case or to hear arguments for the case itself. As a result, the judge announced he was denying the dismissal request, but was not yet ready to listen to arguments. In a bid to grasp the details of the case better, he asked both parties to submit additional briefs outlining their positions. motion to dismiss It seemed that the attorneys on both sides preferred to wrap up the proceedings that day to avoid further documentation and prep work. My attorney essentially restated our arguments from the writ of mandamus in our brief, while Gaming echoed their previous points in their own document.

Step three was to submit our opposition to the motion to dismiss Eventually, on April 11 at 9 AM, we truly had our court session, which was even recorded. I purchased a copy and uploaded it for public viewing. As both sides presented the same arguments we had discussed for months, the judge, after only 12 minutes and without the kind of deliberation you'd expect at the Supreme Court, dismissed my request without any explanation other than that I hadn't satisfied the criteria showing that Nevada's Open Information Act applied to Gaming in this scenario.

In the end, I faced the law, and the law prevailed. This result was hardly unexpected. Before the significant day in court, I had made a wager with my attorney of $100 to win $5 that the outcome would unfold as it did. It would have been nice if the judge had taken the time to weigh the arguments thoughtfully, as Judge Wapner always did on television. Personally, I believe there were larger influences at play that predetermined the result. At least I won $5 to help offset the approximately $3,000 I spent on the case, which I consider a reasonable investment. So after all the expenses, meetings, phone calls, and emails, I ended up losing. Still, I want to extend my gratitude to my attorney, Brandon Phillips, for his dedication and outstanding support. If you need an attorney in Las Vegas for almost any matter, I highly recommend reaching out to Brandon. Find mathematically sound strategies and valuable information for popular casino games like blackjack, craps, roulette, and countless others that can be enjoyed.

Don't forget to check your email and click on the link we provided to finalize your registration.

Absence of a Freedom of Information Act - Wizard of Odds brief in support Uncover the Top Online Casinos Available in Your Region brief in opposition (PDF - 5,400K).

Click image to watch video.
Tool for Calculating Lottery Jackpot Ticket Sales YouTube Slot competitions offering substantial prize pools

For the past 15 years, I have been dedicated to promoting transparent and fair gambling practices through this website. I firmly believe that players deserve to understand the rules of any game that is available to the general public. Most games provide clear regulations, and the odds are measurable. However, when it comes to slot machines, players receive very little insight into the value they are getting for the money they spend.

In Nevada, there exists a regulation mandating that any new game, whether it be a slot or table game, must be programmed to return at least 75% to players. This means that casinos can retain a maximum of 25% of the total bets placed. Furthermore, the Gaming Control Board, which I will refer to as Gaming going forward, publishes data on casinos' actual win rates by denomination across various areas. For instance, the statistics for Clark County casinos for the year 2012 are detailed in a table. It's important to remember that in this context, 'slot' refers to all types of machines, including traditional reels, video poker, video keno, and electronic versions of table games. abetterlegalpractice.com .