A Chat With Chad, Creator of California Hold’em - Pt 2

Written by Raj on March 2nd, 2006

Here is the second and final part of my email interview with Chad Andrews, creator of California Hold’em. Read my original post, and then part 1, first.

(5) Do you foresee tournaments? On TV? Around the world?
(6) What’s your five-year plan for promoting the game?

My strategic partner, Poker Royalty (specially their head of Business Development, James Sullivan,) said something interesting to me the first time we met. (He and some of his players had had a chance to review the game.) He said that five years ago, no one was playing Texas Hold’em. (Comparatively.) He said there was no reason that in five years, millions of people won’t be playing California Hold’em.

I think it is vital to get the game online to give it exposure, but I’ve had great feedback from top players (sorry I can’t name any names, but I’d have to pay for their endorsements.) But, in private, I’ve had some very big names tell me they really like the game and would be there if there are tournaments or other TV opportunities. My problem in that vein is that most of the networks who offer poker have ‘backed their horses’ for awhile. I’d have to ride in on an existing show or tour.

Whereas I believe the viewers will be there if the pros are, realistically, I’ll need a couple years of traction before I hit the networks. Because of the money involved in poker, corporate interests are actually purchasing the air slots of poker shows in advance of production, so it’s a highly competitive market. My plan is to get the game an online home, or homes, and to allow the game to grow from word of mouth and perhaps some endorsement or partnerships with top players. (I am working on this but cannot say more right now.)

I am dealing with one major hurdle that Texas Hold’em doesn’t have. Since I intend to make money on my game, I cannot offer it online and also get it licensed for play in Nevada and New Jersey (as well as some other markets.) I am being very careful to adhere to the complex legal restrictions associated with my offering, which is why I scrapped my initial hope to have my own site. I cannot participate in the rake or make management decisions for gambling sites. And because of gaming commission rules, I cannot have both brick-and-mortar revenues in Nevada or New Jersey and make money from online licensing. So I’ve been weighing my options and believe it would be the best method to try to find online licensees and hope the laws change in the next few years. I do plan to try to get the game introduced to some overseas casinos and would really like the game to catch on in Macau, where the image of California is almost irrationally glamorized.

In the next weeks, I will be further down the track talking to some interested companies. Poker Royalty has given me great access to the top companies in the industry and there is a very healthy level of interest.

In the end, I have to determine both what online sites are interested and whether I will have any top players directly involved. I am engaged in both efforts and it’s been very exciting so far. Hopefully I will have something to report soon. I am hoping some of the opportunities I’m discussing with certain people bear fruit. It could vastly change the landscape. But for now I’m keeping the cart behind the horse.

(7) Are you aware that that the standard deck of 52 cards has a direct relationship to the number of seasons, and the number of weeks in the year? How do you feel competing with a few hundred (?) years of tradition?

First let me say, I did not know the above. (To be honest.) But I can say that I was born on August 26th and I think they left out my birthday, so screw them!

Obviously kidding.

I am aware of some of the symbolism of the deck in relation to Medieval history. That being said, poker has proven to have universal appeal. I think there is something about the nature of the game that appeals to primal instincts.

I’m a big fan of tradition, and have maintained the same face cards and took efforts to preserve as much of the deck as possible. The changes I made allowed me to enact what I felt were the most optimal mathematical odds for hold’em-style poker. These odds just couldn’t be achieved with the traditional deck without making rule or game play changes. So in this case I’ll take pragmatism over tradition and hope the game speaks for itself.

My game sets out to do what it intended. I realize that if I had to rely on people purchasing decks to play the game, I’d be skeptical I could overcome that hurdle in big enough numbers to be successful.

But people are used to the virtual experience now and that’s how I intend to launch the game to consumers. I think people will want to try the game and since the cards are dealt on a computer screen and the logic is the same as Texas Hold’em, people will forget it’s a different deck within a few minutes and the merits of the game will speak for themselves. Remember, it’s a game. Games only catch on if they’re fun. At least online, I don’t feel the new deck is prohibitive, though there will be some mental opposition to change. But once people try the game, I think it will hook people.

There is a much more realistic hope of positive expectations for improving in California Hold’em. So whereas Texas Hold’em has a lot of luck involved, players of my game will have more of the golf experience. As they add components to their game and shore up deficiencies, they’ll see results in a much more consistent way that is not unlike learning to fix a slice in a swing or learning to read greens. I think this will keep people coming back and feeling satisfied. I think the changes to the deck were the very best way to create this dynamic and still maintain the game play that people love. Ultimately, if I can get people to TRY the game, I don’t think it matters.

(8) Where would game rooms get the rules and special card decks?

My decks have a rule card, but since the rules and game play are the same as Texas Hold’em, there isn’t much to impart. If and when I license to brick and mortar, which I intend to pursuant to laws and gaming regulations, I will give rooms an option to buy decks at a reasonable rate from me or the license the ability to print their own. I’m not out to nickel and dime people. I only want to make money as it befits those who offer my game. I’m not going to be myopic and shoot myself in the foot by adding additional barriers. If someone wants to offer my game, I’ll have rates both for the license and the decks that make it profitable to licensees.

(9) Is this your own brainchild, or did someone trigger the idea?

All me. I have an excellent management team assembled that represents the creation and operation of several successful businesses, but I am the creator and at the wheel.

(10) Any plans to develop other games?

I have. I have patents for a very novel gaming platform that has the ability to completely change the way by which people incorporate games into their lives. If it sounds vague, good! I’m in the process of raising venture capital and designing a software engine that may just prove to be revolutionary. I believe I have glimpsed the future in regard to some concepts and am way ahead of the curve.

I have another game that I’m developing with the person who holds the patents for Fantasy Sports scoring methods that mixes the fantasy sports phenomenon with some other exciting activities.

Sorry I can’t say more. I am a passionate guy and it really fires me up to create.

(11) Is there a “free” website where people could learn the game?

I am working on that now. I had a conversation with my developer today. As the CEO of a new business, I am constantly balancing opportunities versus my resources. I have had offers for investment capital, but that comes at a price. I am first going to see what traction I can get within the online industry and whether I can optimize my personal cash to get the game online and available for play to the public. If I exhaust those efforts, I will expand the functionality of the Web-site so that consumers can play for free and buy decks. There will be a site regardless, but it’s going to be a couple months. At this point, though there has been a press release and I want to make sure I answer people’s questions before they form opinions about the game, my efforts are being made within the industry and not toward consumers. Those efforts will come as some of my current opportunities take shape.

(12) Did you have anything to do with the “Lucky You” poker movie that the divine Drew Barrymore is in :>?

Nothing at all to do with the movie. My company rents editing systems, consults and does various services related to creative editing and high definition services. We have offices in Los Angeles in New York and work on dozens of movies a year, around the world. The biggest movie we did last year was ‘Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe.’ We are currently doing movies called ‘RV’, ‘School for Scoundrels’ and several others.

(13) Where can website publishers find out more about signing on board with you/ Poker Royalty?

I have been considering offering the game to someone who wants to shoulder the technical responsibility of placing the game online (for free to players,) in exchange for a free license. It would be great for me to be able to direct curious consumers to a site where they can try the game out in advance of getting the game on a gaming site.

(14) Do you have any math background. It seems to me that you put a fair bit of thought into reducing bad beat situations and allowing players to rely a lot more on skill.

I have a highly technical company and a mind that’s suited for that kind of thing. I’ve been a leader in my industry for about a decade, helping to introduce and pioneer some pretty complex workflows in an industry that is very sophisticated in its technology. I have a good problem solving mind. I am able to get a solid feel for what I’m trying to accomplish and then assess what needs to be done. I wouldn’t say I lead with a mathematical intellect. I use common sense to imagine what I want and math as a tool to validate theories and conclusions to get me there. I designed a gaming platform recently and started by describing in great detail the logical underpinnings and the factors that will come into play for the algorithms that will be run in the software to manage many variables. For me it was a logic, not a math problem. When it comes to calculating those algorithms, I’m leaving it to the true mathematicians. But I did do a lot of math for California Hold’em to validate and test different odds theories in relation to the game theory for poker as described by David Sklansky and others.

(15) Off the record or on, is there anyone you’d like to write the first California Hold’Em strategy book?

I just mentioned David Sklansky. I really enjoy his books and his 2+2 forum.

(16) Maybe I haven’t fully understood the rules (can we see them anywhere?), but are the best 10 pocket hands (before the flop) still the same as for THE?

The rules are the exact same as Texas Hold’em. The deck is just slightly different. There are 60 cards instead of 52. There are four 11s and four 12s. The 10s and 11s are unsuited. Everything else is the exact same. The 12s are suited just like every other card. The 10s and 11s have no suits at all and have ‘UNSUITED’ written across them. The odds change because of the additional cards, but the rules themselves and the game play when compared to Texas Hold’em, do not. You can use the 10s and 11s for rank (pairs, full houses, etc.) or straights (they fall logically between the 9 and the 12 in value.) You simply cannot use 10s or 11s to make a flush or straight flush. You can make a Royal Flush with the 12-A.

Thanks!

Technorati Tags: poker, holdem, california holdem