C.O.C.A. Times

Issue: 2004-November - Vol 4 Num 3

condition of the game. It arrived at our lab in the
condition that you saw in Photo A. Many British
games that have run on the arcade circuit eventual-
ly acquire an aftermarket paint scheme known as
"Showman's paint." (If you would like to see a typ-
ical Showman's paint scheme, see "Fortune
Kooky" COCA Times, March 2004 ). What you see
on the "before" picture here can only be described
as "clown's paint," done by some Bozo with a few
cans of spare paint. This raises the perplexing ques-
tion of whether or not to restore and if so, how
much? The question is not too difficult with
"Shoes". There is no good reason (other than sloth)
to retain the current paint scheme on this game. It
is not original and this sloppy painting is a decided
detriment to the inherent beauty of the game. The
larger question still remains: When do you restore
and how far should you go in that restoration
process?
My pet theory is that Americans restore too
much and go too far when they do. These are gen-
eralizations, of course but I find that we seem to
prefer our games looking like they just stepped out
of a showroom. If we cannot get a mint condition
game, then a total restoration with replating and
repainting is the next best thing. I sincerely ques-
tion the wisdom of this preference. Let me explain.
These games that we love so well are ultimate-
ly machines of commerce. They are mechanical
marvels that sought to entertain the masses while
extracting their hard earned coins. Like ladies of
the night, many of them performed under question-
able circumstance with a slightly tarnished reputa-
tion. The better design of the game, the harder the
game would work for you. Thousands of sweaty
hands caressed your machine, praying for the bene-
diction of financial reward. It has been said that
remarriage after divorce is the triumph of optimism
over experience. While I would agree, I think gam-
bling is a stronger example. You can rest assured
that your machine has broken both hearts and
pocketbooks. Why would you wish to totally erase
all vestiges of such power over the human condi-
tion?
A good friend and advanced British collector,
David Lavender once explained to me why he
acquired but then sold a very early and rare wall
game which he had found in mint condition, com-
plete with packing box. David said, "Although it
was in perfect condition, I found it oddly unap-
pealing - it had acquired none of the character and
patina of a machine that has worked for it's living."
That phrase, "a machine that has worked for it's
living," struck me as the quintessential statement
of what these wonderful machines truly represent.
Let us honor all our machines that have worked for
a living by showcasing them proudly, wrinkles,
warts and all!
And so, class, ends the
C.S.I. of "Lucky Horse
Shoe". For the curious,
( Photo E) is "Lucky Horse
Shoe" today. The case has
been stripped and varnished
plus the grime polished away,
nothing more. Any questions?
All right then, I' 11 see you
next time when we examine
those fabulous foreign games made from the
British market. Class dismissed. Oh, Miss
Moneypenny, may I see you in my private office,
please ...... THE END!
Post Mortem: As you would expect with any
rigorous scientific analysis, I submitted my article
to a highly respected British collector. Here is
what he had to say: "The Lucky Horse Shoe is
great, isn't it? I bought one about 8 years ago and
its in worse state than yours. The case is rotten as
a pear. Some insect liked the taste. I don't want to
make a new case until I identify and locate the
right type of wood. I think C****B**** also has
one and I've seen another with a payout handle!
So although it's rare, it was a "production" model.
I don't like to pour cold water on your theory - I
know how hard it is to discern a manufacturer
sometimes - and how many of my theories have
been proven wrong in the light of further discov-
eries. But I don't reckon it's B.M. Co. I think it's
probably post-war and I think B.M. Co. perma-
nently ceased manufacturing as the war started. I
don't recall any post-war B.M. Co. stuff. If it's
4
on them. So, I'd put my money on it being a
Parkers - maybe. On the other hand it might be by
some unrecorded maker".
Thank you, David. As you can see, Class, other
than the manufacturer, the date of manufacturer,
and the prototype status of the machine, I think
we can agree that I nailed the Lucky Horse Shoe!
B.M. Co., it's made of good old English oak.
Mine actually had a small pale blue paper label
which I can't find at the moment. I think it had an
initial followed by the name "Parker". Horse
Shoes does resemble a Parkers machine in some
way. Parkers didn't make a huge number of
machines and half of those were in use in their
own arcades. Over the years they turned out sev-
eral quite different styled allwins, some of which
had a similar Odeon style to the Horse Shoe (in
veneered softwood). They rarely put their moniker
Post Script: Are you feeling lucky? Want to
talk about British games? Drop me a line at
jp4@charter.net or call (952) 891-2312.
The ''New" Griswold Wheel of Fortune
by Ken Durham
Yes "new", but I'm talking about "new" in
1933. When the Groetchen Tool Company intro-
duced the Gold Rush and Solitaire trade stimula-
tors in 1933, they were copies of the 1890's
Griswold Wheel of Fortune.
Apparently, the story is that the President of the
Groetchen Tool Company, Richard Groetchen,
found the Griswold Wheel of Fortune still operat-
ing in a small drug store in Minnesota.
According to the proprietor, who kept a detailed
log of the machine's receipts, the Wheel of Fortune
had generated $65,000. At a nickel a play, that
meant the Wheel of Fortune was played 33 times
every day for the 27 year period it was in operation.
When Richard Groetchen heard this story, he
quickly decided to design a modern version of the
Wheel of Fortune. The result was the "Gold Rush"
and the "Solitaire" trade stimulators.
The Solitaire was made with a single dial with
numbers on it, just like the original Wheel of
Fortune. The Gold Rush was made with fruit sym-
bols to replicate the popular Little Duke slot
machine.
A third version was made for "closed" territo-
ries, where gambling was illegal. It had a "calen-
dar" motif. The top dial showed the day of the
week (Mon., Tue., etc.), the lower dial showed the
30 days of the month. If you got the right combi-
nation for today's date, you were a winner.
Richard Groetchen was convinced he had a win-
ner. But times had changed and the Solitaire and
Gold Rush weren't as popular as the Griswold
Wheel of Fortune. As a result, today you find many
more 1890's Wheel of Fortunes than you can find
1930's Solitaire or Gold Rush trade stimulators.
If you want more information on this story, you
may want to consult the Fall 1977 (Premier) issue
of Loose Change or the original articles which
appeared in the September 1933 issues of
Automatic Age and The Billboard.
5

Download Page 6: PDF File | Image

Download Page 7 PDF File | Image

Future scanning projects are planned by the International Arcade Museum Library (IAML).

Pro Tip: You can flip pages on the issue easily by using the left and right arrow keys on your keyboard.