|
The Creators, Engineers, and Artists
Link I
http://hometown.aol.com/rusjensen/harryw.htm
An Interview between Russ Jensen and Harry Williams of Williams Pinball.
Where they touch on Bingos, Harry is asked why the Williams Bingo circuitry
is so much different then Bally's. Here He replies: "Since Lyn Durant
was a good circuit designer he probably thought his method was better than
Bally's."
You gotta love that................
Link II
http://www.pinballstore.com/pinball/1080.htm
Comment form the "pinballstore team" on Bally's Gayety:
"General Information about Gayety Bingo: I think the art is by George
Molentin. Manufactured by Bally in 1954 or 1955."
Would love to have additional facts - anyone?
Link III
Is one of my own homepages thanks to Russ Jensen and his being kind enough
to send me a page full of notes from one of his interviews with Bally
Designer Don Hooker.......\
Link IV
Wimi Miss Bowling Bingo
When I got this bingo machine, it had been standing in a warehouse for over
a year, not being used. According to the man I got it from it worked when
they put it there, or so he was told by who delivered the machine. I
haven't had time to test it yet, as it is in storage (no place at my house
for the moment :-(
At the moment I can't tell much more about this machine. Wimi is a Belgian
brand of bingo's, it's started in the 50ies by Willy Michiels.
Check out their website at http://www.wimi.be/.
He has a couple of pictures posted, one in really bad shape and one nice
one of the backglass
Link V
Not available yet, but let me tantalize you
Russ Jensen sent me a copy of a taped interview with Don Hooker, the
primary design engineer behind all of the Bingo machines at Bally
Don talks about how he spent weeks doing calculations working out the
probability and statistics of this concept, so he could design a gambling
machines that would earn money and payout correctly in order to keep
everyone happy.
The story unfolds from there.............
Link VI
Terrance Fagan wrote an article in 1996 titled "bumper to Bumper"
which may help shed some light on the artist
George Molentin above:
Or perhaps you prefer pinballs for their backglasses.
With the electromechanicals, that pretty much means two artists: Leroy
Parker and George Molentin.
"Leroy Parker, probably one of the best backglass artists of all time,
was great at drawing those Vargas-type girls," says Mark Houk.
"There's no such thing as a flat-chested woman on a backglass. The
reason for that is that pinball has always been geared toward young males.
Everybody says, 'Oh, pinball's for everybody.' Baloney. Look at the
backglass--it tells you one thing: it's geared to young men. There's not
one backglass around, hardly, without beautiful women on it."
Arnold also singles out Parker's particular style.
"His specialty was always--we call them 'Parker babes'--women in
various stages of undress. It was just amazing the quality as well as the
quantity of what he did. And he did it not only for Gottlieb. He did it for
Genco, Chicago Coin, Marvel Manufacturing, a lot of the Williams games and
a lot of the United games--the backglass art, the playfield art and the
cabinet designs. As far as we can tell, [his prolific output] would only be
humanly possible if he came to work at 8, sat down and drew till noon, took
a half hour off for lunch and drew till 5, from 1937 or '38 through
1964." Arnold estimates Parker did the artwork for more than a
thousand games.
Molentin, an artist at Williams during the 1950s, had a very different
style than Parker, says Hasse. "Molentin was much more in the mold of
the great fashion illustrators, whereas Parker was much more in the genre
of the cartoon, or panel artists--the Milt Caniffs, Wallace Woods, Alex
Raymond’s. Parker tended to draw his women in kind of a very stereotypical,
cartoon, leering sort of way. They were always wasp-waisted,
melon-breasted, just fabulous-looking women. George, on the other hand, his
women were at once more realistic and yet more romantic. He drew them a lot
softer; they were clearly no less voluptuous, but they were always ladies.
You always had a sense that there was a refinement to George's
illustrations that was lacking in Parker's. It was a more sophisticated
approach, to be honest with you."
Some collectors collect nothing but backglasses, dubbing them an art form.
"They are the Tiffany glass of tomorrow," predicts Bueschel.
A little more research on my part reveals
this extra trivia on George's work dates at various pinball companies as
shown in various entries on the IPD:
Rock-ola Mfg Corp - from April 1935 to Sept 1935
Chicago Coin Mach Mfg - Nov 1947
United Mfg Co - Dec 1948 to May 1950
Williams Elect Mfg - Jan 1948 to Feb 1967
Bally Mfg Corp - Oct 1963 to Aug 1966
Midway Mfg Co - July 1964
Game Plan Inc - May 1979 to May 1982
Well Bally was way into bingo pins between 63 and 66, but who are these
other dudes and what is a panel?
"Molentin was much more in the mold of the great fashion illustrators,
whereas Parker was much more in the genre of the cartoon, or panel
artists--the Milt Caniffs, Wallace Woods, Alex Raymond’s. Parker tended to
draw his women in kind of a very stereotypical, cartoon, leering sort of
way."
Link VII
Lou has an idea that changes our world:
So, in 1951, a new type of pingame came into being to
replace the "one-balls". One story, which was told to me by
industry personage Bob Jonesi a few years ago, regarding the beginning of
this new type of game goes something like this.
Lou Walcher, owner of the large San Francisco coin machine distributorship,
Advance Automatic Sales, had an idea for a new type of pingame which used 5
balls ("one-ball" was definitely out) and scored replays by
lighting numbers in a given pattern. He then challenged the industry to
design games using his new idea. As a result the first "in-line"
or "bingo" type pingames came into being
United's initial entry into this new field was a game called A-B-C which
had a circular playfield (much like a roulette wheel) and three 5 by 5
number "bingo cards" on the backglass. Universal, actually a
subsidiary of United, came out with 5-STAR, having a short rectangular
playfield containing numbered holes and five 3 by 3 cards on the backglass.
Bally's entry into this "derby" was BRIGHT LIGHT, which had a
playfield about the size of a "one-ball" and six 5 by 5 cards.
Well, Bally's format (as for playfield configuration and card size) finally
won out, and games of that type became the new addition to the pingame
industry.
Bally and United became the chief manufacturers of these new
"in-line" games as they were first called, with a few being
produced by Keeney, and even one by Williams. At first there seemed not to
be much of a problem with shipping them under the Johnson Act, after all
they were clearly not "one-balls" as five balls (and up to eight,
as most allowed the player a chance to use up to three "extra
balls") were actually used in each game.
But, before very long, these games were also being challenged in court as
being "gambling devices" primarily due to the fact that they had
no flippers (not much "skill factor") and because a player could
win large numbers of replays which, in most locations, were paid off in
cash by the proprietor of the establishment in which they were located.
Indeed, I am sure "bingos" (as these games came to be called)
were used for gambling more often than not.
|
