Bob Dancer's new progressive games at the M

If people would just go back and read my posts none of this confusion would have occurred. I provided a link to the Dancer article as well as posting the paytables long ago. I also stated exactly what AC did.

Look, this is not rocket science. A progressive ... any progressive ... returns the standard EV of a game PLUS whatever gets added into the progressive. The 4% meter is money going into the progressives that will eventually be won by some player. As a result the casino pays the base 96.6% (or whatever) PLUS 4% MINUS player errors. If the player's errors are zero the casino will lose money. Oobie explained this very well.

However, as has been stated already, people will make lots of errors. Hence, the casino will make money but it has nothing to do with most of the strange theories being tossed around here.

My only contentions are that the house CAN do that, and that MoneyLA's statement is a non-sequitur, i.e. something that MIGHT be true given other conditions, but isn't true in an absolute sense. I.e. the "payback" won't NECESSARILY increase as does the amount of the jackpot. The house is self-interested and certainly has the ability to adjust the "payback."

Yes, $10,000 is definitely 4 times $4,000; 4 x $4,000 = $10,000.

Ok, I'm officially an idiot, and have read that article wrong. AC is stating the RF for quarters and dollars on the same line. Therefore on the 6/5 BP the quarter royal has to be $2340 and the dollar royal has to be $9400. Disregard my previous post.

So, a RF on this game has to be about 2.35 X the reset value to be a breakeven game. The payback is 96.87% on the basic game, so the progressive therefore must contribute an additional 3.13%.

Sticking with this game, the progressive Royal has to be $1340 past reset for the game to be breakeven. In order for this game to accumulate that much, $268,000 has to be played through the bank of 8 machines. $268,000 X 4% = $10720 / 8 = $1340.

I guess the good news is, all 8 machines would be positive EV at that point.

Arc please the casino WILL NOT lose a dime. All of the progressives above 4000 coins is a transfer of other players money. The basic 4000 coin royal is factored into house edge. The M will never lose.

If the pay table is 96% and the casino puts 1% to the progressive then the casino hold is 3%. That never changes.

If the pay table is 96.5% and the casino puts 4% to the progressive then the casino hold is -0.05%. The game is a theoretical loser for the casino.

I stand corrected. Went back an read the original Dancer column of 5/10 where he explained the games.

Yes, the JOB is a 96.147% pay back game, and "another" 4% is added to the progressives, split between 8 games.

The variance is high.

Anyway, I was incorrect in many of the things I wrote previously, and I now need to reevaluate.

I mis interpreted what I thought I read previously.

::: shrug:::

Guys, this isn't rocket surgery.

The games are set to 96.2, 96.5, whatever. Most players won't play that well. So the house takes in 100 and pays out maybe 95. Of the remaining 5, 4 goes into the jackpot (the redneck retirement plan, or RRP) and 1 goes to the house. So the house keeps $10,000+ for every $1 million coin in.

Apparently, Dancer and his cohort have taken on the task of "talking up" these games. All the interested parties understand that after the RRP passes BE, it will spur "chase the royal" strategies that will further reduce the basic payout below 95, and enrich the house, as MoneyLA maintains.

I maintain that if the balances in the RRP increase high enough so that lines form for the machines, the house could also raise the price per play by shaving points, thereby achieving an equilibrium paytable that clears the market. The remaining rednecks may be a bit disgruntled, but hey, it is their retirement fund, and "Bob Dancer" plays, so... For example, the 6/5 bonus poker can be adjusted down to 96.4, etc.

All he did was ask me to reiterate. Is that really what you were feeling, a need for reiteration?

My friend was at the M Saturday night and stopped by to see these machines. He didnt take a lot of notes but said that the Bonus Poker $1 game was indeed 6/5 and the royal was at about $4700. He said no one was playing the kiosk with the $1 games or the 50-cent games or the 25-cent games. He told me that the M is loaded with full pay VP and that's what was getting played.

His thoughts: the only time anyone in their right mind will play these games is when the progressive is big enough. But even then, if YOU dont hit the progressive your still a sucker no matter how big the progressive is.

I agree.

"But even then, if YOU dont hit the progressive your still a sucker no matter how big the progressive is."

A game's expected value increases as a progressive jackpot rises. It does not change because of extreme variance or because someone chooses to look at a selected sample of trials.

No, Money's right. Until you hit the progressive, you're a sucker. Then when you hit it, you're not.

Welcome back to the forum, Money. Did you know someone was using your login ID while you were away?