Vegas Free-for-All - Bob Dancer's new progressive games at the M

Bob Dancer's new progressive games at the M

MoneyLA

May 30, 2011
7:54am

I just checked the $1 joker proressive at the M and it is not even close to 100%. The real numbers are out there, and there are a lot of false assumptions being made here. (note: I did not check the 25-cent progressive.)

arcimedes

May 30, 2011
8:12am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: MoneyLA
Arc wrote: "Once again, the only money the casinos make is the amount of the player errors (-.5%). This is simple addition, money. Everyone else is NOT wrong ... you are." Ummm... do you think the casino is offering a game that is beatable?

Yes.

Quote
Originally posted by: MoneyLA
Are you nuts?

No, I just know how to do simple math. What's your excuse for continuing to claim 96.5 + 4 < 100?

Quote
Originally posted by: MoneyLA
Sure a casino might seed a few positive EV games as loss leaders but there are three banks of games, heavily promoted, and if you knew how the player contributions were divided among all of the games in each denomination you would realize just how much profit the casino is making from the basic poor pay tables until the progressives become rich enough for any of you APs to play it.

There is a good reason why this is the #1 promotion from the M Casino right now. They view it as a gold mine. And they will strike the mother lode from it. And so will Dancer, and good for him. This is a game that will make it appear the players can get rich when it will be the casino, and Dancer deserves his share.

I doubt the machines will last very long. As soon as they become strong positive plays the vultures will descend and tie them up.

fedomalley

May 30, 2011
8:36am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: melbedewy

Quote
Originally posted by: MoneyLA
a couple of things:

Kaypea wrote: "Sure the casino can loose. A player can come and put in $20 and hit the RF. The 4000 coins from the casino is a loss." Actually, Kaypea, hitting the 4000 coin royal is already factored into the very weak, and very high hold that the casino has from the poor pay table. But what would hurt the casino is if the royals get hit in rapid succession, much more frequently than one in 40,000 hands. that would hurt.

Arc wrote: "The advantage players will hit the games when they turn positive. They network with each other and share information about the various progressives around town. The machines fill up fast when they go positive." Well, Ive heard of a chart that shows just how big the royals must be for the games to turn positive. its going to be a long time before these games turn positive. frankly, I cant imagine any AP playing these as the player contribution to the royals is split among all eight games. And already there are some reports about these games with the casino's chart published.

Arc wrote: "Once again, the only money the casinos make is the amount of the player errors (-.5%). This is simple addition, money. Everyone else is NOT wrong ... you are." Ummm... do you think the casino is offering a game that is beatable? Are you nuts? Sure a casino might seed a few positive EV games as loss leaders but there are three banks of games, heavily promoted, and if you knew how the player contributions were divided among all of the games in each denomination you would realize just how much profit the casino is making from the basic poor pay tables until the progressives become rich enough for any of you APs to play it.

There is a good reason why this is the #1 promotion from the M Casino right now. They view it as a gold mine. And they will strike the mother lode from it. And so will Dancer, and good for him. This is a game that will make it appear the players can get rich when it will be the casino, and Dancer deserves his share.

Actually it's a win-win situation. The casino will make some money. The "AP"'s will get some of the theoretical positive plays they crave like crackheads.
The only real losers will be those poor stupid suckers who play this game at under 100%. They are getting a double ass-raping.
I'll avoid the devlish query of asking why, since the Joker Poker is around 102%, these much heralded "teams" of (Ahem) "pro"'s aren't banging away at all 20 machines 24 hours a day. At 1000 hands an hour it is over a $30 an hour theoretical play and rising by the minute.
Hmmmmmmmmm

If you weren't so sarcastic, you'd be correct.

The AP's will only play it when positive; especially at dollars.

The guys who take the bad deal are the ones who play it under positive.....they'll feed the meter for someone else to take it down. Likely these are hit and run plays....the pay table would eat them up otherwise.

Is there really much difference between what you play and the people you make fun of? You claim to play FPDW successfully which I have no problem believing. Yet, you berate the same players who would only play this when it's positive. Which one is it?

Don't get me wrong....I agree that more people will get the short end of this deal than benefit....I think we're on the same page here. Other than variance, why would you play this game if it got to be 100+%?

Dan

MoneyLA

May 30, 2011
9:02am

Block User

Arc, I dont think these games will ever become positive.

I will gve you one example, and this is already on the Internet... for the 7/5 jacks or better $1 game to become a positive game, the royal will have to reach about $12,000.

the contribution to the royals from each player on each game is spread among the eight different games, so the royals will not rise as quickly as you think. this is also on the Internet already.

There is a chart from the Casino already on the Internet showing the jackpot levels necessary for the games to become positive. Even the joker game is only abut two-thirds of the way to being positive.

the thing is the 4% which is being tossed around here is NOT going to only one game... it is going to 8 games.

I am going to suggest (and one of you who knows how to figure this can do it) that the royals will be hit before any game turns positive.

I think this whole thing is a very clever marketing scheme.

melbedewy

May 30, 2011
9:25am

Block User

Well the Joker Poker is already positive. It is an innovative idea and I like it. It may actually work on the quarter machines. No way those dollar machines are going to attract enough suckers at $5 a spin though.

Quote

Originally posted by: MoneyLA
Arc, I dont think these games will ever become positive.

I will gve you one example, and this is already on the Internet... for the 7/5 jacks or better $1 game to become a positive game, the royal will have to reach about $12,000.

the contribution to the royals from each player on each game is spread among the eight different games, so the royals will not rise as quickly as you think. this is also on the Internet already.

MoneyLA

May 30, 2011
9:30am

Block User

melbedewey, for the joker game to be positive at 25 cents the royal must be between 2500 and 3000 dollars. at the one dollar level it must be between 10K and 12K. these figures are already on the web and come from the M.

as of yesterday the joker game at the one dollar level was at about 88-hundred. its got a long way to go.

melbedewy

May 30, 2011
9:32am

Block User

We are on the same page here. The variance is the killer for me and it is the variance that will keep the "teams" away from them unless they get very high.
Hell, if a meter hits 105% you might even see my fat ass down there if I am in town at the time.
I'm not making fun of those who are playing it when positive, I am making fun of those playing it when negative.
At least give the poor bastards a charitable deduction on their tax returns.

Quote

Originally posted by: fedomalley

If you weren't so sarcastic, you'd be correct.

The AP's will only play it when positive; especially at dollars.

The guys who take the bad deal are the ones who play it under positive.....they'll feed the meter for someone else to take it down. Likely these are hit and run plays....the pay table would eat them up otherwise.

Is there really much difference between what you play and the people you make fun of? You claim to play FPDW successfully which I have no problem believing. Yet, you berate the same players who would only play this when it's positive. Which one is it?

Don't get me wrong....I agree that more people will get the short end of this deal than benefit....I think we're on the same page here. Other than variance, why would you play this game if it got to be 100+%?

Dan

oobiedoobie

May 30, 2011
9:33am

Block User

3 points.... 1. It would be nice to see daily updates on what the progressive amounts are. Can that info be found on the net? I think this would put an end to much of this silly talk. 2. Just one person's opinion, but if you can't estimate within 5% of accurate then you shouldn't be using numbers at all. 3.Can't anyone on the net spell " lose" correctly?

MoneyLA

May 30, 2011
9:37am

Block User

IGT does a good job of putting its progressives in real time on the web. Ive even asked Harrahs Rincon to do it, but so far no. It would be smart for all casinos to do this kind of marketing.

arcimedes

May 30, 2011
11:05am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: MoneyLA
Arc, I dont think these games will ever become positive.

Which shows just how little you know.

Quote
Originally posted by: MoneyLA
I will gve you one example, and this is already on the Internet... for the 7/5 jacks or better $1 game to become a positive game, the royal will have to reach about $12,000.

the contribution to the royals from each player on each game is spread among the eight different games, so the royals will not rise as quickly as you think. this is also on the Internet already.

How would you EVER know what I think? You've forgotten I'm the one that highlighted the fact that all the jackpots were separately fed. You should try reading my posts once in awhile. That would prevent you from making these kind of errors. The spread of the 4% across many games means that games that are not played at all will increase just as fast as the highest jackpot. Sooner or later one of those games will go positive.

Quote
Originally posted by: MoneyLA
There is a chart from the Casino already on the Internet showing the jackpot levels necessary for the games to become positive. Even the joker game is only abut two-thirds of the way to being positive.

the thing is the 4% which is being tossed around here is NOT going to only one game... it is going to 8 games.

I am going to suggest (and one of you who knows how to figure this can do it) that the royals will be hit before any game turns positive.

I think this whole thing is a very clever marketing scheme.

What part of 4% don't you understand? Here's a thought that may help you figure it out. Assume 8 players on 8 machines all playing a different game. How fast will the progressives rise? Here's a clue, what's .5% times 8?

Now, each machine game is being played by just one player so, on average, what will the jackpot be when the progressive hits? Hmmm, a little tougher? No, it's still going to take about 35K hands. For dollars that is $175,000. And, 4% of $175K is ... $7000. Add that to the base of $4000 and you have $11K. And, what would a 11K RF do to the return of 6/5 BP ... yup, over 101%.

Isn't it amazing what a little math can tell you?

«‹20 ›»

Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:

Diamond Membership

$3 per month

Unlimited access to LVA website

Exclusive subscriber-only content

Limited Member Rewards Online

Join Now

Platinum Membership

$50 per year

Unlimited access to LVA website

Exclusive subscriber-only content

Exclusive Member Rewards Book

Join Now