Bob Dancer's new progressive games at the M

Roadtrip,Dancer told you what the base payback was, Arc told you what it was, that's all you need to know to figure when a progressive becomes profitable. I'll give you the JOB paytable although I'm sure it will be of no use to you. JOB base paytable is 1,2,3,4,5,7,25,50.800. The base payback for JOB is 96.147% with perfect play. If you never hit a RF the payback is 94.157%.You are confused about the 4%.This 4% isn't subtracted from anything except the casino's profits. The JOB progressive becomes profitable when the progressive increases from its base 1.99% of the game's total expected return to 7.83% of the game's total expected return, which would happen at about the $2600 mark for a .25 game.

Arc, the progressive contributions do not belong to the casino. The NGC regulations clearly state that the "contributions" to the progressive must be returned to the players in the form of a jackpot win... or the contributions can be spread about other jackpots on other games.

This is why the "Majestic Lions" single machine at the MGM is above 2-million. MGM can't "keep" the money on the majestic lions slot.

this is why the M has nothing to lose on these slots. The M will rake it in on the lousy pay tables, while the progressive is fed by the players.

Its a stroke of genius, really.

I just plugged in those JOB numbers on a VP trainer, and to be at exactly 100%, the progressive would need to be 11,700 units.

Guys, be very careful about equating the "progressive" amount with "casino profits." As Ive been posting, all progressive contributions must at some point be returned to the players. It is not the casino's profits.

the M will make big money from the poor paytables regardless of what the progressive is. Even if a progressive reaches one million units the casino loses NOTHING ZERO ZIP NADE ZILCH BUBKAS. And all along the poor paytables will make the casino rich.

this is a manufactured shakedown of the players. It is pitting player against player instead of player against the casino. If Dancer didnt get a million dollars for this idea he made the biggest blunder of his career.

edited to add: roadtrip, what part of SoFla?? Im from West Kendall.

Wait a minute...how can you say this? I thought you'd say something like..."they will make big money after at least 19 trillion hands get played." Before then it's all 'luck', right? And as to the casino 'loses' nothing because of progressives...that depends entirely on what % they choose to build the jackpot. If they choose the wrong number there, they could absolutely lose their collective asses....So it's not really the 'players' money. It's their money that they choose to contribute to the jackpot...and once it's contributed..they can't get it back.

alanleroy, even I can understand the math on this one. LOL

Chasing a progressive is a pipe dream I have found...

Chasing a 99.5% return is also a pipe dream...

When most of your return from any video poker game comes from the lower paying hands (pair / two pair / three oak / straight / flush / full house), if those hands are not going to pay enough, you are going to NEED to hit that progressive to expect a positive return on the game.

And who is to say you are not going to sit at that machine all day and night, feeding the progressive, just for someone to plop down rite next to you, put in enough for one max bet, press the button and hit it.

I have hit a few progressives on my first $100 bill in the machine, but I have also put my whole bankroll for the night ($1K on a $0.25 machine) to try to hit the progressive and it not happen on multiple attempts... When I look back at that loosing session, I would have been much better off playing a better returning game rather than chase a larger return on one hand...

Don't get me wrong, I love to gamble, but the progressive would have to be really high for me to think about playing a poor returning game again (at least 50% added to the royal) otherwise Id be happier playing a better returning game in the long run...

I haven't seen anyone state the progressive contributions belong to the casinos. Not sure where you got this idea. All I said was the casino pays the progressive. 180° opposite.

Sorry money but pretty much everything you just said is wrong. The casino makes money based on the average return of the machines. That includes the progressives. Progressives really aren't anything special. The base return + the 4% meter is over 100% in all cases. The casino would lose money if everyone who played these machines played perfect strategy. Since zero players do play perfect and the majority don't even try, the casinos will make money on the deviation from perfect strategy.

Don't try to make this into something it is not.

As for players competing against each other, you are partially right. The players that find a seat when one or more progressives are high will be taking money away from players who play when they are low. But, this is not limited to these machines. That is true of all machines in a casino. That is one reason why a few +EV games do not have a big impact on casino profits.

All VP machines already have a certain % of the return into the RF. So, in a way you are always chasing that small % since pretty much all VP machines are -ER without it (and most of them with it). The view that the RF return is somehow different than the rest of the machine's payouts is false.