At $3.9 million, is the Face Up Pai Gow Poker progressive a good bet?

I see the Face Up Pai Gow Poker Mega Progressive at the Caesars properties in Las Vegas is over $3.9 million. Usually, it's well under $200,000. Is this currently a good bet?

[Editor's Note: On receiving this question, we immediately thought of Michael Shackleford, who's made a career out of calculating the house advantage of bets such as the Mega Progressive at Face Up Pai Gow Poker. He's not known as the "Wizard of Odds" for nothing. We're delighted to present his answer.]

Mathematically speaking, yes!

On October 21 when last I checked (and took the photo at the bottom of this answer), the jackpots were as follows:

Mega (seven-card straight flush) = $3,922,619

Major (five aces) = $185,104

Minor (royal flush) = $2,969

At those jackpots, the expected return from the mandated $5 side bet is $9.55. Of that, $5.80 is from the Mega progressive. So that's an expected profit of $4.55 per hand.

However, the player must still play the base game, which runs at a minimum bet of anywhere from $15 to $100. The base game has a house edge of 1.81%. Here is the expected loss on the base bet, according to the bet amount:

$15 bet = $0.27 loss

$25 bet = $0.45 loss

$50 bet = $0.90 loss

$100 bet = $1.81 loss

Thus, at a $15 base bet, the player can expect to lose $0.27 on the base bet and win $4.55 on the side bet, for a net profit of $4.28 per hand. Seldom do I see such advantages without advanced advantage play.

All that said, there are two big reasons not to play it.

The first is taxes. The highest marginal federal-income-tax rate is 37%, where most of the Mega Progressive winnings will fall. Assuming the entire jackpot is taxed at 37%, the expected win per hand at a $15 base bet falls from $4.55 to $2.13. This doesn't even consider possible state taxes.

The second is volatility. The vast majority of players not only won't hit the Mega jackpot, but won't win any of the three progressive jackpots. Assuming you don't hit any of them, you can expect to lose $3.11 per hand on the progressive bet. At 30 hands per hour, that will suck your money to the tune of $93.29 per hour.

Bottom line: I would play this only if you either have at least a seven-figure bankroll or are playing it for the fun and excitement, as opposed to it being a bankroll-growing investment.

No part of this answer may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, without the written permission of the publisher.

Have a question that hasn't been answered? Email us with your suggestion.

Missed a Question of the Day?

Have a Question?

Tomorrow's Question

How about rundowns on Danny Gans and Bob Anderson?

Comments

Dave_Miller_DJTB Oct-28-2022

Mathematically speaking

Oh, sure, mathematically speaking it is technically a positive expected value. But you still have to hit it. And that isn’t easy. 

It’s kind of like all the people who will be playing the current Powerball while prize is over $800 million.

Or all the people that played the Powerball in the recent weeks when, mathematically speaking, it was also a good bet, but nobody won.

Good luck. You’ll need it.

Jackie Oct-28-2022

The real point here

"Is this currently a good bet?"
Speaking of course to the $5 side bet.
At $3.9M the side bet is a good bet.
At smaller amounts, not good at all, don't waste your money.

The same analogy has been applied to many other "Side Bet" games like "Let It Ride" for example.

Some say side bets are never a good bet, others disagree.
But here is the rub.
I had a self proclaimed professional/advantage player at a table chastise me for always making a side bet.
Then he hit a huge payoff hand if he had made a side bet.
He was pissed, I was laughing my ass off.

Neither one of us was right but gambling is always about "beating the odds".

Kevin Lewis Oct-28-2022

Semantics

The real question, then, is what constitutes a "good bet." Most people would say it's simply a matter of EV, but not everyone has the time or the bankroll to exploit all +EV plays. In the world of VP, an equivalent situation would be a sequential royal jackpot that pushes an otherwise bad game into +EV territory. Most people would bleed out before they hit the damn thing.

AL Oct-28-2022

Incorrect description

No disrespect intended to the Wizard of Odds, but while his math is correct as always, his description of the math results is not. (And I'm not singling him out; every math or gambling "expert" makes this description mistake.) If he had simply said what the EV is, he would've been fine. But his phrasing about the expected result for 1 hand (or each hand) is not correct. It is impossible to lose 27 cents (or any other oddball amount) on your basic bet; you will either lose it all, or win it all (minus the 5% take, or whatever other percent it might be). Similarly, it is impossible to win $4.55 (or any other small amount) on the side bet; you will either win the jackpot or win nothing. Because the chances of winning the side bet are less than 1%, then your expected result with it should be to get nothing. "Expecting" is about human emotions, ideally tied to likelihood.  That's way different from the statistical notions "must occur", "must not occur", and "has this chance of occurring".

Jeffrey Small Oct-28-2022

Not so fast AL!

The progressive also pays for other hands--Full House or greater, so you will receive some lesser payouts while you pursue the big one (see the photograph listing the payout amounts). Thus, it is not "all or nothing" as you state. Also, the expected payouts are averages over time so the average win or loss can be stated in fractions of a dollar.

churchiec Nov-14-2022

mistake ? or me ?

I may be missing something ( apologies in advance ) . Is Wizard factoring in the payouts for SF, oaK and FH ??  Also a question for Jackie ; what do you think are the break-even figures for Mega, Major and Minor to determine if this is a 'good bet; or a 'waste of money'

Question of the Day - 28 October 2022

Comments