Lion's Share
Quote: tringlomaneHas it been relegated to just hand pays since they converted to TITO? This also would cause people to lose interest in playing it. It might be slow, but there were originally only 4 units, and now there is only 1. Is there any non-network slot jackpot that is over $1M anywhere else in the world?
You are correct. The machine is an IGT S+ model and it doesn't support TITO. I don't know why they are only supporting handpays. Their Sigma Derby games still support coins so I don't know why they wouldn't for the Lion's Share machine.
Quote: DRichYou are correct. The machine is an IGT S+ model and it doesn't support TITO. I don't know why they are only supporting handpays. Their Sigma Derby games still support coins so I don't know why they wouldn't for the Lion's Share machine.
My guess is that Derby uses US quarters, but Lion's Share used MGM Grand dollar tokens? It's likely the only machine left that would accept them.
Quote: tringlomaneHas it been relegated to just hand pays since they converted to TITO? This also would cause people to lose interest in playing it. It might be slow, but there were originally only 4 units, and now there is only 1. Is there any non-network slot jackpot that is over $1M anywhere else in the world?
someone in this thread (Mission?) said they started the jackpot at $1M.
where did they get that $1M from? i guess the probability to hit the jackpot is greater than the casino making $1M to at least break-even??
Quote: DRichYou are correct. The machine is an IGT S+ model and it doesn't support TITO. I don't know why they are only supporting handpays. Their Sigma Derby games still support coins so I don't know why they wouldn't for the Lion's Share machine.
wait.. handpay for ALL payouts, and not for ones that require a W2-G?
oh yuck. i can see why people wont play it.
Quote: 100xOddssomeone in this thread (Mission?) said they started the jackpot at $1M.
where did they get that $1M from?
From their previous profits. If the machine truly has 256 reels and 1 jackpot combination and the meter rise is 1% of the total wager (3 cents a spin), the seed money is worth 333,333.33/256^3 = 0.01986821492513 of the machines return (the fact thats about 2% makes me think it might be 256^3 combos). Meter rise is another 1% of the return. And if line pays are 93%, then the machine would return ~96% to the player overall per spin. It will take the machine 16,777,216 $3 spins on average to give away the jackpot, so the house would expect to earn 16,777,216*$3*0.04 ~ $2.013M during that cycle, easily making up for the initial $1M seed. The average progressive given a 1% rise would be $1.503M.
Quote: 100xOddswait.. handpay for ALL payouts, and not for ones that require a W2-G?
oh yuck. i can see why people wont play it.
Correct. I had to wait for a handpay of $211. During that time I got hit up by a bum asking for money to help his woman who was having "feminine issues."
Quote: Mission146LOL
I didn't even know that! I can't believe they quoted me.
See, I sent them an E-Mail, but I never actually got a response to the E-Mail, so I just figured that nobody really cared about the rumor anymore.
Thanks, BigFoot66!
Cheers!
Is anyone interested?
MGM does have another option. Under the NGC rules, the progressive jackpot can be distributed among other machines. The NGC doesnt care how the jackpot money is won -- it just has to be one by a player since the jackpot was built up by the players one or more players have to hit it.
I am actually surprised MGM let this thing go for so long. Maybe they want to have it as a "draw" and maybe their plan is to make a really big deal out of it when it does get hit.
An attendant said a guy hit for ten grand Sunday morning, with two lion heads on the pay line and the third just above.
So close, yet so far ...
Quote: MrVIt was up a bit over 2.3 million when I was there this past weekend.
An attendant said a guy hit for ten grand Sunday morning, with two lion heads on the pay line and the third just above.
So close, yet so far ...
Ouch. I ran around so much this last trip, I failed to play this game. I didn't want to play it on night 1, but I ended up not getting back to MGM. :(
| Symbol | Reel 1 | Reel 2 | Reel 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lion | 1 | ||
| Seven | 3 | 5 | 8 |
| Triple Bar | 11 | 20 | 2 |
| Double Bar | 31 | 37 | 4 |
| Single Bar | 61 | 16 | 53 |
| Blank (Lion above) | 1 | 1 | |
| Blank (Lion below) | 2 | ||
| Blank (no Lion) | 44 | 74 | 85 |
| Total | 153 | 153 | 153 |
Perhaps if forum members play it they can record some spins and collectively we can estimate the return using the above figures as a starting point.
At one point a guy came over and said "Ah the Lion's Share..she's a tease!" He was funny.
Quote: FroggerFrom the original post, the jackpot was 2.27 million in November. If it is only 2.3 million now, that's not a good sign
As of 6/18/13, it's $2.311 million to be more anal about it. But I don't see why you think that amount of increase is a "bad sign". This isn't a networked jackpot, and it has been collecting for over 15 years!
Quote: onenickelmiracledelete
One of your better posts. ( Shhh. Just seeing if Mission reads everything )
Quote: BuzzardOne of your better posts. ( Shhh. Just seeing if Mission reads everything )
My feelings are hurt. lol.
Quote: BuzzardOne of your better posts. ( Shhh. Just seeing if Mission reads everything )
Yup.
I was told it hit 2x in the first two year of existence in 1995.
I have a feeling MGM decreased the jackpot odds significantly in order to make up for the two quick payouts.
I am not certain the theory that it is due to hit is correct. It wouldn't surprise me if the jackpot was not won for a couple more years.
Quote: onenickelmiracleI wouldn't doubt it or maybe they loosened it twice so it would hit.
Once it hits, it's gone. MGM has said it will remove the machine once someone hits it.
Let me give you some interesting tidbits about this:
1. The three lions have shown up several times... but the players didnt play three coins.
2. MGM can't remove the progressive.
3. MGM has two options right now with the Lions Share machine:
A. Let it keep playing till it hits.
B. end it now, and REDISTRIBUTE the progressive pool to other slot machines on the floor.
Nevada regulations say the progressive jackpot amount belongs to the players and not to the casino.
Now, over at Caesars there is a similar situation. There is one remaining Red-White-Blue $1 progressive game ($3 max bet needed) with a progressive jackpot of about a half million. I don't remember the exact amount. Like MGM's Lion Share it is the last of a bank of machines with a progressive.
But unlike MGM, Caesars did something "funny" about a year ago... they FROZE the progressive amount and each individual play no longer increases the progressive jackpot. The progressive remains where it has been for about the last year.
I have been meaning to find out exactly what they did... and if a chip change was needed.
But in accordance with NGC regs, the machine sits there and is still played until someone gets the red white and blues 7s for the progressive jackpot which has stopped progressing.
Quote: AlanMendelsonCaesars did something "funny" about a year ago... they FROZE the progressive amount and each individual play no longer increases the progressive jackpot. The progressive remains where it has been for about the last year.
If this is true, it's a clever loophole for the casino to pocket the portion of every future bet which would otherwise have gone into the progressive.
Quote: JBIf this is true, it's a clever loophole for the casino to pocket the portion of every future bet which would otherwise have gone into the progressive.
It's true the progressive is frozen, but it could be perfectly "legal." they could have changed the chip to stop the progressive contribution... and keep the progressive already paid in by the players available to be "hit." That would be legal. They just can't tamper with the progressive amount already on the machine.
But they could redistribute the progressive to other machines.
I keep meaning to ask specifically what they did.
Quote: AlanMendelsonIt's true the progressive is frozen, but it could be perfectly "legal." they could have changed the chip to stop the progressive contribution... and keep the progressive already paid in by the players available to be "hit." That would be legal. They just can't tamper with the progressive amount already on the machine.
That's what I mean. If, before the freeze, each bet contributed 1% to the progressive, the casino is now pocketing that amount from every bet made after the freeze, which the jackpot winner would have otherwise won. I agree that it follows the letter of the law, but I'm not sure if it follows the spirit of the law. However, I would be willing to bet that any Nevada court would rule in favor of the casino if there were ever a lawsuit over the casino using this loophole.
Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel though. With only one such machine, they must really be desperate for that 3¢. Oh that's right, you said it was Caesars; now it makes sense.
Quote: JBIf this is true, it's a clever loophole for the casino to pocket the portion of every future bet which would otherwise have gone into the progressive.
I've seen this at Seneca Niagara on old quarter progressives with stickers mentioning it and on Hot Shot Progressives with no mention of it anywhere allowing it. It's cheap as hell and I hate it when games do this stuff with no justification in the rules. There is so much to be had with SBG almost to the point I don't trust casinos anymore because in theory, it is the era where you no longer should.
On moving the progressive to other machines Alan, it would place all the other machines way out of whack, so it would be pointless to just give the money away with easier odds.
Quote: onenickelmiracleOn moving the progressive to other machines Alan, it would place all the other machines way out of whack, so it would be pointless to just give the money away with easier odds.
True, but the point of the regulations is that the casino can't hold on to the progressive money. It MUST be distributed back to the players.
If for example, MGM wanted to get rid of the Lions Share machine they could take that 2+ million and add it to the jackpots, for example, on video poker machines and make royals pay 5,000 coins. Or they could split up that 2+ million on other, smaller progressive machines. Theoretically, they could even have a drawing for it. They just can't keep it.
Caesars is following the law -- maybe not the spirit. They can't keep the progressive money already on the machine, but they can stop it from building up. But if that's what they did they had to get a chip change and I wonder if they had to file paperwork with the NGC to tell them what they did? It wouldnt be a problem, they would just have to be up front about it. And why not?
The Lions Share machine is a pain in the butt for the MGM. Coins pay out, they have to keep filing the hopper, no ticket system.
A few years ago when I wanted to cash out $101 (put $100 in and played awhile) the hopper ran dry after about 28 coins fell out. They couldnt find the key for the hopper... and after about a half hour they just paid me cash.
Quote: AlanMendelsonA few years ago when I wanted to cash out $101 (put $100 in and played awhile) the hopper ran dry after about 28 coins fell out. They couldnt find the key for the hopper... and after about a half hour they just paid me cash.
Empty hoppers are a feature in the Slot Museum at the Ditz, too. The nickels Loose Deuces does have a sign stating pays over 1,000 coins are done by the attendant. But I can't tell you offhand how often they refilled the hopper for pays of between $15 and $30.
It's logical, though. You buy in with bills, not coins. Assuming the hopper can hold only 1,000 nickels, as per the sign, then it should be depleted rather quickly in a positive expectation game.
Quote: onenickelmiracleJust a point Alan, I think only the amount added to the progressive has to be transferred and in the case of LS, it would be 1.2 million if it started at 1 million.
That would be correct. The progressive amount belonging to the players would be the contribution over and above the seeded amount offered by the casino.
Last time I was at MGM (before I ran into trouble winning at craps) was more than five years ago. I guess they did away with their coins and hopper fills?
Quote: AlanMendelsonThat would be correct. The progressive amount belonging to the players would be the contribution over and above the seeded amount offered by the casino.
This is true. The Gaming Control Board's website can give us some insight in Regulation 5A.145:
7. Except as otherwise provided by this section, the incremental amount of a progressive payoff schedule is an obligation to the operator’s authorized players, and it shall be the responsibility of the operator, if he ceases operation of the progressive game, to arrange satisfaction of that obligation to the satisfaction of the chairman.
By definition, the incremental amount is the amount of increase over the "base amount" or seed value. So, the above indicates that something must be done with the "extra" amount but is non-specific as to what, as long as there is approval from the chairman of the GCB.
From what I have heard (from casino staff), if the money is moved to existing progressives, it must be made "as easy or easier" to hit. For example, moving such funds from a dollar royal to a quarter royal is OK, but not the other way around. Generally speaking for vp, keno, reels, etc., they would need to account for both bet size and likelihood.
Quote: JBThat's what I mean. If, before the freeze, each bet contributed 1% to the progressive, the casino is now pocketing that amount from every bet made after the freeze, which the jackpot winner would have otherwise won. I agree that it follows the letter of the law, but I'm not sure if it follows the spirit of the law. However, I would be willing to bet that any Nevada court would rule in favor of the casino if there were ever a lawsuit over the casino using this loophole.
Don't think the courts would need to intervene, as long as the casino followed the proper procedures...
4. An operator may change the rate of progression of any progressive payoff schedule provided that records of such changes are created.
I have seen a User Manual for a slot that outlines how to define the values of a vp, keno, and/or video reels progessive, including the initial rate of meter rise and a later threshold amount at which the rate may be changed, including changing it to zero. On a machine like this (for example), a casino could set a progressive jackpot starting at $1,000 to rise at 1% until it reaches $2,000, then it could either stop at that value, rise more slowly, or rise more rapidly. If they do not specify the higher value, then the meter just continues at the 1% rate until the jackpot is reached. So basically, this could be specified/programmed into the machine, and as long as it is properly recorded, all is fair per Gaming.
Yet another reason to be aware of what you're playing before you invest your bankroll! I have seen a nickel royal max at $500 at one casino that had quarter and dollar royal progressives on the very same machines, and I have seen a dollar progressive max out at $10K. 2.5x reset - am I seeing a pattern?
Quote: camapl2.5x reset - am I seeing a pattern?
Yeah, it's a compete raping of the public trust. Almost all progressives are phoney anymore because in the old days, the wisdom was progressives have a heavier risk, but sometimes, they can become good bets. Now you just get the disadvantage and casinos see the money players contribute as already theirs in the first place. It's almost like a new casino commandment now is "Thou shall never satisfy player". Base games play like shit and progressives move a penny for a twenty lost. 2.5% of coin-in became .025% incrementation. All regulators care about is minimum payback now and it seems it's carte blanche for everything else.
The casino does not provide any seed money. It is just a minimum guarantee that the casino will cover should the jackpot be hit early.
In other words, the meter starts at whatever amount, and advances slowly until the 1% (or whatever percent) in the bank for the progressive totals what is shown on the meter. In some cases, it may continue to advance slowly until a reserve of some value is established to re-seed the meter after it gets hit.
Only if there are early hits and/or multiple hits does the casino cough up any of its own money. But only temporarily. If that happens, then the meter advances slowly until that money is recovered, and continues slowly until the amount banked matches the meter.
Quote: DJTeddyBearYou've got the progressive seed money thing wrong.
The casino does not provide any seed money. It is just a minimum guarantee that the casino will cover should the jackpot be hit early.
You're talking like a lawyer... I think all of us "get it."
The first million dollars is put up by the casino -- so it's not the players' money. I think we accept it to be "seed money" but you can use another term such as the casino's guaranteed minimum.
When you look at any progressive that has for example a 1-million guarantee but the jackpot is $1,100,000 then the only amount that belongs to the players is the additional $100,000 over and above the $1,000,000 guaranteed or seeded or put up by the casino.
Quote: DJTeddyBearOnly if there are early hits and/or multiple hits does the casino cough up any of its own money. But only temporarily. If that happens, then the meter advances slowly until that money is recovered, and continues slowly until the amount banked matches the meter.
I don't know of any casino progressive where what you describe actually happens. If so, where? What casino? The first progressive or base amount is the caisno's money at risk. It is the casino's lure to get you to play games that are harder to hit -- that have a bigger house edge.
This is very easy to see on video poker progressives. At Rincon for example the $5 progressive starts at $20,000 for the royal and with each hand played the progressive increases by 25-cents. The only "progressive amount" belonging to the players is the amount above the normal payout of $20,000 for a royal.
The progressive increases 25 cents on each and every play, in equal steps.
The casino is not paid back for its $20,000 first.
In the case of the Lions Share, the first million of play contributions did not go to MGM. MGM "seeded" the progressive with the first million.
Quote: AlanMendelsonAt Rincon for example the $5 progressive starts at $20,000 for the royal and with each hand played the progressive increases by 25-cents.
That's pretty decent for Harrah's, at least compared to Reno & Lake Tahoe! Even for a $5 denom... I mean I'm not jumping for joy at a 1% meter, but when the VP at Harrah's Reno is all at about 0.25% for single- and multi-meters and Harrah's & Harvey's Lake Tahoe are mostly at 0.5%, I have to say that it's nice to see something a little higher at a Harrah's property!
I can't recall... Has anyone determined the meter rise for the Lion's Share slot (the guest of honor on this thread)?
Quote: WizardA reporter has been asking me about this machine. I found it last week. The jackpot was at $2,355,609.38.
I play this machine a fair bit. I find that the money seems to last longer than other machines (lots of small wins to keep you around even). I suspect that this is because it's a machine from the mid-90s when a $1 machine ($3/spin) was considered more high-limit than it is now, so the edge is lower than on other dollar machines (and they can't change the house edge with an active jackpot)
I charted my spins for a while (only paying attention to the lion on the payline). I am fairly certain that there is an 8-bit number for each reel, with only one number mapping to the lion on the payline (making the probability of hitting the jackpot on any one spin 1 in 2^24 = about 1 in 16.777 million)
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceI play this machine a fair bit. I find that the money seems to last longer than other machines (lots of small wins to keep you around even). I suspect that this is because it's a machine from the mid-90s when a $1 machine ($3/spin) was considered more high-limit than it is now, so the edge is lower than on other dollar machines (and they can't change the house edge with an active jackpot)
I'd like to observe you play sometime and take notes, if you don't mind. I would be charting the frequency of every symbol, including off-payline lions.
Quote:I charted my spins for a while (only paying attention to the lion on the payline). I am fairly certain that there is an 8-bit number for each reel, with only one number mapping to the lion on the payline (making the probability of hitting the jackpot on any one spin 1 in 2^24 = about 1 in 16.777 million)
That would suggest that (2.336/16.777)/3 = 4.64% of the return comes from the jackpot. I'm not sure if that is enough to be positive. That is why I would like to track the other symbols.
If anyone can get me a par sheet to the game, please do!
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceI charted my spins for a while (only paying attention to the lion on the payline). I am fairly certain that there is an 8-bit number for each reel, with only one number mapping to the lion on the payline (making the probability of hitting the jackpot on any one spin 1 in 2^24 = about 1 in 16.777 million)
From data I found at Vegas message board I concur that 1 in 16.777 million is the most likely jackpot probability:
http://www.vegasmessageboard.com/forums/showpost.php?p=615042&postcount=296
The meter also apparently moves 0.75% of coin in from this post:
http://www.vegasmessageboard.com/forums/showpost.php?p=826038&postcount=919
My comments and analysis:
http://www.vegasmessageboard.com/forums/showpost.php?p=849202&postcount=1071
Quote: WizardI'd like to observe you play sometime and take notes, if you don't mind. I would be charting the frequency of every symbol, including off-payline lions.
That would suggest that (2.336/16.777)/3 = 4.64% of the return comes from the jackpot. I'm not sure if that is enough to be positive. That is why I would like to track the other symbols.
If anyone can get me a par sheet to the game, please do!
Please see my PM for details about watching me play...
I seriously doubt that this is enough to make is positive. My understanding is that the jackpot was seeded at $1 million, so you are only getting a 2.65% return over the "base". Furthermore, if they are putting 0.75% back into the jackpot (as tringlomane mentioned) that would mean that if the jackpot makes it 0EV now, the house only has a 1.9% edge on the game. That seems very low... were dollar machines that good in the 90s?
Also, if it was +EV, I'd expect that MGM would advertise that fact like crazy, so someone can finally hit the thing and they can get rid of it.
And, I did ask a slot host, and she confirmed that the rumor is true: If you hit it, you get to keep the machine. I was surprised (I figured it was urban legend....)
The jackpot hit twice in somewhere around the first two years of the game. This was likely completely unexpected and MGM lengthened the odds considerably for the next jackpot..
Is it possible to program a machine like this for 1 in 40M jackpot odds?
I'll post all my results shortly, but based on my sampling and the 153 spins culled by JB, at the current meter of $2,340,744, the game has a return of 94.5%. I show the break-even meter to be $7,281,005.
