McSweeney
McSweeney
Joined: Oct 24, 2021
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 113
March 26th, 2022 at 1:21:46 AM permalink
Whenever you're going after a must-hit-by progressive jackpot, there's nothing worse than running out of money, which means not only did you have bad luck and lost more than you were supposed to, but now you can't even trip the jackpot to at least cut your losses, turning an already bad session into a catastrophic session. Unfortunately, we don't always have the luxury of having a huge bankroll on hand to guarantee we won't run out of money. Sometimes a progressive jackpot is high enough that you scrape together whatever you have and determine that it's worth the risk. Maybe it was obvious to everyone else already, but I just thought of a way that you can protect yourself from running out of money due to bad luck when going after a progressive jackpot: increase the sample size by making lower bets.

We know that higher denomination machines tend to have lower house edge. We also know that making higher or lower bets WITHIN THAT SAME DENOMINATION do not affect the house edge, assuming the game does not give you some kind of benefit that's only available with a max bet.

We know that anything can happen when you only do a handful of spins on a slot machine, but as you spin thousands and millions of times, the law of probability will ensure that your overall results will be closely in line with the house edge.

Let me illustrate by using an extreme example:
1) You come across an ultra high limit machine that allows you to make bets that range from $1.00 to $10,000.00. You know that the house edge on this machine is 10%. Despite the fact both the $1.00 bet and $10,000.00 bet have the exact same 10% house edge, if you make one single spin at $10,000.00, something extreme can realistically happen: you can get a dead spin that loses your entire bet, and the house will enjoy a 100% edge. Conversely, you might hit a bonus round on that one spin that pays out $500,000.00, giving you a player's edge of 5,000%.
2) On the other hand, if you instead make 10,000 spins at $1.00, there's no way you will have those kind of extreme results; it's far more likely that the result after these 10,000 spins will be a loss of $1,000.00, being a 10% house edge. You have reduced your volatility.

So perhaps you have spotted a $10,000.00 must-hit-by progressive jackpot that is in good position. You know that this particular machine is set at a 10% house edge. You have run the numbers and determined that you will need $80,000.00 of raw coin-in to trip the jackpot, assuming you have bad luck and it doesn't trip until the very end. You only have a bankroll of $20,000.00 on you, which is enough to protect you from running out of money if the house has no greater than a 25% edge during the session (before jackpot). This particular machine has a minimum bet of $1.00 and a maximum bet of $25.00. If you max bet $25.00 until you trip the jackpot, it will take 3,200 spins (assuming it won't trip until the end). It would be bad luck to suffer a 26% house edge after this many spins, but it's not outside the realm of possibility. On the other hand, if you reach the end by making 80,000 spins at $1.00, the sample size is much larger and it's more likely that the house edge will be 10%, protecting you from suffering an extreme bad result or enjoying an extreme good result, which is ultimately what you want if your main concern is not running out of money.

A side benefit of this strategy that might be relevant for Americans is that you will get fewer handpay jackpots, which means you will pay less tax (I don't know much about this since I'm in Canada and we don't have to pay tax on slot winnings).

A final benefit of taking longer by making lower bets is that you get to further annoy all the people stalking your machine waiting for you to get off so they can jump on and win the jackpot!
ThatDonGuy
ThatDonGuy
Joined: Jun 22, 2011
  • Threads: 117
  • Posts: 6164
March 26th, 2022 at 6:49:23 AM permalink
Okay, I'll admit that I don't know that much about "must hit by" progressives, but doesn't this strategy make the assumption that the progressive pays off in full regardless of what the bet is? I don't think I've ever seen a machine with a progressive that didn't require a maximum bet to activate it.
blackjacklad
blackjacklad
Joined: Dec 14, 2017
  • Threads: 13
  • Posts: 85
March 26th, 2022 at 2:25:59 PM permalink
Bigger bets = higher variance, smaller bets = lower variance. It comes down to the size of your bankroll, and what hourly rate you find acceptable.

If betting the minimum stake of £0.50 means it will take me an average of 4 hours to take down a jackpot with an EV of £40, I wouldn't waste my time for £10 per hour. However if I bet at £2 a spin I'll average £40 per hour, which is definitely worth my time. I could bet at £5 and improve my hourly rate even further, but bankroll considerations mean I stick to £2.

An exception: One of the progressive games I play a lot is on machines with several MHB linked progressives in addition to the jackpot I'm chasing on the individual machine. Sometimes I bet the minimum until one of the linked progressives gets close enough to the MHB, then bet max until it hits, then lower my stake sizes again. This gives me an average stake size I'm comfortable with, and maximises my return from the linked MHBs.
Roberto21
Roberto21
Joined: Feb 3, 2022
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 69
March 26th, 2022 at 9:49:12 PM permalink
Quote: blackjacklad

Bigger bets = higher variance, smaller bets = lower variance. It comes down to the size of your bankroll, and what hourly rate you find acceptable.

This. The only thing I would add is you can increase your expected value when exploiting online casino promotions by using a doubling strategy, as Reddit user ETA_was_here explains below:

ďCasino bonus limits range from $10 to thousands. Usually the bigger the bonus, the stricter the rules. So a higher bonus does not neccesary lead to higher expected value.

I would make $100 bets (or higher), but just as a part of a doubling strategy to increase profits. Let's take the example from the openings post. What if i would bet $200 on the first hand (100 bonus + 100 own money).

If I double up, I would have to wager the 2000 before cashing out, losing an average of $10. I would end up with $390, my profit would be $290 here. If I lost the bet, I would have lost $100. So the average profit would be $95 over the 2 bonuses. If I played it normally, I would get an average profit of $90. This difference between normal play and doubling up becomes larger when the wagering requirement goes up. So bigbetting leads to higher expected value, but also to much higher variance.

Of course i would never bet full roll on 1 hand of BJ, as this would lead to a higher house advantage (no chance on splitting/doubling)Ē

darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 294
  • Posts: 11376
Thanks for this post from:
Brickapotamus
March 26th, 2022 at 10:10:39 PM permalink
Quote: ThatDonGuy

Okay, I'll admit that I don't know that much about "must hit by" progressives, but doesn't this strategy make the assumption that the progressive pays off in full regardless of what the bet is? I don't think I've ever seen a machine with a progressive that didn't require a maximum bet to activate it.
link to original post



Not generally for must hits. The "trigger" is predetermined when the machine resets.

The meter moves based on coin-in to get to the trigger.

Let's say the meter moves one penny for every $5 coin-in and the game has $1 minimum and $10 maximum.

It takes ten spins at the minimum to move the meter two pennies or one spin at the maximum to move the same two pennies.

So the minimum/maximum isn't an issue. The EXACT same coin-in is required to trigger regardless.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
Brickapotamus
Brickapotamus
Joined: Mar 27, 2022
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 49
March 27th, 2022 at 3:38:49 AM permalink
Quote: darkoz

Quote: ThatDonGuy

Okay, I'll admit that I don't know that much about "must hit by" progressives, but doesn't this strategy make the assumption that the progressive pays off in full regardless of what the bet is? I don't think I've ever seen a machine with a progressive that didn't require a maximum bet to activate it.
link to original post



Not generally for must hits. The "trigger" is predetermined when the machine resets.

The meter moves based on coin-in to get to the trigger.

Let's say the meter moves one penny for every $5 coin-in and the game has $1 minimum and $10 maximum.

It takes ten spins at the minimum to move the meter two pennies or one spin at the maximum to move the same two pennies.

So the minimum/maximum isn't an issue. The EXACT same coin-in is required to trigger regardless.
link to original post



Iíve always heard that must hits are predetermined when the machine resets.

Once though I heard that actually itís random and the odds just get better and better until the very last meter movement before the Must Hit amount is reached where the odds would then be 100%.

I heard that it was this way for security reasons as having it predetermined there could possibly be a way for a slot tech or some other knowledgeable person to determine the predetermined amount in advance and gain a huge advantage.

No idea if there is any truth to this or not but since hearing it Iíve wondered if it is known for an absolute fact that the must hit amount is predetermined or is that just the popular assumption?

By the way, I love your GN vs. Darkoz thread! At least a couple times a day I refresh it to see if a new part to the story is available!
Dieter
Administrator
Dieter
Joined: Jul 23, 2014
  • Threads: 16
  • Posts: 5387
March 27th, 2022 at 5:19:30 AM permalink
Quote: Brickapotamus


Iíve always heard that must hits are predetermined when the machine resets.

Once though I heard that actually itís random and the odds just get better and better until the very last meter movement before the Must Hit amount is reached where the odds would then be 100%.

I heard that it was this way for security reasons as having it predetermined there could possibly be a way for a slot tech or some other knowledgeable person to determine the predetermined amount in advance and gain a huge advantage.

No idea if there is any truth to this or not but since hearing it Iíve wondered if it is known for an absolute fact that the must hit amount is predetermined or is that just the popular assumption?

By the way, I love your GN vs. Darkoz thread! At least a couple times a day I refresh it to see if a new part to the story is available!
link to original post



Welcome to the forum!

Assuming that you are not one of the rarified elite who can extract game state knowledge from a machine... would predetermined trip point vs improved chances with every spin alter the mathematically ideal way to play?
May the cards fall in your favor.
Brickapotamus
Brickapotamus
Joined: Mar 27, 2022
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 49
March 27th, 2022 at 8:42:21 AM permalink
Quote: Dieter

Quote: Brickapotamus


Iíve always heard that must hits are predetermined when the machine resets.

Once though I heard that actually itís random and the odds just get better and better until the very last meter movement before the Must Hit amount is reached where the odds would then be 100%.

I heard that it was this way for security reasons as having it predetermined there could possibly be a way for a slot tech or some other knowledgeable person to determine the predetermined amount in advance and gain a huge advantage.

No idea if there is any truth to this or not but since hearing it Iíve wondered if it is known for an absolute fact that the must hit amount is predetermined or is that just the popular assumption?

By the way, I love your GN vs. Darkoz thread! At least a couple times a day I refresh it to see if a new part to the story is available!
link to original post



Welcome to the forum!

Assuming that you are not one of the rarified elite who can extract game state knowledge from a machine... would predetermined trip point vs improved chances with every spin alter the mathematically ideal way to play?
link to original post



Thank you for the welcome!

No it wouldnít alter the way to play assuming that under both methods the selection of the trip point was completely random such that it wasnít weighted towards any particular trip point.

Itís just something that Iíve been so curios about for many years, that it finally prompted me to stop lurking and ask.

  • Jump to: