NON Must-hit-by progressives: is it easier to trip a Major with a max bet, dollar for dollar?

I tend to ignore Major and Grand Jackpots because they are so hard to hit and the meter movement is so slow that you can't possibly make a profit off them, no matter how high they get. One new-ish game I've been looking at though is Buffalo Gold Revolution:



It has a Major that starts at $500.00 and a Grand that starts at $5,000.00. You trip these jackpots by winning a bonus round and getting it on the wheel spin feature. The Major meter movement is decently fast at $100.00 coin-in to make it go up by $1.00. Based on my observations of this game in various casinos, the average hit point seems to be something like $1,000.00 (although I've seen it as high as $2,700.00!). Assuming that's true, that means it would take $50,000.00 of coin-in on average to trip the Major, of which you'd be expected to lose 10% of that, so a $5,000.00 loss. This obviously would wipe out your profits from tripping the $1,000.00 jackpot. UNLESS ... the reason why the jackpot gets that high is because people are too scared to max bet $4.50 and this hurts their chances of tripping the Major.

If you max bet, your odds of winning a valuable jackpot are greater in any given wheel spin than if you minimum bet. However, if you minimum bet, you'll be playing for much longer and therefore will get more CHANCES to trip the jackpot in a wheel spin, at lesser odds. I'm not sure if the additional CHANCES you get to trigger a jackpot mathematically cancels out the max bet's superior odds per spin.

That leads to my question: does anybody have any kind of insider knowledge -- not just about this game in particular, but any game with progressive jackpots -- that max betting will increase your odds of tripping a valuable jackpot, DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR? In other words, if you spend $50,000.00 to spin 11,111 times at $4.50 bets, do you have a better chance of tripping the Major than if you spent $50,000.00 to spin 66,666 times at $0.75 bets? My first thought was the two would mathematically be the same, but there's a chance that the slot manufacturer would program the machine to reward players for max betting.

There's a bunch of games similar to this that I want to try making a play on when the progressive gets unusually high, but I just can't bring myself to do it because the average hit point looks untenable compared to the jackpot amount I'd win. But knowing that the average hit point has been inflated because of ploppies being too scared to max bet would change things!

In my experience if betting max improves your odds the game will have it written. In fact they usually scream it out loud in bold writing.

It's in the best interest of the casino for people to max bet. Most people won't have fifty grand with them and will lose their cash faster.

Years ago (Forget which slot):
Reset was 1k major, 5k grand
The Major was higher than the grand.

I might have posted about it here.

Don't remember what the consensus was but I didn't rush to go back to that slot

I’m not saying this is true for these progressives but from what I think I know about progressives is that they actually have a completely different RNG process in order to actually pick winners. And someone please please correct me if this seems wrong but …

When picking progressive winners they are usually done in batches… kind of like how class 2 machines work. Everyone who can qualify for the progressives are clumped together into a pool of people on a server. There is 2 bands of numbers one band for winning and the other for losing. You get one of those numbers. For every spin you are reevaluated this. It’s a bit more complicated than that but the gist of the patent is pretty much what I just said.

Quote: heatmap

I’m not saying this is true for these progressives but from what I think I know about progressives is that they actually have a completely different RNG process in order to actually pick winners. And someone please please correct me if this seems wrong but …

When picking progressive winners they are usually done in batches… kind of like how class 2 machines work. Everyone who can qualify for the progressives are clumped together into a pool of people on a server. There is 2 bands of numbers one band for winning and the other for losing. You get one of those numbers. For every spin you are reevaluated this. It’s a bit more complicated than that but the gist of the patent is pretty much what I just said.
link to original post

I have programmed both Class II & III machines and I have never seen a different selection process for winners and losers.

I have seen one as high as 4200 and seen many in the 3000-3500 range. I know someone who just lost $9500 chasing one.

Quote: DRich

Quote: heatmap

I’m not saying this is true for these progressives but from what I think I know about progressives is that they actually have a completely different RNG process in order to actually pick winners. And someone please please correct me if this seems wrong but …

When picking progressive winners they are usually done in batches… kind of like how class 2 machines work. Everyone who can qualify for the progressives are clumped together into a pool of people on a server. There is 2 bands of numbers one band for winning and the other for losing. You get one of those numbers. For every spin you are reevaluated this. It’s a bit more complicated than that but the gist of the patent is pretty much what I just said.
link to original post

I have programmed both Class II & III machines and I have never seen a different selection process for winners and losers.
link to original post

ill have to find the patent as well as the article of what I was referring to but...

what i think i remember is that ainsworth or a company from australia who develops slot ,machines was in a lawsuit with another company who somewhat "stole" the algorithm and IP from ainsworth...

within my search i came across the court documents explaining the way that their progressives awards and people are chosen to win

it went something like .... whoever is betting at the particular moment, they are all in one pool of people and each of them get a random number... that number is either winning or losing...

i dont know much beyond that but i swear i have read something like that now im going to have to correct my knowledge if i am as wrong as you say i am

I don't think Ainsworth even has linked progressives, so this doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Quote: rsactuary

I don't think Ainsworth even has linked progressives, so this doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
link to original post

not sure if its exactly ainsworth but its two aussie companies ... and yes they do

https://www.knowyourslots.com/ainsworth-must-hit-by-progressives-do-the-math/

If that pic is meant to show that those progressives are linked, then you've proved the exact opposite.

Quote: rsactuary

If that pic is meant to show that those progressives are linked, then you've proved the exact opposite.
link to original post

alright alright ill admit i saw that too after i posted it

but if it make it easier for the people who want to figure this out im talking about LIGHTNING LINK

i think the story is... lightning link is the stolen version and there was another version before that named similarly by another company

WOOPS jeeze i said ainsworth instead of ARISTOCRAT..

AND rsanctuary.. idk why your even talking because what im talking about i know more about than you

https://blog.canadianslots.ca/2019/07/18/lawsuit-largest-slots-rivals/

now i just need to find the description of the progressive jackpot picking method... maybe patents are my easiest route here

Interesting what this article is claiming...

https://www.businessnewsaustralia.com/articles/pokies-giants-ainsworth-and-aristocrat-to-duke-it-out-in-the-federal-court.html

Quote:

Aristocrat alleges that during the very short period of time that Prabhu worked for the company he accessed the game mathematics of Lightning Link (in the form of an Excel spreadsheet), copied them onto a USB, and took the spreadsheet back to Ainsworth.

It is further alleged that this spreadsheet was then copied into the Jackpot Strike machines as the basis for the mathematics of those games.

hey DRICH have you ever just copied an excel spreadsheet into a game and had the game use it for its "mathmatics"?

....

Quote: darkoz

In my experience if betting max improves your odds the game will have it written. In fact they usually scream it out loud in bold writing.

link to original post

It's true, I frequently see in the game rules that "your odds of winning a jackpot increase with the size of your bet". HOWEVER, I still don't know if they are talking about per bet or dollar for dollar. Is it better to get 1 bonus at $4.50 bet or is it just as good to get 6 bonuses at $0.75 bet? This is the crucial missing piece of information I need.

Quote: Hunterhill

I have seen one as high as 4200 and seen many in the 3000-3500 range. I know someone who just lost $9500 chasing one.
link to original post

Are you certain that it wasn't a multi denom machine? Because I took a trip to a different casino last month and was also surprised to see a Buffalo Gold Revolution machine that was at some super high Major number, until I took a closer look and discovered that it was a multi denom machine and the jackpot scaled with increasing the denom. The highest I've ever seen, $2,700.00, I checked and triple checked that it was indeed penny denom and couldn't be changed.

Quote: rsactuary

If that pic is meant to show that those progressives are linked, then you've proved the exact opposite.
link to original post

I think it proves that the machines are placed in the field with both progressives near reset. The pic was snapped in terrible but slightly different EV states on both machines.

Quote: Mental

Quote: rsactuary

If that pic is meant to show that those progressives are linked, then you've proved the exact opposite.
link to original post

I think it proves that the machines are placed in the field with both progressives near reset. The pic was snapped in terrible but slightly different EV states on both machines.
link to original post

The lightning link grand jackpot is purely random based on your ability to hit the orbs on each reel and they are not must hit by type progressives.

Quote: heatmap

AND rsanctuary.. idk why your even talking because what im talking about i know more about than you

you're

Quote: heatmap

Interesting what this article is claiming...

https://www.businessnewsaustralia.com/articles/pokies-giants-ainsworth-and-aristocrat-to-duke-it-out-in-the-federal-court.html

Quote:

Aristocrat alleges that during the very short period of time that Prabhu worked for the company he accessed the game mathematics of Lightning Link (in the form of an Excel spreadsheet), copied them onto a USB, and took the spreadsheet back to Ainsworth.

It is further alleged that this spreadsheet was then copied into the Jackpot Strike machines as the basis for the mathematics of those games.

hey DRICH have you ever just copied an excel spreadsheet into a game and had the game use it for its "mathmatics"?

....
link to original post

I have for testing in the office but never released a game with someone else's math, It is helpful to look at the math of a successful game and make changes to it.

I cannot vouch for this author, but the claim is that the mystery jackpot trigger level is preselected and whichever bet advances the progressive through that value triggers the payout.
https://gamingsupport.com/blogs/posts/mystery-jackpots
This would imply that one hundred $1 bets or one $100 bet would have the same chance of triggering. The former would be more efficient because you could stop after betting less than $100. If the jackpot requires a large amount, say $50K, of coin in on average, this hardly matters.

There are technical requirements for wide area linked progressives.
https://gaming.ny.gov/pdf/Slot%20Tournaments%20and%20Progressive%20Gaming%20Devices%20(Part%205320).pdf
These regs describe requirements for keeping the central server up to date as to all the meter contributions from many machines, but nothing in the regulations says how the central server decides which bet triggered the jackpot.

The simplest method is to preselect a trigger value from a PDF (which does not have to be a uniform PDF). The risk is that someone could gain insider knowledge of the current trigger value and profit from that knowledge. The security requirements for a central jackpot controller would minimize this risk. It is much more complicated to have the central server decide for each bet whether or not to trigger the jackpot. However, this would allow an algorithm to favor larger bets over smaller bets. I have never heard anyone with real experience say that this latter method is used. I have seen several articles saying the trigger level is predetermined.

I followed one lightning li lnk bank at a local casino. The Mega (or whatever it's called) hit around the teens or twenties. The one time I saw it at $32,000 it busted shortly after that.

So when I saw it at $30,000 I went and played. And it didn't hit. I lost a lot and left ans came back two days later and it was up over $60,000. Lol, glad I didn't continue.

Anyway it hit by the next visit.

They seem to hit around the relatively same points but can go much farther making these much more dangerous than must hits.

Quote: Mental

I cannot vouch for this author, but the claim is that the mystery jackpot trigger level is preselected and whichever bet advances the progressive through that value triggers the payout.

I believe that to be true on many Must Hit by jackpots.

Quote: DRich

Quote: Mental

I cannot vouch for this author, but the claim is that the mystery jackpot trigger level is preselected and whichever bet advances the progressive through that value triggers the payout.

I believe that to be true on many Must Hit by jackpots.
link to original post

Not all Mystery Jackpots are Must Hit. I play a Mystery Jackpot slot where the rules say it can trigger during any base game, no matter the symbols on the reels. It cannot trigger in a bonus round. This makes sense to me that this could be triggering on the jackpot hitting a preselected level. The meter only advances during the base game. There is no meter advance during the bonus round.

I believe most Mystery Jackpots (MJ) use this mechanism. Any other algorithm is going to be quite complex. If you want to implement the simplest uniform PDF for a MJ, you need to do a new calculation for every bet. This will be a nonlinear equation with the multiple variables even for a uniform PDF. For a PDF (probability distribution function) that is not monotonic or continuous, the jackpot server has to do integrals or use lookup tables to implement the PDF faithfully.

Occam's razor tells me most MJ game designers would use a preselected trigger point randomly chosen from some PDF.

Quote: Mental

Quote: DRich

Quote: Mental

I cannot vouch for this author, but the claim is that the mystery jackpot trigger level is preselected and whichever bet advances the progressive through that value triggers the payout.

I believe that to be true on many Must Hit by jackpots.
link to original post

Not all Mystery Jackpots are Must Hit. I play a Mystery Jackpot slot where the rules say it can trigger during any base game, no matter the symbols on the reels. It cannot trigger in a bonus round. This makes sense to me that this could be triggering on the jackpot hitting a preselected level. The meter only advances during the base game. There is no meter advance during the bonus round.

I believe most Mystery Jackpots (MJ) use this mechanism. Any other algorithm is going to be quite complex. If you want to implement the simplest uniform PDF for a MJ, you need to do a new calculation for every bet. This will be a nonlinear equation with the multiple variables even for a uniform PDF. For a PDF (probability distribution function) that is not monotonic or continuous, the jackpot server has to do integrals or use lookup tables to implement the PDF faithfully.

Occam's razor tells me most MJ game designers would use a preselected trigger point randomly chosen from some PDF.
link to original post

I think Mickey said:

must hit minor is $500.

Chances of hitting is for each spin, Some random range between '$500 - current value' is selected.
If the current minor is within that range, then it goes off.

Quote: 100xOdds

I think Mickey said:

must hit minor is $500.

Chances of hitting is for each spin, Some random range between '$500 - current value' is selected.
If the current minor is within that range, then it goes off.
link to original post

Unless Mickey is writing code for a game developer, he is either guessing or just relating something that he was told.

Very interesting question. I’m sure all slot players/progressive chasers would like more information on this. Mission146 kind of touches on it in reply my post on ‘Volatility and Slot Machines’, where he states that with a limited bankroll, choosing a lower volatility configuration (I.e. a smaller bet size/ more buy-ins) may give you a slightly higher chance of winning the top line progressive. But as you will read, it’s not quite as simple as that.

As from my own personal experience and preference, I have found that betting the maximum number of lines on the minimum bet amount on the highest denomination configuration for that game cabinet has yielded me the top line progressive most frequently. As for the major, I have found that betting the maximum lines/credit multiplier on a lower denomination has yielded me the Major jackpot most frequently. This pattern has held for over 10 years of heavy play.

As for chasing a non-mhb progressive, I would steer clear of it. I have gotten wrecked too many times to count. Having said that I have never taken the full amount expected to trigger the jackpot, but have spent close to that on some occasions and have come back weeks or even months later and still seen the jackpot climbing/maxed out. I do believe that some of the non-capped progressive reach positive ev territory on rare occasions, for example I believe Dancing Drums might be a play when it’s nearing 40k ($10k base) and Lock it Link Majors may be a play when they’re over $7500 ($1k base), both of which I’ve seen on multiple occasions. But I will not chase these anymore.

It baffles me when I see big slot channels sit down at an unusually inflated major or grand progressive jackpot and not chase it, given their ability to from Adsense revenue. Perhaps it’s ignorance on their part or perhaps playing a slot for 40hrs straight does not make for good content. Still I would like to see them try one of these days! Lol

Quote: Roberto21

As for chasing a non-mhb progressive, I would steer clear of it. I have gotten wrecked too many times to count. Having said that I have never taken the full amount expected to trigger the jackpot, but have spent close to that on some occasions and have come back weeks or even months later and still seen the jackpot climbing/maxed out. I do believe that some of the non-capped progressive reach positive ev territory on rare occasions, for example I believe Dancing Drums might be a play when it’s nearing 40k ($10k base) and Lock it Link Majors may be a play when they’re over $7500 ($1k base), both of which I’ve seen on multiple occasions. But I will not chase these anymore.link to original post

Why steer clear of a +EV game? There is no saying you have to chase a hit-whenever progressive to the bitter end. If it is the highest EV game available, I have no problem dumping off a few thousand on a hit-whenever and then calling it a day. Almost all the good options for casino play are high volatility and negative EV. I would rather do my required play through on a +EV progressive and miss than play on a -EV slot with slightly less volatility. The hit-whenever progressive is usually available the next day for another shot and there is usually extra EV from tomorrow's promo.

Yes, this is a good strategy. If you have a set budget to spend and you’re going to spend it anyway you might as well play the higher volatile/higher EV slots. It’s just a cautionary note to stick to your limit on these plays because it’s very easy to spend more than you planned when you think the payoff is close. Remember, the odds don’t change on non-MHB progressives, so this kind of thinking is the classic gambler’s fallacy.

I agree with you though, your strategy is good IF you have good willpower and self-control, otherwise I think sit down and play a low volatile machine without huge progressives you may be tempted to chase.

Quote: McSweeney

Quote: darkoz

In my experience if betting max improves your odds the game will have it written. In fact they usually scream it out loud in bold writing.

link to original post

It's true, I frequently see in the game rules that "your odds of winning a jackpot increase with the size of your bet". HOWEVER, I still don't know if they are talking about per bet or dollar for dollar. Is it better to get 1 bonus at $4.50 bet or is it just as good to get 6 bonuses at $0.75 bet? This is the crucial missing piece of information I need.

Quote: Hunterhill

I have seen one as high as 4200 and seen many in the 3000-3500 range. I know someone who just lost $9500 chasing one.
link to original post

Are you certain that it wasn't a multi denom machine? Because I took a trip to a different casino last month and was also surprised to see a Buffalo Gold Revolution machine that was at some super high Major number, until I took a closer look and discovered that it was a multi denom machine and the jackpot scaled with increasing the denom. The highest I've ever seen, $2,700.00, I checked and triple checked that it was indeed penny denom and couldn't be changed.
link to original post

Yes 100% it was A1c play. I’m very familiar with the multi denoms. Although from far away I too have been fooled by a 2c or 5c before getting close enough to notice the denom.

If the Major can get up to over $4,000.00 then it sounds completely unplayable. So maybe Buffalo Gold Revolution is a bad example. The most prime candidate I've seen is an Ainsworth game called Black Bear. At $1 denom, it has a Minor that starts at $400.00 and the average hit point seems to be something like $700.00. The game rules tell you that a higher bet ($25.00 max bet) gives you a better chance of winning the jackpots. Best of all, the meter movement looks to be extremely fast; something like $71.00 coin in to make the meter go up by $1.00. Although I have seen it at $2,100.00 and was too scared to go after it. If I ever see it at $1,500.00 again (even that's rare) I'm gonna bring my giant $20,000.00 bankroll and go for it. This is going to be even dumber than the time I did Martingale bet at a blackjack table with a $10.00 minimum bet and a $200.00 maximum bet! (Cue Family Guy cutaway gag)

So I took a closer look at the Rules of Buffalo Gold Revolution and the exact wording is this: "The odds of winning the Grand and Major Jackpots change with the bet multiplier."

I visited another casino and saw a game called Buffalo High Limit, which also has a Major and Grand Jackpot. The Rules said this: "An increase in wager proportionally increases the odds of winning the progressive jackpots."

Both Aristocrat games, both Buffalo games, but notice the slight difference in wording. Can we infer from this that because Buffalo High Limit says that an increase in wager "proportionally" increases the odds of winning a progressive jackpot, that increasing your bet 5x will give you exactly a 5x greater chance of winning the jackpot, meaning 1 max bet spin is exactly as good as 5 minimum bet spins and it makes no mathematical difference whether you min or max bet to win a jackpot? And because Buffalo Gold Revolution simply says that "the odds change", it leaves open the possibility that you get more than a strictly proportional increase in odds of winning the jackpot? Or am I reading way too deeply into this and both sets of game rules say the exact same thing, just worded differently, and we can still conclude nothing from it?

Quote: McSweeney

And because Buffalo Gold Revolution simply says that "the odds change", it leaves open the possibility that you get more than a strictly proportional increase in odds of winning the jackpot?
link to original post

Conversely, it doesn’t even increase the odds of hitting it proportionally which would be natural to think. Could go either way.

I just find it hard to believe that a slot manufacturer would want to reward people for minimum betting. It's more intuitive to think you have a jackpot tripping advantage by max betting.