Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1332
  • Posts: 21942
May 18th, 2012 at 11:28:03 AM permalink
It is indeed common that once a jackpot gets high then most of the meter contribution gets put in the "next" jackpot. I can see how this would be bad for advantage players, who would only play if the jackpot got really high.

Personally, I don't have a problem with this method of funding reserve jackpots.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
rdw4potus
rdw4potus
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 7054
May 18th, 2012 at 11:31:24 AM permalink
I suppose you could look at it as a cycle. Sure, some of your money is now going to the reserve jackpot. But, the same thing happened to the people who played the progressive before the last time it hit - they seeded the jackpot that you're now playing.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
WongBo
WongBo
Joined: Feb 3, 2012
  • Threads: 62
  • Posts: 2126
May 18th, 2012 at 11:32:12 AM permalink
Quote: cardshark

You cannot win the progressive amount being funded by your bet either way.



AU CONTRAIRE!
the casino's position is obviously the assumption that you will continue to play after you win the jackpot,
and therefore, you most definitely can take part in the next and all future jackpots.
they view all players as potential lifers.
In a bet, there is a fool and a thief. - Proverb.
Paradigm
Paradigm
Joined: Feb 24, 2011
  • Threads: 42
  • Posts: 2225
May 18th, 2012 at 11:57:21 AM permalink
Quote: cardshark

I think what the casino is doing is wrong. Taking a part of the bet to fund a future progressive jackpot that you have no chance of winning at the time you made your bet seems wrong.



I think the key here is that there is some "seed money" in the jackpot that you are betting on and can win. Where did that money come from? The answer is part of the bets made before the previous jackpot was won. The option of not using any of the previous bets for the future beginning value of the progressive is to start it at zero after it is hit.....who is going to play that progressive?

Now I get the fact that if they up the seed amount for the next jackpot vs. the seed money for the current jackpot but the bottom line is that every bet you are making is an attempt to win what is on the meter at the time the bet is made. If you don't like that proposition, don't make the bet. I can't imagine that anyone is really making a progressive bet saying "Well if I don't win this hand the meter goes up by X cents and I have a chance of winning that much more on the next hand".

Progressives are what they are.....a dollar and a prayer and until they meter getst to a positive EV or at least one that is <3% HE, what are you complaining about.
cardshark
cardshark
Joined: Nov 30, 2009
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 239
May 18th, 2012 at 12:18:45 PM permalink
For what it's worth Paradigm, it was my understanding that the $0.28 (in this example) always goes to the jackpot and not the seed. The seed is paid for by the casino. The casino is compensated for having to pay a seed by the house edge on the bet. I figure the allocation of the bet would be like this:

$x to the casino/owners. Seed money paid from here with a risk that the casino could take a loss in the short run
$y to pay for the non-jackpot portion of the paytable
$0.28 to the jackpot meter
Total = $1

I agree that this isn't the worst thing a casino has ever done. It's more in the "grey area" of wrong for me. But I still feel it is wrong to change the allocation of the amount of your bet dedicated to the jackpot to a future jackpot simply because the current jackpot is too high. It seems wrong to me to take $0.28 of my dollar that should have went to the jackpot that I am currently playing for and give to another jackpot that I cannot win with this bet.

I get that either way, in the end, the players (considered as a whole) will get the money, regardless of how they allocate the jackpot portion of the bet.

I also agree that if the bet is +EV, I will play it, regardless of how they allocate the bet to future jackpots.
rdw4potus
rdw4potus
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 7054
May 18th, 2012 at 12:26:25 PM permalink
Quote: cardshark

For what it's worth Paradigm, it was my understanding that the $0.28 (in this example) always goes to the jackpot and not the seed. The seed is paid for by the casino. The casino is compensated for having to pay a seed by the house edge on the bet. I figure the allocation of the bet would be like this:

$x to the casino/owners. Seed money paid from here with a risk that the casino could take a loss in the short run
$y to pay for the non-jackpot portion of the paytable
$0.28 to the jackpot meter
Total = $1

I agree that this isn't the worst thing a casino has ever done. It's more in the "grey area" of wrong for me. But I still feel it is wrong to change the allocation of the amount of your bet dedicated to the jackpot to a future jackpot simply because the current jackpot is too high. It seems wrong to me to take $0.28 of my dollar that should have went to the jackpot that I am currently playing for and give to another jackpot that I cannot win with this bet.

I get that either way, in the end, the players (considered as a whole) will get the money, regardless of how they allocate the jackpot portion of the bet.

I also agree that if the bet is +EV, I will play it, regardless of how they allocate the bet to future jackpots.



As the jackpot gets higher, the house edge goes down. Do you think that it's fair that the house's portion of the seed money should be constant while $x is shrinking as the jackpot rises? I think the house is basically arguing that $x + (let's call the $.28=$z) =constant; and as the jackpot rises, the house's contribution is replaced by the players' contribution to the next jackpot's seed.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 178
  • Posts: 10237
May 18th, 2012 at 12:29:49 PM permalink
Quote: cardshark

For what it's worth Paradigm, it was my understanding that the $0.28 (in this example) always goes to the jackpot and not the seed. The seed is paid for by the casino. The casino is compensated for having to pay a seed by the house edge on the bet.

Your "understanding" is based upon a bad assumption.

The seed money for a progressive comes from the players.

When a new progressive is introduced, yeah, the casino will put up some nice amount of cash to make it attractive. But the portion of the bet that goest towards increasing the meter is greatly reduced until the seed money is paid back.

Once it's paid back, the meter speed increases, until a backup seed amount is on hand for after it hits. Then it increases to the maximum contribution.

What is happening here is the casino decided up increase the seed value, and since the current jackput is very high, is setting up that reserve ahead of time.


There's nothing fishy going on here. It is what it is.
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 108
  • Posts: 6909
May 18th, 2012 at 12:34:40 PM permalink
Quote: cardshark



I also agree that if the bet is +EV, I will play it, regardless of how they allocate the bet to future jackpots.



I would guess the bet rarely ever gets to a real + EV, if you consider Uncle Sam's cut. But I agree with the concept. You are betting $1. You know the odds of hitting each possible payout. You know what the jackpot is when you are betting your $1. What the casino does with that dollar is irrelevant to you deciding to make that bet or not.
cardshark
cardshark
Joined: Nov 30, 2009
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 239
May 18th, 2012 at 12:44:20 PM permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBear

Your "understanding" is based upon a bad assumption.



Ouch, what did I ever do to you, DJ?!

Quote: DJTeddyBear


The seed money for a progressive comes from the players.

When a new progressive is introduced, yeah, the casino will put up some nice amount of cash to make it attractive. But the portion of the bet that goest towards increasing the meter is greatly reduced until the seed money is paid back.

Once it's paid back, the meter speed increases, until a backup seed amount is on hand for after it hits. Then it increases to the maximum contribution.

What is happening here is the casino decided up increase the seed value, and since the current jackput is very high, is setting up that reserve ahead of time.


There's nothing fishy going on here. It is what it is.



Ok, I stand corrected. That's why I stated it was my understanding, and not a fact. If this is the case, I still have an issue in the fact that the jackpot that I could win is smaller than it should be. The money for the next seed should be coming from the bets being made during that jackpot round.

Also, what happens when a jackpot is hit before the casino can fully recoup the seed money?
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 178
  • Posts: 10237
May 18th, 2012 at 1:12:37 PM permalink
Quote: cardshark

Ouch, what did I ever do to you, DJ?!

I didn't mean to offend. Sorry if you took it that way.


Quote: cardshark

what happens when a jackpot is hit before the casino can fully recoup the seed money?

On the assumption that the original math was correct and it's just an anomoly that it hit in succession, then the slow meter I described runs longer than usual until all the casino's seed money is paid back.

If someone sharpens their pencil and discovers the original math was wrong, then it's a whole 'nother matter. The seed could be reduced, the meter increment could be increased, or the game can be pulled.

Here's an interesting bit of info about progressives (and this includes poker Bad Beat Jackpots): Once they are established, that money MUST be returned to the players. The progressive can't simply be "pulled."

There was a thread about this scenario a while back. Some casino (Western downtown?) had closed, but there was an unpaid progressive. Eventually, the ruling was to create a jackpot situation at the slot parlor next door to pay it down. Seems the slot parlor was owned by the same person, and/or they were operating under the same license, etc...
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁

  • Jump to: