RTGs random jackpots-how random??

[Robertsgirl]

This was the reason that I found and joined the C.M. I was finally paid after Bryan assisted me. They sent me $482.00--Of coarse the charged me for the Western Union. So with that in mind, I used a $50 prepaid Visa $54.95, had a large playthrough, and had to assume the cost of the Western Union $18.00, So how much of the $7500.00, did I win? $427.05.

Please keep in mind that the "coupon" did not specify the 10X cash out rule!

[cheekymonkey]

So how much of the $7500.00, did I win? $427.05

Yuk, yuk and double yuk!

[tennis_balls]

When these slots first started a programer explained to me that they were NOT random, that the slot was set to pay off with the "random " jackpot on a certain spin number and it did not matter if players were spinning for .01 or 5.00 per spin.

if this were accurate, then vinylweatheman would already have 5 PCs spinning 24/7 at .01 per spin and we would see his name on the winner list every month.

[Zaqwert]

When these slots first started a programer explained to me that they were NOT random, that the slot was set to pay off with the "random " jackpot on a certain spin number and it did not matter if players were spinning for .01 or 5.00 per spin.
The reason you see the counter spinning abnormally fast or resetting itself is that it is estimateing how many spins a player is playing so when there is a player playing 5.00 spin the counter starts flying, but when they stop it takes a few seconds for the jackpot reset itself to the correct amount.
As far as setting the payout %, it has nothing to do with the random jackpot, but the casinos are able to bank together a number of the games together to form a single random jackpot that will be larger than if each machine was random on its own.
I have seen players hit the random jackpot on the first spin or after hours of play, and have seen it hit for .01 and for the 5.00 spin.

I used to work for RTG, as a software developer, and I worked directly on the Real Series slots.

There is no magic spin number for the jackpot to pay off. Each spin is a completely independent event. Past spins have no impact at all on what the current or future spins will be.

Regardless of what you have heard or haven't heard up till now, the random jackpot "chance" of hitting is the same per dollar wagered. That is the key.

To say it mathematically, playing 100 spins at $1 a spin has the same chance of hitting the jackpot as a single spin of $100 (long run).

So you aren't "missing out" on anything by playing lower stakes. And you aren't "gaining" anything by playing higher stakes.

The reason is a fixed % of each dollar wagered goes to feed the jackpot, regardless of how it was wagered.

Also the slots are truly video slots. Electronic representation of the "physical wheels" exist and for each spin the wheel stops are generated. Each stop on each wheel is equally likely. The way a payout % is achieved is by what symbols are on what wheels in what quantities. When set to a lower payout % the wheel(s) might have fewer "good" symbols and/or more "lesser" symbols.

Also, it should be noted the wheels are not necessarily uniform. Wheel 1 could have 32 symbols, wheel 2 could have 29, wheel 3 could have 37, and so forth.

It's very hard to spot changes in the wheels from payout % to payout% due to the fact you only need to make a minimal change to affect the %. Changing a high symbol to a low symbol on a single wheel or two very well might be the only change.

[mikepipe]

I used to work for RTG, as a software developer, and I worked directly on the Real Series slots.

To say it mathematically, playing 100 spins at $1 a spin has the same chance of hitting the jackpot as a single spin of $100 (long run).

So you aren't "missing out" on anything by playing lower stakes. And you aren't "gaining" anything by playing higher stakes.

Sorry?
Why dont i gain anything with higher bets? If the chance is per dollars bet, then one bet at 10 gives me as much as 100 at 0.1 - right?

Or simplier: the more dollars i bet, the higher the chance, which means, i shouldnt set the slot on auto the whole nite long with 0,01 bet, but with 0,5 bets (20x better chances )

[Avatar73]

No, it comes back to Zoozie and being linear.

So say betting $100 in one go gives you 1/10 chance of jackpot.

Then setting a computer on all night at 0.01 makes no difference....
assume it spins 10,000 times, wagereing $100. Then overall, you would still have 1/10 chance of hitting the jackpot.

The only difference is that with one type you have one stab at 1/10 chance, and the other method you have 10,000 stabs at 1/100,000 chance.

So theres no real difference.

(aside from the fact that 0.01c spins will be less volatile, and per extra $100 range the chance of not hitting the jackpot will decrease with smaller bet size).


It's a bit like saying.... you can buy 500,000 lottery tickets for a 1M prize, or bet $500,000 on red on no-zero. Both can win the same, but with higher, smaller bets, the chances are a lot more clear cut!

[sweiger]

This leaves me with these questions:
- Is the chance of winning the random jackpot bigger if you bet max pr spin(like rapid fire jackpots) - and is heijac doing this?
- is heijac playing cleos gold day and night 24/7?

Considering Zaqwert's info, I must say that this "heijac" is either ultra-über-extremely lucky, or something terribly fishy is going on...

[Zoozie]

Considering Zaqwert's info, I must say that this "heijac" is either ultra-über-extremely lucky, or something terribly fishy is going on...

I can not reveal the bet size-data from "heijac". But he was no low roller. So given the bet-size linear probability things are as they should be. Of course he also must have played a LOT.

The only thing 'fishy' is the reply from RTG/InetNet. Their slots seems to be working like all other random jackpot slots out there.

The "heijac" data is just another strong indication for the liniear bet size, and one that is easy to understand.

If you have same chance as "heijac" of hitting the several jackpots over some months with 0.01$ bet, they you have a money machine. I believe we calculated earlier it only costs 7$ average/day to spin 24 hours at 0.01$ bet-size.

But only the 2 lowest of about 50 jackpots was won at 0.20$ bet. (and no lower bets won eighter.) So.....

[sweiger]

Yep... Of course high-rolling changes his odds for winning the RJ, but only linear, as I understood from Zaqwert. I still think winning 3 RJ's within one month sounds beyond imaginable luck. But of course, anything can happen when gambling...you can even lose

[sweiger]

The only thing 'fishy' is the reply from RTG/InetNet. Their slots seems to be working like all other random jackpot slots out there.

That is odd, too.