RTGs random jackpots-how random??

[pingpong]

I logged into and played at Inetbet last nigt, and saw the newsscroller announceing the Clepatras Gold Random Jackpot of 8500 $ had been hit yesterday, by "heijac". Good for him/her I thought, and blew 150 dollars on that Aztec-slot. Then I read the last Inetbet newsletter, only to see this:

"Since the last edition of the Newsletter was published over 90 of our Progressive Jackpots have been hit along with some large payouts on other games. Congratulations to you all. Take a look at the table below for some of the recent big winners who have been playing our VP and Slot machines.

...
heijac Cleopatras Gold Random Jackpot $1967
heijac Cleopatras Gold Random Jackpot $6711"


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?

I ve played RTG-slots at inetbet and others for a year and a half years, one dollar a spin, and NEVER won a random jackpot. Whats the odds of one person hitting it three times on the same slot in a month at the same casino??

 

[lovetogamble]

Ummmm....

Actually it was hit Thursday afternoon around 2PM. I was playing Cleo and left for only a couple of minutes...came back...and it was gone. It seems strange the same player could hit the last three Cleo jackpots when everyone else can't even hit one. How do we know if "heijac" is really a real player or maybe someone closely related to "STONELADY" from Zany Bingo?

Makes one wonder?

 

[Zoozie]

This is what I think.

A high roller comes to the casino and bets 20$-100$/spin and plays slots. Because the chance for hitting the random jackpot 'increases' with bet size, this player manage to win several of the jackpots. This is probably also what the casino would claim which they also did last time. And it is probably correct.

But when you start to think about this, it only makes sense if the meaning
'chance of winning the jackpot increases with bet size'
actually means
'change of winning the jackpot increases tremendously with bet size'

So it is not a 'linear' function in bet size.

It was was a linear function it would mean that 200 players each betting 1$ would have same chance that one of the hitting the jackpot during the same time a player betting 200$/spin would have. However there are 1$ slot player
playing all the time(probably 200+ players) and several jackpost is not won every hour as some high rollers manage. QED
(Actually betting 100$ and winning a jackpot of a few k$ is not much different from hitting the bonus round)

Because it is not a linear function at RTG casino is means that payout% increase with bet-size. So low rollers are playing at a higher house edge.

This has not happened at Intercasino to my knowledge, which means the I believe the function is liniear there. And most of the marvel jackpots wins I have heard of has also been won by low rollers. (because there are so many of them compared to high rollers).

This is just yet another nail in the coffin to RTG slots. I like them but as a low roller the slots are just robbing me and the chance of winning the jackpot are way way too slim. (how many has seen post of jackpot wins with bets of 0.2$ or 0.4$ at RTG? I have seen several from Intercasino but not from RTG)

Besides the payout% for RTG is never published. But even if it were published it would be an average where low rollers should except it to be lower for them.

Zoozie

 

[winbig]

But when you start to think about this, it only makes sense if the meaning
'chance of winning the jackpot increases with bet size'
actually means
'change of winning the jackpot increases tremendously with bet size'

So it is not a 'linear' function in bet size.

It was was a linear function it would mean that 200 players each betting 1$ would have same chance that one of the hitting the jackpot during the same time a player betting 200$/spin would have. However there are 1$ slot player
playing all the time(probably 200+ players) and several jackpost is not won every hour as some high rollers manage. QED
(Actually betting 100$ and winning a jackpot of a few k$ is not much different from hitting the bonus round)

Because it is not a linear function at RTG casino is means that payout% increase with bet-size. So low rollers are playing at a higher house edge.

This has not happened at Intercasino to my knowledge, which means the I believe the function is liniear there. And most of the marvel jackpots wins I have heard of has also been won by low rollers. (because there are so many of them compared to high rollers).

This is just yet another nail in the coffin to RTG slots. I like them but as a low roller the slots are just robbing me and the chance of winning the jackpot are way way too slim. (how many has seen post of jackpot wins with bets of 0.2$ or 0.4$ at RTG? I have seen several from Intercasino but not from RTG)

Besides the payout% for RTG is never published. But even if it were published it would be an average where low rollers should except it to be lower for them.

Zoozie

Makes sense, but now my brain hurts. Thanks!

And to think I thought I was through with Algebra after this past semester at school....not!

 

[lovetogamble]

Not the case

All that is probably true, but Casino operators (and I think it was iNetBet) that claimed the random jackpots are set to hit on a certain amount of spins not on the size of the bet.

I have to agree with everyone else posting that the bigger the bet the more likely you are to hit the random jackpot. Other wise something fishy is going on!

 

[winbig]

I have to agree with everyone else posting that the bigger the bet the more likely you are to hit the random jackpot. Other wise something fishy is going on!

If that's the case, then it's not "random".

Random = everyone has an EQUAL chance to hit it, no matter what their bet.

It's kinda similar to how the publishers clearing house drawing was back in the day - you had to actually buy something to have a better chance of winning (or win at all). The only difference in this case is you have to bet a certain amount per spin to have a better (or any) chance.

 

[phynqster]

It is a completley random jack pot and have seen players hit playing .20 a spin or 100.00. Meaning it is random for the players. What is not random is the Jack pot itself, that is pre set to hit on a certain spin number. That is why you see usually the same amount in the jack pot when it hits. If every player played.20 per spin the jackpot would hit with a low balance like 1000, but if everyone was playing 100.00 per spin than the jackpot could go over 20,000 like I have seen when casinos give huge bonuses. I hope this helps in dis spelling some misbeliefs

 

[chuchu59]

It is a completley random jack pot and have seen players hit playing .20 a spin or 100.00. Meaning it is random for the players. What is not random is the Jack pot itself, that is pre set to hit on a certain spin number. That is why you see usually the same amount in the jack pot when it hits. If every player played.20 per spin the jackpot would hit with a low balance like 1000, but if everyone was playing 100.00 per spin than the jackpot could go over 20,000 like I have seen when casinos give huge bonuses. I hope this helps in dis spelling some misbeliefs

Does that mean that the random jackpot will hit on say, the 20000th spin each time. If so, that would surely mean that after a jackpot is hit it would be meaningless to aim for that during the first couple of days after it is reset.

 

[phynqster]

Don't quote me, but I never play till the jackpot has been built by someone elses hard earned money. That is if I was playing for the random Jack Pot only.

 

[Zoozie]

The most logical and fair solution would be that chance for hitting the jackpot is proportional to the bet size. (Ie. liniar function).

This way payout% is the same for all bet-sizes and small bets can win the big jackpot also. I like this the most.

Another solution is that you only win a part of the jackpot. (Ie a 1$ bet would win 20% of the jackpot where as a 5$ bet would win 100%). This is also a fair solution and chance for hitting the jackpot is now the same for everyone (though jackpot size differs).

Unfortunately neighter of the cases seem to apply at RTG casinos.

You could argue that due to the huge house edge at slots it would be fair that high rollers faces a smaller house egde. And this is also the case in Vegas. But this is for different slots. Ie. playing quarter slots compared to $ slots.

When it happens for the same slots I feel low rollers get cheated but only because RTG do not tell players that. (Nor publish any payout% records for that matter).

Zoozie

 

[Mousey]

It is a completley random jack pot and have seen players hit playing .20 a spin or 100.00. Meaning it is random for the players. What is not random is the Jack pot itself, that is pre set to hit on a certain spin number. That is why you see usually the same amount in the jack pot when it hits. If every player played.20 per spin the jackpot would hit with a low balance like 1000, but if everyone was playing 100.00 per spin than the jackpot could go over 20,000 like I have seen when casinos give huge bonuses. I hope this helps in dis spelling some misbeliefs

Hmmm... if it is set to hit on a certain spin # is this the same # each time a particular slot resets? Or randomly selected by the software after a jp is hit? Is it possible "heijac" may have found a pattern? Or is s/he simply setting Cleo on 20 cents a spin, infinite autoplay, stop on jackpot?

 

[iNetBet Promos]

Hi everyone,
Different posters have put forward a number of points/theories/speculation in regards to RTG Random Jackpots which I feel need to be clarified.

Firstly I am unsure as to why people would think that a "Random" Jackpot would hit on a given number of spins or be determined by any other factors. As the name suggests this is not the case. These Jackpots hit at random and they are not determined by spins, bet size or any other variable.
If you take a look at the Random Jackpots listed in our previous newsletter Old / Expired Link you will see that there are no set values for when a Jackpot will hit, neither is there a given timeframe.

Take for example the Cleopatra’s Gold Jackpot. This has been hit on 14 occasions this year. The full data is as follows:

Machine * Date *Days Prior * Bet * Win

Cleopatra’s Gold * 1/1/06 0:35 * - * 100.00 * 4,718.24
Cleopatra’s Gold * 1/21/06 19:53 * 20 * 10.00 * 5,859.21
Cleopatra’s Gold * 2/18/06 20:26 * 28 * 10.00 * 7,114.38
Cleopatra’s Gold * 3/17/06 10:24 * 27 * 0.20 * 6,321.94
Cleopatra’s Gold * 3/23/06 10:57 * 6 * 5.00 * 2,279.23
Cleopatra’s Gold * 3/25/06 23:20 * 2 * 10.00 * 1,328.83
Cleopatra’s Gold * 4/5/06 7:56 * 11 * 1.00 * 3,892.64
Cleopatra’s Gold * 4/13/06 11:21 * 8 * 10.00 * 2,748.34
Cleopatra’s Gold * 4/22/06 12:02 * 9 * 10.00 * 3,586.83
Cleopatra’s Gold * 5/17/06 6:46 * 25 * 1.00 * 5,165.50
Cleopatra’s Gold * 7/6/06 12:52 * 50 * 2.00 * 13,557.33
Cleopatra’s Gold * 8/3/06 0:11 * 28 * 10.00 * 6,672.42
Cleopatra’s Gold * 8/8/06 0:41 * 5 * 10.00 * 1,958.59
Cleopatra’s Gold * 9/14/06 14:54 * 27 * 10.00 * 8,100.48

As you can see there is no set figure for when the Jackpot will hit. What would be the point in having a Random Jackpot that hit in and around a given figure? As chuchu59 says nobody would play the Jackpot until this figure was reached.
You can also see that there is no set amount of spins needed for the Jackpot to hit. I included the Days Prior information to show more clearly the timeframe in between wins. The data shows that there was a gap of as little as 2 days and a max period of 50 days in between the Jackpot hitting on this particular machine. The number of spins, in between all of the above hits, was different. The figures presented show too that the Jackpot has hit on a wide variety of bet sizes from as little as 20c to $100.

As I said previously these Jackpots are totally random and anyone at any time can hit them. This is regardless of bet size, Jackpot size, amount of spins or time prior from the last Jackpot hitting.

I hope that this clears things up for everyone.
iNetBet Promos

 

[Zoozie]

I must thank you for providing the data, I wish more RTG data was avaliable (like payout%). And I sure your data are real and they actually prove one of the speculations raised here.

These Jackpots hit at random and they are not determined by spins, bet size or any other variable.

You say bet size as no influence on hitting the jackpot, but I am 100% convinced you are wrong. You can claim that even a small bet has a chance to hit the jackpot, but you can not claim that it has no influence on the probability for hitting it.

And even the data you provided actually proves you wrong. 9 out of 14 jackpot wins (64%) of the jackpot wins was at bet size 10$ or more. If it had no influence this would mean that 64% of the bets on slot are at a total bet of 10$ or more statistically. This is because the sample would then simple be uniformly distributed over all bets. I find it impossible to believe that 64% or more of the bets on slots are 10$ or higher.

For Intercasino the chance of hitting the jackpot is proportional to the bet size and this is good, because it means payout% is the same.
p(x)=probability for hitting jackpot
x=bet size
p(x)=k*x

You claim that for RTG casinos the formular is:
p(x)=k

For RTG jackpots I do not even believe the function is proportional.
Ie p(x) =k*exp (x) or p(x)=k*x^2
And it is extremely unfair not telling the players this because this means
payout% of the slots is not constant for different bet-sizes. This is the big issue I have been raising in this thread.

If you statement was true dont you think the jackpot could be exploited by autospinning at bet 0.01$ (1 line at minimum bet) ? And betting 0.01$ would give the best payout% in that case.


Zoozie

 

[Scampo]

bet size?

Totally random but $10 seems a good bet size!

 

[iNetBet Promos]

I knew that someone would jump onto my post with some form of statistical analysis.

Thanks for your feedback Zoozie however I can assure you that the Jackpot is random and not dependant on Bet size.
Please remember that you do not have all of the variables i.e you do not know how many spins were made at each individual bet size etc
If 70% of spins were at $10, 10% at $1, 10% at $2, 5% at $100 and 5% at 20c then what you are saying would not be correct.
I have only provided a small section of data from one particular machine. You cannot apply your formulae to this small sample as it is not perfect data.

I could have provided you with data from a different game which showed the majority of the jackpots being hit from 1c bets. In fact our Caesars Empire Random Jackpot has only ever hit at the $1 denomination. That is not to say that tomorrow it will not hit at 20c or $10.
However as Cleopatra’s was the game in question earlier in the thread this was the data I thought most prudent to post.

As I posted previously the Random Jackpots are just that, Random. Bet size has no influence.

Best Regards
iNetBet Promos

 

[Zoozie]

Thanks for your feedback Zoozie however I can assure you that the Jackpot is random and not dependant on Bet size.

Thank you for responding. I can garantie you that I am not on RTG rambling mode, but I actually believe I have a case.

Try look at the jackpot wins from other slots and if shows 50%+ of the jackpot wins was on bet 10$ or more, you know you are wrong.

But even the small sample show 60% bets of 10$ or more and I believe
only 10% (at MOST!!!! probably a lot less) of the bets on slots are 10$ or more, so even this sample would then be mathematically very very unlikely. So I actually believe your sample to be sufficient. However just giving is a few sample for other slots more would settle this argument forever.

However you should be arguing that chance of winning the jackpot is liniear (proportional) to bet-size, because that is actually the most fair method (But I still do not believe this to be true for RTG). I am surprised you defend a unsymmetric distribution that actually screw high-rollers.

You do realize that IF the probablily for winning the jackpot does not depend on bet size, then the slot would have maximum payout% at bet 0.01$?

Lets say the jackpot is 4000$. This means the jackpot could cover 400000 spins (0.4M) alone on bet 0.01$. But remember the paytable from the reels also contribute. So with a bankroll of 4000$ you will have have about 4M spins before going bust if the payout is as low as 90% without the jackpot. So if the 'constant' probablity for winning the jackpot is higher than 1 to 4M then the slot would have 100+% payout (if base paytable from reels gives 90% payout which is a low estimate).

I really hope the chance for hitting the jackpot is higher than 1 to 4M....

Anyone not conviced yet?

Zoozie

 

[KathyK]

My mom hit 2 rapid fire jackpots in 2 weeks time at Intercasino. She was only spinning 45 cents a spin. I've been playing there for 2 years and haven't hit one yet!! LOL

 

[silcnlayc]

As I posted previously the Random Jackpots are just that, Random. Bet size has no influence.

I have also been playing the RTG random jackpots for YEARS on different denominations from $.20-$5.00 but could never bring myself to play $10 EVER. So as Zoozie says

Anyone not conviced yet?

I have believed it for a long time that the higher the denomination played the more apt it is to pay off so , I don't think it's that random.

The other reason for this belief is, I also play at Intercasino, Sands of the Caribbean, and have hit MANY rapid fire jackpots ranging from $500-$1400 with wagering spins ranging from $.90-2.25, and NEVER had to bet any higher. Now this is called RANDOM, not as your stats show, just 1 winner out of many that bet under $10 ...that is called appeasing the masses with a token in my opinion.

In fact our Caesars Empire Random Jackpot has only ever hit at the $1

This is intersting to know, for my husband has played this NON stop for as long as it has been offered and he has NEVER hit this (almost like 24/7 player on this) for thats how much he liked it and he never could bring himself to go over the $5.00 mark either....random? I think not, for how does one hit this random jackpot 2-3 times in a month (with higher denominations?) if others that are playing for a longer period ( with lower bets?) can not?

The odds just aren't lining up or something here...and that is as good a reason to stop playing heavily at any RTG in my opinion as I need.

 

[lovetogamble]

I have to agree

....random? I think not, for how does one hit this random jackpot 2-3 times in a month (with higher denominations?) if others that are playing for a longer period ( with lower bets?) can not?

My thoughts exactly!

Now if this person had hit 3 jackpots on the same day playing then I could possible understand that maybe they were playing at a time when the slots were all hitting. BUT for the same person to hit 3 jackpots days aparts (and no one else hit the random jackpot between their 3 hits) is just plain fishy to me and all three hits won on $10 bets.

 

[chuchu59]

I knew that someone would jump onto my post with some form of statistical analysis.

Thanks for your feedback Zoozie however I can assure you that the Jackpot is random and not dependant on Bet size.
Please remember that you do not have all of the variables i.e you do not know how many spins were made at each individual bet size etc
If 70% of spins were at $10, 10% at $1, 10% at $2, 5% at $100 and 5% at 20c then what you are saying would not be correct.
I have only provided a small section of data from one particular machine. You cannot apply your formulae to this small sample as it is not perfect data.

I could have provided you with data from a different game which showed the majority of the jackpots being hit from 1c bets. In fact our Caesars Empire Random Jackpot has only ever hit at the $1 denomination. That is not to say that tomorrow it will not hit at 20c or $10.
However as Cleopatras was the game in question earlier in the thread this was the data I thought most prudent to post.

As I posted previously the Random Jackpots are just that, Random. Bet size has no influence.

Best Regards
iNetBet Promos

To quell their doubts, can you show us the stats for other random JP slots like Fruit Frenzy, Goldbeard and Ronin. Statiscally, the more info the better.

 

[silcnlayc]

I can assure you that the Jackpot is random and not dependant on Bet size

Just wanted to try out something tonight to see how "random" really works.

I haven't played at VIP Casinos in about 2 months, decided to give the "Rapid Fire" random jackpot a go at it and played for a solid 5 hours and would you believe it!??? Yes, I hit the "random" jackpot of "Rapid Fire" .THAT is what I call RANDOM.

Screen shot will be posted.

Now, I have played at the RTG casinos for many hours, months, years and NEVER had the pleasure of hitting one of those. Odd, maybe, random, I don't think so at all, after tonights play proved to me that it isn't so. I didn't even have to go OVERBOARD and play $9.00 a spin...just the normal $.90-2.25 as usual...go figure!

 

[Zoozie]

You cannot apply your formulae to this small sample as it is not perfect data.

I ran a statistic analysis based on different values on the percentage of bets that is 10$ or more.
Out of 14 random picked spins made on the slot , what is the probablity that 9 of these (or more) was with total bet 10$ or higher?.
(In the sample 9 of the 14 jackpot wins was with bet 10$ or higher. If the jackpot does not depend on bet size, then this would be a uniform random sample on bet-size on that slot)

p= probablity of 9 or more (out of 14) of the spins was bet 10$ or higher
b=percentage of bets that is 10$ higher

For b=0.4 (40%) gives p ~ 1 to 16
For b=0.3 (30%) gives p ~ 1 to 120
For b=0.2 (20%) gives p ~ 1 to 2500
For b=0.1 (10%) gives p ~ 1 to 750000
For b=0.05(5%) gives p < 1 to 1000000000

So if the casino has a massive ammount of high rollers so 30% of all spins on the slot is 10$ or higher, then the data you provided seems reasonable.

However I do not believe that even 10% of the spins are with bet 10$ or higher, which means the data you provided are next to impossible if
jackpot does not depend on bet size.

Earlier in this thread I showed that the probabilty for hitting the jackpot each spin had to be less than 1 to 4M if the statement was correct(this did not use the data provided). So if we assume 30% or more spins on the RTG slots are with bet 10$ or higher then slot would have been feed more than 0.3*4M*10$=12M$. So 0.033% of the coinage is used to build the jackpot, which is just too low and so far from the standard. (and the estimate is a lower bound ignoring all the small bets!)

I can not do more mathematically sorry, but something is fishy here.

Jackpot wins DO depend on bet size, but the big issue I have been raising is that it is not liniear which would have been fair.

I hope INetBet will investigate this matter as I find it unetical that the casino give false information to the players (that jackpot win do not depend on bet size).

And if jackpot win do not depend on bet size, you realize that high rollers will face a lower payout% than lowrollers? I thought casinos would treat high rollers better than that.

Zoozie

 

[The Dude]

By the way, I've been provided a spreadsheet from iNetBet that covers the random jackpots they've incurred since January (56), and they do seem to be quite random.

The largest wins are from .20 cent bets ($13K to 25k). The larger bets don't seem to generate large wins, probably because most players are betting smaller (my guess). Kasino King - there is opportunity here .

If more information is needed, I can contact RTG if you'd like.

 

[Zoozie]

I would not mind having a look at the bet-sizes that won the jackpot.

The size of the jackpot is not important and I am sure that at least is uncorrelated to bet size.

Just a few more samples would help me.

However I still find it hard to believe RTG implemented it so jackpot win does not depend on bet-size, because that is screwing the high rollers.

Example to demonstrate:
Roll a dice. If you hit a 6 you win you money 1-5.
However lets say each roll has a 1 to 100 (does not depend on bet size) chance to win the jackpot that is 100$

If you bet 2$ and roll the dice, then you AVG win will be 2$ (from the dice game) + 1$ (from jackpot) =3 $.

So EV from this game is 1$.

However if you instead roll the dice but only bet 1$ each time. Then the your average win each game will be 1$ (from dice game)+1$ (from jackpot) = 2$ So playing this game twice each with bet 1$ instead will give you average win = 4$. (which is higher than 3$ when you only rolled the dice only once but with bet 2$.)

The same mathematics applies to the RTG slots if jackpot does not depend on bet size. But if it was true then you could just bet 0.01$ to have same chance to hit it.. And I showed earlier than chance of hitting the jackpot then has to be less than 1 to 4M or the payout of the slot would be higher than 100%.

Zoozie

 

[GrandMaster]

I would find it very strange if these slots had a higher expected payout, possible over 100%, for low rollers.

There are two obvious way to make the slot "fair": the probability of hitting the random jackpot could be proportional to the player's stake, or the player could win an amount proportional to his stake, so that, for example, a $1 player could win the whole jackpot, and a 1c player could win 1% of the jackpot.

 

[Zoozie]

There are two obvious way to make the slot "fair": the probability of hitting the random jackpot could be proportional to the player's stake, or the player could win an amount proportional to his stake, so that, for example, a $1 player could win the whole jackpot, and a 1c player could win 1% of the jackpot.

I could not have put it better.

So what do you think when INetBet claims that RTG slots has the same probability (constant) for hitting the jackpot? (Bet size does not matter)

My example when betting 0.01$ assumed that the payout (without jackpot) was as low as 90% which mean that even if hitting the jackpot(4K$) was a 1 to 4M shot; then the slot would have payout 100%. Some jackpots even are up to 10K$. So this constant will actually have to be a lot smaller than 1 to 4M. (1 to 20M is a rough estimate). This does not make any sense. No way it can be that low!!!!

So INetBet has the following options:

1) Admit payout on slots is over 100% for low bets.(would like to hear that!)
2) Admit the probablity for hitting the jackpot each spin is less than 1 to 20M and that they are also screwing high rollers with lower payout%.
3) Admit they made an error in their statement and the probability for winning the jackpot DOES depend on bet size.

The data sample provided earlier has nothing to do with the conclusions reached above. The data sample is a whole different story that also is fishy, but which mathematically also confirms
that size does matter! (Bet size..) Or the casino has a massive amount of highrollers so 30%+ of all bets on slots are at bet size 10$ or more.

I am not claiming RTG cheats in any way which I am sure it does not, I am just saying INetBet made a wrong statement in good faith. I really do appriciate the open and honest communication
from INetBet casino, I am just sorry I have to correct an important mistake.

Zoozie

 

[soflat]

If it depends on bet size then how do you explain the Caesars slot being hit more with bets under $1?

How can you draw the conclusion just from the Cleo slot? If you added in the Caesars data, then from what iNetBet said, it sounds like it would even out. Doesn't it?

 

[Zoozie]

If you added in the Caesars data, then from what iNetBet said, it sounds like it would even out. Doesn't it?

I have not seen the data. And even without the data I can conclude
winning the jackpot must be less than 1 to 4M or the slot would have payout
over 100% when betting 0.01$ and jackpot is 4K$. (easy math.)I dont believe that. If you read my note you will also see that it has to be less than 1 to 20M. (harder math). That fact alone should make all high rollers totally avoid playing there. If you are betting 1$ you have to wager 20M$ before you can expect to hit the jackpot once.

 

[iNetBet Promos]

Following the recent comments, by Zoozie, I feel that some points need clarification.

Firstly we object very strongly to any accusations of iNetBet being unethical and providing players with false information. These accusations are not warranted and are without any foundation. You have made a categorical statement that the Jackpots are NOT random. This is conjecture at best. Your analysis is based on incomplete data from one game in a short period of time. You have no information on how many bets were placed at given denominations, how many games were played etc.

With all of the current Real Series Slots the Jackpot increases in relation to the amounts wagered. Whilst high rollers, by the amount they wager, will contribute more per spin, this is irrelevant. One has to remember that a higher wager per spin player does so as a matter of choice, they will be rewarded with much higher Bonus and Top-Line Payouts on a dollar for dollar basis. Most players play to enjoy the game and hit the features and the Top-Line Jackpot, not to hit the Random Jackpot, this is an added random bonus.

If a player is only interested in playing for a Random Jackpot then they will get more return for their bet size playing at the lowest denomination. This is exactly what we have always told any players when asked If I want to hit the Random Jackpot are my odds increased with bet size?

The facts here are that 1) All players contribute the same % of their bet to the Random Jackpot. That 2) All players on each spin, play with the same house advantage regardless of their bet size.

That is really all we have to say on the topic. The contribution size and the way that the Random Jackpots are awarded are fair.

We have posted this information previously. We also provided more completed data to Casinomeister with which he could make an informed reply to this thread. He too has commented that the information provided to him seems quite random.

We are pleased to answer any queries or questions on such highly respected forums such as Casinomeister, in order to assist with any concerns or issues that members may have. We have always been as transparent as possible in all of our responses and I would hope that our input has assisted many members in the past.

We have been posting for a number of years and would never post anything to misinform players. This, as I am sure many longstanding members will attest to, is not the way that we operate. I can categorically state that the information that we have provided in regards to the Random Jackpots is correct. Each players bet size does not affect the odds that they will win the Jackpot.

 

[Zoozie]

the way that the Random Jackpots are awarded are fair. (1)

Each player’s bet size does not affect the odds that they will win the Jackpot. (2)

All players on each spin, play with the same house advantage regardless of their bet size. (3)

Thank you for responding!

I would like to comment these three sentences, since they conflict with each other. I will number them 1), 2) and 3).

First of all I just proved this mathemathically earlier:
If 2) is true then players will not play with the same house advantage as you claim in 3).
This is one of the core problems here.

I proved it by using a similar example, but it can be done formally as well. However I did assume that the 'base payout%' for the slot is the same for all bet sizes. By this I mean the chance for hitting 5 wilds ect. is the same ether you play 0.20$ bet or 20$ bet. (same number of lines). I believe that we can safely assume this is indeed the case since the alternative is very severe.

If you assume 2) then I would not say the jackpots are awared fair as you say in 1). They will favor the lower rollers, which I actually would prefer since I also am a low roller, but I would never call it 'fair'.

I would not mind seeing bet sizes that won jackpots from other slots as well and I will not use them
for what you probably thinks is my personal crusade against RTG, which it is not. I will just see if they
show the same and them I am forced to accept 30%+ of the spins made at the slots are 10$ or higher bet which is a surprise for me, but can it certainly be true.

Zoozie

 

[Flizzin]

IMO, seems fair to me... That's the whole idea of random in my head is that anyone can win the RJP regardless of bet size.

I guess it depends on what you would call fair...

 

[soflat]

Thank you for responding!

I would like to comment these three sentences, since they conflict with each other. I will number them 1), 2) and 3).

First of all I just proved mathemathically earlier before:
If 2) is true then players will not play with the same house advantage as you claim in 3).
This is one of the core problems here.

I'm pretty sure the chance of hitting the jackpot on a single spin directly corresponds to total bet. Thus each player will have the same house advantage with regards to the random jackpots.

Basically each penny bet on a line is one bet, and each of those bets has the same chance of winning the jackpot.

Of course I could be wrong.

 

[Elizabeth]

Elizabeth

If that's the case, then it's not "random".

Random = everyone has an EQUAL chance to hit it, no matter what their bet.

It's kinda similar to how the publishers clearing house drawing was back in the day - you had to actually buy something to have a better chance of winning (or win at all). The only difference in this case is you have to bet a certain amount per spin to have a better (or any) chance.

I won a random jackpot on a .20 bet, with a low deposit. What I have noticed about them is this... If the numbers are spinning rapidly, that means a lot of people are playing at that moment, if you do not see the numbers moving, your odds are going down. So I believe most of them are truly random but your chances increase with the popularity of a certain game. However, I have played some of these casinos where you will win a little and then the machine will go ice cold until most of your winnings are gone. I do not think there is anything random about that!

 

[cynthial]

Sweet!
Elizabeth, how much was the jp? Were you able to collect the full amount or were you tied to a max withdrawal amount? Details girl, Damnit, I want details!

 

[Avatar73]

Zoozie is totally correct.

If what InetBet says is true, then consider this.
They claim that the probability is equal with each spin.
So say the probablility of the RJ was 0.01, and it values at $500, then it is reasonable to see that roughly 100 spins has a good chance of hitting it.

So a highroller, 5$/line x 20 lines = $100 per spin.
100 spins is a cost of 100x100= $10,000 win RJ $500 = LOSS $9,500
(all other things being equal).

Similarly, 1c/line x 1 line = 1c /spin
100 spinds is a cost of 100x1c = $1 win RJ $500 = WIN $499.

So I am afraid I do not see how InetBet can claim that the house edge is constant. If it were me, I would set it up so that probability increases with bet size, so chance at $10 = 0.01 means chance at 1c = 0.00001.

I would be grateful if InetBet could explain how the house edge is the same.

Thanks!

PS I am aware that you should in fact use Prob(not hitting in 100 spins) = 0.366 but I have gone for simplicity here.

 

[Zoozie]

Zoozie is totally correct.
I would be grateful if InetBet could explain how the house edge is the same.

Thanks for the support!

INetBet asked RTG and I believe some manager at RTG fucked up and misunderstood the answer from the development team (or maybe did not ask them at all).

So do not blame INetBet - they actually tried to solve the puzzle. And they have to believe what RTG tells them.

I saw the Random Jackpot data and they were the 'smoking gun' kind of evidence for my claim. However before I saw the data I was already convinced I was right. However I must not publish the jackpot data.

I know CM also saw them and said they looked fair, but I believe he did a mistake not asking someone qualified to see the data.

Zoozie

 

[Avatar73]

So the final conclusion is......... ?!

1) non-linear (ie much higher chance with higher bet)
2) linear (higher chance with higher bet)
3) equal (who cares how much you bet)

... and you're saying generally (2) with a little bit of (1) here and there, but never (3) .... ?

 

[Zoozie]

So the final conclusion is......... ?!

1) non-linear (ie much higher chance with higher bet)
2) linear (higher chance with higher bet)
3) equal (who cares how much you bet)

... and you're saying generally (2) with a little bit of (1) here and there, but never (3) .... ?

That is correct. However (1) is just a slight suspicion I have. (and the data can not show this, would need a gigantic sample. But it shows (3) is not correct.)

But first of all and the most important thing is that what RTG claims can not be right.

So when finally (3) is rejected, then we can start with the (1) or (2).
And with the sale of RTG going on right now (and developers getting fired) this could take a long time, if ever.

We know the casino managers can change the payout% for the slots. But it is a mystery how this is possible without changing the reels. (no reports of anyone ever seeing different reels at RTG casinos).

So all this makes me wonder if RTG slots are indeed 'true' video slots where
the reel does determine the wins. The alternative is that some lottery algorithm determine the win and then find reel showing the win. Because if this is true, then (1) can also be true. However then the situation is much much worse. But all this is PURE SPECULATION, I do not think or hope this is true. Best thing I can compare it to is the 'video poker' at Slotland which is not video poker at all. The results are not determined from a deck of cards.

Sadly, which can be seen in thread, most people do not understand this and they are happy if it just is 'random'.

A die showing
6 50% and
1,2,3,4,5 10% of the time each

that is still 'random', but it is not fair!

Actually you can not use the word RANDOM alone. You need to tell the distribution of the random variable. A normal die is UNIFORM random (all events have same probability etc.). So for this you say it is uniformly random.
And this is what most people actually mean when they say random. If this is not the case then they can say it is weighted at least.

Zoozie

 

[Simmo!]

We know the casino managers can change the payout% for the slots. But it is a mystery how this is possible without changing the reels. (no reports of anyone ever seeing different reels at RTG casinos).

If you watch closely you'll often see the reels reset themselves during a spin. Pretty sure this is how they take into account the different payouts. My theory is, if you see a slight "judder" on each reel before they settle, get the hell away from the slot - i's in a bad mood and resetting like mad to avoid paying out

 

[Pinababy69]

some manager at RTG fucked up

Zoozie

Zoozie said the "F" word!!!

 

[Avatar73]

If you watch closely you'll often see the reels reset themselves during a spin. Pretty sure this is how they take into account the different payouts. My theory is, if you see a slight "judder" on each reel before they settle, get the hell away from the slot - i's in a bad mood and resetting like mad to avoid paying out

This is incorrect.
If they were going to bodge the slot, they would NOT do it through shabby visual display programming!
What you are thinking of is merely a by-product of animation.
There is a "reel-spin" animation, showing many symbols whizzing by, and then a "reel stop" animation, showing the chosen result banging into play and then stopping.
That is all

 

[Avatar73]

I won a random jackpot on a .20 bet, with a low deposit. What I have noticed about them is this... If the numbers are spinning rapidly, that means a lot of people are playing at that moment, if you do not see the numbers moving, your odds are going down. So I believe most of them are truly random but your chances increase with the popularity of a certain game. However, I have played some of these casinos where you will win a little and then the machine will go ice cold until most of your winnings are gone. I do not think there is anything random about that!

Ok, I'm afraid you will need the mind of a woman to explain that logic to me!

 

[Simmo!]

Zoozie said the "F" word!!!

Strictly speaking, he only typed it, which isn't quite the same

 

[lojo]

Zoozie, I didn't know you had seen the sample they provided the Meister. (from discussion in another thread) Wouldn't the small size of the sample make it just as likely one way or the other?

I have read about players low-rolling and winning sizable random jackpots. Could they 'seed the mine' with these to make it look truly random, or...

It wouldn't do me any good to see the sample as I would form an opinion on gut, or "it looks like". But if it was small and not actually analysed statistically your perception could be based on the same thing?

All I know is I have never won one.

Thanks for any insights

 

[sweiger]

We know the casino managers can change the payout% for the slots. But it is a mystery how this is possible without changing the reels. (no reports of anyone ever seeing different reels at RTG casinos).

My guess is that each symbol on the reels is weighted, and with less or more weight on the "expensive" symbols (e.g. wilds), you affect the payout%.
So to set a different payout%, the casino software would simply be set to another weightening of those symbols, without having to change the reels.

Re. chance of hitting the RTG random jackpot, I share your concern, as it seems unfair if a $0.01 bet has the same chance as a $100 bet. I just can't imagine that it is so.

 

[Robertsgirl]

Random Jackpot

I hit a Random Jackpot playing $2, a spin. The Random Jackpot was for $7,500.00.

Did I get $7500.00? Sure didn't..It was before I joined this forum. Sorry to make lame excuses...Used a coupon that did specify X amount of play. However the T/C were not listed. They were however on the Casino's website. So I deposited $50, and won $500.

 

[phynqster]

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.

 

[Simmo!]

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 that's correct, that's very good

 

[Mike031]

I hit a Random Jackpot playing $2, a spin. The Random Jackpot was for $7,500.00.

Did I get $7500.00? Sure didn't..It was before I joined this forum. Sorry to make lame excuses...Used a coupon that did specify X amount of play. However the T/C were not listed. They were however on the Casino's website. So I deposited $50, and won $500.

Which Casino was this?

 

[Mousey]

Which Casino was this?

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/virtual-casino.17431/