Exterminating the low-roller from online casinos

Mavin1

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Location
Arizona
Okay, this is not going to be an endless debate about VARIANCE, RNG's OR RTP's. As I am still pondering them from other threads I had gotten myself into.

This is about the low roller, 20 cent to 75 cent players not finding the good play anymore and it is a fact despite the statistics of the above that the small player/low roller is being systematically exterminated from online casinos.

My reason for thinking this way is not based only on my experience but on the experience of many many posters here saying the same thing.
Can't get the bonus rounds or the free spins and the payouts are very rarely more than the wager amount. Usually the line win payouts are coming in at well below the wager amount keeping the low roller on a constant decline until they/we have busted out again and again.

Think about how when a new casino comes on board the play for everyone is very good and fair. Then they become known to the entire playing public and are hit with scads of high rollers, people that can afford to wager $2 and up. Now they have to rethink the RTP so they are not taken to the cleaners by the big money payers. How would they do this and yet still have the same statistics? My guess is and I have said this before, that they are spreading the wins out that are above the players wager amount and freespin/bonus rounds where a great deal can be won by the high rollers, by increasing the smaller wins (less than wager amount) inbetween the big wins. If a casino has increased smaller wins and decreased large wins then the RTP has not changed.

Think of it as a mile marker, for every mile you have a 1/4 mile marker, each of the 1/4 mile markers are a decent win with the less than decent to none inbetween every 1/4 mile marker and the 1 mile marker is the freespin/bonus round triggers. Now remove the 1/4 mile marker and only have the 1/2 mile marker and 1 mile marker, two of the now gone 1/4 mile markers have become the less than wager amount win to no win and the 1/2 mile has become the win equal to or above the wager amount as has the 1 mile marker. Now the freespin round/bonus rounds have been set to the 2 mile marker with the same amount of distance not changing between the 1/4 mile to the 2 mile thus not changing the RTP either. You still have the same RTP because statistically you are giving the same amount of wins spread out in smaller amounts. This keeps the casino at a constant attitude of what they are paying out keeping them in the profit margins they require and still be able to pay the high rollers the types of wins they are getting at the cost of sacrificing the low rollers.
Or think in terms of $1, they can still give the %100 of the dollar but in pennies instead of quarters, 50 cents or the $1.

That is why we are not heard, because if the line win amouts were adjusted back to the original 1 mile marker settings the high rollers would kill the casino business and I'm sure casinos would rather sacrifice the low rollers than themselves. So it will never be like it was for the little player ever again.

Hopefully I have not confused to many with this thought but maybe the real issue is not the RTP or RNG or Variance, it's the high rollers that are killing it for the low rollers because they have the means to keep banging away at a casino and walking away with decent sized bankrolls on a regular basis, where if we the low rollers manage to walk away with $50 anymore we feel we hit the jackpot.

I will add to be fair to the high rollers that maybe there are just to many of us low rollers too.
Just my opinion.
 

DemonUK

Dormant account
PABnoaccred
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Location
Warrington, UK
Just a quick response to the above.......

last 3 months aladdins wishes on two occasions 1000 and 1060 times my 40c

Aztec Feature Guarantee $98 on 25c stake.
 

NeuroPR

Dormant account
webmeister
Joined
Sep 5, 2009
Location
Greece
That's exactly what i was thinking off the last month all the time...
Since i'm a low roller (my pockets can't afford to play too much), i've experienced the last 2 months that slots became from hard to ultra tight for my bets. I've marked down my deposits and bets the last month to figure out what's happening. The results were terrible for low bets and somehow 'acceptable' in two deposits that i decided to bet up to 2$ per spin.

The 'miles' example you mentioned is exactly what i mean.
Of course this 'policy' is not fair for online players. Others have big and full pockets to their pants, and others have some tiny ones with some pennies to spend and have fun...

Anyway, i totally agree with your opinion, maybe this topic needs some more discussion to hear other ppl what have to say. :oops:
 

Mavin1

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Location
Arizona
Just a quick response to the above.......

last 3 months aladdins wishes on two occasions 1000 and 1060 times my 40c

Aztec Feature Guarantee $98 on 25c stake.


Not to say that a low roller still can't get lucky once in awhile, because it can happen, just not as often and for fewer low rollers.
 

De Beuker

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Location
Netherlands
Okay, this is not going to be an endless debate about VARIANCE, RNG's OR RTP's. As I am still pondering them from other threads I had gotten myself into.

This is about the low roller, 20 cent to 75 cent players not finding the good play anymore and it is a fact despite the statistics of the above that the small player/low roller is being systematically exterminated from online casinos.

My reason for thinking this way is not based only on my experience but on the experience of many many posters here saying the same thing.
Can't get the bonus rounds or the free spins and the payouts are very rarely more than the wager amount. Usually the line win payouts are coming in at well below the wager amount keeping the low roller on a constant decline until they/we have busted out again and again.

Think about how when a new casino comes on board the play for everyone is very good and fair. Then they become known to the entire playing public and are hit with scads of high rollers, people that can afford to wager $2 and up. Now they have to rethink the RTP so they are not taken to the cleaners by the big money payers. How would they do this and yet still have the same statistics? My guess is and I have said this before, that they are spreading the wins out that are above the players wager amount and freespin/bonus rounds where a great deal can be won by the high rollers, by increasing the smaller wins (less than wager amount) inbetween the big wins. If a casino has increased smaller wins and decreased large wins then the RTP has not changed.

Think of it as a mile marker, for every mile you have a 1/4 mile marker, each of the 1/4 mile markers are a decent win with the less than decent to none inbetween every 1/4 mile marker and the 1 mile marker is the freespin/bonus round triggers. Now remove the 1/4 mile marker and only have the 1/2 mile marker and 1 mile marker, two of the now gone 1/4 mile markers have become the less than wager amount win to no win and the 1/2 mile has become the win equal to or above the wager amount as has the 1 mile marker. Now the freespin round/bonus rounds have been set to the 2 mile marker with the same amount of distance not changing between the 1/4 mile to the 2 mile thus not changing the RTP either. You still have the same RTP because statistically you are giving the same amount of wins spread out in smaller amounts. This keeps the casino at a constant attitude of what they are paying out keeping them in the profit margins they require and still be able to pay the high rollers the types of wins they are getting at the cost of sacrificing the low rollers.
Or think in terms of $1, they can still give the %100 of the dollar but in pennies instead of quarters, 50 cents or the $1.

That is why we are not heard, because if the line win amouts were adjusted back to the original 1 mile marker settings the high rollers would kill the casino business and I'm sure casinos would rather sacrifice the low rollers than themselves. So it will never be like it was for the little player ever again.

Hopefully I have not confused to many with this thought but maybe the real issue is not the RTP or RNG or Variance, it's the high rollers that are killing it for the low rollers because they have the means to keep banging away at a casino and walking away with decent sized bankrolls on a regular basis, where if we the low rollers manage to walk away with $50 anymore we feel we hit the jackpot.

I will add to be fair to the high rollers that maybe there are just to many of us low rollers too.
Just my opinion.
You might very wel be right..
I've often wondered how it is possible that some people just keep hitting those monsterhits at Rivals.
I've never ever hit anything over 1000x bet at Rival.
And Scary 1+2 and Psychedelic Sixties are my most played slots.
Those 2500x bet and higher wins always seem to hit on $2 or $4 or even higher bets..
And casino's dont like lowrollers, thats for sure.
Betway for example have altered their slots so its not even possible to low roll them anymore.
The minimum bet for Isis is $2,50 per spin, Avalon $2.- per spin..
 

Wildfire7

Dormant account
Joined
Apr 9, 2006
Location
UK
Surely the bet size is not relevant to the outcome. Bet size in proportion to the bankroll on a Pro rata basis, for low and high rollers it should be the same.

A low roller may have less chances because the zero balance will always be on the horizon before a lucky win could come to the rescue. Whereas someone with a larger bankroll can stick around that bit longer to hit something decent. Low rolling is good if your going for low cashouts, otherwise you need a lot of wins to keep your bankroll increasing.

An unusual thread in that its usually people saying that when they up their stakes they never win. Not the other way around.

Mike
 

Simmo!

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
May 29, 2004
Location
England
I've been told that because of deposit/cashout processing costs and the cost of support required to maintain a large player base, a low-roller is often seen as a loss-making player to a casino, so it *may* make sense for *some* casinos to reduce the number of low-rollers. Or turn them into higher rollers ;)

But, while the thread title is an interesting topic for discussion, I don't think they could do this through reductions in expected returns based on levels of play.
 

silcnlayc

Just one more spin pleez!
PABaccred
PABnonaccred
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Location
Left Hungary
And casino's dont like lowrollers, thats for sure.
That is because it ccosts them more in the long run for the deposits and withdrawals since many lowrollers withdraw less than $100 many times and deposit very little to begin with. Each transaction costs these casinos..If you look, the newer casinos are upping their minimum deposits..because of this.
An unusual thread in that its usually people saying that when they up their stakes they never win. Not the other way around.
I think many that are complaining in this department is upping the bet from 20 cents up to $1...not the higher stakes...and getting no return for it..

My husband just played $250 in lowrolling and got exactly ZERO bonus rounds in all the games he played at 40cents to $1...so there is something going on...because he even noticed it lately..

.
 

silcnlayc

Just one more spin pleez!
PABaccred
PABnonaccred
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Location
Left Hungary
Simmo! I've been told that because of deposit/cashout processing costs and the cost of support required to maintain a large player base, a low-roller is often seen as a loss-making player to a casino, so it *may* make sense for *some* casinos to reduce the number of low-rollers. Or turn them into higher rollers
Beat me to it! I said the same thing within seconds of your posting! :lolup:

.
 

Stovetopp

Senior Member
MM
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Location
On the Beach
I've been told that because of deposit/cashout processing costs and the cost of support required to maintain a large player base, a low-roller is often seen as a loss-making player to a casino, so it *may* make sense for *some* casinos to reduce the number of low-rollers. Or turn them into higher rollers ;)

But, while the thread title is an interesting topic for discussion, I don't think they could do this through reductions in expected returns based on levels of play.
Ridiculous!!! It cost the same to process 100 or 10000...I assume the casinos while located in "underdeveloped" countries uses computer and not human beings to do any transactions

I know for sure the B&M casinos make most of their monies on the penny machines..onjline casinos cant differiante bgetween penny machines or dollars machines so the odds are the3 same if you bet 5/spin or 20cents/spin
Here I am referring to the real series type slots and not the 3 reel slots.

This is my 2cents worth
 

Simmo!

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
May 29, 2004
Location
England
Ridiculous!!! It cost the same to process 100 or 10000
Some processors charge a percentage, but some others charge a fixed fee. And it wouldn't surprise me if most had a "minimum" charge unless they can handle micropayments. I think Visa/MC also have a fixed charge in place if I remember right.
 

Mavin1

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Location
Arizona
Ridiculous!!! It cost the same to process 100 or 10000...I assume the casinos while located in "underdeveloped" countries uses computer and not human beings to do any transactions

I know for sure the B&M casinos make most of their monies on the penny machines..onjline casinos cant differiante bgetween penny machines or dollars machines so the odds are the3 same if you bet 5/spin or 20cents/spin
Here I am referring to the real series type slots and not the 3 reel slots.

This is my 2cents worth

I understand the point Simmo made. Yes it costs the same to process $100 or $10000, but they lose in processing and overhead for the player that only deposits $25 compared to a player that deposits $1000, as the $1000 depositor is the one they make money on. With the $25 depositor that happens to get lucky it's all gravy for the player and not the casino.
 

dominique

Dormant account
Joined
Jul 5, 2003
Location
The Boonies
Actually, with the legal climate in the US, if you are cashing out into a US account the processing fees and time required can vary immensely. Processors are changing constantly and they can pretty much "ask" for anything they want. And they do.

It's one of the ways "prohibition" fosters criminal elements.

And that hurts everyone.
 

Mavin1

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Location
Arizona
You might very wel be right..
I've often wondered how it is possible that some people just keep hitting those monsterhits at Rivals.
I've never ever hit anything over 1000x bet at Rival.
And Scary 1+2 and Psychedelic Sixties are my most played slots.
Those 2500x bet and higher wins always seem to hit on $2 or $4 or even higher bets..
And casino's dont like lowrollers, thats for sure.
Betway for example have altered their slots so its not even possible to low roll them anymore.
The minimum bet for Isis is $2,50 per spin, Avalon $2.- per spin..



I agree with this statement as well. I used to play at Millionaire casino, quit because all the classic slots are a minimum of $2 and I'm a 30 cent player on those. Top Game, quit them for several reasons, but the attitude they have towards the low roller in a past post is, "The wagering requirements will not change for the progressives", we're talking $45 to $65 per spin!
This is just a small sample of again how lowrollers are eliminated.
 

Nifty29

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 20, 2001
Location
Turn right, then right. then right again
Good post Mavin and thankyou for your thoughts.

My guess is and I have said this before, that they are spreading the wins out that are above the players wager amount and freespin/bonus rounds where a great deal can be won by the high rollers, by increasing the smaller wins (less than wager amount) inbetween the big wins. If a casino has increased smaller wins and decreased large wins then the RTP has not changed.
Yes thats right....the RTP hasnt changed....but can anyone guess what has changed in this scenario?

In this situation, your money should last longer - not the other way around. The more smaller wins means more play time but less chance of a bigger win.

If the casino wanted to 'get rid' of low rollers, all they have to do is make the min deposit $50 or $100 and make the min slot bet $2....it isnt necessary for them to alter the games etc as this would affect the high rollers as well which would be counter-productive.

It is really important to realise that betting .20 or .40 per spin will very seldom result in a decent withdrawable balance, hence it is more likely for a low roller to just keep playing hoping for one of those 'monster' hits which almost never comes....and the money is gone. How do I know this?? I used to be a low roller. Nowadays Im certainly not a high roller, but I have increased my bet size and sacrificed some play time for a chance to hit a bigger win. My deposit amount hasnt significantly increased, so it just means that sometimes it is gone in very short order, but other times (as in the winner SS) I hit some really nice wins. I made that decision as I was in the same boat as some people above where I just never seemed to cash out..after all, you would need to win 500xbet to cashout $100 betting .20 spins, and $100 isnt exactly a huge amount and 500x bet doesnt happen very often either.

If you are on a very limited budget, its important to have a very strict set of guidelines in regards to cashout levels, bet levels and which games you play, with the latter being more important than you might think. If you dont have a large bankroll, dont play the high variance games like scary rich or rain dance or you will always be behind the 8 ball.

As for being disappointed with a 1000x bet win....that is a very rare animal and I would be jumping for joy! The 2500x wins etc you see are extremely rare and are more likely to be hit by players with big bankrolls who can absorb all the crap spins in between. In some cases, they might just be getting back some of the money they spent chasing it (which is the part you dont see in the winners screenshot thread - remember that).

Ask yourself this question = Why do you gamble?

If you play for fun just to pass the time etc, then low roll and stick to the low variance games. You might even consider video poker at low stakes.

If you want to make decent money at times (in the long run you wont), then increase your stake and choose games like scary rich etc.

If you dont care either way and you just gamble because you're sad or lonely or you cant help it, then please get some professional help as I guarantee it will all end in tears.

Good Luck!
 

pmhcfc

Experienced Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Location
UK
I'm inclined to side with the OP - I think they have it spot on.

I've always 'low rolled' and in the past this has netted me some very good returns - 6k from a 20 deposit being the best.

I only play at MG casinos, but that being said I've just about stopped playing at them all anyway...Why? Because of the non-returns I get from any deposit these days.

For eg; I have to ask myself why MG have completely changed 2 of my (old) favourite slots, they being Ladies Nite and Kathmandu. I'm not sure when they changed but it's fairly recent. I played these because the length of play-time one got with a relatively small deposit. You always knew with Ladies Nite that if you went 300+ spins without a bonus - there were always a batch of them coming soon - as many as 5 or 6 in as little as 150 spins and at least one of those would retrigger. Play Ladies Nite now and it's so hard to hit a bonus, let alone a retrigger and let alone seeing a bonus pay well - It's much the same with Kathmandu and many other of the MG slots.

In addition, look at all the deposit bonuses, suddenly you need to deposit upwards of 60 to even qualify for the bonus.

Why can't (or won't) MG introduce 10, 20 or even 25p (or cents) Roulette? Ladbrokes have 20p Roulette machines in all their shops and there are always people playing them.

And the big slot tornys are ALL geared toward the high-rollers...Yeah I know one or two people may have got lucky and won a torny without having to rebuy, but that's rarer than Rocking-Horse s*it.

I don't know why the casinos are taking the enjoyment away for the low-rollers, but they are. I'm not knocking those who can afford 2 + per spin, good luck to them, I just wish the casinos were like they used to be. You got much longer for your money and you always felt there was a chance you'd win a decent amount of money.

Happy New Year to every member.
 
Last edited:

Mavin1

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Location
Arizona
Good post Mavin and thankyou for your thoughts.

Yes thats right....the RTP hasnt changed....but can anyone guess what has changed in this scenario?

In this situation, your money should last longer - not the other way around. The more smaller wins means more play time but less chance of a bigger win.

If the casino wanted to 'get rid' of low rollers, all they have to do is make the min deposit $50 or $100 and make the min slot bet $2....it isnt necessary for them to alter the games etc as this would affect the high rollers as well which would be counter-productive.

It is really important to realise that betting .20 or .40 per spin will very seldom result in a decent withdrawable balance, hence it is more likely for a low roller to just keep playing hoping for one of those 'monster' hits which almost never comes....and the money is gone. How do I know this?? I used to be a low roller. Nowadays Im certainly not a high roller, but I have increased my bet size and sacrificed some play time for a chance to hit a bigger win. My deposit amount hasnt significantly increased, so it just means that sometimes it is gone in very short order, but other times (as in the winner SS) I hit some really nice wins. I made that decision as I was in the same boat as some people above where I just never seemed to cash out..after all, you would need to win 500xbet to cashout $100 betting .20 spins, and $100 isnt exactly a huge amount and 500x bet doesnt happen very often either.

If you are on a very limited budget, its important to have a very strict set of guidelines in regards to cashout levels, bet levels and which games you play, with the latter being more important than you might think. If you dont have a large bankroll, dont play the high variance games like scary rich or rain dance or you will always be behind the 8 ball.

As for being disappointed with a 1000x bet win....that is a very rare animal and I would be jumping for joy! The 2500x wins etc you see are extremely rare and are more likely to be hit by players with big bankrolls who can absorb all the crap spins in between. In some cases, they might just be getting back some of the money they spent chasing it (which is the part you dont see in the winners screenshot thread - remember that).

Ask yourself this question = Why do you gamble?

If you play for fun just to pass the time etc, then low roll and stick to the low variance games. You might even consider video poker at low stakes.

If you want to make decent money at times (in the long run you wont), then increase your stake and choose games like scary rich etc.

If you dont care either way and you just gamble because you're sad or lonely or you cant help it, then please get some professional help as I guarantee it will all end in tears.

Good Luck!

Okay, maybe I'm having a Sybil moment here. First you seem to like the post then you think I should get professional help? ;)
Well maybe I could use some but not for gaming, maybe for thinking to much. :D
As to your question for me to ask myself, why do I gamble, the answer there is I don't anymore. When I did, it was for mostly fun and as with anyone else to have the thrill of a nice win sometime. But when it has now become no fun for me personally anymore because the stakes have been upped for the lowroller then I knew it was time to call it a day. As I stated in the "What will you be doing for 2010" thread it certainly won't be online gaming.
But one has to reflect and ponder on just what it is that brings an online player to this point where the casino loses it's customers.
We have argued and debated the RNG and Variance issue till there was no more recourse, same with the RTP issues. These arguements and debates have been going on longer than I have been here and will go on long after I am gone because RNG's, Variances and RTP never really answers and satisfies the player when these stats do not match the experience.
Thus the reason for my original post.
 

nisosbar

Ueber Meister
PABnonaccred
Joined
Aug 28, 2009
Location
Right here
Wait, wouldn't the high-roller get just as bored as low-rollers if they were playing the same machines with the same RNG's? How would tinkering with the payouts serve to cater to high-rollers and, at the same time, eliminate low-rollers? I'm not getting the mechanics of this theory.
 

Mavin1

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Location
Arizona
I'm sure there are plenty of people that know exactly what I mean and it isn't about being bored.
 

GGW Laurie

Paleo Meister (means really, really old)
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Location
In the Beautiful South !!
I can honestly say i used to be a high roller a year or so ago, i remember well doing 100.00 spins and there are some screenshots to prove it, buried way back there somewhere in the screenie section.

I went from being a high roller to a low to medium roller, as i wasnt having the fun, and it was eating up alot of dough, sure i was hitting a few jackpots but i have hit some pretty damn good ones on 2.00 down to 40 cent bets. if it wasnt for us low rollers, most of these casinos would be out of bussiness and they know it imo, just like in Vegas, most of the money is played on 25 cent slots or less, they make up for alot of the casinos revenue, so ive been told..........laurie( low roller)................wanted to add, most of the casinos i played bigger bets at still treat me as well as they did back then, even tho i bet smaller now:)
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top