- Joined
- Mar 29, 2013
- Location
- United Kingdom
@snorky510238 Why do you think the RTP is low in bookies? I'll give you a clue, its nothing to do with the games providers wanting to rip players off...
@snorky510238 Why do you think the RTP is low in bookies? I'll give you a clue, its nothing to do with the games providers wanting to rip players off...
The category of games I suppose but when they have games like raging rhino it tells me that game must be gimped. You can play at £2 a spin for instance but can’t win more than £500 so explain that for example.@snorky510238 Why do you think the RTP is low in bookies? I'll give you a clue, its nothing to do with the games providers wanting to rip players off...
Actually this has nothing to do with it... They still have to comply with the UKGC technical standards regardless of where they are based. That's more for tax reasons...
If the RTP is at stupendously low levels then it certainly is a polite way of ripping players off.
Unless this falls under the 'It's legal' umbrella
Post #2, towards the end?? (or am I way off, again )
The category of games I suppose but when they have games like raging rhino it tells me that game must be gimped. You can play at £2 a spin for instance but can’t win more than £500 so explain that for example.
The statistics only quote the overall number or self excluded gamblers which is 6% of all gamblers. These are figures for the UK. I imagine self exclusion is used more online than in bookies and casinos just because it's easier. Two clicks and you're done which is a good thing.Yes I see what you meant about the amounts it’s possible to lose FOBTS v online. Like I said if there is a lot of things that need changing/looking at more in depth but listing them all is pointless as it’s all hypothetical. Just out of interest what would be your guesstimate on the number of self excluded players at a bookmakers v casinos percentage wise. As regards the random part you are right I will never change my mind.
What do you define as stupendously low? It's always a little different for different people. And if you know the RTP and still choose to play...can that be considered ripping players off?If the RTP is at stupendously low levels then it certainly is a polite way of ripping players off.
Unless this falls under the 'It's legal' umbrella
There is on the AWP's. Or used to be.Well there is no minimum RTP in the UK. One of the few places in the world not to have one... i can't argue that's a good thing in any way
There is on the AWP's. Or used to be.
That’s a very polite way of putting it. Is “special maths” the type where 2+2=5 or is it a class for retarded slot players?.Well if by gimped you mean having special maths for the UK market then yes they are. I'd call it localised rather than gimped...
That’s a very polite way of putting it. Is “special maths” the type where 2+2=5 or is it a class for retarded slot players?.
There is on the AWP's. Or used to be.
Dont know if they still use them but I think the rtp keys fitted to fruits didnt go below 78%
I think most use DIL switches now - not seen keys in a long time. There are some spoons in Brum on 72%...
You wouldn’t believe how uneducated and care free most of them are to begin with. You hardly ever see anyone checking the rtp. They just assume it’s a slot it must payout. It’s only when they have lost a couple of grand that they question anything. I have seen some horrendous occurrences on these things. One if not the worst was a guy doing £100 a spin on roulette leaving 5 numbers blank. One of the blank numbers was 6. He had 5 spins and 4 of them landed in 6. There are hundreds more like it but you could go on forever. Not even the remotest chance they are random.Dont think a lot of players realize how bad these rtp,s are and the effect of playing at that kind of level.
I used to design machines for Barry Nobles and they used to run 25p machines at 92%,and they made
plenty of money at that level.Operating a £2 machine at sub 90% is not a sustainable business model
unless there is only passing trade