Loose Change

[DynamiteRave]

Wow, I'm glad I'm not a betting woman... All this gambling talk has got my head going in circles. I might start spitting pea soup.

I'll just stick to slots. Anyone have any probability stats on those?

[jamf]

Originally Posted by DynamiteRave

Wow, I'm glad I'm not a betting woman... All this gambling talk has got my head going in circles. I might start spitting pea soup.

I'll just stick to slots. Anyone have any probability stats on those?

Yes, Somewhat...
Slot machines are not based on probability of winning, they are based on return percentages.
The return percentage is how much of your money the machine return on average. The state of Nevada has a mandated payout minimum of 75%. Most casinos in Las Vegas have a return of 92%. Some casinos will even advertise the payouts!

The return percentage can differ from machine to machine and is based over the life of the machine.

[DynamiteRave]

Originally Posted by jamf

Yes, Somewhat...
Slot machines are not based on probability of winning, they are based on return percentages.
The return percentage is how much of your money the machine return on average. The state of Nevada has a mandated payout minimum of 75%. Most casinos in Las Vegas have a return of 92%. Some casinos will even advertise the payouts!

The return percentage can differ from machine to machine and is based over the life of the machine.

DISCLAIMER: I'll admit when it comes to statistics and math I'm terribly stupid. I know no knowledge of statistics and probability! I haven't taken a class on it yet and when I do, I'll probably just squeak by with a C-. So if/when I say something stupid, I know I am. I'm just feeling my way through this. Don't kill me.

Alright so onwards to my question.. So basically I have a much better chance of receiving a payout at a Vegas machine compared to a machine elsewhere?

Does the probability of receiving a jackpot payout vary as well?

[jamf]

Originally Posted by DynamiteRave

Alright so onwards to my question.. So basically I have a much better chance of receiving a payout at a Vegas machine compared to a machine elsewhere?

Does the probability of receiving a jackpot payout vary as well?

Not necessarily, Casinos control the payouts. They will increase the payout range to the low to mid 90's to give the impression that the machines are hot.
I'm sure atlantic City and other places have similar payouts compared to vegas.

as far as the probability of hitting the jackpot, It depends on the machine and and how many lines, reels and icons per reel.

Example From Going To Vegas:
Lets take a simplified example of a three-reel machine. If a machine has 10 symbols on each reel, and there are two "blank" positions between each symbol, that's 30 positions on each reel. A three-reel machine gives 303 or 27,000 possible results that you could get when you pull the handle or press the "Spin" button. A fair number of these possible results will give smaller, partial payouts, but there's only a 1 in 27,000 chance that the combination of numbers that represents the machine's jackpot will be generated. Because the random numbers are generated so frequently and so rapidly, the combination of numbers that correspond to this 1 in 27,000 jackpot position of the reels could be generated quite frequently (relatively speaking). It's the probability that you will pull the handle or hit the "Spin" button at the precise moment that they are generated is what is very low.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by DynamiteRave

Alright so onwards to my question.. So basically I have a much better chance of receiving a payout at a Vegas machine compared to a machine elsewhere?

Does the probability of receiving a jackpot payout vary as well?

Hey, there's never anything wrong with not knowing about something, acknowledging it, and yearning to learn more. That's great. What I've got a beef with is saying you know all about it, yet assert something completely contradictory to mathematic principles that are generally accepted as law.

On to the answer, it's not necessarily that you'll receive "a payout." It's that you'll get more of your money back.

A machine paying on average 92% payout means that for every dollar you play, you are likely to get 92 cents back. That may come in the form of winning a dollar every four or five times you play that quarter, or it may come in the form of dealing with a major cold streak until you hit a major jackpot, or somewhere in between. Now, you should note, that if you play a machine long enough, you'll get real close to that advertised payout of 92 cents per dollar played. But most people don't play that long. So what ends up happening is you catch the cold streak before the big payout, run out of money, and finish up your day as a loser. Or perhaps you come into the machine after it's had a big cold streak, and you happen to catch a big payoff.

So the payback % isn't necessarily about how often you'll win. It's about how much the casino's machines pay out on average.

Also, I definitely have to say that just because a machine has been cold for a while doesn't mean it's inevitably due for a big payoff. They program some machines to be big losers, and others (generally near entries and doors) to be bigger winners. So there's no system you can apply to it (though people will try). That's why they're such moneymakers for the casinos. So when you add up all the losing machines in the place with all the winning machines in the place, it comes out to a 92% payoff percentage. But there's no way to tell which are the winning machines and which aren't. It's just luck, that's why they call it gambling!

As long as you head to the casino with the expectation that you're going to lose some money, and you're comfortable with losing a certain amount, you'll be sure to have a good time. The morons who go in with the intention of making money are the ones you see pulling their hair out and later lying in the gutter while drinking an MD 20/20.

[Schneed10]

And piggybacking off of Jamf's last post, it's not that casino's "program" certain machines to be winners and losers. Certain machines have different configurations that lead to certain payouts. Some are configured to pay you back at like 97.5%, others are configured at like 90%, and some still at a crappy 80%. And it's really tough to tell which machines are which. So casinos generally put the 97.5% machines near their entrances, because all that "ding ding ding" near the doors tends to draw people in.

So it's not about the casinos playing funny business and monkeying with the machines to pay you whatever they want, it's simply about them owning a mix of good paying machines and bad paying machines, placing them throughout their casino in strategic positions based on studies of human behavior in order to achieve the overall % payout they're looking for.

After all, a 92% payout means they earn eight cents per dollar played. That's how they roll.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

After all, a 92% payout means they earn eight cents per dollar played. That's how they roll.

Exactly.

This is the proper way to look at it. Every dollar you spend THEY MAKE 8 cents.

Extrapolate this over a large sample and it shows the picture.

Casinos in Vegas traffic close to $100,000,000 a DAY. The 92% being talked about is actually a relatively GOOD payout for a casino game. And let's be honest, all the games are in the end the same. You are betting on something happening that is more than likely NOT going to happen. That is the house advantage. If you use the 8% as the MAX the casinos are winnig (and it is probably very far from the max. They are actually probably pulling in the nieghborhood of 13-17%) Then vegas casinos make 8 MILLION DOLLARS A DAY. That is a normal day. A big day like Superbowl Sunday or a fight day and they are easily clearing 30 mil. It is how they stay in busniess. It is how the can afford to comp so much. It is how winning at roulette as a rule is impossible.

[SmootSmack]

I thought Schneed did try your method last year around this time?

Regardless, while I-among several other people here-simply don't see how your system can possibly work considering the laws of probability and statiscs, if you believe it works more power to you. And you're right there is no need to continue berating each other over it.

[724Skinsfan]

Okay, I finally figured out how to tie the original thread topic into the current one...

By switching the thread title from Loose Change to Choose Lange. Who the hell is Lange you might ask? Kenneth Lange to be exact. Simply one of the smartest mathematicians specializing in statistical probability and numerical analysis.

{sigh} I love the offseason...

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

Okay, I finally figured out how to tie the original thread topic into the current one...

By switching the thread title from Loose Change to Choose Lange. Who the hell is Lange you might ask? Kenneth Lange to be exact. Simply one of the smartest mathematicians specializing in statistical probability and numerical analysis.

{sigh} I love the offseason...

LOL...wait, I thought Ken Lange was the guy who played Isaac on The Love Boat??

[skinsguy]

I don't believe I have been this much entertained since the thread about question #3! I, of course, can't comment on everything that has been discussed, so this my abbreviated answer. Forgive me if I'm leaving anything out.

Conspiracy theories will cause you to lose any sense joy in life. I'm quite active with politics and government, but my life goes far beyond the things I can't directly control. 9/11 was a horrible day and I will honor those who lost their lives that day. But you know, that was almost seven years ago. Let's worry about what we have in the present.

I can't really add much with the gambling. I've never went to a casino before, and have never bought a lottery ticket in my life. The way I see it, I feel blessed to have the money I have. If I was going to basically give it all way, I'd give it to a local charity or church. But heck, if you like to gamble, that's cool. I usually wind up blowing my money on computer and stereo equipment..lol! I guess maybe I'm one of those guys that Rings used to beat up on in high school (hahaha not really. Never lost a fight in school! ;-0)

[GTripp0012]

Though, in Jsarno's defense, if the goal is to go into the night, and quit as soon as any money is made, the probability of leaving with less than you started with is pretty low.

Of course, you get that one bad string of luck where you keep playing to try to finish above, you lose many months of work by the system.

Sample size is totally going to eat the system up every time. Doyle Brunson (many time poker champ) used to say that he would play a lot more hands when his luck was running hot because he 1) made better decisions, and 2) could capitalize on his luck run while sitting tight during a period of cold cards.

The difference between Roulette and Poker is that Sample Size will eventually kill any Roulette system if you play long enough, where a poker player can continue to profit at the expense of the other players.

[SmootSmack]

I think we should leave it alone at this point. Clearly, I think the majority of us don't buy into jsarno's system-to me, it just doesn't make sense-but if he believes it works then let him believe it. It's not our money he's gambling away. No one's mind is going to change on this so why force it any longer?

[Schneed10]

Yeah, I'm not going to get into a childish war involving namecalling because it's pointless. I'll continue to debate the notion that any gambling system can work until I'm blue in the face, but a namecalling match doesn't interest me.

I will, however, note that I've received recent rep points for my arguments within this thread. Someone, who shall remain nameless, referred to you as a nice guy jsarno, but seeing you so hardheaded and unwilling to listen to reason made them take some kind of pleasure in seeing a strong argument go against you. More than one person took enough pleasure in it to give me positive rep points.

The rep points aren't my goal, I could care less about them. But it makes a key point; while you're busy worrying about being friendly and getting along, I'm worried about being right.

Being right doesn't mean I have to be an ass about it, for sure. But there are people out there who are enjoying seeing you get dressed down, because you're more than just trying to be friendly, you're ignoring reason. And people don't like that. So if you want to have this wonderful family atmosphere here on the Warpath, where everybody loves you and gets you through tough times, try listening to them.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Yeah, I'm not going to get into a childish war involving namecalling because it's pointless. I'll continue to debate the notion that any gambling system can work until I'm blue in the face, but a namecalling match doesn't interest me.

I will, however, note that I've received recent rep points for my arguments within this thread. Someone, who shall remain nameless, referred to you as a nice guy jsarno, but seeing you so hardheaded and unwilling to listen to reason made them take some kind of pleasure in seeing a strong argument go against you. More than one person took enough pleasure in it to give me positive rep points.

The rep points aren't my goal, I could care less about them. But it makes a key point; while you're busy worrying about being friendly and getting along, I'm worried about being right.

Being right doesn't mean I have to be an ass about it, for sure. But there are people out there who are enjoying seeing you get dressed down, because you're more than just trying to be friendly, you're ignoring reason. And people don't like that. So if you want to have this wonderful family atmosphere here on the Warpath, where everybody loves you and gets you through tough times, try listening to them.

I also don't think anyone should be taking pride in being right on this issue.

Look, it takes guts to step outside of the box and try to develop a successful system where none has been developed before. I'm not going to bash Jsarno for trying to do to Roulette what I've been trying to do with football player eval for the last two years.

It, however, takes even more guts to admit that no matter how much thought you put into a system, that all the effort was for naught. People tend to develop psychological biases towards what they are doing, and it becomes temporarily impossible to think clearly and logically towards the situation.

You and I both know that he will come around eventually, and realize that he can't beat the odds in a large sample. You stated your position, backed it up with the cold facts, and then added your signature, and often unnecessary "charm" to your posts.

You are right, and he is wrong, but it's not his fault that this evolved into a pissing match.