Comment by blunte | Hacker News Reader

Comment by blunte | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

And I have sat many times beside a guy who has no qualms against pumping $2,300/min into $100 slot machines, only to walk out of the casino with far more than he came in with.

He talks to the VIP slot hosts, and to other VIP players. Then he picks the machines that are "loaded up" and "are due to pay out". I've tried to explain that this means nothing. But in his mind, it makes total sense.

In the limited experiences observing him, I cannot say his (unfounded) beliefs are not accurate. That said, I've explained that slots are designed to pay out a certain percentage in a year, based on millions of plays. One high roller weekend is just a drop in that bucket, so _anything can happen_.

It's quite a scene to have several machines tied up because they're on the jackpot, and the slot host is busy working on 1099 forms while you play another "due" machine.

None of this is near as exciting as the MIT blackjack stories, but it is still pretty cool to see what $161k looks like in neatly wrapped stacks of 10k.

Not sure the particulars of your friend's situation, but some slot machines have a Jackpot that increases in value the longer it hasn't paid out. If the machine happens to hit a stretch of not paying out the jackpot for a long time, the EV of playing actually does become positive (assuming you can bankroll yourself until you hit the jackpot).

Some video poker machines with jackpots can actually end up becoming +EV, or in other words you win money (in the longrun) with each play. The immediate payout rate for many of these machines is already quite high with a house edge < 1% given optimal play, so in other words on a $100/play game you'd really be losing less than a dollar per play on average even without any additional incentives. Factor in hotel comps, and it can be +EV even without jackpots. Wagering $100k would only be a house edge of ~$800.

Some of these machines (at least in europe) are actually required by law to average out to a certain return percentage over a set number of bets. This means they need to compensate for naturally accuring bad streaks. (And good...)

You wouldn't see that in most US jurisdictions that have proper gaming laws and review (NV and NJ being the big ones).

The software and underlying math is audited by a third party and verified to produce the desired average result over millions of plays, but cannot adjust the odds dynamically to make sure that percentage is hit.

A proper die doesn’t need to compensate to make sure every side is hit the same amount of times.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com