Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 59

Thread: New VP game idea: Monster Jackpot Bonus Poker

  1. #1
    Dealt Royal 10,000
    Royal 800
    Straight flush 50
    4 Aces 80
    4 2-4 40
    4 5-K 25
    Full House 6
    Flush 5
    Straight 4
    Trips 3
    2 Pair 2
    Jacks or Better 1

    It's identical to 6-5 Bonus, except you get 10,000 coins per credit bet for a dealt royal. This adds 1.54% to the return, which makes it a 98.41% game -- still good for the casino, and lower than the dreaded (by the casino) "full pay".

    So someone playing 5 credits at $1 will win $50,000 for a dealt royal, which you would think would be very enticing. Even quarter players would win $12,500 for a dealt royal.

    At the same time, there's still the excitement of hitting quad aces or quad 2-4, which retains all of the interesting elements of bonus poker.

    The same game could be built upon 8/5 DDB, with a 98.32% return.

    Or if they really want to water down the paytable, they could do this with 7/5 DDB at a 97.25% return.

    I think this game would be a hit because of the allure of big money without having to play high limits.

    Does something similar exist?
    Check out my poker forum, and weekly internet radio show at http://pokerfraudalert.com

  2. #2
    Yes, there are several games that pay bonuses for dealt royals and these are usually multi hand games that also have premiums for dealt quads and dealt straight flushes. Don't ask me the names because I don't remember.

  3. #3
    I think Rob Singer once talked about a bank of dollar machines offering $250,000 for a dealt royal. I personally never saw one, but I don't travel to Vegas that often.

    Dealt royal jackpots (650,000-1) are much more attainable than the sequential royal (30+ million-1).

    I believe it's a good idea to advance the proliferation of dealt royal jackpots more widely, yes.

    To some extent, multi-play machines (3-play, 5-play, 10-play, etc.) give inherent bonuses to dealt royals via the nature of the games themselves.

  4. #4
    When Aria first opened they paid $1-million for a dealt royal on their 50 - play 25-cent games.

  5. #5
    Originally Posted by Count Room View Post
    Dealt royal jackpots (650,000-1) are much more attainable than the sequential royal (30+ million-1).
    I'm not certain that a sequential is that tough. I've gotten four of those and only one dealt royal.

  6. #6
    Originally Posted by Count Room View Post
    I think Rob Singer once talked about a bank of dollar machines offering $250,000 for a dealt royal. I personally never saw one, but I don't travel to Vegas that often.

    Dealt royal jackpots (650,000-1) are much more attainable than the sequential royal (30+ million-1).

    I believe it's a good idea to advance the proliferation of dealt royal jackpots more widely, yes.

    To some extent, multi-play machines (3-play, 5-play, 10-play, etc.) give inherent bonuses to dealt royals via the nature of the games themselves.
    That was a $2 DDBP game at Sam's Town.

    I believe dealt royals should ALWAYS be paid a 50,000 credit bonus.

  7. #7
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    That was a $2 DDBP game at Sam's Town.
    Rob: I'd like to compliment myself for at least remembering you mentioned that game, if not the denomination or specific game, because the $250K jackpot you mentioned and your walking away from the temptation with a small win after a quad was written AT LEAST five years ago.

    I'd like to think I don't have Alzheimers' yet....

  8. #8
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Yes, there are several games that pay bonuses for dealt royals and these are usually multi hand games that also have premiums for dealt quads and dealt straight flushes. Don't ask me the names because I don't remember.
    Deal/Draw poker comes to mind.

  9. #9
    Originally Posted by jbjb View Post
    I'm not certain that a sequential is that tough. I've gotten four of those and only one dealt royal.
    Much tougher to get a sequential than a dealt royal. The odds of a dealt royal is 1:649,740. But the first question is the sequential reversible or not. You can make a sequential two ways, either A-K-Q-J-T or T-J-Q-K-A. On most machines that have a sequential it's reversible.

    Without a strategy shift the odds of a reversible sequential is 1 in 60 royals.

    Just hypothetical here but if a 9/6 Jacks had a reversible on it, and without a strategy shift, then the frequency would be 40,391 X 60 = 2,423,460

    When you make a royal it can appear 120 different ways. The first card can be any one of the 5, the second card can be any one of the remaining 4, the third card can be any one of the remaining 3, the fourth card can be any one of the remaining 2, and the fifth card is whatever is left.

    5X4X3X2X1 = 120

    So the chances of a reversible sequential is 1 in 60 when you make a royal.
    Last edited by slobdinger; 12-25-2015 at 12:58 PM.

  10. #10
    120 x 40,000 = 4.8 million, Not 30 million. I think the 30 million figure is the odds of getting it holding just one card to a royal. One of mine was that holding an ace in the last position. I wasn't doubting it's tougher overall, just that it wasn't the 1 in 30 million figure.

  11. #11
    Some of the stuff I played in the old days was a five coin quarter FPDW (100.76%) with a $10,000 reversible sequential at the Fiesta.

    And the Carson Nugget in Carson City had 20 coin nickel 17/10 Loose Deuces (101.6%) plus a $10,000 reversible sequential. This game had auto-hold that played flawless except for the sequential strategy. It made it very easy to play two machines.

    Unfortunately, the sequentials I've hit were all on the wrong machines.

    I had a friend that hit a $50,000 sequential at the Riverside in Laughlin about 2006.
    Last edited by slobdinger; 12-25-2015 at 02:25 PM.

  12. #12
    Unfortunately, games with poor pay tables (mainly 6/5 BP) are so bad on the lower-paying hands, it doesn't take long before you're in the "I pretty much can't ever come out ahead" situation. After a few sessions, where people are losing every session, they're gonna stop playing. People don't like that and casinos don't like that. Casinos and players prefer games where they sometimes lose and sometimes win, giving the illusion they at least have a chance to win.

    Would probably be a more successful game (players enjoy it and continue to play it) if the 4oaks paid higher [no idea what they'd have to pay], while dropping a dealt RF to something like 5K credits (25K on a 5-credit wager).

    Or keep the 10K credit dealt RF, increase 4oaks, but change it to queens or better (or perhaps only kings or better) to keep the HE in the 1.5% range.

  13. #13
    Originally Posted by jbjb View Post
    120 x 40,000 = 4.8 million, Not 30 million. I think the 30 million figure is the odds of getting it holding just one card to a royal. One of mine was that holding an ace in the last position. I wasn't doubting it's tougher overall, just that it wasn't the 1 in 30 million figure.
    I was looking at a website that explains the sequential RF being dealt is just under 39 million to one. Obviously I was thinking of this number and didn't account for the other situations that dramatically improve those odds (ie. holding one or more sequential cards). I don't know what the actual odds are at this time.

    One other interesting option is to have bonuses for dealt full houses (693-1) and quads (4,165-1)...maybe even dealt straight flushes (~72,000-1). Setting these up on progressive jackpot meters sound viable with the dealt royal as well (~650,000-1).

  14. #14
    Maybe it's my selective memory, but I think most of the straight flushes I've gotten were dealt.

    For those of you who like sequential royal flush bonuses -- Red Rock casino in Summerlin has progressives for sequentials (both ways) on the $1 and $2 games (I remember seeing those) and I think also on the 25-cent games. You can choose among six different video poker games on these progressives.

  15. #15
    Bally's has a 25 cent progressive that pays in every suit. If you hit one in spades the other 3 suits keep progressing.

  16. #16
    Originally Posted by RS__ View Post
    Unfortunately, games with poor pay tables (mainly 6/5 BP) are so bad on the lower-paying hands, it doesn't take long before you're in the "I pretty much can't ever come out ahead" situation. After a few sessions, where people are losing every session, they're gonna stop playing. People don't like that and casinos don't like that. Casinos and players prefer games where they sometimes lose and sometimes win, giving the illusion they at least have a chance to win.

    Would probably be a more successful game (players enjoy it and continue to play it) if the 4oaks paid higher [no idea what they'd have to pay], while dropping a dealt RF to something like 5K credits (25K on a 5-credit wager).

    Or keep the 10K credit dealt RF, increase 4oaks, but change it to queens or better (or perhaps only kings or better) to keep the HE in the 1.5% range.
    I disagree.

    Plenty of casinos have degraded their paytables to these levels -- and that's without the enticement of this exciting 10,000-per-credit dealt royal.

    Double double bonus is the most popular variant of VP because gamblers have shown that they are wiling to lose most of the time in order to have a shot at a few big hits.

    8-5 DDB is a horrible game, yet it's very popular just because people like hitting their precious AAAA2/AAAA3/AAAA4 and getting paid half of what they do on a royal.

    I will say that 8-5 DDB is probably a better game to build this dealt royal payout, as 8-5 DDB is more popular in general than 6-5 bonus (and it has some more exciting quads payouts).

    Nobody will like a game where it's queens or better or kings or better. That's too foreign to what people are used to. Even DDB is built upon the foundation of JoB.

    Sadly, casinos are realizing more and more that the average gambler simply doesn't care about paytables, and simply wants to play for the big score. That's why the 99% machines are quickly disappearing, and some of these casinos decided they would actually prefer to lose the business of 99%-paytable-or-nothing players than keep them around and beat them for a small profit. It's just not worth the trouble and variance to some of these places, especially when you factor the rewards programs into it.

    This is part of the reason they were happy to no-offer Alan from Rincon. The main reason was that they were insulted regarding some critical articles/posts he wrote on this site, but they also didn't mind losing him because he was mainly playing a 99.26% game, so he really wasn't the type of player they wanted anyway.
    Check out my poker forum, and weekly internet radio show at http://pokerfraudalert.com

  17. #17
    There used to be some sequential royal games which paid 10,000 (just as I listed for my "dealt royal" game), and it was analyzed that these happen around once every 4,000,000 hands, assuming that "sequential" is defined only as T-A, and not A-T.

    However, this figure includes sequential royals that you can draw to.

    A dealt sequential royal (T-A only) will only occur once out of 78 million hands.

    So they could add an exciting "dealt sequential royal" bonus on a $1/credit game of $1,000,000 (for 5 credits played only), and only be adding 0.25% value to the paytable.

    I think this sort of thing should be added more often to VP games, as it will entice a lot more "dreamer" type players who play a lot more (and longer) with the hope of becoming an instant millionaire due to this stroke of luck.

    BTW, some of you might remember that near the end of my March Rincon trip, I almost hit a $200,000 dealt-royal-with-multiplier bonus on Double Super Times Pay, but I was dealt the wrong suit's queen.
    Check out my poker forum, and weekly internet radio show at http://pokerfraudalert.com

  18. #18
    Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post

    8-5 DDB is a horrible game, yet it's very popular just because people like hitting their precious AAAA2/AAAA3/AAAA4 and getting paid half of what they do on a royal.
    I've only seen 8/5 DDB when there is a royal progressive and sometimes with progressives on Aces and 2s. 3s, 4s.

    When there aren't progressives, then I've seen only 9/5 DDB at Caesars in Vegas.

    At Rincon they still had a couple 9/5 and even a 9/6 DDB on non progressive machines when I was there months ago. I have no idea what they have now.

    At Bellagio 9/5 DDB is pretty standard.

  19. #19
    It's more common on lower denomination machines in many places. Even 25¢ 7/5 DDB is popping up in places.

  20. #20
    Originally Posted by Count Room View Post
    Rob: I'd like to compliment myself for at least remembering you mentioned that game, if not the denomination or specific game, because the $250K jackpot you mentioned and your walking away from the temptation with a small win after a quad was written AT LEAST five years ago.

    I'd like to think I don't have Alzheimers' yet....
    Yes I recognized that, and it was a long time ago. You also have the scenario correct!

    mickey, during the Riverside's 25th anniversary year I hit a dollar royal by it being dealt sequentially. As they counted out my $4000 I noticed a substantially larger wad. Turns out they had a year-long 25,000 credits bonus for any dealt sequential RF for the whole year, up thru the $5 machine. However, when I read the rules afterwards they stated that it had to be AKQJT only and not in reverse. Every 50,000 credit bonus for dealt royals in any order I've seen have allowed reversible.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •