Why do people think RTP matters? (Slot machines)

[dirtystack]

On 27/01/2020 at 11:25, CC. said:

No I am not wrong, the real rtp will "not show" after just many spins, you need to practically play for so long that is not humanly possible. It does not matter if you play land or online, its just a trick for online gambling.

 

Where in his post, that you are referencing and replying too did he say:

On 27/01/2020 at 11:25, CC. said:

after just many spins

???

Nowhere did he say that.

This is why it is pointless to debate with you, you have a position, you have stuck your feet in.

You exaggerate everything that agrees with you.

You diminish, misinterpret, misquote and misrepresent anything that contradicts you.

How on earth are you ever going to learn anything?

 

 

[CC.]

6 hours ago, dirtystack said:

If you c.c provide a question, a question that has a point, It will be asked.

My question is: do RTP matter? If so, how! Or is it just plane luck in the end.

This is not a troll thread, im sorry if it sounds like it. I dont speak much english, but I try my best so please have patient with me.

My take is that RTP does not matter, but hey show me how I am wrong and I will change my mind. I know this is not they standard way of doing things (If you belive in something you should prove it, not the other way around, I know it)

But for me to change my mind I dont want oppinions, I want facts, statistics and other "hard proof" thats why I made this thread on Casino Grounds because I know there are people who know this things here.

[dirtystack]

Maybe it was a bad idea.

  Would be laughed out of the business for asking if the very basis of the business matters... no way I am asking that. 
 

just google “does RTP matter?” and educate yourself on it, there is a hell of a lot of information on it.

 

Sorry but, fear of ridicule prohibits that question.

My stupid condescension putting me in a tough spot, again, fuck me.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[CC.]

17 minutes ago, dirtystack said:

Maybe it was a bad idea.

  Would be laughed out of the business for asking if the very basis of the business matters... no way I am asking that. 
 

just google “does RTP matter?” and educate yourself on it, there is a hell of a lot of information on it.

 

Sorry but, fear of ridicule prohibits that question.

My stupid condescension putting me in a tough spot, again, fuck me.
 

I have tried Google and other ways to get an answer to my question, but didnt find anyting of great value. Do you have some links?

[dirtystack]

I’m trying to sleep and have work in 5 hours.

 If you can wait a couple of days for my days off to come around, I’ll spend some time in finding some links.

For now, I’d just like to sleep, nightshifts really mess up your sleeping patterns.

[TalkingSlots]

13 hours ago, CC. said:

Is there any proof out, that you know about that support that theory?

 

I think it's a very interesting discussion, and I understand it appears complex so I will try again. In most cases like this where mathematics are the 'support' and it's not theoretical, the problem lies with 'how' to explain it so I will go a different angle.

I also struggle a bit to see what level of evidence makes you feel comfortable, there's been plenty of good posts on the subject in this thread but you don't seem to move from your stance, maybe we are missing something in what you are trying to say.

 

You also mention I simplify too much with the tossing of coins, maybe, as it's going too far away from slots gameplay. But RTP within slots is a complicated bunch of potential outcomes due to reelbands and features of a game, so it kind of has to be simplified to explain I think.

 

Let's go with scratchcards. They are an advanced version of slots I'd argue. They are also limited in a batch making it easier to explain.

So let's assume we have the TalkingScratch line in scratchcards, the total batch is 10 tickets, the cost is €1, prize pool is €8 and prize structure is like this:

 

3
2
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
 

The RTP here is 80%.

If we keep everything constant, but lower the RTP to let's say 70% then prize pool becomes €7 and in the prize pool we remove one €1 prize to reach our goal:

 

3
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0

 

You now have 10% more chance of getting a €0 instead of a €1. We have effectively reduced the hitrate of our scratch cards.

 

We could achieve a drop of 10% in other ways, the pool becomes €7 through redistributing the prize pool:

 

3
2
1
0.5
0.5
0
0
0
0
0

 

Now we didn't decrease the hit rate, we just lowered the value of two hits achieving the same drop in RTP.

 

And this is where the difference lies with Book of Dead on Unibet compared to Book of Dead on Videoslots (in my opinion the tasteless act of offering lower RTP games should be very visible through payline prizes, and not by a 'hidden' reduction in 'hit rate')

And to give the above some weight, I have worked both on B2C and B2B side of the industry. In a way that might explain the trouble in explaining things that have been standard things in my line of work the last 15 years.

 

[CC.]

14 minutes ago, TalkingSlots said:

I think it's a very interesting discussion, and I understand it appears complex so I will try again. In most cases like this where mathematics are the 'support' and it's not theoretical, the problem lies with 'how' to explain it so I will go a different angle.

I also struggle a bit to see what level of evidence makes you feel comfortable, there's been plenty of good posts on the subject in this thread but you don't seem to move from your stance, maybe we are missing something in what you are trying to say.

 

You also mention I simplify too much with the tossing of coins, maybe, as it's going too far away from slots gameplay. But RTP within slots is a complicated bunch of potential outcomes due to reelbands and features of a game, so it kind of has to be simplified to explain I think.

 

Let's go with scratchcards. They are an advanced version of slots I'd argue. They are also limited in a batch making it easier to explain.

So let's assume we have the TalkingScratch line in scratchcards, the total batch is 10 tickets, the cost is €1, prize pool is €8 and prize structure is like this:

 

3
2
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
 

The RTP here is 80%.

If we keep everything constant, but lower the RTP to let's say 70% then prize pool becomes €7 and in the prize pool we remove one €1 prize to reach our goal:

 

3
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
0

 

You now have 10% more chance of getting a €0 instead of a €1. We have effectively reduced the hitrate of our scratch cards.

 

We could achieve a drop of 10% in other ways, the pool becomes €7 through redistributing the prize pool:

 

2.5
2
1
0.5
0.5
0.5
0
0
0
0

 

Now we didn't decrease the hit rate, we just lowered the value of all the hits achieving the same drop in RTP.

 

And this is where the difference lies with Book of Dead on Unibet compared to Book of Dead on Videoslots (in my opinion the tasteless act of offering lower RTP games should be very visible through payline prizes, and not by a 'hidden' reduction in 'hit rate')

And to give the above some weight, I have worked both on B2C and B2B side of the industry. In a way that might explain the trouble in explaining things that have been standard things in my line of work the last 15 years.

 

First off I would like to thank you for your post. I do agree what you are writing and I understand that. I may have been vague in my starting post.

The thing I really want to know is how RTP affect just me as a player. I do understand that if the RTP is 97%, 97% of the money put in will get back to the players, if its 80%, 80% will get back, so in those terms it would be better to play the 97% machine.

But! Since RTP is calculated over long term, and billions of spins, will RTP in reality affect me as a player, or is it just pure luck in the end? This is the question I would like an answer for.

Like the scratch card exempel you brought up, it would not matter the RTP if I am unlucky regardless the odds.

[TalkingSlots]

Well, I would argue my example answers your question. With 10 spins you miss out on €1 in both lower cases, you end up with €7 instead of €8 (clearly no billions of spins).

Luck is in some way relevant to 'dodge' the lower RTP cards in example 2, but in example 3 you always lose out, even with limited amount of cards

[CC.]

1 hour ago, TalkingSlots said:

Well, I would argue my example answers your question. With 10 spins you miss out on €1 in both lower cases, you end up with €7 instead of €8 (clearly no billions of spins).

Luck is in some way relevant to 'dodge' the lower RTP cards in example 2, but in example 3 you always lose out, even with limited amount of cards

In basic theory yes. But lets talk about the real thing. The thing I am interested in is when streamers for say dont play a certain machine because its only 95% rtp rather then 96, or 97. Would RTP really matter?

[The Reel Story]

Ok, so I'm gonna start off by dropping my video here

In it, I build a simple slot machine (starts at about 4:35) and show the result of simulations over differing numbers of spins (11:30). As you can see, there is a big variance at 1,000 spins, but it's not huge. My example is a low volatility one though, if it was a higher volatility slot, you would expect the variance to be higher (this is why volatility is so important).

As has been said before, you are both right and wrong.  Low, statistically insignificant numbers mean the RTP matters less, but it's not true that it doesn't matter at all. So here are the facts. At low number of spins:

1. Luck is the most important factor

2. Volatility is more of a factor than RTP at low numbers of spins (I.E, get lucky and hit it big on a high volatility slot and your laughing. On a low volatility slow, low numbers or high numbers of spins, either way your balance will trend downwards).

3. RTP does still matter at low numbers of spins, but it doesn't matter very much. Simply think about it that with a lower RTP, each spin has a fractionally lower chance of hitting that big win. So if you play a higher RTP version of a slot, your chance of hitting that big win are *very slightly* higher, meaning you need a tiny bit less luck. Of course, you want every advantage you can get. Card Counting in BlackJack only adds about 1% to the RTP, but it's enough to turn sustained losses in to sustained profits over relatively low numbers of hands.

P.S, I did work in the industry, but I don't anymore. So I do not have access to simulation statistics like I used to. That said, I believe our maths guys would get a good idea of RTP, on a low volatility slot) from 10,000 odd spins. On a higher volatility one it was more like 50-100,000 I think.

P.P.S, as to whether the RTP effects you as a player directly? We'll never know.

If you went and played a 92% version of a slot, rather than 96%, and did 100 spins, it's POSSIBLE that you missed out on a massive win because of it. We can never know for sure, but mathematically and statistically, it IS possible. Likewise, if you went and played a high RTP slot and got a big win, it's POSSIBLE you may not have hit that win on the low RTP version.

Til we can compare parallel dimensions, we'll never really know 🙂

[moimei]

it is all about luck  

[SixtyHertz]

There was a study that showed players were 80% accurate in discerning RTPs ( i would find the link but i'm too damn lazy )... so yes it does matter, and like a previous poster said, billions of spins are for accuracy of the RTP down to like the third or fourth decimal point... so yes you probably can't tell the difference between 96.50% and 96.49% but you actually can tell the difference (at least 80% of players could) between 92% and 96%...

[PMT Slots]

I don't think it really matters playing one game over another because of 1-2% RTP difference. That only makes sense if you're playing the SAME game and planning to play it for a long session but one site has a better RTP than the other.

[CC.]

18 hours ago, The Reel Story said:

Ok, so I'm gonna start off by dropping my video here

In it, I build a simple slot machine (starts at about 4:35) and show the result of simulations over differing numbers of spins (11:30). As you can see, there is a big variance at 1,000 spins, but it's not huge. My example is a low volatility one though, if it was a higher volatility slot, you would expect the variance to be higher (this is why volatility is so important).

As has been said before, you are both right and wrong.  Low, statistically insignificant numbers mean the RTP matters less, but it's not true that it doesn't matter at all. So here are the facts. At low number of spins:

1. Luck is the most important factor

2. Volatility is more of a factor than RTP at low numbers of spins (I.E, get lucky and hit it big on a high volatility slot and your laughing. On a low volatility slow, low numbers or high numbers of spins, either way your balance will trend downwards).

3. RTP does still matter at low numbers of spins, but it doesn't matter very much. Simply think about it that with a lower RTP, each spin has a fractionally lower chance of hitting that big win. So if you play a higher RTP version of a slot, your chance of hitting that big win are *very slightly* higher, meaning you need a tiny bit less luck. Of course, you want every advantage you can get. Card Counting in BlackJack only adds about 1% to the RTP, but it's enough to turn sustained losses in to sustained profits over relatively low numbers of hands.

P.S, I did work in the industry, but I don't anymore. So I do not have access to simulation statistics like I used to. That said, I believe our maths guys would get a good idea of RTP, on a low volatility slot) from 10,000 odd spins. On a higher volatility one it was more like 50-100,000 I think.

P.P.S, as to whether the RTP effects you as a player directly? We'll never know.

If you went and played a 92% version of a slot, rather than 96%, and did 100 spins, it's POSSIBLE that you missed out on a massive win because of it. We can never know for sure, but mathematically and statistically, it IS possible. Likewise, if you went and played a high RTP slot and got a big win, it's POSSIBLE you may not have hit that win on the low RTP version.

Til we can compare parallel dimensions, we'll never really know 🙂

Thank you very much for your contribution. Great video btw!

[LetsGiveItASpin]

On 28/01/2020 at 21:12, CC. said:

Is there any proof out, that you know about that support that theory?

Dont get Roulette in to this, we only talk about slotmachines. You have conections in the gambling industrie, it would be fun getting an answer from people building the machines, do you think its possible?

You should do statistics on your game, would be fun to see the result when playing different slots/RTP, to really see if RTP matters.

I know there is a simulator somewhere, just can't find it right now but I'll try and see what I can do.

On 28/01/2020 at 21:35, CC. said:

Mega Joker and Jackpot 6000 have 98-99% RTP, what is your looses on them machine Kim?

Hahaha, the fun thing is that I didn't play Mega Joker optimal, actually far from so my theoretical loss is way higher than it's supposed to be.

Sidenote is that I had a turnover of $2,000,000 in Las Vegas on Video Poker which has 99.54% RTP, if that was a slot with 90% RTP my average loss would be a staggering $200,000