--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.
>
>
> >
> The jackpot in question was for a generic four-of-a-kind, not a
> royal, that showed $252 in the meter but the machine locked up and
> showed a $5,000,000 jackpot on the screen.
>
>
>
I just dug the book out to make sure I had the facts right.
Nercessian discusses this case on pages 224/225. He describes the
machine involved as a "$.50 three-way progressive video poker
machine." For plagiarism reasons these are not his exact words but
words to the effect.
If a larger than expected jackpot is caused by a programming error by
a slot tech, it is not a malfunction. And this is exactly what the
Nevada Gaming Control Board ruled.
When the dispute occurred the patron involved called Gaming and his
lawyer in. It came out in the hearings that the slot tech simply
made an egregious error in programming the jackpot for the four-of-a-
kind. It should have been reset at $250 but instead the programmer
reset it at $5,000,250.
There was an upper limit safety that limited the jackpot liability to
$99,999.99. NGCB ruled that the computer and game performed exactly
as it was designed and programmed to do. Consequently, pay
up.
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
