On Sun, 13 Mar 2011 09:24:14 -0000, DesmondT wrote:
>Would the comparison between progressive VP machines and live poker tables be appropriate?
>
>In poker, the money generally flows from bad players to smart players and the casino takes a cut (rake).
>
>In progressive VP, the same thing generally happens and the casino's cut is built into the paytables and added onto by bad play and strategy changes. Why wouldn't casinos encourage this? They don't 86 Daniel Negreanu or Doyle Brunson from live poker tables. In fact, they encourage their play.
>
>With non-progressive VP, smart players take their edge against the casinos. With progressive VP, smart players take their edge against other gamblers and the casinos get their money from both groups.
>
>Seems like a no-brainer to me to put in more progressives.
There are a few relevant differences between live poker and video
poker. One is that professional poker players help keep games alive,
whereas a progressive jackpot doesn't "break up" if too few players
play it. Another is that a progressive is usually either good or bad
for both professionals and non professionals, whereas live poker is
usually good for the professionals and bad for the non professionals.
To be consistent, since professionals, whether video poker or live
poker, tend to not lose back their winnings in other games in the
casino as much as non professionals do, maybe they should 86 the Doyle
Brunsons.
