I never made the request, but I play it a lot.
On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 17:17:02 -0000, Sai Sai wrote:
>Frank wants to hear ideas that will be good for the M and good for the pros currently hitting that play every day so a reduction in the meter rise is not going to work. If the actual pros stop playing the bank it would be a lot more profitable for the M and it wouldn't need a change. Out of curiosity Frank you keep mentioning that it was a big request from VPfree posters to have this type of progressive. The only person riding the FrankNBobs kool-aid seems to be BartopBob. How many actual VPree members play this bank that made this request?
>
>--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, 007 <007@...> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 15:49:55 -0000, Bob Bartop wrote:
>>
>> >--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, jaycee5353@ wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Here is another thought on the meter movement consept.
>> >> You could reduce the meter when the games go positive.
>> >> For example at $1800 the meter reduces by 80% for the
>> >> balance of time until hit.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >On these games it is more like $2700, not $1800.
>> >
>> >Anyway, I don't want to sound rude, but this is a lousy idea. Nothing personal. lol
>>
>> LOL indeed! You must be expressing a player's perspective. That's
>> the worst idea I've heard from my point of view, also, but if you
>> owned the M, would you regard it as a lousy idea? Barley's didn't
>> tolerate this arrangement for long. I can't imagine often having
>> $4500 quarter royals being optimal for them.
>>
>
