Amazingly there still seems to be some confusion on why high progressive have the potential to be positive expectancies, and it seems to be focused on the unlikeliness of hitting Royal Flushes. Yes Royals are the rarest hand in VP, and one can go long periods of time without hitting one. One can also hit several in a short period, or even more unlikely, one could get exactly as many as they are supposed to. All of that is chance and no one is disputing it. Chance always plays a role in gambling, that's why they call it "gambling". There are no guarantees, only best guesses.
The question I was posing can be summed up thusly: If you look back at all the jackpots you have ALREADY HIT, would you have more money in your pocket right now if they had paid MORE when you hit them.
The answer to this question is so clearly, "Yes", I'm not sure why some people are still having trouble understanding the point.
I also stated in the original post that the "progressive concept" works for any jackpot, not just the Royal Flush.
It might interest you to know that at least half of my life-time action was spent playing for high Four of A kinds and High Straight Flushes. (NO ROYAL REQUIRED)
If it is still unclear as to why getting more for a jackpot is better than getting less for a jackpot, then I doubt I can say anymore on the subject to convince you.
Simply ask yourself this question, "If I was to hit a jackpot(any) would I rather get paid less or more?" If your answer is "less", then you may have a problem or be in a high risk category to develop one.
~FK
