Are you sure you're not missing a zero on that devaluation. One percent reduction in dreamcard frequency doesn't seem at first glance to be as significant as you say. Another thing couldn't the difference in the %58 and %59 numbers just be a rounding difference and the actual difference could actually be less than %1. Just asking questions I'm no math whiz.
Regards
A.P.
From: mailto:vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2015 7:02 PM
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Dream Card
I thought I had replied to this earlier, but don't see the post. Maybe I self-edited. In any case, I've rethought the reply.
Bob reported the numbers provided by the manufacturer.
If the original 99.91% published ER for 9/15 DW was based upon a 59% Dreamcard frequency, but the actual installed frequency was 58%, I guesstimate (with likely accuracy) that this would reduce the ER by 0.85% to 99.05%.
That's a sufficient return depression that I'd be inclined to want to get this sorted before venturing with play.
That will only happen with someone running the numbers/probabilities in the manner that produced the game stat's in WOO's webpage, or perhaps contacting the manufacturer themselves.
The calculation is extensive, but by no means onerous (more likely just tedious). Perhaps you can get noti to dedicate the time.
- H.
---In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, <vegasvpplayer@...> wrote :
Do you know if Bob used the 58% or 59% Dream Card frequency? I don't think this article is any longer available for viewing by the public. Action Gaming may have decreased the frequency because casinos felt it was too generous. Hard to believe WOO would have used the wrong figure on every deuces wild game unless his web person was really incompetent\
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Posted by: "Albert Pearson" <ehpee@rogers.com>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (21) |
