6a. Re: Sneaky Paytable Changes
Posted by: "HRDiane@aol.com" HRDiane@aol.com hrdiane
Date: Thu Aug 6, 2009 9:18 am ((PDT))There is a $1, $2, $5 multi-denominational 9/6 JOB machine at Oneida here in GB
that pays $239 for a Straight Flush with 5 coins bet,?instead of the common $250
payout. I have asked and no one knows "why" at the casino.? But it also only
pays 20 for a straight, not 25Seems such an odd "number" on a paytable.? Not an increment of 5 like all other
full coin payouts on this paytable.
20 for a straight is a "correct" payout on 9/6 JoB, assuming you're looking for the customary 99.54% return on that game.
I guess 239 for a SF could be considered "sneaky", since it's not the FH and flush payment that we're used to getting shorted on, but all of this emphasizes once again that we need to examine the entire paytable on a game before deciding it is or is not a so-called "full pay" game.
The rationale offered (re: 239 coints on a SF)is that it does not generate a W2G at 239 coin payout for $5 play, which is an implied "you don't have to pay tax" and/or, at least, "you don't have to be inconvenienced waiting for a W2G".
They are correct that you won't be inconvenienced waiting; personally, if I'm playing $5 denom., I wouldn't mind the inconvenience for my extra $55.
Of course, the fact that they are saving 11 coins on every SF, including (apparently) those that are not at $5 denom. and therefore would not generate a W2G anyway at 250 coin pay for SF, is certainly a factor in the casino's favor.
Also, of course, the win is taxable whether or not it generates a W2G, if the session generates a net win; W2Gs have nothing to do with reportable gambling wins and losses (although I will admit that many have reported here that they've had trouble convincing the IRS that their taxes are correct when they've reported a loss in a session in spite of a W2G payout, or a win less that implied by the W2G).
I do not know the % return effect of the reduced payout; the dollar amount per occurrence is significant, but the frequency of occurrence of a SF is not. I'd guess that the return is hurt much more by a reduction in payout of a single coin on any of the more common hands, i.e., full house on "down", and of course, reducing the payout on FH and/or flushes, often to disastrous levels, is the common downgrade.
I know there's software out there to figure this out, but I don't encounter these questions often enough to justify buying it -- but it would be interesting to me to know what payout reduction on quads (instead of 125) would be equivalent to a reduction from 250 to 239 on a SF; in my personal experience (or perception), quads certainly seem to come up far more than twice as often as SFs, which is not proportional to the 2x payout of 250 vs 125.
--BG
···
===============