Party Bad Beat Jackpot: Absolute Crap? - Page 2

theben · #11 08-18-2005, 11:38 PM

its highway robbery

RydenStoompala · #12 08-19-2005, 07:27 AM

It's not a question of being forced to play. It's a question of +EV. I do not know the answer, which is why I made the post.

To a casual observer like myself, the 10% "admin" charge looks like a rediculously large vig for providing nearly nothing. I mean how hard is it to program these rooms? The house is getting a fantastic ride on the risk taken by the players. Given the probability of winning the jackpot, plus factoring in the normal rake that is also present, how does an operator justify the vig? Just because he can take it he does? OK. That is a good, legitimate answer.

daryn · #13 08-19-2005, 07:34 AM

in other news, casinos around the world offer games which, while popular to the casual gambler, actually feature a negative expectation value for the player.

craig r · #14 08-19-2005, 07:35 AM

[ QUOTE ]
in other news, casinos around the world offer games which, while popular to the casual gambler, actually feature a negative expectation value for the player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but is there really any proof of that? I would need some hard evidence before I believe this outlandish claim.

craig

jb9 · #15 08-19-2005, 09:28 AM

[ QUOTE ]
how does an operator justify the vig? Just because he can take it he does? OK. That is a good, legitimate answer.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe this is the answer.

Any advantage to playing the bad beat jackpot tables probably comes more from the looseness of the games vs. the non-bad beat jackpot tables rather than likelihood of winning the jackpot.

I've played at the 2/4 and 3/6 tables a fair amount, and they generally have fewer multitabling TAGs and more LPPs and LAGs than the normal tables -- especially 2/4 as it is the lowest of the BBJ tables and any .5/1 or 1/2 player who wants to take a shot at the jackpot ends up at these tables.

Whether or not this makes up for the extra rake, I'm not sure, and lately I've been suspecting that it really doesn't.

Perhaps if I get bored I'll try to find a way to compare pokertracker data for BBJ vs. normal tables (maybe by exporting sessions and sorting by table name??) and see if I notice anything interesting -- although I probably don't have enough hands played for any info to be reliable.

timprov · #16 08-19-2005, 10:07 AM

[ QUOTE ]

I've played at the 2/4 and 3/6 tables a fair amount, and they generally have fewer multitabling TAGs and more LPPs and LAGs than the normal tables -- especially 2/4 as it is the lowest of the BBJ tables and any .5/1 or 1/2 player who wants to take a shot at the jackpot ends up at these tables.

Whether or not this makes up for the extra rake, I'm not sure, and lately I've been suspecting that it really doesn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure they do, for me. They did this spring, and I noticed during the last bonus that they're even better now, I suspect because most of the multitabling TAGs are playing on skins with rakeback.

I'm sure they don't make up for not getting rakeback, but they're certainly nice for clearing the bonus. When I still had RB on Party, I ran the numbers and figured I was getting about 80% of jackpot rake I paid back in extra RB because of the substantially larger pot sizes than regular 2/4, and of course that I was paying less than my fair share of the jackpot drop.

theblitz · #17 08-19-2005, 11:15 AM

I have always wondered one thing about these BBJ tables:
Why are they only Limit?

Is there any reason not to have them on NL or PL?

Maddenboy · #18 08-19-2005, 12:46 PM

when last i checked, the Skins do not have jackpot tables.

Perhaps i misunderstood your post.

timprov · #19 08-19-2005, 01:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
when last i checked, the Skins do not have jackpot tables.

Perhaps i misunderstood your post.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's what I mean -- Party killing rakeback means TAGs playing under RB accounts don't have access to the BBJ tables.

Art Vandelay · #20 08-19-2005, 01:34 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Perhaps if I get bored I'll try to find a way to compare pokertracker data for BBJ vs. normal tables (maybe by exporting sessions and sorting by table name??) and see if I notice anything interesting -- although I probably don't have enough hands played for any info to be reliable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does PT count the jackpot drop as rake? I'd assume it does but I have no clue.

You have a good point about the lack of rakeback TAGs populating the BBJ tables; I believe I'll try clearing my next Party bonus there to see if the level of play is any better.