22 replies to this topic

[kensplace2]

Either the people saying they put in x hundred quid in are lying, or the machines are not random and set on the percentage they claim to be on.

How can a random machine on say 94 percent payout, swallow 600 quid in a short period of time.

At 94 percent, or whatever high percentage these machines are on, the machine would be spitting wins out 94 percent of the time (randomly of course)......

That would mean it would take a long time to lose hundreds of pounds.

Unless the machines are not random.... and are rigged to not payout smaller wins, just a big win once in a blue moon. But if the machines offers smaller wins, as well as big ones, then it would payout the smaller ones on a regular basis as statistically they would come up more often. Meaning it should take AGES to lose that much. Never played one though, just thinking.

[spa]

In my local are Elvis, Random Spinner, Fortune 500, Slotto and Monopoly. The owner has told me that Monopoly is the most popular by a long shot.

IMO, they all play a fair game apart from Elvis. For some reason Elivis is by far the worst. Saw some poor lady stick a few hundred through with not much back at all, £50 in one spin the best, and 24 unwinning spins in a row (£48!).

[Winnie]

I think this is the problem with the £500 machines as they stand. Certainly Fortune 500 and Slotto on the hard settings are ruthless. I have played some of them where the wins are more distributed (i.e. wins of £100 - £250) - which means that at least you can get some of your money back instead of nothing or the jackpot. These things have brought back my addiction, I had stopped playing because the others had ceased to be fun.