Australia's Gambling Industries - Productivity Commission
Australia's Gambling Industries - Productivity Commission Australia's Gambling Industries - Productivity Commission
Table U.3 Credits\ lines Expected hourly losses on Cash Chameleon a Results for different playing styles 1 credit per line 5 credits per line 10 credits per line 20 credits per line 25 credits per line Player return=92.13% $ $ $ $ $ 1 line 1.13 5.67 11.33 22.67 28.33 5 lines 5.67 28.33 56.66 113.33 141.66 10 lines 11.33 56.66 113.33 226.66 283.32 15 lines 17.00 85.00 169.99 339.98 424.98 20 lines 22.67 113.33 226.66 453.31 566.64 Player return = 87.78% 1 line 1.76 8.80 17.60 35.19 43.99 5 lines 8.80 43.99 87.98 175.97 219.96 10 lines 17.60 87.98 175.97 351.94 439.92 15 lines 26.40 131.98 263.95 527.90 659.88 20 lines 35.19 175.97 351.94 703.87 879.84 Player return = 85.15% 1 line 2.14 10.69 21.38 42.77 53.46 5 lines 10.69 53.46 106.92 213.84 267.30 10 lines 21.38 106.92 213.84 427.68 534.60 15 lines 32.08 160.38 320.76 641.52 801.90 20 lines 42.77 213.84 427.68 855.36 1069.20 a The formula for the expected (or average) dollar value of losses from playing one hour continuously is: Expected loss 3600 D × C × L × ( 1− r) × BPT = where C is the number of credits staked per line, L is the number of lines played per button push, r is the player return (for example, 0.9213), D is the denomination of the machine (such as 1 or 2 cents, and in the above examples a 2 cent machine), BPT is the time elapsed between button pushes (here set at 5 seconds). Cash Chameleon comes with four return options for the venue/jurisdiction (87.78%, 85.15%, 90.42% and 92.13%). The table above shows the player loss outcomes associated with three of these return rates. Source: Commission calculations. The expected losses also vary by the machine denomination and the player return rate. Clearly, the one cent Cash Chameleon with the same return rate as above, has half the expected player loss per hour for the same playing style. Far less obvious is the influence of the player return on the expected player losses. The Cash Chameleon machine has a number of variants, offering returns as low as 85.15 per cent and as high as 92.13 per cent. As noted in chapter 16, both the maximum and minimum return rates on these variants appear to be high returns, and many people would think the difference slight. However, different player return rates — which are produced by usually making a few simple changes to the symbols on one or two reels — can have a large impact on expected player losses. Thus playing at top HOW GAMING MACHINES WORK U.5
intensity on the 85.15 per cent Cash Chameleon will set back the gambler an expected $1 069 per hour but nearly halves this to $567 per hour on the 92.13 per cent version. Gaming machines are entertaining precisely because of interesting game features and the unpredictability of the outcomes. The complex payoff distributions in gaming machines mean that the returns that gamblers make from games vary significantly in the short run. The corollary to this is that the return rates realised by players will vary considerably from playing session to session. As noted by the AGMMA (sub. D257) and in chapter 16, this implies that players will not be able to readily determine the ‘price’ of single machine, except after many trials. Figure U.1, which shows the player returns from 100 000 simulations of a gaming machine, confirms gaming manufacturers’ statements about the extreme volatility of actual outcomes on poker machines. 6 For example, while the expected net losses from playing on a 10 cent Black Rhino at maximum intensity (nine lines and ten credits per line) are around $780, there is around a 30 per cent chance that the losses will be $1 300 or more per hour. Similarly, there is around a 2.3 per cent chance that the gambler will make a net $1 300 win in an hour long session at this maximum intensity. The odds of breaking even or better are around 17 per cent. U.3 Game volatility Even while all styles of play involve highly unpredictable returns over a reasonable session time, the player can decide whether they wish to increase this unpredictability further by choosing certain playing styles. For example, a Black Rhino player could: • choose a 10 cent machine and play one line with 10 credits per line (staking $1 per button push) — playing style 1; or • also stake $1 a button push by choosing a 2 cent machine and playing 5 lines and 10 credits per line — playing style 2. 6 These data and other simulations of a gaming machine in this appendix are based on software developed by the Commission. The program, which runs on MS Windows 95+ platforms, is available on request from the Commission. U.6 GAMBLING
- Page 333 and 334: Table Q.2 Employment status of prob
- Page 335 and 336: Table Q.3 continued Study Average a
- Page 337 and 338: Relationship status The greater inv
- Page 339 and 340: Table Q.6 Gender of problem gambler
- Page 341 and 342: The pattern of an increased feminis
- Page 343 and 344: R Bankruptcy and gambling This appe
- Page 345 and 346: Table R.2 Age profile of bankrupts,
- Page 347 and 348: Table R.5 New bankruptcies per mill
- Page 349 and 350: Figure R.2 continued Western Austra
- Page 351 and 352: • The penalty has become less sev
- Page 353 and 354: S State and territory gambling data
- Page 355 and 356: Table S.4 Real government revenue f
- Page 357 and 358: Table S.8 Real government revenue,
- Page 359 and 360: Table S.12 Real government revenue
- Page 361 and 362: Table S.16 Real government revenue
- Page 363 and 364: Table S.20 Real government revenue
- Page 365 and 366: Table S.24 Real government revenue
- Page 367 and 368: Table S.28 Real government revenue
- Page 369 and 370: Table S.32 Real government revenue
- Page 371 and 372: Table S.36 Real government revenue
- Page 373 and 374: Dickerson et al (1998, p. 79) for e
- Page 375 and 376: However, the survey used a set of p
- Page 377 and 378: T.3 The logistic approach The NORC
- Page 379 and 380: Table T.3 Method Various estimates
- Page 381 and 382: such as France and the US (Casino I
- Page 383: Table U.2 An example of an outcome
- Page 387 and 388: considers that the machine price
- Page 389 and 390: egular playing (30 years) the proba
- Page 391 and 392: for an amount of time that is less
- Page 393 and 394: U.6 The gambler’s fallacy Gambler
- Page 395 and 396: This does not mean that a person ca
- Page 397 and 398: V Use of the SOGS in Australian gam
- Page 399 and 400: Differences in question wording and
- Page 401 and 402: References AADAC (Alberta Alcohol a
- Page 403 and 404: —— 1998, Efficient Tobacco Taxa
- Page 405 and 406: Bickerdyke, I. and Lattimore, R. 19
- Page 407 and 408: ——, Dickerson, M. and Harley, B
- Page 409 and 410: Campbell, C. and Smith G. 1998, Can
- Page 411 and 412: —— and Winefield, A.H. 1996, Co
- Page 413 and 414: ——, Baxter, P., Boreham, P., Ha
- Page 415 and 416: Ferguson, B. 1996, A Note on the In
- Page 417 and 418: —— 1997, Legalised Gambling as
- Page 419 and 420: Horner, T. and Bradfield, G. 1998,
- Page 421 and 422: ——, Marston, A., Singer, R., Wi
- Page 423 and 424: Gambling Studies, ‘Towards 2000:
- Page 425 and 426: —— 1995b, Social impacts of urb
- Page 427 and 428: —— and Ohtsuka, K. 1999, ‘The
- Page 429 and 430: NT Select Committee (Select Committ
- Page 431 and 432: Prosser, G., Breen, H., Weeks, P. a
- Page 433 and 434: Single, E., Collins, D., Easton, B.
intensity on the 85.15 per cent Cash Chameleon will set back the gambler an<br />
expected $1 069 per hour but nearly halves this to $567 per hour on the 92.13<br />
per cent version.<br />
Gaming machines are entertaining precisely because of interesting game features<br />
and the unpredictability of the outcomes. The complex payoff distributions in<br />
gaming machines mean that the returns that gamblers make from games vary<br />
significantly in the short run. The corollary to this is that the return rates realised by<br />
players will vary considerably from playing session to session. As noted by the<br />
AGMMA (sub. D257) and in chapter 16, this implies that players will not be able to<br />
readily determine the ‘price’ of single machine, except after many trials.<br />
Figure U.1, which shows the player returns from 100 000 simulations of a gaming<br />
machine, confirms gaming manufacturers’ statements about the extreme volatility<br />
of actual outcomes on poker machines. 6<br />
For example, while the expected net losses from playing on a 10 cent Black Rhino<br />
at maximum intensity (nine lines and ten credits per line) are around $780, there is<br />
around a 30 per cent chance that the losses will be $1 300 or more per hour.<br />
Similarly, there is around a 2.3 per cent chance that the gambler will make a net<br />
$1 300 win in an hour long session at this maximum intensity. The odds of breaking<br />
even or better are around 17 per cent.<br />
U.3 Game volatility<br />
Even while all styles of play involve highly unpredictable returns over a reasonable<br />
session time, the player can decide whether they wish to increase this<br />
unpredictability further by choosing certain playing styles. For example, a Black<br />
Rhino player could:<br />
• choose a 10 cent machine and play one line with 10 credits per line (staking $1<br />
per button push) — playing style 1; or<br />
• also stake $1 a button push by choosing a 2 cent machine and playing 5 lines and<br />
10 credits per line — playing style 2.<br />
6 These data and other simulations of a gaming machine in this appendix are based on software<br />
developed by the <strong>Commission</strong>. The program, which runs on MS Windows 95+ platforms, is<br />
available on request from the <strong>Commission</strong>.<br />
U.6 GAMBLING
Change language