When we went live with HexaPro – our take on Jackpot Sit & Go (hereinafter JPSNG) – in 2018, we chose a very different multiplier distribution. At the time, and it still holds true today, all competitors had a minimum multiplier of 2x: you were always guaranteed to play for at least double your buy-in. We went with 1.5x for the lowest multiplier, as it’d allow for less games of the lowest multipliers and for instance 10 times more 10x than with other site. Despite the 1.5x and higher occurrence of for instance 10x, the variance was still limited over larger samples, partly because we didn’t have the +10,000x option that practically never hit (usually 1-5 in 10,000,000 chance).
Before we dive deeper, let’s first have a look at our current distribution (remains unchanged since launch) compared to competitors.
Competitor example distribution
| Prize Pool Multiplier | Probability in 10,000,000 games | Probability % |
|---|---|---|
| 12,000 | 1 | 0.00001% |
| 100 | 500 | 0.005% |
| 50 | 1,000 | 0.01% |
| 25 | 7,500 | 0.1% |
| 10 | 100,000 | 1% |
| 5 | 250,000 | 3% |
| 4 | 900,000 | 9% |
| 3 | 3,968,502 | 40% |
| 2 | 4,772,497 | 48% |
Our current distribution for €1-€25 regular HexaPro
| Prize Pool Multiplier | Probability in 10,000,000 games | Probability % |
|---|---|---|
| 1000 | 100 | 0.001% |
| 100 | 500 | 0.005% |
| 25 | 10,000 | 0.10% |
| 10 | 460,000 | 4.6% |
| 5 | 1,400,000 | 14% |
| 3 | 2,500,000 | 25% |
| 1.5 | 5,629,400 | 56% |
The HexaPro game mechanic decisions predated my tenure, so I’m not fully aware of the original reasoning behind the unique approach. Regardless, I’m comfortable defending the distribution.
If we look at the two largest poker sites in the world, you generally play for either 2x or 3x the buy-in around 87% to 92.5% of the time. At the same time, you play for 10x+ in less than 2.5% of the games, and at some buy-ins it’s just around 1% of games!
With our current distribution for regular HexaPro, the two smallest multipliers (1.5x & 3x) hit 81.2% of games, and you’ve got 4.7% chance of hitting a 10x or higher! On some buy-ins, that’s more than a 400% greater chance of hitting a 10x+ prize.
Considering these statistics, it’s clear where I would prefer to play. Playing more than 9 out of 10 games for a 2x-3x return is unappealing, and the lottery animation loses its excitement. On paper, I do find our current distribution far superior to that of the competitors, but the issue is more complex.
We’re a small poker site, and the JPSNG format has become so popular that players have come to expect it to function in a particular way. We frequently encounter questions regarding the 1.5x versus 2x multiplier, with some casual players perceiving our rake as significantly higher simply because 1.5x is lower than 2x. Many casual players participate in only a few games, and while one might assume that a more realistic chance of hitting a substantial multiplier like 10x would be beneficial over a small sample, this often isn’t the case. Deviating from the established industry standard comes at a cost, amplified by the fact that many players do not fully understand how the multipliers work. Most players are unaware of the multiplier probabilities and thus do not grasp the nuances of different distributions. What everyone does understand is that 1.5x is lower than 2x.
We know that there’re downsides with the current distribution, but we also know a good share of our active players do like the 1.5x – naturally a strong survivor bias here. Ultimately, the question is whether we attract sufficient additional players due to the 1.5x – the ones that prefer this distribution – to offset the negatives. We can’t say for sure.
The Highroller change
In a previous blog post, I explained the reasoning behind the changes made at the Highroller stakes (€50 and €100) where we transitioned from a 1.5x minimum multiplier to 2x and reduced the rake to 6%. I argued that different buy-in levels require different distributions, and aspects such as the average disposable income relative to the buy-in amount must be considered. Nothing has changed in this regard. However, while I was initially hesitant to implement the 1.5x to 2x change across all HexaPro stakes, I now see things differently. Despite my personal preference for the 1.5x distribution, I’m now strongly considering it.
It’s too early – much too early – to draw definitive conclusions about the Highroller performance, especially given the significant traffic variance at these stakes. However, the traffic has been very encouraging. During the two-week promotional period, we saw the best numbers of 2024 by a significant margin. This strong performance has continued, and the outlook appears promising. Furthermore, there has been little to no negative feedback on the change, despite most of our active high-volume players previously advocating for the 1.5x multiplier. Additionally, it’s worth noting that the rake cut from 6.853% to 6% is substantial, making it impossible to say how much of the impact is from the 2x multiplier change.
Regardless of whether we move to a 2x minimum multiplier, I consider it likely that there will be bigger changes to the HexaPro multiplier distribution in the coming 12 months.
When will we see a change to the €1-€25 stakes?
It’s still early days and there’s not even a decision made at this stage, so I naturally can’t provide an accurate timeline. If the change does happen, I do believe it’ll be this year, and if I was to guess, I’d say around late October or November.
The above blog posts is solely about the regular HexaPro. It’s unlikely we’ll increase the minimum multiplier of HexaPro Extreme, but the Extreme distribution could still be due for a refresh.