Slot Machine Misconceptions Debunked: Contrary to Common Belief, Slot Machine Jackpots Aren't Influenced by Who Frequently Feeds Them
In the world of gambling, slot machines are a popular choice for many. However, a common misconception exists that the person who funds a spin on a slot machine is entitled to any resulting jackpot. But according to Corey Levitan, a Commercial Gaming and Entertainment Expert, this is far from the truth.
A recent article on Casino.org, posted on April 7, 2025, at 07:31h, discusses this very myth. The article, titled "Vegas Myths Busted," delves into the facts surrounding slot machine jackpots and who the rightful winner truly is.
According to the Nevada Gaming Control Board (NGCB), the defining moment of a slot machine wager is the act of spinning. It is at this point that the machine's random number generator (RNG) determines the outcome. Therefore, the person who spins the machine is the one who wins any jackpot.
This policy has been in place for decades in Nevada's gaming industry, although it is not explicitly stated in Nevada law. The NGCB does not publish the outcomes of patron dispute hearings unless they are appealed to court.
Two notable cases that illustrate this point are those of Jan Flato and Marina Navarro, and an unnamed player at The Venetian Resort. In 2017, Flato funded a $400 play at the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel & Casino in Florida, asking his friend, Marina Navarro, to spin the machine. Navarro won a $100K jackpot, and Flato had no viable recourse.
In 2021, a case was reported on Las Vegas online forums where a player funded a $50K jackpot, the casino awarded the jackpot to the friend who spun, and the NGCB declined to intervene.
In contrast, the winners of grand jackpots at The Venetian Resort remained anonymous. The NGCB reported two recent cases where anonymous guests won grand jackpots of over $1 million playing Dragon Link slot machines in the high limit room, with bets of $250 each.
If a dispute about a slot machine jackpot is brought to the NGCB, they will review surveillance footage and rule in favour of the person who initiated the play, not the one who funded it.
If a substantial jackpot is funded and the friend who spins the machine is not willing to share, there is a possibility to take the case to civil court, although the lack of relevant case law suggests that the odds might be against the funder.
The article also advises against letting friends spin slot machines, citing the story of Jan Flato and Marina Navarro as an example of why friends should not let friends spin slot machines.
For those interested in reading more about Vegas myths or suggesting a myth that needs busting, visit VegasMythsBusted.com. Email suggestions to [email protected].
[1] https://www.nevadagaming.org/news/2021/03/12/venetian-resort-guest-wins-more-than-1-million-on-dragon-link-slot-machine [2] https://www.nevadagaming.org/news/2022/01/05/venetian-resort-guest-wins-more-than-1-million-on-dragon-link-slot-machine
*This article was last updated on April 7, 2025, at 11:35h.*
- In the world of casino-and-gambling, slot machines in Las Vegas casinos are a sought-after choice for many, offering a chance to win a jackpot.
- However, it's essential to understand that the person who actually spins the slot machine is the one entitled to any resulting jackpot, according to the Nevada Gaming Control Board (NGCB).
- The defining moment of a slot machine wager is when the machine's random number generator (RNG) is set in motion during the spin, determining the outcome.
- A common myth exists, suggesting that the person who funds a spin on a slot machine is entitled to any resulting jackpot, but this is far from the truth.
- In 2017, a case involving Jan Flato and Marina Navarro demonstrated this point when Flato funded a play at the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel & Casino in Florida, asking Navarro to spin the machine, resulting in a $100K jackpot, with Flato having no viable recourse.
- If a dispute about a slot machine jackpot is brought to the NGCB, they will review surveillance footage and rule in favor of the person who initiated the play, not the one who funded it.
