From a purely EV scenario jackpot drops are suppose to be returned 100% to the players, and since so many promotions in casinos are centered on locals and not tourists you are more than likely getting back more than your $1 jackpot investment.

Also, as MOST winning players win fewer pots than "normal" (ie they don't win 10% of pots at a 10 handed table) as they actually fold hands like 58 suited in early position to an UTG raise. You are paying LESS than your share into the jackpot but still reaping the same benefits (high hands, free rolls, bad beats, etc) as those who are playing any 2 regardless of position.

But those other people only suffer if they WIN the pot with those bad hands (whereas they might have slightly more chances of hitting a high hand if they get in there with 4-7 suited in any position for any number of bets). At first the logic made sense, but actually they are not "padding" the jackpot at all, since the jackpot is a straight dollar drop, not percentage-based...

The jackpot IS percentage based, the percentage is just based off of the number of hands they WIN instead of how much they win (assuming all pots are over 10 dollars and the drop is at 10)

I know that at a full ring 2/4 or 3/6 game I will win about 6-7% of the hands dealt on average. Which means over a period of 100 hands I am paying 6% of the total jackpot dropped instead of my "expected" 10%. So I am in fact getting a discount. The looser players will hit more often, and win more often (and lose more often) and will often win 15-17% of hands dealt at the table. This is actually part of the reason they keep coming back and will always be losing players, they are focusing on winning HANDS and not long term profit. Just because folding 2/7 off is long term EV in middle position, doesn't help them when they want to win THIS hand NOW.

As to them winning more high hands because of the hands they play. I generally play just about any jackpot eligible hand in limit. I am playing every pocket pair for set value primarily, the vast majority of suited connectors depending on position and pot size. The only ones I am likely folding are the 4-7 suited 2 gappers you mentioned, and I will let that small EV loss for high hands be offset by the numerous 2 and 3 dollar call/fold scenarios of losing money. But they are indeed slightly more likely to hit a high hand than I am, and potentially that balances them paying 2-3 times the jackpot drop I do.

Ah I see your point, yes, that makes sense - you are winning less pots than they are (but they are also losing more pots than you are). Overall this is a good point, in that a high variance (loose aggressive) style is probably just a bad thing at low limit games with jackpot drops. (whereas high variance can be very profitable or even ideal in mid and high limit games)

Indeed.. or as one person once put it to me. "playing opposite the rest of the table is often the most profitable".

If they are all tight rocks, run over them with a LAG game. They are LAGging it up, tighten up and look to get it in with the best.

I was just about to post a reply on this one, but I've realised BaldEagle has beaten me to it. I'll leave it below anyway because it is so close what BaldEagle posted (even down to the percentage) its freaked me out!

I think I'm with BaldEagle on this one, though I never really thought about it before. I would say a good player playing a tight-aggressive game against a loose 10-seat table will only be winning say 6% or 7% of the hands, so will be contributing only 6% or 7% of the jackpot drop (and incidently 6% or 7% of the rake too). Someone else must be contributing more than their fair share, whatever trash they are playing.

However a disproportionate number of the TAG starting hands will have a chance for a jackpot hand. If they are playing pocket pairs and suited connectors, they probably have nearly the same chance of winning a jackpot hand as anyone else.

I call Liar! No way we both posted almost EXACTLY the same thing, even down to the percentages and jackpot comments. FREAKY!

I should get on the same table as you - I would be able to read your mind! Hmmm, or maybe it would be the other way round ...

No, on second thoughts, I should NEVER play on the same table as someone who has thought about percentages and changes their style to suit conditions.

Rack Please!

If you can't beat 2/4 limit after the rake, moving up is not going to solve your problem.