But I am a part-time Super Aces player, and I hate to give up a
> valuable spot where those four aces might pop up, or even the
other
> three kings. My main sacrifice? Discarding the ten gives me a zero
> percent chance at the royal or straight flush. And I'll lose a few
full
> houses, flushes, straights and two pairs along the way.
>
> Any opinions?
>
Well, it's not really a matter of opinion, as you have suggested. In
a VP-playing situation, one alternative will always be clearly
superior to all others (or two or more will be equally optimal).
In JOB-based games, keeping KTs as opposed to K alone is partially a
move to make thr RF possible, and partly to make straights and
flushes more likely. This is done at the cost of drawing one less
card in order to pair the K.
The question is, is there a significant loss from not getting quads,
which are obviously less likely if you keep KTs rather than K.
Without bothering to calculate exactly, I would surmise that there
is no significant loss from the inability to draw four aces when
holding a singleton K, since this involves drawing exactly ONE
combination of four cards or all the possible draws; to put it into
perspective, it's the same chance you have of drawing a royal when
you hold that singleton K (and we all know how often THAT
happens :)). The "lost" four Kings (or other quads) that you might
have gotten are likewise highly unlikely.
In short, if the strategy says to keep KTs, it's because the
enhanced chance of making the "small" draws (straights, flushes),
PLUS the chance of hitting the RF, outweigh the reduction in the
chances of making quads.
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
