Harry wrote:
>it's my experience that reasonable opportunities for alternate strategy play (of significant magnitude) are few and far between formosr typical players.
I agree, although I'm surprised at the conceptual problems some very
experienced players have. I was sitting next to one such player on a
progressive recently and he had a hand for which the progressive was
just a few dollars over the amount that made drawing to the
progressive or not the same expected value, so, for the sake of making
the "right" play, he drew to the progressive. Without mentioning the
added fluctuation of drawing to the progressive, which might have
meant that he didn't have the bankroll to make the draw, I asked him
if he would regard the cost to him of the meter resetting to be
greater than the cost to him of not drawing to the progressive when
the meter indicated in that situation and he said it would. But the
magnitude of the difference in value wasn't very significant and the
frequency with which taking such reasons not to draw to a progressive
into account would dictate a different strategy from "max-EV" is low.
There was a team a few decades ago that locked up many progressives
they played and the progressives had huge meter movement. I estimated
their "max-EV" strategy cost them 5 figures per year.
Posted by: 007 <007@embarqmail.com>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (9) |
