Re: [vpFREE] Re: Progressive strategy change and variance

 

I have mentioned this a couple of times over the years. (Bob Dancer did a couple of articles on this in Casino Player many years ago.) I have used this method for over 20 years back in the "Stanford Wong" VP days.
Almost all normal VP software will show you the ER for all possible plays. To find out when the RF play is better take the difference between ERs for the perfect 4000 coin play and the RF play and multiply that by the number of possible draws to the RF play (47 for a 4RF, 1081 for a 3RF, 16215 for a 2RF and 177,365 for a stiff high card.) Add the result to 4,000 (the non-progressive RF amount.)

Ex: Playing 9-6 Jacks
      Dealt Kc, Qc, Jc, Jd, 2s. KQJ suited has an ER of 7.4422. JJ has an ER of 7.6827.
      Difference = 0.2405, Combos = 1081
      0.2405 * 1081 = 260.
      4000 + 260 = 4260 so you play for the royal at 4260 or higher.

Discussion of Max EV versus min risk or other strategies is beyond the scope of this.

Howard W. Stern 


On Saturday, July 12, 2014 6:46 PM, "pede1976@badbeatscrew.com [vpFREE]" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


 
Just an update, I did figure out how to do all the stats/variance analysis with FVP.  I was surprised to find that the standard 9/6 optimal strategy on a 9/6 machine with a 5500 coin royal went up from 19.5 to 34.1.  I guess this just goes to show you that high variance is not necessarily a bad thing. 

Now onto a simpler question.  What are the common strategy differences you make when playing these progressives that have a high value?  The two things that stand out to me are taking 3 to a royal over a high pair as well as including ATs towards the bottom of the list.


__._,_.___
Posted by: Howard Stern <pyiddy@att.net>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (3)

.

__,_._,___