There are costs to hitting jackpots, but I find it hard to believe
that these costs generally even come close to the amount of the
jackpot. Setting the royal flush to 0 already costs .5% overall.
That's way too expensive and will often make the difference of whether
it's playable at all. It's better to hit jackpots and get kicked out.
From my experience, the correlation between hitting jackpots and
getting kicked out is being greatly exaggerated. It's as if a casino
is so trigger happy that one jackpot will get you barred for life, but
if you otherwise play as a professional but get unlucky, they'll love
you. That's extreme.
>It's not clear to me that simply assigning zero to the royal flush is
>sufficient to determine optimal strategy. You really ought to assign a
>negative value to the RF, specifically its nominal value minus the net
>present value of all future expectation times the chance of your getting
>kicked out by hitting this royal. Setting it to zero is very lazy thinking.
>
>Cogno
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) |
