Vegas Free-for-All - VP odds question, hitting a royal?

VP odds question, hitting a royal?

KayPea

Feb 22, 2011
12:39am

Quote

Originally posted by: MoneyLA
so how much does the progressive have to be to justify using the Wizards "go for the royal" strategy?

It would be possible to construct a strategy based upon the value of the progressive. In other words, as the progressive grows, the strategy changes. At one point you'll go from keeping those 4 aces to keeping just one ace to chase the royal. One could build an app for that.

billryan

Feb 22, 2011
1:35am

Block User

I met a person in Vegas last year who had a modified Go for the Royal strategy. In his case, he'd only break up a non-winning hand to do so.He'd toss a pair of fives and keep a Queen, but not toss a pair of Queens. He claimed to have hit more Royals than usual this way, and also claimed to be a net winner since he switched to his strategy some three years ago. I have no idea if his claims are true, but I do see him at the same machines almost every time I'm in that casino. The first time we met, he ended up buying me lunch as he went over his strategy, but since then he isn't particulary friendly as I didn't embrace his all or nothing strategy.

arcimedes

Feb 22, 2011
3:25am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: MoneyLA
I am always willing to learn from my son. OK, what the heck does that mean? so how much does the progressive have to be to justify using the Wizards "go for the royal" strategy?

I doubt you would find any progressive jackpot where only going for the RF would be the best strategy. Normally a RF is 2% of the return, now you're playing for it being 100% of the return. Let's assume 23K hands is the right number. Playing at $5 denom you would bet $25*23K = $575,000. For a game that returned about 100% the RF would have to pay this amount.

MoneyLA

Feb 22, 2011
6:46am

Block User

Thank Arc, and all I can say about that number is WOW!!!! And youre right, I wouldnt break up AAAAK to go for a royal, though it has been suggested in discussing a tournament strategy.

billryan

Feb 22, 2011
6:58am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: arcimedes

Quote
Originally posted by: MoneyLA
I am always willing to learn from my son. OK, what the heck does that mean? so how much does the progressive have to be to justify using the Wizards "go for the royal" strategy?

Aren't you assuming you hit a RF or you hit nothing? When drawing for a RF, you'll still end up with plenty of smaller wins. You hold an Ace- you will get quite a few pairs, a bunch of sets, the occasional 4OAK, plus assorted two pairs, straights and flushs. Its not nearly as bad as you imply.

MoneyLA

Feb 22, 2011
8:56am

Block User

Its true that while going for the royal you will pick up other wins. But by going for the royals you are giving up other possible wins. Example: dealt As Ks 5d 5h 5c With the "royal strategy" you drop the trips fives.

RoadTrip

Feb 22, 2011
9:24am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: arcimedes

Quote
Originally posted by: MoneyLA
I am always willing to learn from my son. OK, what the heck does that mean? so how much does the progressive have to be to justify using the Wizards "go for the royal" strategy?

Arch....

You seem to have overlooked the other pays along the way in your "go for the royal" money analysis. Even if only holding one card to a royal, the player will still receive numerous pays, including an occasional 4 aok, etc. So the $575 coin in number being equal to a royal would be deceiving.

Not sure what pays could be expected for those 23K hands, I'm guessing if only 20% popped some "winner" return, it would seriously reduce the numbers in you example.

I'll rely on you to let us know what math results could be expected in 23K hands where all players "go for the royal" on the draw, except when holding 4 oak or st8 flushes on the initial dealt hand.

:::shrug:::

arcimedes

Feb 23, 2011
12:30am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: RoadTrip

Quote
Originally posted by: arcimedes
Quote
Originally posted by: MoneyLA
I am always willing to learn from my son. OK, what the heck does that mean? so how much does the progressive have to be to justify using the Wizards "go for the royal" strategy?

I doubt you would find any progressive jackpot where only going for the RF would be the best strategy. Normally a RF is 2% of the return, now you're playing for it being 100% of the return. Let's assume 23K hands is the right number. Playing at $5 denom you would bet $25*23K = $575,000. For a game that returned about 100% the RF would have to pay this amount.

If you read a little closer you'll note that I stated that the RF was 100% of the return in my computation. Change the paytable and you change the math.

I was going with the extreme paytable just to highlight what the extreme strategy could mean. Thousands of possible paytables exist that would change the computation.

BAGIANT

Feb 23, 2011
12:37am

Block User

The only problem with giving up paying hands to go for the Royal is that those "paying" hands keep you in action and those extra hands just might give you the hand that makes the royal.

billryan

Feb 23, 2011
1:01am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: arcimedes

Quote
Originally posted by: RoadTrip
Quote
Originally posted by: arcimedes
Quote
Originally posted by: MoneyLA
I am always willing to learn from my son. OK, what the heck does that mean? so how much does the progressive have to be to justify using the Wizards "go for the royal" strategy?

I doubt you would find any progressive jackpot where only going for the RF would be the best strategy. Normally a RF is 2% of the return, now you're playing for it being 100% of the return. Let's assume 23K hands is the right number. Playing at $5 denom you would bet $25*23K = $575,000. For a game that returned about 100% the RF would have to pay this amount.

Arch....

You seem to have overlooked the other pays along the way in your "go for the royal" money analysis. Even if only holding one card to a royal, the player will still receive numerous pays, including an occasional 4 aok, etc. So the $575 coin in number being equal to a royal would be deceiving.

Not sure what pays could be expected for those 23K hands, I'm guessing if only 20% popped some "winner" return, it would seriously reduce the numbers in you example.

I'll rely on you to let us know what math results could be expected in 23K hands where all players "go for the royal" on the draw, except when holding 4 oak or st8 flushes on the initial dealt hand.

:::shrug:::

So your post is meaningless as one can't possibly exclude any of the payouts.Why try and show an impossible result and use that impossible result to show how a strategy is bad? You were the one who stated the RF would be 100% of the return. Thats impossible, so why bother with it. Theres a huge difference between saying you will go for the Royal every hand and saying the RF is the only possible payout.

‹2 ›

Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:

Diamond Membership

$3 per month

Unlimited access to LVA website

Exclusive subscriber-only content

Limited Member Rewards Online

Join Now

Platinum Membership

$50 per year

Unlimited access to LVA website

Exclusive subscriber-only content

Exclusive Member Rewards Book

Join Now