howardwstern wrote:
See my original note on this subject. Each multiplier has a different
strategy. With no multiplier the 6-4-2 rule gets 20% added to it to
cover the sixth coin multiplier possibilities on subsequent lines.
With a multiplier you first multipy the base values by the multiplier
and then add the 7.2 or 4.8 or 2.4 units.
Entirely understood, Howard ... and when implemented "perfectly", this
is where 16 distinct strategies for play are introduced (as we earlier
discussed).
Larry has suggested a simplified approach that's limited to the 4
basic strategies of standard MS. However, he noted, "The general rule
of thumb is to revert to maximize the current hand (standard strategy)
when the STP multiplier is in play although this doesn't work on every
hand."
So, this begs the question of what might be done next to refine the
strategy without going full hog and introducing the 16 strategies
we've earlier noted.
I'm now suggesting that one might improve upon Larry's very basic
approach be advancing one step -- in the case where a multiplier
appears, shifting to "standard" strategy (vs. MS optimized strategy)
would only be done when the EV of the dealt hand exceeds a given
threshold and the multiplier is at least 3x.
The logic is that below some EV, the advantage of progressing to
higher levels may still be so strong as to warrant use of an MS
optimized strategy even when there's a multiplier on the current line.
Still, to keep things simple and limited to the basic 4 MS strategies,
I'm suggesting that when strategy is shifted to an "optimized MS" one,
the player stick to the optimized strategies of standard MS ... i.e.
one based on the already used 6-4-2 rule, not on the adjusted
7.2-4.8-2.4 that would represent a perfect play approach.
Bottom line, I suggest using basic strategy when there's a Free Ride
or when there's a 3x+ multiplier AND hand EV is below a given
threshold for the Level in play. Otherwise, the existing adjusted
strategy for MS is used.
While somewhat cumbersome to describe in words, we're talking about a
single shift in strategy application vs regular MS -- and using only
the same existing 4 MS strategies; no new ones.
While a step more complex than standard MS play, it's tremendously
simpler than the fully optimized MS-STP strategy -- which I think we
both agree would likely be too unwieldy to effectively adopt in play.
Via the enhancement I suggest, I think it may be possible to recoup
the lion's share of the .12% lost under Larry's simplified strategy.
- Harry
calls the ER at 99.67% under this simplified strategy.