If, bare with me, there are 16 rounds (number of peolpe per round
unknow)and we have 10 minutes to play as many hands as we can and
perfect play generates the best return overall, shouldn't we play that
way? The 1st 20 places win from $1500 down to $50.
If I assume (I know!?)say 20 people per round ... that's 320 chairs
filled. Further assume 150 hands on avg. gives 48000 hands played.
Based on WinPoker's analysts of 9/6 BD with 4500 coin RF a Royal would
occur every 37118 hands and Aces every 4463 hands on Avg. That would
mean 1 to 2 RF's and 10 plus sets of Aces, give or take for the
Tournament. Those that had the good luck to hit these would most
probably be in the money, somewhere. Now, if no one had the good
fortune to hit a Royal( what kind of high scores can we expect?) and
perfect play make the most point(return) most of the time(can that be
said for the short term, we're talking 20 minute here?)shouldn't we
play as perfect as possible. Or, do we go for the luck factor? Play a
Super Ace type of Strategy and go for the Quad Aces? I mean, if Luck
is the only way to win 1st place going for(just play for the big
hands) it seem like the best way overall!
Oh Well, if nothing else this may stir the pot, so to speak!
Tournament Play
Uh, no thanks. The thought of naked video poker just doesn't cut it
with me.
Neil
p.s. I'm just now catching up on close to three week's worth of
digests. If someone else has had a little fun with this already, sorry
for the redundancy.