# Activity Stream

• Today, 04:20 PM
Yes, right. I'd make the three-player game (four total hands) \$70, since the six-player game (seven total hands) is \$40, and 7/4 x \$40 = \$70. It may not be a very satisfactory answer,...
6 replies | 73 view(s)
• Today, 04:15 PM
Just reread those pages. Guess I had the same misconception you did twenty years prior to your writing. Sooo, why aren't those indices adjusted up to the RA indices and simply called the indices?
21 replies | 460 view(s)
• Today, 02:52 PM
Thanks for that clarification! So I can take the "hourly rate" to mean the "per 100 hands" rate and all will be fine when making various analyses as long as I understand the impact to how long it...
6 replies | 73 view(s)
• Today, 02:50 PM
That simply isn't true and is the reason I urged to reread pp. 375-377. It makes no difference what your bankroll is. By using r-a indices, the lowering of the variance immediately permits you to...
21 replies | 460 view(s)
• Today, 02:32 PM
The help would be finding out a practical application because as far as I can tell, the number is meaningless.
22 replies | 594 view(s)
• Today, 02:18 PM
thanks a lot for your answer, this is highly appreciated and I am sure it can benifit many people considering the answers I got like you stated.
22 replies | 594 view(s)
• Today, 02:06 PM
Makes sense, given your handle. I've known him for 25+ years.
41 replies | 2000 view(s)
• Today, 02:01 PM
21forme, apparently we both know more of the same people than I originally thought as I was a NEAP member for a long time.
41 replies | 2000 view(s)
• Today, 01:43 PM
Don, I did reread pp. 375-377 and I see and understand the obvious benefits with virtually no risk. I asked my question in order to elicit Freightman's reason for using them.
21 replies | 460 view(s)
• Today, 01:34 PM
True, but we are telling marginal bankrolls that by using risk averse indices, that they can reduce variance and increase their max bet.
21 replies | 460 view(s)
• Today, 01:32 PM
Nicely phrased. I should add that the 8v6 double at plus 3 or more has some decent coin on the felt. The gain at plus 3 or more is simply too much to ignore, thus, the decision to double is made in...
21 replies | 460 view(s)
• Today, 01:29 PM
If your BR is sufficiently high for the level you're playing, and the variance doesn't matter to you, EV is lower using risk averse indices.
21 replies | 460 view(s)
• Today, 01:28 PM
Don, I did reread pp. 375-377 and I saw and understood the obvious benefits with virtually no risk. I asked my question in order to elicit Freightman's reason for using them.
21 replies | 460 view(s)
• Today, 01:19 PM
Trust that clarifies.[/quote It does. You use them to decrease the risk of being labeled an AP and thus increase longevity. (In other words, a risk being averted that is not in the definition of...
21 replies | 460 view(s)
• Today, 01:17 PM
Let me turn it around: Why would you NOT use risk-averse indices? You need to study carefully BJA3, pp. 375-377, to understand that using them can't possibly do you any harm. Don
21 replies | 460 view(s)
• Today, 01:00 PM
Certain hand combinations are so common, example 8v6. The index for doubling is +1. The combination is so common that a mix of many doubles versus non doubles just makes it to easy to be picked off....
21 replies | 460 view(s)
• Today, 12:58 PM
So, you're confusing two separate issues. It goes without saying that, at a full table, the game slows to a crawl, and you will play a fraction of the hands per hour that you would if playing alone....
6 replies | 73 view(s)
• Today, 12:55 PM
Hillarious! I'm about to get blocked from half my email contacts as I'm now blasting this link out.
20 replies | 759 view(s)
• Today, 12:53 PM
thank you. :) I do appreciate the responses you've given, though. It's very enjoyable here.
6 replies | 73 view(s)
More Activity