Is it possible for the r-a index to be lower than the EV-maximizing index? When generating the hard double index for index for 9 vs. 2, I get +1 for r-a and +2 for EV-max.
Is it possible for the r-a index to be lower than the EV-maximizing index? When generating the hard double index for index for 9 vs. 2, I get +1 for r-a and +2 for EV-max.
> Is it possible for the r-a index to be lower than the
> EV-maximizing index? When generating the hard double
> index for index for 9 vs. 2, I get +1 for r-a and +2
> for EV-max.
No, not for the situation you mention. It's possible to be lower for surrender and insurance, because doing those things earlier than usual lowers variance. But, the only way to lower variance when you're doubling is to wait until a higher index to do it (less frequently).
Your numbers are backwards, above.
Don
> No, not for the situation you mention. It's possible
> to be lower for surrender and insurance, because doing
> those things earlier than usual lowers variance. But,
> the only way to lower variance when you're doubling is
> to wait until a higher index to do it (less
> frequently).
> Your numbers are backwards, above.
> Don
That's what I thought but CVData came up with lower r-a indexes for 9 vs 2 also A8 vs 6. Maybe I'm doing something wrong in the software.
Not what I get. Is Skip RA PreSim turned on? That would certainly cause a problem. Use TOOLS-EXPORT to backup the configuration and e-mail me the file and I'll take a look.
> That's what I thought but CVData came up with lower
> r-a indexes for 9 vs 2 also A8 vs 6. Maybe I'm doing
> something wrong in the software.
Posting Permissions
-*-
Bookmarks