Tweet is here: https://mobile.twitter.com/redrockca...45554718416906

$1.25 wager wins $150K+ Sequential RF (“SRF”).

Mickey Crimm proceeds to do the math:
Tweets start here: https://mobile.twitter.com/mickeycri...96743599824896

“Fundamental of Sequential Royal play. 120 ways five royal cards can appear in the window, 5X4X3X2X1=120. First card can be any of five, second card can be any of 4 remaining, 3rd card can bet any of 3 remaining, etc.” - MC

“ 6/5 Bonus Poker is a 96.87% game. Royal odds are 40,236. Sequential odds are 120 X 40,236 = 4,828,320. Reversible Sequential is half that, 2,414,160. A $150,000 one-way sequential adds 2.4%, reversible adds 4.8%. So either 99.27% or 101.67%.” - MC

It took me less than 2 minutes to spot MC’s mistake. In plain English MC does not understand convexity. This is another attempt by MC trying to do “Advantage Play” math but gets it wrong.

To be clear: Mickey (I can’t do AP-grade Math) Crimm claims 2.4% for 1-WAY $150K SRF in the Red Rock Casino example. MC clearly used $150K (floored) in his analysis.

The correct answer requires an VP analyzer that can handle SRF. I don’t code but I can write algorithms so I used a trick that someone posted on Skip Hughes’ VP forum from 20 years ago. The trick involves Newtonian approximation so I will not disclose how I got my answer.

Me: The 1-WAY $150K SRF adds roughly 3% (rounded).

The difference is roughly 60 basis points so MC’s margin of error would be roughly 60 / 240 or 25%. A roughly 25% margin of error is huge in the world of true Advantage Players!

The fastest way to spot MC’s mistake is to use functions:

Y(1) = Beta1*(RF) + Beta2*(SF) + Beta3*(Quads) * Beta4*(FH) + Beta5*(FL) + Beta6*(ST) + Beta7*(Trips) + Beta8*(2 Pair) + Beta9*(Hi Pair)

Y(2) = BetaSRF*(SRF) * BetaRF*(RF) + Beta2*(SF) + Beta3*(Quads) * Beta4*(FH) + Beta5*(FL) + Beta6*(ST) + Beta7*(Trips) + Beta8*(2 Pair) + Beta9*(Hi Pair)

Notice BetaSRF DOES NOT EQUAL (“DNE”) BetaRF and BetaSRF DNE Beta1.

Mickey (can’t handle functions) Crimm equates BetaSRF = BetaRF = Beta1

In these multivariate regressions (aka functions), there are no Betahats (these are Beta’s), these are zero-intercept regressions, and there is no error term. The function produces an exact answer using the Max EV industry convention.

If you want to be an a true AP, not a scavenger disguising as an AP-wannabe, you have to be able to perform math at the AP level. MC’s margin of error is roughly 25%, so this is not even close.

I will leave it up to others to verify the “correct” answer is closer to my roughly 3% number than MC’s 2.4%, respectively.

Btw, you know I am correct because Y(1) is 96.8687% to 4 digits after the decimals point per WinPoker app.