Super Times with multiplier on... any change?

[Eduardo]

I know the mathematical strategy is probably the same. But we all have the set amounts we like to play, and expected payouts for those amounts, whether it is nickels, quarters, dollars, etc.
 
Now... when you are sitting at a Super Times Pay machine and you see that 8x or 10x multiplier come up, I'm wondering how people react since the payouts can get much more extreme than we are used to.
 
Are you more likely to take better odds at a hand that is a decent payout when multiplied, take extra risks for a super high paying hand while you have the chance, or stick to your normal strategy no matter what the cards?
 
As an example, say you get the 10x on deuces 10 line STP and are dealt a 5 of a kind with 3 deuces. The proper play is to take that 5 of a kind. But how many shots are you going to get with 3 deuces on a 10x?
 
Not only are your possible wins multiplied, but the difference between a big winner and an average winner become greater too. If you miss, you gave up a lot more coin than on a non-multiplied hand for the chance.  On the other hand, even an average paying hand when multiplied by 10 and also the number of lines can buy you a number of chances in future hands. But what are the odds of you getting that 10x to come up again, WITH good cards?
 
That's just one example, and I think it's a dilemma that we all face whenever we see a big multiplier come up with any sort of decision to make on a hold.  What would you all do?

[New2vp]

Hey Eduardo, I just answered this question on another thread while you were typing this one!
 
I can't find an emoticon of a chicken  to punctuate this with (of course, I prefer to think of myself as somewhat "risk averse" rather than as a coward), but I really like taking the 5 of a kind, regardless of the EV, for real money.  Here on this site just for credits, it's not that stressful of a decision either way...for me.
 
But by the way, I think it is the max EV play (by just a little bit) to go for the deuces if you have 5 of a kind with 3s thru 9s and to keep the 5 of a kind with tens through aces.  With the latter, you get fewer chances at wild royal flushes since you have thrown away potential royal cards and that tiny difference makes it more profitable in the long run to keep the quints.
 
But its such a small margin that my guess is that many (not including Shadowman who I have the faith in that he will always take the max-EV play) will make the same play for the 5oak or the deuces regardless of the other two cards.
 
But what a great problem to have!  I would promise to take the LOW EV play every time if someone could guarantee me an 8x or 10x hand with three deuces every couple hours!
 
(I know you didn't really require an answer from me to this query, but since I already had 49 posts, I decided to move up to Forum Regular status...and who knows?  At this rate in 20 more years, I can become a Master!!)

[Eduardo]

I just changed the paytable and you are right that the correct hold is barely in favor of the deuces in full pay. But I've never seen a full pay table on STP so I practice using a lower one, where the correct play is for the 5oak.  But it's very close either way.
Like I said, that's just one example and there are a lot of other times where you must pause for a moment and decide which way you want to go. It seems like the rare occasions of a big multiplier make this decision tougher.
 
Say you are dealt a straight flush, 9TJQK. The correct play in deuces is to throw the 9 and go for the royal. But if the payout for a straight flush (10x) is 4500 instead of 450, you are throwing away a LOT of potential bankroll in that decision if you miss. You could take that straight flush money back to a triple play machine and have a lot of fun for a long time.
 
So even for the long term player, I'm wondering if the decision is impacted.

[wilcoxfun]

If I hit a straight flush with a (10x) I am going to keep it regardless what possibilities could happen!  I am thinking I am out of here if it happened in a casino because that would bring me even for the year!

[shadowman]

It's this kind of situation that makes the variance of STP so high. You get so few hands with large multipliers that it will take a lot more time to average out. Now, if you are a Kelly betting advocate you should always take the lower variance hold as it will reduce long term risk and promote faster bankroll growth for those playing positive situations.

[faygo]

I hate to say this, but when a hand comes up like that or similar, my partner and I look at each other and say "that's why they call it gambling"
 
Of course this go for broke type of decision is modified by ones current bankroll status.

[Eduardo]

So we have faygo taking his chances at the big win, wilcox taking his money and running, and shadowman assessing the blue book value.
 
For myself, I have to admit it's a decision I make in the heat of the moment. Yes, I think my current bakroll status plays into it a big deal and I'm probably more likely to "go for it" early in my trip or if I'm already ahead.
 
I play STP in very short stints, never for a full session. So while I might be tempted to go for it if the circumstances are like I said above, in many cases I would be likely to take the guaranteed winnings back to the regular machines where it will last a lot longer.
 
Of course, it also depends on the hands I am choosing between. In the extreme situation I mentioned above, I would find it hard to resist going for the deuces since you know you are going to get something keeping 3 of them.

[shadowman]

I hate to say this, but when a hand comes up like that or similar, my partner and I look at each other and say "that's why they call it gambling"
 
Every now and then someone asks me why I gamble so much. I simply tell them I almost NEVER gamble.
 

[faygo]

[QUOTE=faygo]I hate to say this, but when a hand comes up like that or similar, my partner and I look at each other and say "that's why they call it gambling"
 
Every now and then someone asks me why I gamble so much. I simply tell them I almost NEVER gamble.
 [/QUOTE]
 
That I truly believe.
If I put it this way is it correct?
You might put money at risk but it is never a gamble.

[Eduardo]

Every now and then someone asks me why I gamble so much. I simply tell them I almost NEVER gamble.
 
I've only gambled once. I nervously decided to put my chips on a marriage proposal and see what happened.
 
I've been paying for it ever since.