Jacks or Better Number Crunching?

[FloridaPhil]

When playing single line Jacks or Better, I understand that a Royal averages about one every 40,000 hands. I also understand that there are no guarantees, but we'll use that number for this question. I also understand that pros modify their strategy when a Royal progressive reaches a certain level. I assume they break paying pairs to play a three card Royal hand and play Ace-10s, Etc.   Can anyone figure out how this strategy modification theoretically changes the potential Royal frequency?  In other words,  if I play to the Royal on every hand, can I bring the theoretical Royal frequency down 10%, 20% or more?  I understand that playing to the Royal could mean increased short term losses. Thanks for crunching the numbers for me. 
 

[Vman96]

9/6 jacks with $1500 quarter royal (100.66% return): 1 in 33,202.

9/6 jacks with $2000 quarter royal (101.86% return): 1 in 32,744.

Both the above have you taking 3 to a royal over high pair and holding AT suited.

Going for the royal at all costs (a very bad strategy except in some tournaments):

1 in 23,081.

[FloridaPhil]

That's more than I thought.  OK.  Let's say a recreational player plays 5 hours a week at 800 hands an hour or 4,000 hands per week.   With perfect strategy, the player should average a Royal about every 10 weeks.  Would keeping 3 to a Royal over a paying pair and Ace 10s potentially reduce that to one every 8 weeks?  I assume "going for the Royal at all costs" means throwing away paying straight flushes too?  Thanks!

[Vman96]

Roughly that, but without a high enough progressive it will cost you money in the long run.


And the last number is throwing away anything but a royal chance, so yeah you'll discard a sf for a royal draw in that scenario.

[FloridaPhil]

I'm getting kind of bored with my current options, so I'm thinking about going with Jacks for a couple of months to see what happens.  If I lose some money along the way it's OK so long as it's not 2-3 Royals worth.   I definately won't be throwing away any straight flushes.  That seems crazy to me. Again, I realize anything can happen.  Thanks!

[Vman96]

FYI, if you decided to do this, I'd really try to find a 9/6 or the rare 8/6 machine because you're going to be making a lot more flushes by making these plays too.

[Minn. Fatz]

When considering advanced progressive strategies like this it would probably be worth the investment in a VP software package. I use good old WinPoker and VIPoker (which when I got it was a free download). Swap out the payoff for RF and see how that affects your strategies. Good Mathematics!

[Quad Deuces]

Both the above have you taking 3 to a royal over high pair and holding AT suited.

Those are the only changes from standard 9/6 JoB?  Can I assume that you only hold A instead of AT suited with a flush penalty?In these scenarios, If presented with, say, AhJhThJd3h would the 3h flush penalty make holding the paying pair the right play?I don't normally chase progressives, but I was recently faced with a 25c 8/5 Bonus game with a $1600 royal, plus progressives on SF and 5-K (the D).  Got me thinking.

[Vman96]

It all depends on how high the meter is. I just did a quick look at basic strategy at the Wizard of Odds.

When I play a progressive, I tend to go to the bathroom first to figure out the basic strategy adjustments. I don't concern myself with penalty exceptions much. I do like to play while drinking after all.

[BillyJoe]

I submit that you would have more success playing a higher volitility game, like TDB, rather than adjusting a JOB strategy to chase a progressive RF.