Regarding Jek's/BW's break-even points for BBJ (long)

[MicroBob]

Party BBJ is +$300k now so of course I've been thinking about it some more.


I still don't know if jek's way of figuring out the +EV points for the BBJ that he did on bonus-whores is correct.
I've stated as much before in previous threads about it...but also admit that I'm not smart enough to know exactly why.


There were a couple of reasonable points made in one of the more recent threads about this a couple weeks ago.

One was that it shouldn't matter what limit you are playing at as far as the impact of the BBJ drop is concerned because you are essentially just paying the $0.50 SEPERATELY from the regular rake...kind of like taking the insurance-bet in blackjack (for those of you who count-cards/play advantage BJ and understand when it is +EV to do this).

That was interesting argument.
but then I thought about it...."Why should it really matter?"

It is an extra $0.50 that is taken out on each hand.
For purposes of that hand I don't really care whether $0.50 is going to play the jackpot and $2 is going to the rake...or vice-versa.

I'm not playing the jackpot until it gets big anyway....which is a result of EVERYONE ELSE paying their little $0.50/hand fee at a time to drive the jackpot up to a point where I determine that I want to play it.


Viewing the extra $0.50 as a 'seperate side-bet' is not quite correct imo.
What matters is how much is getting taken off the table per hand and how that impacts the game you are playing.

If it was a $0.50 max-rake but also a $3 jack-pot drop would that change things? No. I don't care where the money that is getting taken off is going.
The fact that the jackpot continues to grow from the extra $0.50 (or $3) jackpot drop doesn't mean anything to me really. I'm playing for the money that EVERYONE ELSE put in there.


The amount taken off DOES MATTER for each limit.

If I'm playing $1/$2 hold-em and they have a $7 max-rake up to 20% then obviously this is going to alter my bottom-line to the point where that game can no longer be beatable.

If I'm playing $400/$800 hold-em and they have a $7 max-rake up to 20% the difference for a player who is winning 1BB/100 in that game is going to be much smaller. The game is still beatable for the +1BB/100 player.


Thus, I still think that the $0.50 jackpot drop PER HAND is really much worse news for the 2/4 BBJ player. There are many pots in there that are raked just $1 or $1.50.
This is 25%-37.5% of a BB.
Tack on the extra $.50 removed for the jackpot drop and you are taking out another 12.5% of a BB.


At 5/10 through 15/30 the jackpot drop has a lesser bottom-line impact on the winning player.


I reiterate (again) that I don't really know my way around the math very well.
I was just thinking some of this stuff through a little bit and have come to the conclusion (again) that I think the impact of the extra $0.50 really DOES hit the 2/4 and 3/6 tables harder.


Of course, I'm not even addressing the idea that the players on these 2/4 BBJ tables are so much worse to still make them worth one's while.
That's really mostly up to the individual to determine.