MTR SIGMA

Across the four counties it splits two and two. Hidalgo and Cameron support expanding. Starr and Willacy do not.

In Starr, the worlds where you enter are mostly worlds where Gulf Star plays Prepare Enter alongside you, and your position there carries 0.19 less durability than the Hold Out row.

Support tier follows durability, not how often an action wins. Willacy holds a higher share than Cameron and a lower tier because its position is less robust to what the field does.

Read 12,480 scored worlds in 2.4sShow the steps

Because 0.71 is an average, and in Cameron the average is hiding the shape. The worlds are close to bimodal on one rival's action.

Hidalgo does not do this: its worlds cluster tightly around 0.78 whatever the field does. So Cameron is not a moderately good bet. It is a good bet or a poor one, decided by a single rival, and the mean sits in a region almost no world actually occupies.

Rio Vista displays as aggressive on 13 years of observed county decisions, which is context for how to read that 22%, not a weight I have applied to it.

Durability distribution across 3,050 Cameron worlds

Yes, and it costs you the ceiling.

Develop is the leading action and reaches 0.84 in the favourable branch. Enter with a defensive benefit posture is second by mean, but it holds 0.79 and 0.74 across the two branches. Narrower spread, lower peak.

Restricting to rivals that anticipate your move before making their own, the gap between those two actions narrows further. If you think Rio Vista reasons that way, the defensive posture is close to free.

Both actions scored on the same world set

I scored your marked posture against the leading action in all 41 Texas counties you operate in. You diverge from the model in 12 of them. Eleven are small. Bexar is not.

You have Bexar marked Hold. The leading action there is Develop, at 68% of consistent worlds, frontier-supported, 0.80 durability. It is the largest single divergence in your book, and the gap at stake on that one county exceeds the four Valley counties combined.

That does not tell you the Valley is wrong. It tells you the cheapest available move is in a market you already have.

41 counties scanned · 12 divergences · sorted by gap at stakeOpen divergence list

I can name that risk, not score it. Rio Vista sits on the exit watchlist in two counties, Bexar among them. I will not give you an exit probability: that model has not cleared our validation bar, and a number from it would be worse than no number.

What I can score is the branch. In the 14% of Bexar worlds where Rio Vista plays Prepare Exit, your Develop position carries 0.88 rather than 0.80. The downside case for the recommendation is favourable, which is worth putting in front of the committee precisely because it is unusual.

Watchlist framing · no exit probabilities reported

Two clocks, and that is the part that bites. The Valley is a footprint decision: it needs a service area expansion, so the Notice of Intent to Apply falls in mid-November 2026 and the application on the second Wednesday of February 2027.

Bexar is a bid decision in a county you already hold, so it runs on the April pricing window. Different deadline, larger number, and no filing required.

The filing is also cheap and reversible: approval is an option, and the June bid decides which approved counties actually launch.

Decision windows from the CY2028 cycle

Done. The four Valley counties with a recommendation each, the Cameron split and the defensive alternative, the Bexar divergence as the largest gap at stake, the two watchlist notes with their limitation stated, and both deadlines called out separately.

Every figure carries the run and dataset it came from, so your actuary can trace any line back to the worlds underneath it.

Open draft memoStamped user-requested · vintage 2027