 Related paradoxes and problems abound. One centers around a pair of games, the Pasadena game and the Altadena game (Nover &amp; Hájek 2004). The Pasadena game is also played by flipping a fair coin until it lands heads; here, the player receives \(\$({-1})^{n-1}(2^n/n)\) if the first heads occurs on the nth flip. Thus, its payoffs alternate between positive and negative values of increasing size, so that its terms can be rearranged to yield any sum whatsoever, and its expectation does not exist. The Altadena game is identical to the Pasadena game, except that every payoff is raised by a dollar. Again, its terms can be rearranged to yield any value, and again its expectation does not exist. However, it seems (contra EU maximization) that the Altadena game should be preferred to the Pasadena game, since the former state-wise dominates the latter—it is better in every possible state of the world (see also Colyvan 2006, Fine 2008, Hájek &amp; Nover 2008). Similarly, it seems that the Petrograd game, which increases each payoff of the St. Petersburg game by $1, should be preferred to the St. Petersburg game, even though EU maximization will say they have the same (infinite) expectation (Colyvan 2008).