I like the formula I chose and intended that effect; if it’s about phrasing, I’d be happy to resolve it, but if it’s simply disagreement about intended effects, I’ll respectfully disagree. 

I don’t think it can be fixed with phrasing alone. For the exact effect described, the only other option is one readable but elaborate paragraph that expresses that same equation. Which would be better for being understandable by non-mathematicians, but is still a lot to process: whether that’s the extra time required to apply it correctly 14 times on a Wheel Spin, or the extra cogntive load of glancing at the scores to plan your next move (“Clucky’s on 35 but Jumble’s on 37, which means that if the next spin is Unearned, then I need to score at least… um…”).

I’d rather try something else with a similar effect, if it means that the rule becomes simpler to write out and internalise. (And 62366 tiptop is maybe already doing the job.)

“That the current equation bumps a player on -1 down to -2” It’s not true. The current equation acts on the module and then restore the sign.

[Marco Sulla] By my math, Kevan is correct about that because -1*2*sqrt(|-1|)=-2; whether you think that is a good thing or not is up to you.

It doesn’t bode well that at least one player didn’t understand the equation, and may have applied it incorrectly if Spinning the Wheel.

I guarantee that I would apply it incorrectly if I was spinning the wheel

Can I propose to exclude Josh from spinning? X-D

While the current equation is interesting, this is far simpler and has a similar effect.