Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) and group-based policy optimization methods such as GRPO update a stochastic policy by sampling multiple completions per prompt and increasing the policy's probability on those with higher reward, regularized by a KL penalty toward a reference policy. These updates do not include explicit mechanisms that track epistemic uncertainty. This paper studies a stylized explanation for why such uncertainty-agnostic updates can nevertheless be effective. We analyze an annealed softmax (Boltzmann) policy that selects actions according to a softmax of empirical mean rewards in a many-armed Bayesian Bernoulli bandit. Under a linear upper-tail condition on the prior (the $β=1$ case of $β$-regularity), which implies an abundance of near-optimal arms, we prove that annealed softmax greedy achieves Bayes regret $\tilde{O}(m + T/m)$, and in particular $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{T})$ when the number of arms scales as $m = Θ(\sqrt{T})$. This is the near-optimal Bayes regret rate in this regime, attained also by empirical-mean greedy. Under $β$-regularity, many arms maintain empirical means close to the optimum throughout learning, so when softmax samples an arm other than the empirically best, that arm tends to be another near-optimal one rather than a clearly inferior one. By contrast, with a small number of arms, the same kind of softmax policy can suffer linear regret. The result also provides a structural analogy to RLVR, where a base policy with a non-negligible probability of producing a correct completion plays the role of $β$-regularity.