I think the spirit world communicated with Rob Singer that he has been discussed here on the forum... and perhaps only by coincidence, Rob sent me a trip report from an excursion to Tunica. He hit a big winner. Is anyone surprised?
But what is surprising is that Rob did not use a "special play" in an obvious "special play hand" at Triple Double Bonus. In fact, he followed conventional strategy and got lucky and won FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS on a $25 machine.
He sent this to me to point out that he doesn't always use his special plays -- but we know that. He has said he uses special plays only 5% of the time. He explained to me that while he normally would use a "special play" in this hand, he had to go for the big win, apparently because he was down by about ten-thousand dollars. Getting quad threes without the kicker only would have brought him back to even, I figure.
In this particular hand he was dealt trip 3s with an Ace kicker. The conventional play is to hold the kicker. The Singer "special play" is to hold on the 3s to maximize your chance for drawing the quad or case 3. But quad 3s wouldn't be enough... he had to get the quad with kicker.
Rob said in his email to me:
Alan: We went down to Tunica to meet up with some old friends from Houston. Good thing. Check this win that CET had to pay! I'm sending it to you so you may understand more about the Singer Special Plays. They don't all deviate from optimal strategy. Here's why:
You'll notice this hand held A333--something you might think is a no-no in my special-play world. But not so. Notice the amount of cash on the machine: $50,705. This was an ARTT session, five levels, $1 thru $25 with a win goal of $1000. If just the three 3's were held and a 4th 3 was drawn, the $10,000 win would NOT have attained the win goal. But here, because of the overall Singer methodology, the opportunity for a session-ending win was there by making the OPTIMAL play, which is to hold the Ace kicker. You don't see many of these, but then again, you don't see many like me.
You're probably asking yourself how this could be the hold when I advocate NEVER holding the kicker with 3 Aces in this game. Easy answer. Four Aces w/o a kicker will always attain my win goal. But the beauty of this particular hand is how the math does come into play along with all the other elements in my play strategies. It is the overall reason why negative EV games (and notice the "pitiful" 9/6 pay table on this "losing" game) consistently are beaten in my strategies. Here, to the tune of a $49,295 profit. AP's would claim any player was "losing X amount on every hand" on this game, thereby costing a fortune. HA!
Photo below sent to me by Rob as it was sent.
Reply With Quote
