Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
When there's a reasonable discussion about my method of play then "my act" will usually appear.

I agree, what Dan said makes sense. However, he tends to discredit himself whenever he gets into the "long-term" part of the discussion. And I can't completely fault him: those who have not really put the right amount of thought into something they still don't understand will always automatically revert back to the original cookbook and true-believe it because that's the easiest way. I don't need to re-hash the same information about why he's wrong once again. If he were truly motivated to comprehend the details, then the fact that I've profited well over a million dollars since dropping my AP "state of mind" in late 1999 would make the statement "a short term session unrelated to any that have come before or that have yet to come" would be something very reasonable to him. But since he chooses not to do any learning or work on this, he prefers it being safer to disbelieve. I can't argue with whatever it is that makes him feel comfortable.

Red, you've seen this before: no one plays exactly as I do so no one will be out there winning like I do. Everyone I've trained uses what they've learned to formulate their own method of play within their comfort zone. None of them are professionals and all they wanted is to have more enjoyment playing while losing less or winning for a change. Most of them tell me they're successful. Why would they tell anything to a critic like you.

What remains astonishingly amazing to me is that people who believe they're intelligent when it comes to playing video poker, somehow choose to continually misrepresent what they espouse about my method. On the one hand, they nearly bulldoze their way into the discussion about how they firmly believe playing for a 5% win in a single session using tiny EV-reducing special plays that go for the session-ending big winners along with increases in denomination & game volatility, is entirely possible most of the time NO QUESTIONS ASKED. Yet it confuses me when these same people inexplicably proclaim that it has to be only a one-time-event! And here's where they choose fuzzy rather than clarity. "Please explain this".

It's like they think the opportunity I have on that first "easy-money" session disintegrates somewhere somehow, without explanation--just as a demand or something. And then, whenever I slap some sense back into them about how their wavering belief system begins not to hold water, they R-E-A-C-H by claiming "the one big loss will wipe out all those little winners"....only to be scolded, taught, and reminded that there is such a thing as BIG WINNERS, and they happen far more often & are almost always larger than those big losers.

If you can't understand this people, then at least educate yourselves on why it's stupid to be tipping on casino hand pays.
Rob, since you and only you (and presumably your hundreds of trainees) know exactly what to do when, nobody else is qualified to run simulations of your strategies. Do I have that right?

Soooooo, have you or your trainees ever run simulations of your strategies? If so, what were your results? If you haven't run simulations, why haven't you?

Inquiring minds want to know.