Originally Posted by
Rob.Singer
You know, watching kew position himself when trying to talk theory about my strategy is like watching a blind man play chess. He guesses, he postures, and he theorizes....but he never understands historical actuals because he doesn't really want to. These results I've had have zero to do with overcoming the math. That would be impossible. Rather, it is VERY heavy on all aspects of what will provide a minimum 5% profit today---and not 20 years from now. IE, the strategy does two things: it either waits for one of the many high-paying hands to come along using optimal play, or it gives that good luck a helping hand on potentially high-paying hands where optimal play would not be capable of producing one.
Aside from that, a heavy bankroll plays a significant part. Think of how much a martingale player could win at a bj table if he were able to double his bet size for up to 50 straight hands. Is anybody gonna say a player WILL LOSE 50 straight hands and bust out? Well, there is no martingale in video poker, but I have devised a very winnable method of allowing 6 different denominations to attain that single winning hand (and/or multiple smaller ones) in order to reach a relatively small win percentage during any given session--which has mathematically shown an 85% rate of success.
But what no one chooses to explain is how their argument holds any water at all....that a session with such a win rate, can somehow suddenly shift as more sessions are played. 85% is 85%, throughout time. I understand clearly that someone who plays optimal play only in several different denominations for 20 years with no structured strategy, minimum win goal, or hefty bankroll (which would make no difference in this situation) can very well end up a big loser, and his chances of being a winner by then are probably about the same as getting 10 straight yo's.
So I'm open to listening to anyone who wants to take a stab at this. And please, stay away from generalizations. Remember, nothing will change the past. My results are my results with this strategy. It is predicated on seeing good luck in winning sessions....really, just like for ANYBODY who wins playing anything. Go ahead and explain why the math is required to snatch all of my winnings away, and more. And explain how an 85% win rate in today's session can somehow change 2000 sessions from now. When doing this, keep in mind the larger winners are more frequent than and bigger than the larger losers. There is no such thing as "a bad session will wipe away all profits and more"....which critics regularly claim when they have no idea how to follow it.
It is why the Law of Large Numbers does not apply to the method I devised. That only works when a given procedure is followed every single time. My strategy inherently changes each session to be a one-off every time it's played.
Let's have it.