I just read this post by Rob Singer on Alan's site.
I just read Frank's post on LVA reacting to how some people feel that a "pause" of a day or whatever in-between playing sessions in video poker is somehow different than simply stringing it all into one long session as far as play results go. In it he indicated an article he wrote on some geek-infested forum or site referring to some "Fairy" as well as several other characters only those with overactive & slightly troubled minds might conjure up in explanatory messages.
As issues with vp go, right now Frank is immersed in what makes the Singer Play Strategy (SPS) tick, so it is only natural that when he doesn't understand something he will write about it over & over again until he has convinced himself I'm wrong and CASE CLOSED! And he well may receive the kudos, hand shakes, and pats on the back from a group of nerds who look at the world as one great big theoretical probability curve, but in the real world that route will never make the grade.
This issue of course has arisen because of the way my strategy has been developed, which requires I play a session in Nevada, immediately drive back to Phoenix upon attaining my win (or loss) goal for the session, and not play again until returning to Nevada on my next trip. The big question seems to be, what difference could it possibly make how long....1 minute, 1 hour, 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 1 year....before I went back for another SPS session? After all, the machines have no memory or clue and they do not know it's me out there, right?
Further on in Frank's dissertation about the subject, he claims he's done some sort of unsupported "study" about how players looking at play in this manner are prone to becoming addicted to the game. Again, as with nearly everything Frank asserts, it comes from theory, mathematical probability equations and formulas, or from reading. It is rarely the product of actual events or experience.
That's where -- and why -- my words are worth far more than his on this subject. Prior to developing SPS, I was an AP who solidly believed video poker would be one lifelong event. I could only play every month or two, but I looked at those sessions as one continuous event. In other words, I have experience in doing & thinking that, and I understand where & how I made my mistake.
Enter SPS--where each individual session is as different and separate from one another as each dealt hand always is. Which reminds me....AP's and those who live by theory first, are always quick to point out how session outcomes are just one long continuously inter-related string of events, but HANDS remain unaffected or related to any that have come before or that have yet to come. This is classic talking out of both sides of the mouth.
What makes SPS unique & consistently as well as cumulatively successful, is the fact that no one part of it is any more important than any other part. For example, required bankroll is just as meaningful as discipline, which is just as meaningful as following the strategy to the letter, which is just as important as having the right support system in place, which is just as important as only playing it if you are in decent shape, which is just as important as taking at least a week off in-between sessions. None of this will get through to very many AP's of course, because so many of them are fat and completely out of shape, they chain smoke, their discipline only goes as far as sitting at the machines until they get close to passing out or go broke, and most are loners with little to know family that would give them support for what they've chosen to do.
Why the minimum one week wait between sessions, and how can that possibly affect results? Very simple. When a win goal is met - and it was over 85% of the time - a certain satisfaction ensued, and that 300 mile drive home was enjoyable and even safer to an extent. The time at home with my family was affected by this even if only slightly, and the next week's trip back was fun because of winning the last time. As a result, I was always fully prepared in both body AND mind, which means less irritation while playing a very unforgiveable game and waiting patiently for that one winner that will send me home, and this resulted in less errors in optimal play as well as in when to make those ever-important special plays that deviate from expert strategy. Also, the fact that play always stopped at a higher-than-$1 denomination and always re-started back at dollars and usually at the much less volatile game of BP, while not mathematically affecting overall long-term distribution, was increasingly important because my play never did and never would go beyond being individual, unrelated short term sessions....just as individual hands have no relation to one another.
And what about the possibility of addiction? Well again, when AP's and math people claim they DON'T GAMBLE because they are, eh-em, "playing with an edge" all that means is they are in severe denial. These people play as often as possible and sit like silly zombies at the machines for as LONG as possible - chasing slot club points and long term dreams. So tell me, is this more or less addiction-prone that weekly sessions where you get up and go home immediately upon attaining a pre-determined goal??
This is what it's all about people: EXPERIENCE, and not simply quoting obscure names who wrote things down on grape leaves thousands of years ago. I've been on both sides of this fence, unlike ANYONE else, and until someone has the courage & wherewithal to do as I have done, they will never be qualified to fully discuss the ramifications of why SPS sessions are short term bursts of play--really not any different to how they play. I believe Jesus Christ said that too. The book is too old to read the title, but it's a really, really strange name. Last edited by Rob.Singer; Today at 08:06 AM.
I wonder if Rob Singer also believes that setting "win goals" would mean you could also win consistently on blackjack with a 0.18% to 0.4% casino edge. Aren't those even better odds than some of the Video Poker pay schedules?
