Reactions to systems, strategy invariably vary

Nov 26, 2002 3:03 AM

   There’s a saying that it is much better to travel hopefully than to arrive. The same could be said for gambling. While the sweaty palms and the racing hearts convert into glorious moods prior to hitting the casino, the heart begins asking questions as the once brightly colored flowers begin to wilt.

   It takes a lot to understand this, and it takes an incredible amount of understanding to be able to utilize it as a positive motivator. Without this knowledge, the Play Strategy I’ve developed would never have made it off the drawing board, and it makes hearing the criticisms of my strategy all the more understandable.

   After all, who in video poker has ever heard of concepts like setting win and loss goals? Who has ever heard of going into professional play after saving a bankroll of over 70 times one’s weekly win goal? Who’s ever heard of combining expert strategy with the compiling of a list of over 1,700 special plays that deviate from it — while at the same time being mathematically sound plays during short-term sessions?

   And who in the world has ever heard of being able to do what you say you are going to do before going into the casino? There just isn’t much discipline at all walking around the floors of the casinos, and if there were, they simply would not be open for business. It was because of all this that I came onto the scene fully prepared for a broad spectrum of comments, questions, and the inevitable array of confused critics who probably would be much better off reviewing their own methods of play.

   Back in my so-called optimal strategy days of part-time/recreational play from 1990-1997 where each year saw a losing record, if someone nearby hit a string of winners I’d get up and go somewhere else. Royals on the other guy’s screen were nothing but an irritant. And if I overheard people at dinner talking about how much they’ve been winning, I’d quickly lose my appetite.

   Of course, most people were moaning about losses, and I felt right at home with them as my dining neighbors. But winners really turned me off, because I really had no idea how to be successful at the time. I figured since I followed the famous writer’s ways I’d have little trouble winning as often as they gave the perception that they did.

   Suggesting that computer-perfect/expert-play strategy should be only a portion of a method of consistent winning has raised questions and eyebrows alike. Declaring that computer-perfect play is a quick route to both addiction to the game and unneeded financial challenges (from my own personal experience as well as through discussions with hundreds of others) was and continues to be very unpopular to those with unopened minds.

   When I present my professional results along with my critical opinions and views, strong debate results. For instance, I was on a video poker forum this year where one miscreant was so driven by envy over my winning record and my criticism of optimal strategy that he turned it into a mission of extreme reaction. He went into an uncontrollable frenzy that began with the posting of my real last name (Singer is a pen name), and ended with identifying personal tax/financial information from 15 years ago as well as the name, address and number of a company that I work for now that I’ve met my 2002 win goal in early September. Predictably, all the facts were spun away from the truth, and this led to the forum’s closure by the administrator.

   Every now and then public figures run into this type of behavior. This fellow’s problem was that he wasn’t aware that I’m prepared, and that I understand the extreme frustration and hurt experienced by those who lose at the game.

   Critics of my views and strategy are fast to explain that my losing for nearly seven years of expert play was an oddity that certainly can happen even to the best of them, yet when they read about my consistent winning that is equally as odd in going against the math, they are just as quickly to label me “possibly untruthful.” Go figure.

   However, when I offer them a bet of proof that entails going with me to my Nevada bank for a live review of withdrawal records from the Arizona branch, and next-day deposits of at least $2,500 more (with the exception of nine losing trips that show an average $7,000 less in depositing) into the Nevada branch for 140 out of 149 winning trips — along with all the supporting W2G’s — there’s nothing but silence. And that’s quite a reaction.