Marcus, I'm not saying that he, or anyone else, has not or can't achieve the strike rate and POT mentioned (in the short term).

What I AM saying is that the combination of the said strike rate and POT is unsustainable in the *long term*.

For example, if a losing method is run for let's say 10 years, within that 10 year period there's bound to be periods (if these periods are considered separately, and not part of the whole 10 years) where a profit happens, where the strike rate will be sensational and be accompanied by unusually high dividends. If someone peruses one of those periods, in isolation to the full 10 year period, it can seem like a way has been found to beat the odds...... to get a great strike rate combined with big dividends. So....... the ONLY way, the only *accurate* way, to judge any method is to judge it's performance over incredibly lengthy periods and over many, many thousands of actual real world bets. When that is done, the overall law of averages then initially begins to assert it's dominance, and it's impossible to avoid this.
When the averages and percentages eventually show their hand in full , and a punter is STILL in front, then that punter is doing something right.