I guess I have just been lucky overall, because of course it is not possible to beat the house edge over time on slots. My winnings for 2006 are partially due to using bonuses (I didn't keep track of them, so I can only assume)
But there
is the super secret strategy that the casinos don't want you to know about. It's called quitting when ahead. They fully count on me playing back through any winnings over and above my original bankroll. It's the nature of the gamble beast to chase, IMO.
I haven't actually charted it so my theory is anecdotal; If I pick a reasonable expectation, say 10% increase, and always quit then, I'll be able to survive a bust now and then and maintain a profit.
Conversely, if I'm willing to spend my bankroll each time and always bet large with any amount over my throughput, I'll eventually hit a large enough return to maintain a profit. To illustrate; two buckets of coins - bankroll in one and throughput in the other - mostly lowrolling with the bankroll, and randomly doing 'big bets' with the throughput bucket.
And then the mixture of those two things, randomly applied.
Unless I was just lucky because I played sporadically, or I got the 'leg-up' because of manipulating the EV with bonuses - this harebrained scheme works.
If I accept the premise (which I do) that over time 10,000 $1 bets will probably not net a profit. And I agree that at some point in those 10,000 pulls I will probably have more money than I started with - Then simply quitting while ahead is the holy grail of the gambler who hates to lose. Because of the very randomness and volitility of the game, i don't think that statement can be statistically debunked, any easier than it could be proven.
So I get to have my little dream for now.
And since I ultimately play for fun, and never gamble more than I can afford to lose, I'm good to go