So the premise is the classic two-player counting to 100 game: players alternate picking an integer between 1 and 10 (inclusive), and the first to let the cumulative sum be greater than or equal to 100 loses.
However the twist is this (and it defeats the normal solution of adding to multiples of 11) - no two consecutive moves in the game can add to 11. That is, if Player A says an integer k, Player B cannot in the next turn say an integer m that would make k + m = 11. With this additional rule, what's the new winning strategy?
Player A has a winning strategy, which begins with the unique move of choosing $3$.
Every game state after the starting state can be represented by an ordered pair $(r,m)$, where $r$ is the remaining distance to $100$ (that is, $r$ equals $100$ minus the cumulative total) and $m$ is the previous move.
A brute-force calculation reveals that the losing positions are precisely these:
In other words, player A wants to end every turn in one of those positions. Note that A's choices for the first move leave the game states $(99,1)$, $(98,2)$, ..., $(90,10)$, and of these only $(97,3)$ is a losing position, which is why A should choose $3$ as their first move.
Note that if A starts their turn in a non-losing position, then they can always choose to move to a losing position:
On the other hand, if B starts their turn in a losing position, every possible move results in a winning position for A:
(The reason for phrasing this in terms of $r$, the remaining distance to the largest non-terminal total, is that if the terminal total is changed from $100$ to some other number then the entire analysis remains the same, other than player A's first move: it is a win for player A unless the terminal total is congruent to $1\pmod{12}$.)