List of Gambling Fallacies

[Bayes]

Go here.

In particular:

   
• Quit while you are ahead each time and you'll never lose: (i.e., keep chasing your lost money until you recover it.)This belief is a hallmark of pathological gamblers.   

[hamsup_sotong]

hahahah i have one ( tongue in cheek though ). No offence bayes

if you never ever quit(stop) while you are ahead, how could you possibly win?

a no brainer eh

hamsup

[Bayes]

Hi hamsup,

I know you're not being entirely serious, but do you really believe it's not possible to win unless you quit  while you're ahead?

I guess this comes back to the debate regarding hit & run.

You must then believe that no consistent winning system is possible, right?

[hamsup_sotong]

hi there bayes,

As for the answer to your question, its possible to win provided you consistently win more than you lose when u quit ahead.


well i do believe that there is a consistent winning bet out there.However, this method of playing can not possibly be a flat bet unless its advantage play. It'll never be able to beat mathematically, the edge of 2.7.

However, i do feel that there are other ways of winning as well. Unfortunately, there has to be a combination of both positive and negative progression. The crux lies in averages i guess. Higher average winning bet and lower average losing bets within table and personal risk limits. How to do it, is the answer that we're all looking to find.

As for hit and run, i think a way to put it would be trying to identify the ebbs and flows of the system involved. Not exactly running away, but betting less or even abstaining when its on a bad run.

cheers
hamsup

[Proofreaders2000]

"...but betting less or even abstaining when its on a bad run."--hamsup_sotong

When one system is losing another may be winning.  If a bettor can just figure out which one is winning at the moment...

[hamsup_sotong]

its possible as well proof ... food for thought


cheers
hamsup

[GLC]

Go here.

In particular:

   
• Quit while you are ahead each time and you'll never lose: (i.e., keep chasing your lost money until you recover it.)This belief is a hallmark of pathological gamblers.   

Bayes my friend,


Since you made that statement, I feel like I have to defend my signature statement which is "Quit while you're ahead, How can you win if you don't."


I'm not suggesting that you never stop until you are ahead.  If you could do that you would have a GRAIL!  What I'm trying to encourage is if you get ahead, don't give it all back to the casino.


When I say "get ahead" I'm not defining how much ahead that is.  Each person will have to determine that for themselves.


Let's say "get ahead" is 15 units.  I would suggest that if you get ahead 15 units, stop if you get back down to 10 units.  On the other hand, having reached +15 you must be having a run of good luck,  why stop just because you reached some arbitrary profit.  You may be at the beginning of a really big winning run.  Risking those 5 units can possibly turn into winning another 15 or more units.


Now, I know that some will say, "but you may not win more, often enough to overcome the 5 unit losses it costs you when you failed."  And that's a legitimate observation.  We each have to decide which side we fall on.


No matter what we do, there will be members championing the opposite side.  One purpose of the forum is to educate members and guests as to all the options available so they can make educated decisions regarding their own method of play.


George

P.S.  Believe me, of all the members of the forum, I'm the least pathological gambler here.

[GARNabby]

Since you made that statement, I feel like I have to defend my signature statement which is "Quit while you're ahead. How can you win if you don't."

Ah, that means you're not winning, and don't expect to win.  Ie, if you had a winning system, whichever, then you would expect to become as hopelessly-ahead as the losers hopelessly-behind.

I'm the least pathological gambler here.

I don't "buy into that", because yours is the "prime real-estate" of the self-deluded... another way to out think yourself.

[GLC]

Hey Garnabby,



Nice one!


Your sense of humor is cracking me up.


GLC


How's that Ken?

[MrJ]

Come on guys, its getting a little shaky. Lets all be pals.....P L E A S E.

Ken

[Bayes]

Since you made that statement, I feel like I have to defend my signature statement which is "Quit while you're ahead, How can you win if you don't."


I'm not suggesting that you never stop until you are ahead.  If you could do that you would have a GRAIL!  What I'm trying to encourage is if you get ahead, don't give it all back to the casino.

Hi George,

Hope you don't think I was attacking anyone in particular by highlighting that statement (which was copied from the site), actually I hadn't noticed your signature statement, and I certainly don't think you're a pathological gambler (maybe just a pathological system creator  ).

I do agree that it's foolish to give it all back to the casino assuming that you ARE up at some point. It does seem to me, on reflection, that there are 2 separate points being made; "quit while you are ahead each time and you'll never lose" doesn't necessarily mean that you're chasing lost money, although the author seems to have put that interpretation on it.

Nevertheless, many gamblers do believe that quitting while ahead is an important component of a winning strategy. For example, the gambling author John Patrick recommends that you quit after 3 losses in a row, which by itself cannot possibly give any advantage. As hamsup says, it makes sense if your betting is modified according to the ebbs and flows of the game, but in that case you're not really quitting, but using a strategy which you've hopefully researched and found some merit in.

[GLC]

I didn't think you were Bayes, I was just making the post in case some newbie thought we had different philosphies regarding the concept.

In fact, my statement has to be considered as a whole.  "Quit while you're ahead.  How else can you win?"  If you never quit while you're ahead, how can you win?  That's my point. 

Naturally, there will be times when you have to quit before you get too far down.  And sometimes you never get "ahead" far enough to call it a reasonable quit point.

Anyway, the main point is to not chase a loss with money you didn't intend to risk.  Sometimes you will win, but most of the time you wind up losing way more than you intended to.

I over-reacted a little to Garnabby's post, but our friend Ken brought me back to a more balanced perspective.  I was able to modify my post before the time for that option passed and all h&!! broke lose.  So, all's well that ends well!

By the way, this is a very worthwhile topic.  We all need to be reminded of the basic inaccuracies associated with gambling.

Cheers,

GLC