Between live
poker and blackjack, I spend about 1000 hours per year at the gambling
tables. No matter which game, I constantly see players trying to
beat that game by merely quitting when they're ahead -- as if it
could actually do something. It can't!
I know, it seems
to make sense that if you leave the casino with some winnings in
your pocket, then you have in fact won. But that's only part of
the picture, and it takes the whole picture to make you an honest
to goodness winner. Let me try to prove my point by asking you this
question:
What do you
suppose your chances are of beating an honest coin flip game? I
mean, it's a balanced coin and you're getting even money on every
bet. The answer is: you're a 50-50 shot, of course. But did you
know there's a way to book a winner on roughly 80% of your playing
sessions in this game if you manage your money right? How? Simply
by quitting every time you get one flip ahead! The only losers you'll
book are when you lose your first flip and never get ahead -- even
for a moment.
Sound like a
winning strategy? It's not! There's still one problem you can't
get away from. No matter what, you're going to end up winning 50%
of all your flips. And at even money per flip, where does that put
you? Dead even, doesn't it? "Well, how can this be if I win
most of my sessions?" you ask. Let me show you with a similar
poker illustration.
Suppose you've
been a dead break even poker player over the last five years. So
to gain a little extra edge you decide you're going to quit every
time you get ahead, even if it's after the very first hand. Now
let's say that on two separate days you won the first hand you were
dealt and were up $300 each time. True to your game plan, you locked
up the $300 both times and high-tailed it home. For those two sessions,
your poker log would look like this:
Win
+$300
Win +$300
Total +$600
That's two neat
little wins, no losses and a $600 gain. By quitting winners you've
averted the possibility of a loss and can start out fresh next time
-- with another 50-50 shot. The only problem is, you've also averted
the equal possibility of a larger win. You see, as a break even
player you'd have been as likely to win a few more dollars as lose
back that same amount had you kept on playing. In fact, if you played
onward both times, winning an extra $500 once and losing back $500
the other time would be perfectly normal and average for you. Then
your poker log would look like this:
Win
+$800
Lose -$200
Total +$600
Now you'd have
one win and one loss, but the same $600 net gain. Stop right here
and think hard about that. The only thing quitting winners accomplished
was averting further swings in both directions. So it improved your
win/loss record, but not your bottom line. That's because you can't
improve your chances of winning overall just by stopping and starting
at selective points.
When you come
back to play next time, there'll be no difference between that last
hand you didn't take because you quit and the first hand of your
next playing session. To the cards and the chips, they're both just
the next hand. The only place there was any effective break was
in your mind. But actually, gambling is all one long game even if
we don't think of it that way. You see, you're eventually going
to end up right where your own personal gambling compass is pointed,
whether you take one long trip or many short ones.
|