quoted from wikipedia.

QuoteGambler's conceit is the fallacy described by behavioral economist David J. Ewing, where a gambler believes they will be able to stop a risky behavior while still engaging in it. This belief frequently operates during games of chance, such as casino games. The gambler believes they will be a net winner at the game, and thus able to avoid going broke by exerting the self-control necessary to stop playing while still ahead in winnings. This is often expressed as "I'll quit when I'm ahead."[1]

Quitting while ahead is unlikely though, since a gambler who is winning has little incentive to do so, and is in fact rewarded for continuing to do so by their winning. Once in the throes of a winning streak the individual may even become convinced that it is their skill, rather than blind chance, causing their winnings, or good luck on their side, and thus it seems especially senseless to stop while continuing to win.[2]

Apart from the psychological aspect, you are never really "quitting" if you plan to play again, because all random outcomes in casino games behave like an unbroken stream. In other words, it doesn't matter how many outcomes you skip, or where you enter or exit the stream, because the distribution is the same. And of course, the gambler forgets the times he never actually gets ahead, and has to break off with heavy losses.

The moral of the story is: quitting when ahead offers no advantage whatsoever.

So, I am wondering, is this only for Gambling in your mind or does it apply to *Working, *Sex, *Eating, *Bowling, *Model Building, *Sporting Games, *Garage Sales, *Attempting to Set Records, etc., etc., and so on?

The other thing, and this applies not only to this author-but many others, what makes David Ewing's explanation and thoughts gospel???

Myself, I always ask questions and ask why someone says something when it is published and why that would be gospel, believed or should be followed upon or acted on. 

"The moral of the story is: quitting when ahead offers no advantage whatsoever" >>> I have to admit, this has crossed my mind SEVERAL times.

PERHAPS?.... the only real way to "win", is to walk into the casino for the FIRST time, win (hopefully) we'll say $100, leave and NEVER play the game again?

Ken   

Quote from: Mr J on November 24, 2014, 04:22:36 AM
"The moral of the story is: quitting when ahead offers no advantage whatsoever" >>> I have to admit, this has crossed my mind SEVERAL times.

PERHAPS?.... the only real way to "win", is to walk into the casino for the FIRST time, win (hopefully) we'll say $100, leave and NEVER play the game again?

Ken   

Even better idea is to go with a rich friend and ask him to bet only twice with a huge sum to check his luck. If he wins he will buy you drinks and if he loses, he will beg you to have drink with him.
               The moral of the story is: Don't think of gambling, if you can not afford to lose money. Consider the gaming table a monster that will eat all your buy-ins and if u r prepared for that, go for it otherwise let other gamble and cheer for them.

What happened to all the 'Systems' that will allow one to win repeatedly and over the long run?  I am confused! 

Quote from: alrelax on November 24, 2014, 07:55:49 AM
What happened to all the 'Systems' that will allow one to win repeatedly and over the long run?  I am confused!

I thought you weren't going to post anymore and said your goodbyes? I am confused! [smiley]msn/hot.png[/smiley]

Quote from: alrelax on November 23, 2014, 07:23:03 PM
The other thing, and this applies not only to this author-but many others, what makes David Ewing's explanation and thoughts gospel???

Myself, I always ask questions and ask why someone says something when it is published and why that would be gospel, believed or should be followed upon or acted on.

And what makes the gospel "gospel"?

The facts back up David Ewing's thoughts  on the matter, that's why it's reasonable to believe it. Same for anything else you read or hear about. Does it seem reasonable and in line with common sense? And like it or not, we all have to rely on the opinions of experts. In general, gambler's don't quit while they're ahead, but even if they had the discipline, it wouldn't make any difference because games like roulette and baccarat are unpredictable, so you can never know the best time to quit.

You might be quitting just before the longest winning run of your life, but without a crystal ball, you can't know this. And how much is "ahead" anyway? 1 unit? 10 units? So you make 1 unit per session and quit when you have your target, you do this 10 times and have 10 units. On the 11th session, you hit a losing run right from the start and lose your previous profits and more. That's the way it goes, win some, lose some, but you are always fighting a negative trend.

Something what is somebody somewhere wrote can only be a subjective attitude.
The game should be based on the personal research, acquired knowledge and skills, financial possibilities and of course the mental stability.

Quote from: greenguy on November 24, 2014, 09:13:28 AM
I thought you weren't going to post anymore and said your goodbyes? I am confused! [smiley]msn/hot.png[/smiley]

Half the constants forum members have left once the forum only to return later. I mean at all levels like those announcing their departure, or simply show their displeasure publicly for a member like it is him or me, and those who give ultimatums. If they do not return as the same user they simply register another username but then it goes through the seams.

Who has not left the forum and then returned, even to himself with an imposed inactivity, cast the first stone.