Most of us continue to learn as we progress through life. A 70-year-old man has many more life experiences than a 20-year-old. Most 20-year-olds have more recently been a student and have a more flexible mind than their grandparents, but their grandparents have been in many more situations and have learned from them. That learning experience is very valuable.
Unless they’re a football fan.
On a kickoff in the National Football League, a “touchback” — meaning the kick goes into the end zone or beyond and the receiving team makes no attempt to run it out — results in the ball being placed on the 25-yard line.
If the receiving team runs the ball out and gets “only” to the 20-yard line, the typical announcer says that running it out was a “bad decision.” The reason he says this is obvious. Had the kick returner given up and taken a knee, the ball would have been at the 25-yard line. Since he only got to the 20-yard line, any fool can see that it was a bad decision.
Conversely, had the runner gotten to the 30-yard line, this would have been pronounced a “good decision.”
Seventy-year-olds have heard this kind of football-announcer logic hundreds or thousands of times. And they sometimes believe this kind of thinking because it makes sense.
Except it’s dead wrong — at least to my way of thinking.
Whether or not you have made a good decision or a bad decision should be determined at the time you make the decision — NOT sometime down the road. In the case of football, the player needs to consider how deep the ball is kicked, his speed, the score of the game, the placement of the players on both teams, and a variety of other factors. Sometimes another player has the responsibility of determining whether or not the kick should be run out because the guy who is catching the ball needs to concentrate on that and not on where everybody else is.
When the player catches the ball and runs it out, he cannot know exactly where he will be tackled or run out of bounds. He can have a good idea — but he doesn’t know exactly. Over time he learns that on average, if the ball is kicked nine yards deep, he doesn’t get as far as when the kick comes down right on the goal line. This is an important factor in his decision. He learns that balls kicked really high take longer to come down so he’s more likely to be tackled earlier than if it were a low kick. This is also an important factor in his decision. There are many other such factors and eventually he becomes better at this — or is replaced by somebody else.
In gambling, many people use the same type of illogic — namely if they win they were playing well and if they lose they were playing poorly. Again, this is dead wrong to my way of thinking.
A good bet, or a good decision, should be evaluated as good or bad when you make the bet — not afterwards. With the hand Q♠ J♠ T♠ 9♠ 8♦, discarding the 8 and seeing if you connect on a flush or straight flush this time is definitely not the way to evaluate what the correct play is. (Generally speaking, in games without wild cards, when the straight flush pays 250 you keep the straight and when it pays 400 or more you go for the straight flush.)
People who listen to a lot of football games and learn to accept the kind of logic presented there have a tough time accepting this “truth.”
What makes “my” truth better than the truth told by football announcers? (It’s not “my” truth at all, but merely the truth I’m presenting here. It was discovered long before I came along.) The most successful gamblers from a variety of disciplines accept it.
Poker players talk about pot odds. If the pot is offering 3-1 odds and the actual odds are only 2-1 against you, poker teachers tell you that you should make the bet even though you are going to lose it two-thirds of the time.
Michael Shackleford, the head guy at the Wizard of Odds series of websites, who is arguably more of a theoretician than a gambler (although clearly, he is both), phrases it as, “It’s not whether you win or lose; it’s whether you had a good bet.”
The basic strategy in blackjack says you should splits 8s against a ten (as well as all other up cards.) Doing this, you’re frequently going to lose twice as much as if you either stood on the 16 or took another card. This decision is made because on average, you’ll lose less money splitting the 8s than you will making either of the other two plays. And “on average” means over several times, not just this time in particular.
In sports betting, you might see -150 on one side of a bet and +125 on the other — meaning you have to bet $150 to win $100 if you lay the favorite, and you win $125 for your $100 bet if you take the underdog. Either side might be the smart bet — depending on a bunch of factors. Waiting until after the game is over and THEN saying “I should have bet on . . .” is not the way it’s done — but that’s the way football announcers tell it.
Experience is a great teacher. But sometimes it teaches us the wrong lesson.
Never miss another post
Outstanding series of analogies to tie into video poker. I think it should be mentioned that the touchback rule to the 25 yard line was fairly recent as it was incorporated just this season. It was set for the 20 yard line for a long time before this season so players have to get used to it. A good luck returner should also observe the direction of the opponent is rushing towards compared to where the special teams is assigned to block (a guess) left middle or right. All while focusing on the ball in the air, it’s much harder than it looks.
I do not play as much Triple Bonus Plus or White Hot Aces which have 500 and 400 credit payout for the straight flush, but I learned something new today in the event I’ll play one of those later down the road
I am a casual observer of other video poker players at the local racino. Nothing infuriates me more than to watch players who are so afraid of losing they make the most fundamental mistakes in card selection. I tend to play fast and loose. I tell people who question me on my style of play: If I want to play it safe, I would not have gotten out of bed this morning.
I too play relatively fast. But not because I am not a “safe” player. I just get bored playing too slowly.
Two things come to mind when reading this post. The first is the Super Bowl two years ago when Seattle, at the end of the game and near New England’s goal line–with the game on the line, chose to throw a pass instead of having Marshawn Lynch run it. I’m sure it could be argued that the smart play was to give it to Lynch but considering that New England’s defense was expecting it, I’m not so sure. However, whatever the smart (or smarter) play might have been, the ONLY reason Pete Carroll was excoriated is the fact that it did not work. If it would have worked, he would have deified by the very same naysayers.
The other thing that comes to mind is a friend of mine who has been studying Texas Holdem for ten years and, for all his knowledge, is the fish (and joke) at almost every table he sits. He has absolutely no control, plays almost every hand, bluffs way too often, can’t keep his mouth shut, and gives away tons of valuable information–on every hand–to his opponents. He has a good job but loses more than he can afford playing poker; however, if he has a few winning sessions in a row (even as few as two), he never fails to inform anyone who chooses to listen that “[he’s] playing much better now,” and that “[he’s] much more selective preflop.” The sad thing is he is so delusional that if he read this post, I truly don’t believe he would get it.
Tom. What about other players playing, in your opinion, incorrectly infuriates you?
One common mistake in ddb is holding a pair and a single Ace. I tell people either hold the pair or the Ace. Not both.
That’s pretty bad advice.
Assuming we’re talking about 6 6 A 9 3 in 9-6 DDB, holding these are the following EVs.
66 3.66
66A 2.63
A 2.38
holding 66 is better than 66A, but the ace by itself is worse. If you’re going to speak up at all, why give the a choice between a better play and a worse play. I would let them play what they wanted, but if they insisted I’d tell them that 66 is better. I would never suggest holding the ace by itself is an acceptable play.
Your articles are, as always, thought provoking. I read almost every one. Have you considered putting them into a book. It would be a great gift idea for wannabe gamblers.
George
I think before playing any game, you should have a decent knowledge of it or you won’t do well. Take a class, read up on it, etc. Great information, thanks for sharing!