They have always said that the end justifies the means, but it is not always necessary to justify everything in the short term when in the medium-long term such justifications are lacking in effectiveness.
A pick is not good or bad according to its final result, but according to its initial approach. “Sure, and what else does it give me that initially the pick is good if I’ve had cash?” In the short term this question may not have a reasonable answer, but in the long term yes, since the gusts are over and the laws of large numbers remind us that repeated experiments give us the expected result by statistics.
I mean, bets with a positive expectation of winning (bets with value) in the long term give us gains and in the short term we create uncertainty (like any other bet) and as we should care about is the long term, we will take in conclusion that a bet is good if it has value, regardless of the result.
It is very important for a good bettor to abide by what I have just said in order to keep his psychological strength intact. Fruit of the uncertainty of the result of a simple bet in the short term there is the possibility of a bad streak. That bad run can make us vary the strategy we have to bet.
Remember that the strategy has to be safe, we have to have positive conviction about it and it has to be fixed. If the strategy is good in the long term we will have gains, despite not having hit all the picks, maybe not even half, but with a good application of stakes we can reach the green numbers.
Losing a good bet should make us draw conclusions, but never doubt about the quality of it. The quality is prior, never posterior and must be evaluated beforehand. The fact of losing money with good bets should only make us think that for each lost bet we will have a higher number of bets won.
That must be the psychology of a bettor, optimistically and mathematically true. The best of all is that it is one and the other are the same.
- Comments Off on The quality of the picks and the results