Chance and Luck

Next, gamblers recognize those who start on a gambling career with singular good luck, retaining that luck long enough to learn to trust in it confidently, and then losing it once for all, remaining thereafter constantly unlucky.

Thirdly, gamblers regard the great bulk of their community as men of varying luck -- sometimes in the 'vein' sometimes not -- men who, if they are to be successful, must, according to the superstitions of the gambling world, be most careful to watch the progress of events. These, according to Steinmetz, the great authority on all such questions (probably because of the earnestness of his belief in gambling superstitions), may gamble or not, according as they are ready or not to obey the dictates of gambling prudence. When they are in the vein they should gamble steadily on; but so soon as 'the maturity of the chances' brings with it a change of luck they must withdraw. If they will not do this they are likely to join the crew of the unlucky.

Fourthly, there are those, according to the ideas of gamblers, who are pursued by constant ill-luck. They are never 'in the vein.' If they win during the first half of an evening, they lose more during the latter half. But usually they lose all the time.

Fifthly, gamblers recognize a class who, having begun unfortunately, have had a change of luck later, and have become members of the lucky fraternity. This change they usually ascribe to some action or event which, to the less brilliant imaginations of outsiders, would seem to have nothing whatever to do with the gambler's luck. For instance, the luck changed when the man married -- his wife being a shrew; or because he took to wearing white waistcoats; or because so-and-so, who had been a sort of evil genius to the unlucky man, had gone abroad or died; or for some equally preposterous reason.

Then there are special classes of lucky or unlucky men, or special peculiarities of luck, believed in by individual gamblers, but not generally recognized.

Thus there are some who believe that they are lucky on certain days of the week and unlucky on certain other days. The skilful whist-player who, under the name 'Pembridge,' deplores the rise of the system of signals in whist play, believes that he is lucky for a spell of five years, unlucky for the next five years, and so on continually. Bulwer Lytton believed that he always lost at whist when a certain man was at the same table, or in the same room, or even in the same house. And there are other cases equally absurd.

Now, at the outset, it is to be remarked that, if any large number of persons set to work at any form of gambling -- card play, racing, or whatever else it may be -- their fortunes must be such, let the individual members of the company be whom they may, that they will be divisible into such sets as are indicated above. If the numbers are only large enough, not one of those classes, not even the special classes mentioned at the last, can fail to be represented.

Consider, for instance, the following simple illustrative case: -- Suppose a large number of persons -- say, for instance, twenty millions -- engage in some game depending wholly on chance, two persons taking part in each game, so that there are ten million contests. Now, it is obvious that, whether the chances in each contest are exactly equal or not, exactly ten millions of the twenty millions of persons will rise up winners and as many will rise up losers, the game being understood to be of such a kind that one player or the other must win. So far, then, as the results of that first set of contests are concerned, there will be ten million persons who will consider themselves to be in luck.