Whether to play to win or avoid errors depends on whether you're in your area of expertise
You should calibrate your strategy based on your skill level relative to the domain you're operating in. When you're operating inside your genuine area of expertise, you have the skill to execute aggressive plays and should go for the win.
The winner's game / loser's game distinction isn't fixed to a domain — it depends on your skill level relative to that domain. The same chess position is a winner's game for a grandmaster and a loser's game for a club player.
The practical rule: if you're operating inside your genuine area of expertise, go for the win. You have the skill to execute; aggressive play makes sense. Outside that area, flip the strategy — avoid errors, stay in play, let your opponent beat themselves.
Most people get this backwards. They go for high-variance moves in areas where they're clearly amateurs, and play it safe in the few areas where they actually have an edge.
Source claim: The correct strategy — seek wins vs. avoid errors — depends entirely on whether you're operating within your genuine area of competence.
Related notes
- There are no veterans in Russian Rouletterationality
- Avoiding stupidity produces more long-term advantage than seeking brilliancecircle of competence
- Sequential decisions are solved by working backwards from the endsubgame perfect equilibrium
- Expected utility matters more than raw probabilitypsychology
- You cannot reason with a tiger when your head is in its mouthabsorbing states