Gambling has been viewed as irrational, and even though blackjack offers ra
tional strategies (i.e., Basic EE. Thorp, 1966] and card counting), people
exhibit departures from rationality (e.g., "Never Bust" strategies). To det
ermine whether departures from rational behavior reflect ignorance or fatig
ue, university students were provided with on-line Basic advice while playi
ng a simplified computer blackjack. Although the on-line advice initially a
ffected the totals these players sat on, it was eventually discarded for hi
gher risk strategies. Irrational pig did not reflect ignorance or fatigue a
nd was not necessarily conservative. Real fluctuations of odds in blackjack
may lend to situations in which Basic is not perceived by players as effec
tive. Because Basic is not a personalized strategy, it seems less likely to
be maintained in the fade of losses. Players were more optimistic that the
y might win when utilizing their personalized strategies.