I think either approach is incorrect. You should not be taking an approach just because it works in the past nor should you do something repeatedly if it's shown not to work. You should always be iterating and making adjustments to your approach. If something does not work you should consider if it was bad luck or the wrong approach and that's where you should then make adjustments if necessary.
Interesting... but you could indefinitely adjust on something wrong, isn't it ?.... what about working any approach with large number of events OR very low probability events with a smaller number .....to validate any approach... (same thing used for Artificial intelligence validation...
You could, but the premise is to always make the best decision with the information you have at hand. After the event you can evaluate that decision and iterate to make improvements on future decisions. I understand the idea that just because something turns out bad does not mean it was the wrong decision, you face this all too often in gambling and trading isn't too far different but it is quite different in that you must be constantly evaluating your decisions and choice making process because the environment you are working within is never static.