Most closes are objection-specific — there are closes for time, closes for money, closes for decision-maker, closes for stall. All-purpose closes work across objection categories. They're the 80/20 — the closes you reach for when the specific overcome you'd use isn't obvious, or when you want to chunk up from the specific objection to the broader decision.1
The two anchor all-purpose closes:
1-to-10 Close: "On a scale from 1 to 10 — 10 being let's do this, 1 being you never want to talk to me again — where are you?" Whatever they say, the next question is: "What would make it a 10?"
Best-Case Worst-Case Close: "Let me lay this out for you. Best case, this works exactly like we discussed and you get the outcome. Worst case, it doesn't work and [guarantee/refund/whatever]. Either way you're not in a worse position than today. Which risk-free option do you want?"
Both closes chunk the prospect up from whatever specific objection they're stuck on to the broader decision-shape. Both work because they reframe the decision as low-risk and force the prospect to articulate what would actually move them.2
All-purpose closes are E-section moves that operate across objection categories. They're useful in three contexts:
The 1-to-10 close works because the prospect's number tells you exactly how far you have to move them. If they say 8, you only need to address one or two things to close. If they say 4, you have more work to do but you know what to work on. The follow-up question "what would make it a 10?" forces them to articulate the missing pieces.
The best-case worst-case close works because it eliminates the perceived downside. If you have a guarantee, the worst case becomes essentially "no harm done." The decision becomes asymmetric in your favor: best case is good, worst case is neutral. The prospect's only rational move is to take the risk.
All-purpose closes deploy across all objection categories. They connect to:
Prospect, minute 29: "I just don't know."
Closer: "Totally fair. Let me ask — on a scale from 1 to 10, 10 being you're ready to do this, 1 being you absolutely don't want to, where are you?"
Prospect: "Probably a 7."
Closer: "Awesome. What would make it a 10?"
Prospect: "Honestly, I'd just want more certainty that you can deliver for someone in my specific industry."
Closer: "Got it — let me show you exactly what we've done for three other companies in your industry recently."
The 1-to-10 close converted "I don't know" into a specific articulable concern (industry-specific evidence) that the closer could directly address. The prospect's 7 told the closer that the gap was small; the follow-up surfaced exactly what to address.
The case shows the all-purpose close working as a diagnostic. The close doesn't try to convince — it surfaces what would convince.
Minute 28. Prospect is vague. You don't know which specific overcome to use.
Run 1-to-10: "On a scale from 1 to 10, where are you?"
Their number tells you:
If 1-to-10 doesn't close, escalate to best-case worst-case: "Let me lay this out — best case, X; worst case, Y. Either way you're not worse than today. Which risk-free option do you want?"
The best-case worst-case works best when you have a guarantee or low-risk back-out option. Without one, it lands weaker.
All-purpose closes have analogs in scaled-question therapy techniques (motivational interviewing's readiness ruler), in consultative-selling traditions (Sandler's pain-funnel scaled questions), and in negotiation training (BATNA-anchoring as a best-case worst-case variant). Hormozi's contribution is the specific commercial-deployment in 30-second moves that fit transactional sales calls.
Psychology: Inner Child Child Psychology Hub — motivational interviewing's readiness ruler ("on a scale of 1 to 10, how ready are you to make this change?") operates identically to the 1-to-10 close. The structural parallel: both architectures use scaled-questions as diagnostic-and-commitment tools. The insight: the 1-to-10 close is therapeutic-readiness-assessment deployed commercially. Same mechanism, different goal.
Behavioral Mechanics: Cialdini Six Principles of Influence — best-case worst-case operates on Cialdini's contrast principle (the worst case is contrasted with the alternative of doing nothing, making the worst case look acceptable). The structural parallel: both architectures use anchoring-against-baseline to reduce perceived risk.
The Sharpest Implication
All-purpose closes imply that closing isn't always about overcoming specific objections — sometimes it's about chunking up to the broader decision shape. Most sales training teaches specific-objection-specific-close mappings; the all-purpose closes provide a chunk-up alternative when the specific is unclear or when the specific overcomes haven't closed. Adding all-purpose closes to closer-training increases versatility without increasing the per-category training burden.
Generative Questions