Topic: $5 lost by a poor gambler is worth to him than $1K lost by a rich gambler - page 3. (Read 1539 times)

Of course yes the poor has more of profit gamblers while the rich has more of fun gamblers but how is the statistic evaluated? It is simple that when we talks about financial management, we cut our costs based on our incomes but then, how can a poor who does not have a reliable source of income draft a financial expenses with a budget to loose the little he has struggled to achieve at the course of gambling just for fun?

So certainly they literally gambles to double their wager at possibilities of winning and they feels intolerance in loosing whatever amount even at their one time stake but the rich may have to stake multiple times before that could feel the pains of their losts.

Yes the poor gambling more on profit and the Rich gamble more on fun. And as you said, really the small amount lose by the poor is vet painful foe him. But if that small amount is loss by the Rich gambler, it wouldn't pain him. A popular footballer in my country loss $4,000 and he was like nothing happened but if that money was loss by a poor gambler, I  am telling you the truth, he wouldn't sleep for night. That is there is always a saying that " gamble why you can afford to lose".

This is the first time I read something like that, and I'm not sure whether it works the way you said (it seems that you don't know it for sure either).

On one hand, doesn't it go against provably fairness? On the other hand, it is reasonable that if you build a casino you implement mechanisms to avoid bankruptcy in the event of several massive lucky breaks among users. So I don't know. Maybe it works that way in some sites, and not in others?

You are right with this rely because I always wondered why the casinos make their staking minimum so little then I realized that their targeted audience are not the rich people but the poor people that think their luck is just one bet away from them getting all the money they always dreamt about. Casinos do not make money from rich people but they hire them to make the poor people to think that the rich people got their wealth from gambling. Still casinos do not force us to gamble therefore they have not done anything wrong but we are the ones that do not think before we start gambling and when we are losing, we still do not stop but continue gambling. If we do not gamble out of frustration but gamble out of fun, we might be having a different results from the ones we are getting.

People say that gambling isn't for the poor but I'm of the opinion that gambling is for everyone whether poor or rich, Everyone has their financial capacity.

There's generally a huge distinction between rich and poor gamblers. Someone who has very little money turns to gambling because they are trying to take a shortcut to wealth or think they will be the one to beat the odds, it's the very basis for why casinos make the huge amounts of money that they do every year. It's easier to take a dollar from one million people than it is to take one million dollars from a single person, there is a lot of correlation in that statement to how casinos operate. Anyone who is rich has generally acquired the knowledge and financial acumen that they are simply playing gambling for recreational purposes, not seeking to get rich because they've already "made it".

Like we kept discussing on other boards that Bitcoin trading or investment is not a convenient sector for an individual who does not have a source of income to invest their funds on otherwise, when they are in need of money, their Bitcoin assets becomes the only hope for them and the will be push to sell without undermining if profited or lost.

This is equivalent in gambling, we have as much discussed about gambling not being a good approach to rely on for source of income but a place to bet and gaming for funs but prettily potential to be profited if lucky to win more than the values of your stakes or even losts.

We have heard several stories of how gamblers has been financially and mentally affected at the course of addiction and loosing more than being afford simply because they are primarily aiming to make profits.

So I am trying to pick some statics to understand between the poor and the rich who gambles more for profit.
There in, I am convinced that the poor takes the lead because if we are to gamble with with is affordable to loose, the poor may actually not find the least stake of their $5 affordable to loose but yet they risks it on gambling. What for? Of course it is aimed to profit in returns and when they looses it, they goes frustrated and timely empty handed looking other means of raising as little to come back and keep trying again if they could win. Their major concern is to win and profit and never find fun as they play.

As for the riches tending to gambling for profits, even if they looses $1K + such as we have Drake has been, he actually don't feel so disappointed of the lost why? Because he has more and could afford so even while gambling for profits, they are not much financially or emotionally affected as the poor who can not afford the least lost on gambling.

Agreeably, some rich addicted gamblers do go bankrupts too but it takes processes to be drained they could loss but feels some fun expressions because they have more and could afford the lost at the moments but the poor start to feel drained at their first lost meaning gambling for profit is not a game for the poor else or even the inability to pull out when they are financially being affected.
In all, gambling without sustainabilities of income as you stick to gamble is not just a good place for anyone who is after making profit.

So since we can not make personal decisions for our fellow gamblers who had lost their prides in chasing the profits on gambling, let keep advocating for carefulness even while compromising the concept of gambling as a game of fun and not to be enriched.

Yes the poor gambling more on profit and the Rich gamble more on fun. And as you said, really the small amount lose by the poor is vet painful foe him. But if that small amount is loss by the Rich gambler, it wouldn't pain him. A popular footballer in my country loss $4,000 and he was like nothing happened but if that money was loss by a poor gambler, I  am telling you the truth, he wouldn't sleep for night. That is there is always a saying that " gamble why you can afford to lose". Many people loss big because of greediness and also taking the last risk of gambling. And I am saying last risk of gambling because, when you bet on sport games, there is always a provision for Cash out before the final result which might be higher than your total stake and or below the stake but risk taking and greediness would not allow some gamblers to Cash out. And loss out all at the end

Yes the poor gambling more on profit and the Rich gamble more on fun. And as you said, really the small amount lose by the poor is vet painful foe him. But if that small amount is loss by the Rich gambler, it wouldn't pain him. A popular footballer in my country loss $4,000 and he was like nothing happened but if that money was loss by a poor gambler, I  am telling you the truth, he wouldn't sleep for night. That is there is always a saying that " gamble why you can afford to lose". Many people loss big because of greediness and also taking the last risk of gambling. And I am saying last risk of gambling because, when you bet on sport games, there is always a provision for Cash out before the final result which might be higher than your total stake and or below the stake but risk taking and greediness would not allow some gamblers to Cash out. And loss out all at the end

None of us can know when we will be lucky and under what circumstances, so it is not quite correct to assume that if you have managed to significantly increase your bankroll with a low bet, then if you had made a bigger bet the same thing would have happened. I think the algorithm of winnings distribution takes into account the maximum possible winnings at any given time. That's why very often the winnings happen when we make a small bet. I do not claim to be true, but judging by my personal experience, this is exactly what happens.

Well, that's the thing right, if you win you want to have bet more, and if you lose you want to have bet less....

That's basically how it goes.

The reality though is just what it is, and that means that you will lose more than what you bet overall.

Sad, boring, but true.

Well, that's the thing right, if you win you want to have bet more, and if you lose you want to have bet less....

That's basically how it goes.

The reality though is just what it is, and that means that you will lose more than what you bet overall.

Sad, boring, but true.

I have never managed to hit a big jackpot, but I think if I do manage to do it, the last thing I will think about is that I did not bet more. Risk management is one of the foundations of financial stability through which the gambler remains responsible. Violate risk management is about the same as putting a stick in the wheel. 

Like we kept discussing on other boards that Bitcoin trading or investment is not a convenient sector for an individual who does not have a source of income to invest their funds on otherwise, when they are in need of money, their Bitcoin assets becomes the only hope for them and the will be push to sell without undermining if profited or lost.

This is equivalent in gambling, we have as much discussed about gambling not being a good approach to rely on for source of income but a place to bet and gaming for funs but prettily potential to be profited if lucky to win more than the values of your stakes or even losts.

We have heard several stories of how gamblers has been financially and mentally affected at the course of addiction and loosing more than being afford simply because they are primarily aiming to make profits.

So I am trying to pick some statics to understand between the poor and the rich who gambles more for profit.
There in, I am convinced that the poor takes the lead because if we are to gamble with with is affordable to loose, the poor may actually not find the least stake of their $5 affordable to loose but yet they risks it on gambling. What for? Of course it is aimed to profit in returns and when they looses it, they goes frustrated and timely empty handed looking other means of raising as little to come back and keep trying again if they could win. Their major concern is to win and profit and never find fun as they play.

As for the riches tending to gambling for profits, even if they looses $1K + such as we have Drake has been, he actually don't feel so disappointed of the lost why? Because he has more and could afford so even while gambling for profits, they are not much financially or emotionally affected as the poor who can not afford the least lost on gambling.

Agreeably, some rich addicted gamblers do go bankrupts too but it takes processes to be drained they could loss but feels some fun expressions because they have more and could afford the lost at the moments but the poor start to feel drained at their first lost meaning gambling for profit is not a game for the poor else or even the inability to pull out when they are financially being affected.
In all, gambling without sustainabilities of income as you stick to gamble is not just a good place for anyone who is after making profit.

So since we can not make personal decisions for our fellow gamblers who had lost their prides in chasing the profits on gambling, let keep advocating for carefulness even while compromising the concept of gambling as a game of fun and not to be enriched.

^

A wise gambler knows how to play gambling well. For us, we think that it was only in sports betting is the ones that we can bet a huge amount to earn a slightly huge profit but in casino games, we will only choose the high odds games (they are mostly slot games) and we can still enjoy the game by betting only tiny amounts. Once we get lucky and hit the high multipliers, or better 'jackpots' and  max wins, we can still be able to profit greatly from them.

rich people have more capital that they can allocate to bet. they know how to get money back if they lose some of their money in gambling.
you may also realize that gamblers who are poor, or with small capital will bet more money they have to get bigger wins. what may make the difference is that rich gamblers understand the limits in using their money, while poor gamblers do not care about those limits. they hope to bet more and get bigger.

Though as you said, no one enjoys losing their money, but the logic presented by the OP somewhat makes sense. If the gambler is not well-off and he is just using his extra money, every dollar counts for him. Whereas, for a rich gambler, losing thousands may not be as painful as with the poor gambler losing his only remaining few bucks.