Topic: Does good side of gambling overcomes its negative side? - page 3. (Read 1374 times)
Everything is a good thing until you abuse it. So it depends on how you really gamble.
This isn't with gambling alone. With each and everything there is positive as well as negative side. The way we use it and move forward gives it an positive as well as negative outlook. With gambling we can't state certain things to be positive and certain things as negative.
Why I say this, because one who has got lucky to win big describe on gambling as a positive thing. On the other side the losers will term it negative. In this manner same thing gets described inverse.
Why I say this, because one who has got lucky to win big describe on gambling as a positive thing. On the other side the losers will term it negative. In this manner same thing gets described inverse.
At the end of the day, everything boils down to moderation. Gambling could be considered good for as long as it does not go beyond moderation. If a gambler is already hooked onto it to the point of spending time and money more than what is moderate, that would already be bad regardless of whatever positive things gambling could give.
Buddy, a sheep is always a sheep and a dog is a dog. It takes alit for a gambler not to be used at the end of the day. Used in the sense that it can't be controlled or have a limit. Most people who gamble have a thing with coming back harder when they lose in the first time of play, so they keep trying to regain. They forget at that point that all days are not the same.
Yes, you have the means of not choosing it but it could be the result whether you like or not. Gambling when your mood is good, I think that's considerably a good idea if you like to think about the positive side. But as we always know, this is gambling.
Results do vary so we win sometimes or lose now and again.
Results do vary so we win sometimes or lose now and again.
Outcome cant really be known and also gambling isnt intended for money making in the first place and also this is just for entertainment
and if you treat on the thing as it should be then frustrations and rage towards it when you loss is less.
But, you have to overcome whichever is bothering you and it's likely the negativity and accept whichever comes first then overcome it afterward.
Oh no, o don't believe it. This is pure crime and none of the legal entrepreneurs or athletes would do that. The risk of going to jail is too great. All this firms balance on the verge of law with financial transactions, with taxes, etc., but they do not commit obvious crime.
Those who clearly violate the law very quickly fly off the market.
Those who clearly violate the law very quickly fly off the market.
The world is not fair, although I have not read that bookies are paying players to manipulate the games but the speculation that games are rig has been circulating in the internet, and these are actually just theories but sometimes if you follow their explanation you would be able to believe.
This kind of dilemma makes our heads difficult to choose.
You either want to be positive because it's beneficial or you'll hate it but will choose the negative sides because you're always losing. We can't define each situation when you ask this kind of tricky question.
This is not an option because there is no way we will choose something negative. Indeed, we cannot determine the situation every time we gamble but if you only gamble when in a good mood and also only gamble with money that can be eliminated, then at least you will gamble with the positive side even though the results are not always good, but with these efforts at least it will makes you have control and will be aware of the time to stop when negative results are obtained.You either want to be positive because it's beneficial or you'll hate it but will choose the negative sides because you're always losing. We can't define each situation when you ask this kind of tricky question.
as I said before:
risk management is everything
just don't play with more money than you can afford to lose and all will be fine.
also:
all the things have more than one side
it's yin yang
the law of nature and life
This is exactly so in theory. But in practice, for some reason, bookmakers hate plus players. And in various ways they struggle with them - they cut the limits of bets and even ban. How can you explain this?
I’m always looking for an answer to this question but no one can clearly explain it.
Bookmakers are not so innocent as they look like to be. They are the ones who make the most of the money on the bets. Even the bigger bookies buy the teams and players and make the deal with team so that the stronger team loses and all the bet money goes in the pocket of bookies. I’m always looking for an answer to this question but no one can clearly explain it.
Oh no, o don't believe it. This is pure crime and none of the legal entrepreneurs or athletes would do that. The risk of going to jail is too great. All this firms balance on the verge of law with financial transactions, with taxes, etc., but they do not commit obvious crime.
Those who clearly violate the law very quickly fly off the market.
There are too many negative sides on gambling. Whether you obey or not, I don't think the good sides of gambling can overcome its negative sides. If you are addicted on gambling and somehow if you are not able to manage enough fund for gambling then you will become involved with many more bad things like stealing, snatching and so on. Again, you can get addicted to drag and alcohol too. These are harmful to you and your family. I agree that there is some exception but I don’t think that, good sides of gambling can overcome its bad sides.
It can never be outweighed when it comes to is negative.We do see there are lots of aspects that can be affected if you do let gambling destroy your life.There are indeed lots of negative sides than positive but eventually you can avoid these things if you do know how to control up yourself towards it.
If not then for sure you would really end up into unfortunate things.
Yes, you have the means of not choosing it but it could be the result whether you like or not. Gambling when your mood is good, I think that's considerably a good idea if you like to think about the positive side. But as we always know, this is gambling.
Results do vary so we win sometimes or lose now and again.
Outcome cant really be known and also gambling isnt intended for money making in the first place and also this is just for entertainment
and if you treat on the thing as it should be then frustrations and rage towards it when you loss is less.
This kind of dilemma makes our heads difficult to choose.
You either want to be positive because it's beneficial or you'll hate it but will choose the negative sides because you're always losing. We can't define each situation when you ask this kind of tricky question.
This is not an option because there is no way we will choose something negative. Indeed, we cannot determine the situation every time we gamble but if you only gamble when in a good mood and also only gamble with money that can be eliminated, then at least you will gamble with the positive side even though the results are not always good, but with these efforts at least it will makes you have control and will be aware of the time to stop when negative results are obtained.You either want to be positive because it's beneficial or you'll hate it but will choose the negative sides because you're always losing. We can't define each situation when you ask this kind of tricky question.
Results do vary so we win sometimes or lose now and again.
This kind of dilemma makes our heads difficult to choose.
You either want to be positive because it's beneficial or you'll hate it but will choose the negative sides because you're always losing. We can't define each situation when you ask this kind of tricky question.
This is not an option because there is no way we will choose something negative. Indeed, we cannot determine the situation every time we gamble but if you only gamble when in a good mood and also only gamble with money that can be eliminated, then at least you will gamble with the positive side even though the results are not always good, but with these efforts at least it will makes you have control and will be aware of the time to stop when negative results are obtained.You either want to be positive because it's beneficial or you'll hate it but will choose the negative sides because you're always losing. We can't define each situation when you ask this kind of tricky question.
This kind of dilemma makes our heads difficult to choose.
You either want to be positive because it's beneficial or you'll hate it but will choose the negative sides because you're always losing. We can't define each situation when you ask this kind of tricky question.
This is not an option because there is no way we will choose something negative. Indeed, we cannot determine the situation every time we gamble but if you only gamble when in a good mood and also only gamble with money that can be eliminated, then at least you will gamble with the positive side even though the results are not always good, but with these efforts at least it will makes you have control and will be aware of the time to stop when negative results are obtained. You either want to be positive because it's beneficial or you'll hate it but will choose the negative sides because you're always losing. We can't define each situation when you ask this kind of tricky question.
I think no matter how we try to quantify the advantages of gambling, i am not sure it can be more than the negative sides.
Because practically, 70% of gamblers lose dailies, which makes the bookmakers even more rich.
Until gambling provides proportional profiters to losers, it still has more disadvantages even without listing them.
This depends entirely on your point of view, if you are trying to obtain profits from gambling and we know the majority of gamblers are long term losers then regardless of any positive side that gambling may have it is probably not enough for the ones that have that goal in mind, but if you are aware that it is almost impossible to obtain profits when you gamble and your goal is only to have fun or something similar then the positive side of gambling can be good enough as long as you can maintain your losses as small as possible.Because practically, 70% of gamblers lose dailies, which makes the bookmakers even more rich.
Until gambling provides proportional profiters to losers, it still has more disadvantages even without listing them.
are losing and getting addicted to this kind of entertainment.
Because practically, 70% of gamblers lose dailies, which makes the bookmakers even more rich.
Bookmakers does not take your bet, they only facilitate your bet, they make money from juice so their income would rely on the volume of gamblers and the amount of money entering in sportsbook. it goes like this, when one wins, the other will lose, the winning bettor will usually get 90% only while the 10% will be for the book makers, that's how they make money.
This is exactly so in theory. But in practice, for some reason, bookmakers hate plus players. And in various ways they struggle with them - they cut the limits of bets and even ban. How can you explain this?
I’m always looking for an answer to this question but no one can clearly explain it.
Bookmakers are not so innocent as they look like to be. They are the ones who make the most of the money on the bets. Even the bigger bookies buy the teams and players and make the deal with team so that the stronger team loses and all the bet money goes in the pocket of bookies.
Because practically, 70% of gamblers lose dailies, which makes the bookmakers even more rich.
Bookmakers does not take your bet, they only facilitate your bet, they make money from juice so their income would rely on the volume of gamblers and the amount of money entering in sportsbook. it goes like this, when one wins, the other will lose, the winning bettor will usually get 90% only while the 10% will be for the book makers, that's how they make money.
This is exactly so in theory. But in practice, for some reason, bookmakers hate plus players. And in various ways they struggle with them - they cut the limits of bets and even ban. How can you explain this?
I’m always looking for an answer to this question but no one can clearly explain it.
I think no matter how we try to quantify the advantages of gambling, i am not sure it can be more than the negative sides.
Because practically, 70% of gamblers lose dailies, which makes the bookmakers even more rich.
Until gambling provides proportional profiters to losers, it still has more disadvantages even without listing them.
This depends entirely on your point of view, if you are trying to obtain profits from gambling and we know the majority of gamblers are long term losers then regardless of any positive side that gambling may have it is probably not enough for the ones that have that goal in mind, but if you are aware that it is almost impossible to obtain profits when you gamble and your goal is only to have fun or something similar then the positive side of gambling can be good enough as long as you can maintain your losses as small as possible.Because practically, 70% of gamblers lose dailies, which makes the bookmakers even more rich.
Until gambling provides proportional profiters to losers, it still has more disadvantages even without listing them.
yes, if you're only doing it for fun and not for profit and supposing you're not addicited to it then the gambling expense would come as a "fun expense", let's say simmilar to going to the theatre or going to the park, with the difference that going to watch a play will add to your life in a more meaningfull way.
if we generalize, overview would mostly be negative
but of course, it's a distribution and there are people who will take something good out of it.
I think no matter how we try to quantify the advantages of gambling, i am not sure it can be more than the negative sides.
Because practically, 70% of gamblers lose dailies, which makes the bookmakers even more rich.
Until gambling provides proportional profiters to losers, it still has more disadvantages even without listing them.
This depends entirely on your point of view, if you are trying to obtain profits from gambling and we know the majority of gamblers are long term losers then regardless of any positive side that gambling may have it is probably not enough for the ones that have that goal in mind, but if you are aware that it is almost impossible to obtain profits when you gamble and your goal is only to have fun or something similar then the positive side of gambling can be good enough as long as you can maintain your losses as small as possible. Because practically, 70% of gamblers lose dailies, which makes the bookmakers even more rich.
Until gambling provides proportional profiters to losers, it still has more disadvantages even without listing them.
This kind of dilemma makes our heads difficult to choose.
You either want to be positive because it's beneficial or you'll hate it but will choose the negative sides because you're always losing. We can't define each situation when you ask this kind of tricky question.
You either want to be positive because it's beneficial or you'll hate it but will choose the negative sides because you're always losing. We can't define each situation when you ask this kind of tricky question.
Bookmakers does not take your bet, they only facilitate your bet, they make money from juice so their income would rely on the volume of gamblers and the amount of money entering in sportsbook. it goes like this, when one wins, the other will lose, the winning bettor will usually get 90% only while the 10% will be for the book makers, that's how they make money.
With 90% losing a bet I don't think there are advantages of bad sides to good sides, the good sides is when you are gambling free of risk, and you can only do that if you are playing within your means and just for entertainment, any more than that it can be considered as high risk and takes away all the good sides of gambling.
Because practically, 70% of gamblers lose dailies, which makes the bookmakers even more rich.
Bookmakers does not take your bet, they only facilitate your bet, they make money from juice so their income would rely on the volume of gamblers and the amount of money entering in sportsbook. it goes like this, when one wins, the other will lose, the winning bettor will usually get 90% only while the 10% will be for the book makers, that's how they make money.
I think no matter how we try to quantify the advantages of gambling, i am not sure it can be more than the negative sides.
Because practically, 70% of gamblers lose dailies, which makes the bookmakers even more rich.
Until gambling provides proportional profiters to losers, it still has more disadvantages even without listing them.
Because practically, 70% of gamblers lose dailies, which makes the bookmakers even more rich.
Until gambling provides proportional profiters to losers, it still has more disadvantages even without listing them.
I think that the answer to this question will primarily depend on the point of view from which we will look at it.
After all, the brain of addicted people is inclined to seek confirmation of the positive factors of their addiction, while a person without addiction can objectively see more negative factors than his dependent friend.
Jump to: