Topic: Ever heard about financing a gambler? - page 12. (Read 3358 times)

Giving a piece of advice so they can comprehend is certainly a good thing instead of rejecting them all alone. That is a good initiative, especially since the context is a friend. I think it plausible that if someone needs to borrow money to gamble, there is a high likelihood they are addicted. So we should not completely ignore such kind behaviours.

Another supporting reason for that is it would prevent, as what you said, destructive consequences. Who would want to see their friend in financial ruin? Certainly, there is no obligation that one should take responsibility, but it wouldn't hurt to have words with those who face addiction conditions.

Gambling is fine for us as long as we take gambling as fun but as soon as we take gambling as our profession we have to accept that something bad is bound to happen to us. We should never really choose gambling as a means of income. Whenever we take gambling as an alternative profession for earning money then we become addicted to gambling and we often end up losing money instead of making money. We mean by profession we will get money consistently from a certain place but in gambling whenever we don't get money consistently or we lose multiple times then we get frustrated and get frustrated and make worse decisions about our bets or gambling. So gambling should be considered as a normal pastime from a normal level.

That's why its never a good decision to finance them knowing that their activities done is so risky to participate and if they lose for sure they might get broke then struggle financially, that's why our chance to get paid for what we lend to them is so slim. So to avoid any problem related to this stuff much better if we should not let them borrow our money and give them good advice regarding on financing and their poor gambling activity since for sure it can help them more rather than allowing them to do what those things can destroy them.

We should consider all conditions since if we just let them do what they want for sure they might think about that we are still fine and its ok that they would not pay because we still have money base on their observation.

Yes, it's that simple. But the problem is if he loses and he can't pay back the money he borrowed from us, what do we do? I guess people who lend money to someone will collect the money, right? Unless he actually gave the money and it wasn't a loan. If so, the person does not have to return the money, whatever the outcome. But most people will ask for their money back and they don't want to know what happens to the borrower because that is the risk of people borrowing money from other people. Besides that, we also have to think about how much money we want to borrow or how much money we have to finance that person. We cannot fund someone with a large amount of money.

Absolutely, agree with you on that, as gamblers, we often don't focus on the concept of 'safety.' We're drawn to the thrill of taking risks and pursuing huge rewards. Consequently, we're willing to do whatever it takes to enhance our chances of winning, even if it means placing trust in someone else to do the winning for us.

While financing a gambler may sound like a dubious idea to many, and perhaps to most gamblers, the fact that it exists (as shared by the OP) suggests it's happening everywhere. Consider it a norm in the gambling realm.

That's how a gambler should think. It shouldn't complicate things. We're all in this to expect two possible outcomes: either we lose or we win. Similarly, when trusting a person, it's akin to a gamble with agreed-upon terms. If they succeed, we win; if they fail, we lose. It's that simple, right?

That's what trust could lead to. If you trust a person to succeed in gambling, you'll risk your money without questioning him much, given that you know his credentials. If he loses, then it's up to you whether you are still willing to finance him to see if he'll end up profitable. Though this is quite risky, being a gambler already considers ourselves to be risk-takers, so we decide whether we are willing to experiment on this to improve our profitability.

It's just a matter of success and failure; once it fails, you won't finance again. But if the person is winning, that would help you earn consistent profit, provided he sticks with the same setup.

It does not really make any sense, because even if we were to give the benefit of the doubt to the friend and assume they can do exactly what they claim, at the end the one taking all the risk is yourself, since you are the one forking the money for this supposed business opportunity.

And obviously you do not need to be a genius to know this is a terrible proposal, because if that friend lost your money then they will not reimburse your losses, and if anything they may try to convince you to spend more money so they can recover the money they have lost already.

You will even feel some kind of regret if the money that's on your hand and was given to support or finance you losses. I don't want to receive money as well when someone approaches me that way about financing me with gambling or even with any investments.

I don't have that confidence of touching people's money even if they're going to give me permission. It's because I have that belief that if it's not my hard earned money, I should keep it off my hands.

There is, the house.  

Personally, I don't see any point in financing someone, no matter what they say about themselves. Usually finance that brings income and better without unnecessary risks, which in gambling is plenty. In addition, gambling is a form of entertainment, not earnings.

That's how you finance someone once and you will have a queue of people who want to get money. So no, I do not trust my money to anyone.

Nothing make sense in the world of gambling to be honest with you. Everyone play, become addicted, or have some fun, but still they are going to lose money in the end. And so if someone approaches me with that kind of proposal, I wouldn't accept it. I will try to reason out that it's not a good thing to do and besides I don't have money or extra in my pocket.

Just make sure that you explain it in a nice way and don't be rude as he might take it negative. And if ever I had the money, I still wouldn't lend some even if the proposal is good, like I will have the big percentage of the cut, but still though, he will not shell out money and you will, and then the risk involved. We all know that in gambling, no one is going to win in the end.

It sounds like a catch 22 situation, why would a good and profitable gambler ever need backing from an outside source? If they were making a profit then they could find their own expansion, which just leaves scenarios where you are giving money away to bad gambler's or downright fraudsters. Some people may do this on a high level by backing certain very skilled poker celebs, but the average person won't have access to that or be interested in putting up the sums that they would need. There are a lot of delusional people out there who are happy to spend your money, just be wary.

In some ears, that sounds perfect, and in others, it does not make any sense at all, because this is entirely a double potion of risk that the person is going to get themselves involved in; the person who has the game and wants to play it is already taking a risk, and the person who they walk up to and demand sponsorship is also getting the person involved in the risk they are taking, and I don't see that as a good thing to do.
 
If I see such a person, I won't even give them a listening ear unless I have some left-over money that I can give to them for free; if not, I won't risk a penny for such a person, because if the game does not enter as they expect, the person will lose both the one they have to bet with and the one that they were sponsored with.

Once we fund them, they will come back to us and ask us to fund them again. By funding them, at least it has given them the opportunity to think that we can be a place to ask for money to fund their gambling. We must be able to refuse those who want to ask us to fund their gambling because, after all, it is not good for them or us because money problems can make everything bad, especially if the money is used for gambling. It is better for us to fund ourselves than to fund others. At least we can be responsible in gambling, and we will also gamble only with the money we can afford so that we will not gamble excessively.

You have a very right choice because you decided not to fund anyone to gamble because there are many bad impacts in the long term and most often, for example, if you fund a friend or anyone you know too often, it will make their mind get used to asking you for help and Another impact is that you will lose a friend when you refuse to fund it.
This happens very often and you have very wise way to continue funding yourself without having to fund other people.

We all want a big win, but unfortunately, not many can get it, and even if we use a lot of money and borrow money, that doesn't guarantee we can win big. Everything will probably be determined by the skills and luck we have so that we can win big. And if someone says they want to borrow money for gambling capital, we should not lend them money because there is a possibility of losing all their money. Usually, those who borrow this money will exceed our limits in gambling, and that is why we can refuse them because it will clearly disrupt the allocation of funds we use for gambling, especially if we take money from allocations elsewhere. You are right about "loaning money to people who want to start a business."

I also choose to invest the money I have rather than pay for the gamblers because by investing, I can increase the profits I can get. Meanwhile, if I finance other gamblers, I could actually lose all the money because of the loss factor received by the gambler. And I don't want that to happen to my money.

Even if I know the person, it will not make me want to lend him money to gamble because I know that in gambling, a person can experience losses more often than he wins. I don't want to risk losing all his money, and when I collect his money, he won't be able to pay it. That could make our relationship worse because he can't return the money when I need it. Even though he is a professional gambler, I still wouldn't do it because a professional gambler will definitely have a way to earn money and not by borrowing money from other people. They really know how to treat money and gambling at different times as well as at the same time.

In my opinion, hiring a gambler is something that happens in big casino gambling areas. I believe gambling is not only related to pure luck. There are many types of gambling, like casino games, sports betting, lottery games, online gambling, etc. I didn't say that every gambling game will financially hire gamblers, but some games are definitely exceptional. Luck is the unexceptionable factor in any gambling, but a good gambler also has some skills and knows the rules and tricks to win the money. Gambling games are not solely dependent on luck, so if someone is willing to pay the money for gambling but doesn't know how to play, surely he will hire a gambler who plays well and make some money for himself. But I am not sure about the dark secrets of gambling financing.

People who fund gamblers to gamble are people who purely want to win without doing it, but it's not that easy. Especially with people we don't know and also don't know the traces of that person's gambling, and that is very risky.
And if someone wants to do this, it's best to find out the trace or ask directly as proof that the person is an expert at gambling and always wins.
And what we have to realize is, if the person is an expert and always wins at gambling, why should they be funded? Because if that's true, why doesn't he do it himself with his own capital so that he can fully own his winnings, and the question is why does he need other people's funds to gamble and this is definitely an important question. Because the person does not have the funds to gamble and only relies on or looks for people who want to fund it.
And if it were me, I wouldn't do it because I want to gamble alone with enough capital just to have fun and enjoy the game.

In that case then it could be a good idea to not lend that money just like that and involve a lawyer that may draft a legal document which states very explicitly what you are supposed to receive for the money that you are lending to that person.

That way they cannot conveniently forget they owe you money, and in the case they do not want to pay, you will have the necessary paperwork to take them to court and eventually recover all the money you lent to them.

Why do we have to finance a gambler when we can do it ourselves? Although there are be gamblers that are very good in a particular game and the need of sponsoring them for a competition or bet can be very tempting but I don't think that is the best. There are people you can sponsor and notice that when they finally won, they may never recognize you and compensate you for sponsoring them and giving them the opportunity to stand strong and win. Although it is obvious that people are very different and their are people that would not behave this way but everything is very risky.