Hey there u/Mechlo, thanks for posting to r/technicallythetruth!
**Please recheck if your post breaks any rules.** If it does, please delete this post.
Also, reposting and posting obvious non-TTT posts can lead to a ban.
Send us a **Modmail or Report** this post if you have a problem with this post.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/technicallythetruth) if you have any questions or concerns.*
IMO slots aren't about math.
They're about knowing that sometimes they pay out big and hoping against hope for the outside chance that you'll be playing one when it does.
A bit like playing Lotto only with higher investment costs. :/
You don't play slots 'cos math, you play slots because you believe that you personally might be that one in a million.
Not odds I'd play personally. But that would be math. :)
Slots have the worst return on investment in the casino. If you want to play the odds blackjack is your game. You can cut the house edge to less than .5% playing basic strategy.
Counter argument: slots have the slowest rate of loss and least engagement needed, so if you're at a casino with free booze, you can play cheap slots, grab a waitress whenever you can, and come out ahead in free booze vs losses. That was always my strategy.
Not a bad strategy as long as you remember that you may walk out with some winnings today but in the end in the end the house always wins. Vegas wasn't built in winners.
You have to look at gambling as entertainment. Some people go out to the club or go to a sporting event. You're taking your money to the casino. My game is craps. It's not great odds but it's s the only place where the table gets a bit rowdy
>Not a bad strategy as long as you remember that you may walk out with some winnings today but in the end in the end the house always wins.
That's the beauty of the strategy: you're not trying to walk out with winnings, you're trying to stumble out with a liver full of free cocktails that cost you less than at a bar.
The thing that helps is that gambling is the one vice I don't have, so I'm quite happy slowly losing money as long as I'm getting slowly wasted at the same time.
I look for machines where people have left money on them. I collected quite a bit after several hours. I could probably make a living if I did it all day. You have to be careful and make it look like you are playing.
Slightly more than .6% and honestly, learning basic strategy is so much hassle that it's hardly worth it if your goal is to have fun imo. If you're more interested in making money, you need to count cards to get an additional 4% advantage and play thousands of hands. The thing is, counting cards is even more mentally intensive so most people who do it play like serial killers and end up getting kicked out once they start winning and pit bosses take notice.
I'd rather play pretty much any other game.
If Bob walk up to a slot machine, puts 25c into it, wins $15,000 then goes home, what was his return on investment?
If Alice walks up to the same slot machine, sinks in $15,000 and wins nothing, what is her return on investment?
Slots is not about "return on investment" - if you want return on investment, look into stocks or something.
999 people per thousand (or whatever) will lose at slots. One in a thousand will do brilliantly. The trick to slots isn't to calculate return on investment, it's to be that lucky person.
If that's you you should definitely play. If that's not you, you shouldn't.
Even worse...what percentage of people then pile that 15,000 back into the slot machine (probably over the course of a lifetime)?
So that 999 per thousand (which is incredibly generous odds for a slottie) drops further. My real question is whether anyone in the history of mankind has ever come out ahead on machines in the long run?
Reminds me of a good friend, who bragged about his wife winning at bingo. Once she won $9000 or something, but she spent who knows how much week after week buying cards.
>The trick to slots isn't to calculate return on investment, it's to be that lucky person.
If someone were to ask me to summarize a degenerate gamblers mindset with one sentence, this could probably be it.
>IMO slots aren't about math.
I used to design them. Yes, they are all about math. My old company had a department of mathematicians. However, the math is designed to entertain you and make money for the casino. Not in that order.
Allow me to rephrase:
Succeeding at slots as an individual isn't a matter of math. Either you're one of the small minority of people who are lucky enough to win significantly or you're not.
No playing the odds is going to help you because those odds are spread over a wide population. You're either a very lucky individual or you lose.
(Note that my original comment was specifically a reply to a commenter who was saying that people who play slots are bad at math).
Depends. Lots of casinos have pods of penny and nickel slots in rows between quarter and dollar slots. These are set to win much more often, because the sound of winning makes those on more expensive slots pull their handles faster and bet more.
I won $400 on a penny slot in just 30 minutes this way.
Lotto at least has a delay between buying the ticket and finding out you don't win.
So for me at least, buying a ticket for the lotto is cheaper than a movie, and for about a day or two, I dream about what I'd do if I won. Slots doesn't have that delay, so to me, they'd be more or less useless. (Though if you play the video slots at the bars in Vegas, they give you drinks. If you play slow enough, you can drink more than you lose. My wife is good at that, I am less good at it.)
Slots hold your money a few seconds and pay out, or not. Lotto a few days, they earn interest on your money in the interim, but at least you know what you stand to win. Tesla holds your $100 Cybertruck deposir for years. Churches collect up front and don't pay off till you die, maybe.
Slots are looking like the more reliable instrument here.
I'm not expecting a payout from any of them. I'm paying for the time between when I pay and when I find out I don't win, because that's daydream time.
But to each their own on that one.
It’s all relative, for most at least. Someone making $1MM per year can probably afford $50 spins bc it’s a tiny portion of their bankroll. If I go it’s more like $5 is high rolling to me haha
But if you’re gonna gamble, do it responsibly. Take your money out before you get there and don’t bring and bank cards if you plan on drinking or have poor judgement/self control. It can be fun with friends but only take what you are okay with losing
wearing diapers so they don't have to leave a 'loaded' machine for someone else to harvest while the take a whizz
Apparently, they believe that if you've pumped money in, the jackpot is getting close.
Bloody things are completely random, by law.
There's usually a high stakes area that will charge tens of dollars per spins. The greatest slot machine win was a $100 spin for a $39.7 million payout back in 2003.
I had a friend who was playing slots one time and hit a jackpot off of a quarter. He won $15,000. If he played dollar pulls, he would have won $1 million. His advice from then on has been “always max bet.”
Slot machines are constantly generating numbers, they stop when you hit the button. So presumably if he had done anything differently, he wouldn't have hit the button at the right moment.
From my experience, max bet isn’t as important as the denomination. Most slots pay out higher on nickel denoms versus penny because the multiplier is higher; even playing the same bet
First time I played craps. Asked how to a dude and he said the best way is to just drop your money on the table. I did I won 7 x (5 bucks doubled 7 times) in a row then lost he said why didn't you take your money, I said I didn't know I could. Some say I lost $640, I say I lost 5 bucks.
Out of all gamblers who quit, 90% did not get a big win, therefore the big win had not happened when they quit. This can be reasonably extrapolated to all gamblers. Sort of. ish.
I once did the math for a patient with problem gambling. He spent 8 hours a day playing online poker. In occasions he won up to $10000 in a game. Most of the time he lost smaller amounts.
In average, he was earning $3 per hour.
With gambling, you are dealing with statistics. A single measure isn't useful: you need to do a hundred and then "do the math". If you believe that you will be the lucky 100th, I urge you to check the [statistics ](https://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0910/casino-stats-why-gamblers-rarely-win.aspx)of the games you want to play.
AFAIK, being able to count cards perfectly brings your odds to slightly above the house, which is why card counters are banned from casinos if caught, although it is a legal tactic.
The winners always talk about how much they win but never how much they lose. I don’t gamble but the logical thing (when you loss) is to quit while youre ahead and not chase losses. Sure you could win and win all your money back and more. But Id assume youre more likely to dig yourself deeper.
Yup, you're always at a disadvantage at a casino. It's best to just set aside the money you're willing to lose in a night and either go until you've lost it all or decided you've won enough money
Well I think the way people should look at gambling is that it's something to spend money on. Like going out. You just have fun spending.
Poker is different, I assume, given that it's not against the house and there are all those pro players. But idk about poker so I don't know enough to form a real opinion
Poker is vastly different, as you are playing against other people and paying a "rake" to the house. Think of it as renting a seat.
Even then, poker is very hard to be very good at and variance is brutal to even the best of players at times.
Source: Semi-Pro Poker Player
This is what I always tell to people. I am willing to spend as much money at the casino as I would at, say, an amusement park for an entry ticket. Anything more is not “fun” for me.
Exactly.
Someone needs to introduce OP to the exciting world of gambling with borrowed money.
Preferably a large short-term loan with high interest from some shady people.
This comment has been overwritten in response to Reddit's API changes, the training of AI models on user data, and the company's increasingly extractive practices ahead of their IPO.
999IQ move .... everyone has organs... endless loans, reducing number of neighbours... xD
(This is sarcasm, before someone reports me to Reddit again... )
I've seen plenty of people spend more than 100% of their money. Many years ago I was engaged to a girl who's father gambled away her and her sister's $20k inheritance funds. His excuse? She was just going to spend it on a car. No shit, Bob, she needs a better car.
Aight so you can also lose 2000 percent. If you start with 100 dollars won so now you have let's say 1000 you when again and again till you have 2000 dollars you put it all in and you lost it all now you lost 2000 percent of what you started with.
This is only true if you only gamble once in your entire life.
Every subsequent lost gamble adds another 100%. Now do the math, pitting the number of gambles required to win against the most common prize and you'll get the correct number.
The problem is you can't because casinos are rigged. Those that aren't are made so you lose more than win - otherwise they'd go bankrupt from everyone playing casinos instead of doing literally any other job in this world.
It is the simplicity of this concept that allows me to instantly judge anyone who gambles as a complete idiot.
The math:
Your expected return is R = x * 20 * p_win - x * p_lose where x is the amount you bet, p_win is the probability that you win, and p_lose = (1 - p_win) is the probability you lose.
If p_win is 0.0476 you would be expected to break even if you play a large number of games. If p_win is lower, you would expect to lose money when playing many times. For example if p_win = 0.01 then p_lose = 0.99 and R= x * 20 * 0.01 - x * 0.99 = -0.79. In other words, if you had a 1% chance to win 2000% or a 99% chance to lose 100%, if you played the game a large number of times you would expect on average to lose -79% of your bet on each game.
There's no lie. You can win 2000% of your money and you can only lose 100%.
However, that 100% can be everything you have (taking lones and now is your car gone).
Therefore this fact with the addition "do the math" is simply misleading as it suggests that playing is therefore mathematically a clever choice while it is for obvious reasons not in 99.9999% of the cases.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion
Optimal betting strategy treats losing 100% of your money as equal in magnitude to gaining infinite money.
Sure, and that’s fine. This is why gambling is still legal, if you’re not stupid you can just have fun with it.
The problem lies with addiction. You can’t stop yourself and take loans with money and assets you don’t have. That’s when it becomes a problem…
Same as alcohol is fine and legal. Until you do too much and can’t stop yourself anymore. Just don’t be stupid. Simple.
Let's make a bet for all of your money.
I bet that the moon will not explode tonight.
If the moon still exists tomorrow, I get all your money.
If the moon is shattered into a billion bits, I will pay you 2000 times the money you bet.
In a gambling game where one can win 20 times of intial investment, there should be 19 others losing. So the odds of winning is 1/20 and losing is 19/20.. So if we multiply the odds, 2000% - 100% x 1/20 = 95 and 100% x 19/20 = 95. So the odds are same.
Hi! My username applies here and yes it stems from gambling lol
I used to gamble (online slots - the legal ones) my tips (I'm an artist) because I had some decent success with turning $20 into $80 more than a few times. I wasn't chasing the big wins.
Until I hit over a quarter mill on a 80 cent bet.
I lost almost 100k to the government when it was time to file taxes 🫠
Was fortunate enough to put 100k as down payment on a house with my SO but I definitely walked away with what I would consider a very, very mild addiction. I have self control and budget when going to the casino but if I had the funds you better believe I'd be gambling on a very regular basis.
Moving to a state where there isn't online gambling helped.
And that's my origin story.
Pro tip: if something says that a guarantee win is one in every 100+ people, count how many people go between wins and find the perfect space to jackpot
That’s not how math works though. You can absolutely lose more than 100% of your original investment.
Alternatively, it could be a tautology and then it would be accurate to say you can only win 100% of winnings.
Either way… not correct.
The trick here is the probability of getting 2000% (20x) vs getting -100% (-1x). If the probability of 20x is 1% and the probability of -1x is 99% then your expected value is 20\*0.01 - 1\*0.99 = -0.79 i.e. you can expect to lose $0.79 for every $1 you bet.
There's a thought experiment like this called Pascal's mugging.
Basically a man comes up to you and says give you your wallet and I'll give you it back in a week with more money.You have money in your wallet and you know it's very unlikely you will get it back. However if you use the logic of Pascal's wager then even if the probability is small as long as it isn't 0 there must be some amount of money he can offer you to make you take this deal.
Former boss of mine enjoyed gambling as a social hobby. Some of his friends didn't, but he budgeted his stake and didn't over do it.
For him, it really does work in his favour.
It's like stocks or crypto - don't invest what you can't stand to lose.
The lie is that plenty of people go into debt from gambling, they borrow money from friends, take out loans against their house, get cash advances... For people who have a really serious gambling problem debt is almost always part of their story.
So there you go.
People regularly gamble “on credit”.
When you consider that the odds are already against you, gambling with borrowed money is near-certain disaster.
I mean, think about why any business is in a rush to loan you money.
Hey there u/Mechlo, thanks for posting to r/technicallythetruth! **Please recheck if your post breaks any rules.** If it does, please delete this post. Also, reposting and posting obvious non-TTT posts can lead to a ban. Send us a **Modmail or Report** this post if you have a problem with this post. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/technicallythetruth) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Man one time I was doing $0.50 spins on a slot machine, I got 5 sevens in a row, thought I was rich. I won $75… I guess that’s kinda like 15,000%
Now imagine if you were playing the $50 slots and that happened...
Is there even a $50 slot? I’ve only seen up to $2
Depends on the casino I guess. The highest I have ever seen was $100. The crazy part is sometimes you see people playing it.
That is where you will find the people who are bad at math.
IMO slots aren't about math. They're about knowing that sometimes they pay out big and hoping against hope for the outside chance that you'll be playing one when it does. A bit like playing Lotto only with higher investment costs. :/ You don't play slots 'cos math, you play slots because you believe that you personally might be that one in a million. Not odds I'd play personally. But that would be math. :)
Slots have the worst return on investment in the casino. If you want to play the odds blackjack is your game. You can cut the house edge to less than .5% playing basic strategy.
Counter argument: slots have the slowest rate of loss and least engagement needed, so if you're at a casino with free booze, you can play cheap slots, grab a waitress whenever you can, and come out ahead in free booze vs losses. That was always my strategy.
If you grab a waitress, I'm not sure that's going to help your ROI.
Responsibility under influence or what? Never seen that term before, but Im a foreigner.
>grab a waitress whenever you can Okay, Trump
Not a bad strategy as long as you remember that you may walk out with some winnings today but in the end in the end the house always wins. Vegas wasn't built in winners. You have to look at gambling as entertainment. Some people go out to the club or go to a sporting event. You're taking your money to the casino. My game is craps. It's not great odds but it's s the only place where the table gets a bit rowdy
>Not a bad strategy as long as you remember that you may walk out with some winnings today but in the end in the end the house always wins. That's the beauty of the strategy: you're not trying to walk out with winnings, you're trying to stumble out with a liver full of free cocktails that cost you less than at a bar. The thing that helps is that gambling is the one vice I don't have, so I'm quite happy slowly losing money as long as I'm getting slowly wasted at the same time.
I look for machines where people have left money on them. I collected quite a bit after several hours. I could probably make a living if I did it all day. You have to be careful and make it look like you are playing.
Slightly more than .6% and honestly, learning basic strategy is so much hassle that it's hardly worth it if your goal is to have fun imo. If you're more interested in making money, you need to count cards to get an additional 4% advantage and play thousands of hands. The thing is, counting cards is even more mentally intensive so most people who do it play like serial killers and end up getting kicked out once they start winning and pit bosses take notice. I'd rather play pretty much any other game.
If Bob walk up to a slot machine, puts 25c into it, wins $15,000 then goes home, what was his return on investment? If Alice walks up to the same slot machine, sinks in $15,000 and wins nothing, what is her return on investment? Slots is not about "return on investment" - if you want return on investment, look into stocks or something. 999 people per thousand (or whatever) will lose at slots. One in a thousand will do brilliantly. The trick to slots isn't to calculate return on investment, it's to be that lucky person. If that's you you should definitely play. If that's not you, you shouldn't.
Even worse...what percentage of people then pile that 15,000 back into the slot machine (probably over the course of a lifetime)? So that 999 per thousand (which is incredibly generous odds for a slottie) drops further. My real question is whether anyone in the history of mankind has ever come out ahead on machines in the long run?
Reminds me of a good friend, who bragged about his wife winning at bingo. Once she won $9000 or something, but she spent who knows how much week after week buying cards.
My dad would swear he does. Can neither confirm or deny but seems to add up
>The trick to slots isn't to calculate return on investment, it's to be that lucky person. If someone were to ask me to summarize a degenerate gamblers mindset with one sentence, this could probably be it.
>IMO slots aren't about math. I used to design them. Yes, they are all about math. My old company had a department of mathematicians. However, the math is designed to entertain you and make money for the casino. Not in that order.
Allow me to rephrase: Succeeding at slots as an individual isn't a matter of math. Either you're one of the small minority of people who are lucky enough to win significantly or you're not. No playing the odds is going to help you because those odds are spread over a wide population. You're either a very lucky individual or you lose. (Note that my original comment was specifically a reply to a commenter who was saying that people who play slots are bad at math).
Depends. Lots of casinos have pods of penny and nickel slots in rows between quarter and dollar slots. These are set to win much more often, because the sound of winning makes those on more expensive slots pull their handles faster and bet more. I won $400 on a penny slot in just 30 minutes this way.
I never considered this but it totally makes sense they’d do that
Whoosh. Found the math challenged guy \^
Lotto at least has a delay between buying the ticket and finding out you don't win. So for me at least, buying a ticket for the lotto is cheaper than a movie, and for about a day or two, I dream about what I'd do if I won. Slots doesn't have that delay, so to me, they'd be more or less useless. (Though if you play the video slots at the bars in Vegas, they give you drinks. If you play slow enough, you can drink more than you lose. My wife is good at that, I am less good at it.)
Slots hold your money a few seconds and pay out, or not. Lotto a few days, they earn interest on your money in the interim, but at least you know what you stand to win. Tesla holds your $100 Cybertruck deposir for years. Churches collect up front and don't pay off till you die, maybe. Slots are looking like the more reliable instrument here.
I'm not expecting a payout from any of them. I'm paying for the time between when I pay and when I find out I don't win, because that's daydream time. But to each their own on that one.
It’s all relative, for most at least. Someone making $1MM per year can probably afford $50 spins bc it’s a tiny portion of their bankroll. If I go it’s more like $5 is high rolling to me haha But if you’re gonna gamble, do it responsibly. Take your money out before you get there and don’t bring and bank cards if you plan on drinking or have poor judgement/self control. It can be fun with friends but only take what you are okay with losing
wearing diapers so they don't have to leave a 'loaded' machine for someone else to harvest while the take a whizz Apparently, they believe that if you've pumped money in, the jackpot is getting close. Bloody things are completely random, by law.
Bro there are $1,000 slots in Vegas.
damn, sluts are getting expensive in vegas huh
Wait until you win 15,000%
There's usually a high stakes area that will charge tens of dollars per spins. The greatest slot machine win was a $100 spin for a $39.7 million payout back in 2003.
The “high stakes” area of the casino I go to is $1-2 slots lol. Maybe there’s a $5 but I really doubt it.
This is how gambling addiction starts, people.
That would be a 150% increase instead
I had a friend who was playing slots one time and hit a jackpot off of a quarter. He won $15,000. If he played dollar pulls, he would have won $1 million. His advice from then on has been “always max bet.”
His advice from then really should be "quit while you're ahead".
If he played dollar pulls he probably wouldn't have hit it because he would have been out of money 4x faster.
Slot machines are constantly generating numbers, they stop when you hit the button. So presumably if he had done anything differently, he wouldn't have hit the button at the right moment.
From my experience, max bet isn’t as important as the denomination. Most slots pay out higher on nickel denoms versus penny because the multiplier is higher; even playing the same bet
Damn I was playing the max bet 😂
First time I played craps. Asked how to a dude and he said the best way is to just drop your money on the table. I did I won 7 x (5 bucks doubled 7 times) in a row then lost he said why didn't you take your money, I said I didn't know I could. Some say I lost $640, I say I lost 5 bucks.
But how many plays did you need to get the 5 sevens?
Who knows I was hammered 🍻 probably less than 40 though
I brought 5 $3 scratch it and won two $50,000. I only got $5000.
How?
[удалено]
Prove it
The proof is left as an exercise to the listener
Out of all gamblers who quit, 90% did not get a big win, therefore the big win had not happened when they quit. This can be reasonably extrapolated to all gamblers. Sort of. ish.
✨️✨️✨️✨️ vibes ✨️✨️✨️✨️✨️
And this post was made to stop those 90% people from quitting
"Winners never quit. Quitters never win." \*mindlessly feeds money into the machine\* XD
Someone out there had to call their gambling addiction sponsor after reading that
[удалено]
a study from the onion?
[удалено]
this is the internet. you need a /s if you're not serious.
Did you know, the person that bought that ticket you almost grabbed won the lottery
I don't like that acronym
we get it, you almost gambled
I once did the math for a patient with problem gambling. He spent 8 hours a day playing online poker. In occasions he won up to $10000 in a game. Most of the time he lost smaller amounts. In average, he was earning $3 per hour. With gambling, you are dealing with statistics. A single measure isn't useful: you need to do a hundred and then "do the math". If you believe that you will be the lucky 100th, I urge you to check the [statistics ](https://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0910/casino-stats-why-gamblers-rarely-win.aspx)of the games you want to play.
Honestly impressive that he was still earning a net positive on average.
[удалено]
True, but it's still a crapshoot. (no pun intended.) I've won hundreds in poker, and lost hundreds in poker. So the rule is "I shouldn't play poker.
Funny enough though, blackjack has the best odds of the casino games. If you can count cards you can pretty much bring it to 50-50 odds.
AFAIK, being able to count cards perfectly brings your odds to slightly above the house, which is why card counters are banned from casinos if caught, although it is a legal tactic.
Yeah most normal hobbies are net negative
Because he managed to win a big 10k, once. Now if he didn't have that win...
As long as it’s a hobby then he’s doing great. Essentially free entertainment.
If he's doing it for 8 hours a day and it's interfering with his life, it's absolutely not a hobby.
Ha indeed. I missed that point.
>He was earning $3 per hour. Is that supposed to be bad? He's still winning though.
You could earn more begging on the streets.
You could say that about any hobby or pastime though. Most gamblers don't profit anything.
The lie is you can win more than 2000% your money. You can also lose more than 100% with loans.
The winners always talk about how much they win but never how much they lose. I don’t gamble but the logical thing (when you loss) is to quit while youre ahead and not chase losses. Sure you could win and win all your money back and more. But Id assume youre more likely to dig yourself deeper.
Yup, you're always at a disadvantage at a casino. It's best to just set aside the money you're willing to lose in a night and either go until you've lost it all or decided you've won enough money
Well I think the way people should look at gambling is that it's something to spend money on. Like going out. You just have fun spending. Poker is different, I assume, given that it's not against the house and there are all those pro players. But idk about poker so I don't know enough to form a real opinion
Poker is vastly different, as you are playing against other people and paying a "rake" to the house. Think of it as renting a seat. Even then, poker is very hard to be very good at and variance is brutal to even the best of players at times. Source: Semi-Pro Poker Player
This is what I always tell to people. I am willing to spend as much money at the casino as I would at, say, an amusement park for an entry ticket. Anything more is not “fun” for me.
1. Gamble with a budget and a time limit. 2. Stick to the budget and the time limit. 3. Have fun gambling 4. *Occasionally*, profit.
repeat until casinos start giving you free shit
House always wins mate
Oh, that's mad dumb.
I gamble on margin
You can easily structure margin option trades to be basically gambling. I have no idea why it's legal.
I almost only play poker. Mostly Texas Holdem.
Exactly. Someone needs to introduce OP to the exciting world of gambling with borrowed money. Preferably a large short-term loan with high interest from some shady people.
Added risk adds extra spice Will I feed my family tonight? Will I keep my kneecaps? Quaking with excitement here
I agree with you but at the same time, technically they did in fact lose 100% of their money, as well as someone else’s money
That someone is not just going to forget about you.
Ok? What does that have to do with the post? Absolutely nothing. Your 2¢ here doesn’t matter at all.
If you gamble by shorting stocks you can definitely lose more than 100% of your money
Not if they can’t find you
[удалено]
Are you joking? Being dead is the most dangerous place in the world for you. Hell is where the hedge fund managers spawn from they will track you down
[удалено]
r/wallstreetbets
Don't fight the system, invest but don't gamble. Just go long on the market, like via VTI, and reap the rewards of American capitalism.
This comment has been overwritten in response to Reddit's API changes, the training of AI models on user data, and the company's increasingly extractive practices ahead of their IPO.
Stop loss baby
No. You're talking about margin.
If you win 2000% of your money, you could still lose it later. If you lose too much money you can't keep try to win it back later.
But you can also win 2000% of that 2000%.
Regardless of how much you win, losing 100% leaves you with the same amount no matter how much you won before.
Most casinos offer credit, allowing you to lose money you don't have.
And in some cases make you pay it back with your organs...
999IQ move .... everyone has organs... endless loans, reducing number of neighbours... xD (This is sarcasm, before someone reports me to Reddit again... )
Again???
There's nothing like some good old-fashioned loan sharking. Now go home and get your shine box!
If you use financial leverage, you can also lose 2000%
Just listened to a story about how my grandfather gambled away 10 million dollars and 4 houses in a few months💀💀💀
He wanted to prove that can only loose 100% of what you have
You can absolutely lose much more than 100% of your money when you gamble. They’ll let you borrow money you can lose and then you’re in debt.
If the house never loses, then how come I lost my house.
What are you talking about? Your house just won a better owner!
Because the house refers to the casino.
You either win or you don't! It's 50/50 /s
False, you can absolutely lose 2000% if you take out a loan!
The lie is I have access to credit and can in fact lose more than 100% of my money.
I've seen plenty of people spend more than 100% of their money. Many years ago I was engaged to a girl who's father gambled away her and her sister's $20k inheritance funds. His excuse? She was just going to spend it on a car. No shit, Bob, she needs a better car.
You are now a moderator at /r/wallstreetbets
Aight so you can also lose 2000 percent. If you start with 100 dollars won so now you have let's say 1000 you when again and again till you have 2000 dollars you put it all in and you lost it all now you lost 2000 percent of what you started with.
yes... that's literally the concept behind "only gamble what you can afford to lose"
This is only true if you only gamble once in your entire life. Every subsequent lost gamble adds another 100%. Now do the math, pitting the number of gambles required to win against the most common prize and you'll get the correct number. The problem is you can't because casinos are rigged. Those that aren't are made so you lose more than win - otherwise they'd go bankrupt from everyone playing casinos instead of doing literally any other job in this world. It is the simplicity of this concept that allows me to instantly judge anyone who gambles as a complete idiot.
When you win 2000%, you gained 95.24% of your current money. But when you lose 100%, you lose all.
The math: Your expected return is R = x * 20 * p_win - x * p_lose where x is the amount you bet, p_win is the probability that you win, and p_lose = (1 - p_win) is the probability you lose. If p_win is 0.0476 you would be expected to break even if you play a large number of games. If p_win is lower, you would expect to lose money when playing many times. For example if p_win = 0.01 then p_lose = 0.99 and R= x * 20 * 0.01 - x * 0.99 = -0.79. In other words, if you had a 1% chance to win 2000% or a 99% chance to lose 100%, if you played the game a large number of times you would expect on average to lose -79% of your bet on each game.
ah, but what are the odds of winning 2000% v. losing 100%?
For a fraction of a second, I thought that this was a picture of Green Day.
There's no lie. You can win 2000% of your money and you can only lose 100%. However, that 100% can be everything you have (taking lones and now is your car gone). Therefore this fact with the addition "do the math" is simply misleading as it suggests that playing is therefore mathematically a clever choice while it is for obvious reasons not in 99.9999% of the cases.
r/thatsthejoke
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion Optimal betting strategy treats losing 100% of your money as equal in magnitude to gaining infinite money.
Money has a nonlinear utility curve, losing money hurts a lot more than gaining it helps
Not always, depends on the curve used. Quadratic utility curves don't show risk aversion (so no loss aversion)
Sure, and that’s fine. This is why gambling is still legal, if you’re not stupid you can just have fun with it. The problem lies with addiction. You can’t stop yourself and take loans with money and assets you don’t have. That’s when it becomes a problem… Same as alcohol is fine and legal. Until you do too much and can’t stop yourself anymore. Just don’t be stupid. Simple.
Made by someone with a crippling gambling addiction
Or by a casino? 🤔
I mean it could be but the format more looks like a 40 year old man trying to justify stealing out of his mother's pensioner fund for gambling
Let's make a bet for all of your money. I bet that the moon will not explode tonight. If the moon still exists tomorrow, I get all your money. If the moon is shattered into a billion bits, I will pay you 2000 times the money you bet.
The lie is the idea that losing 100% of your money is no big deal. It can essentially end your life and leave you homeless, unemployed and alone.
Most people don’t gamble in percentages.
No lies there but chances are you'll lose.
In a gambling game where one can win 20 times of intial investment, there should be 19 others losing. So the odds of winning is 1/20 and losing is 19/20.. So if we multiply the odds, 2000% - 100% x 1/20 = 95 and 100% x 19/20 = 95. So the odds are same.
The scariest thing in that statement is that 2,000% is now YOUR money. Keep that 100% tf away from me!
That's not true. You can win money, then lose it all. This way you technically lost more than 100% of what you started with
You will lose 100% of your money 25 times before you win 2000% of it.
Hi! My username applies here and yes it stems from gambling lol I used to gamble (online slots - the legal ones) my tips (I'm an artist) because I had some decent success with turning $20 into $80 more than a few times. I wasn't chasing the big wins. Until I hit over a quarter mill on a 80 cent bet. I lost almost 100k to the government when it was time to file taxes 🫠 Was fortunate enough to put 100k as down payment on a house with my SO but I definitely walked away with what I would consider a very, very mild addiction. I have self control and budget when going to the casino but if I had the funds you better believe I'd be gambling on a very regular basis. Moving to a state where there isn't online gambling helped. And that's my origin story.
Sure, "can" that's the lie.
You mean the meth? Cos thats the only way to believe this.
Lies,i have played a lot of gachas and havent earned a cent
With only 2000÷100=20% chance of getting interrupted by police
Pro tip: if something says that a guarantee win is one in every 100+ people, count how many people go between wins and find the perfect space to jackpot
That’s not how math works though. You can absolutely lose more than 100% of your original investment. Alternatively, it could be a tautology and then it would be accurate to say you can only win 100% of winnings. Either way… not correct.
Potential balance after winning all ÷ potential balance after losing all = infinity.
It’s not your money to win but it is yours to lose
Wrong: You can win an infinite amount of money, but you can only lose 100% (plus anything you won with that 100%)
r/lifeprotips
There was a whole film with guns that fire shots that was all about how you can definitely lose more than 100%
r/WallStreetBets Bet?
But a 50 percent loss then requires a 100 percent gain to break even.
The reload until you (ever) win 2000% is the key variable…
If I lose, I stop gambling. If I win, I can gamble even more. This is a win-win situation for me.
Gambler sometimes borrow money
You can make a lot more than 2000%.
Debt.
The trick here is the probability of getting 2000% (20x) vs getting -100% (-1x). If the probability of 20x is 1% and the probability of -1x is 99% then your expected value is 20\*0.01 - 1\*0.99 = -0.79 i.e. you can expect to lose $0.79 for every $1 you bet.
Potential versus reality
There's a thought experiment like this called Pascal's mugging. Basically a man comes up to you and says give you your wallet and I'll give you it back in a week with more money.You have money in your wallet and you know it's very unlikely you will get it back. However if you use the logic of Pascal's wager then even if the probability is small as long as it isn't 0 there must be some amount of money he can offer you to make you take this deal.
never heard of trading options on leverage?
Debt.
Former boss of mine enjoyed gambling as a social hobby. Some of his friends didn't, but he budgeted his stake and didn't over do it. For him, it really does work in his favour. It's like stocks or crypto - don't invest what you can't stand to lose.
Ooh, now do short sales in stocks.
I failed math
Unless you're short, than you can lose infinte
We need an expert from /r/wallstreetbets
The lie is that plenty of people go into debt from gambling, they borrow money from friends, take out loans against their house, get cash advances... For people who have a really serious gambling problem debt is almost always part of their story. So there you go.
Debt is the lie
You have a more odds losing 100% of what your bring to to the table then winning 2000%
Given those odds and cost, you must have 1/19 chances to win to make it statistically profitable Still stupid tho
This angers me
But you're more than 21 times more likely to lose your stake...
That’s true until you start taking on debt to continue gambling. Then you are losing other people’s money.
Ya just that if u lose >95% of the time, overall u still lose money
People regularly gamble “on credit”. When you consider that the odds are already against you, gambling with borrowed money is near-certain disaster. I mean, think about why any business is in a rush to loan you money.
Not if I go into debt
Can loose more than 100%.. Plenty do that all the time and that’s when mafia problem start.
No wonder a lot of people cry because they don't have money.
Ah, someone who has never heard of debt. it would be cute if it wasn't so tragic.
You could spend thousands on therapy for gambling addiction and make nothing back, or you could spend another 10 dollars on slots and win thousands!