Bitcoin Forum

As for me, i'm pretty certain I'll go with B.

Well I do think that if am really good at this game which am competing for then I would rather use option B. If am probably not really sure about what am doing then I do think think it would even work I would probably go with B for sure.

B sounds more fun hands down.

Therefore I would rather evaluate my decisions and then make an informed decision as well.. Both ways you need a lot of luck but in one you need skills as well.

How about moving this topic to Gambling Discussion (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=228.0) board.

I've always disliked online casinos because of their algorithms, which cause the odds to be stacked against you, but playing against humans who aren't connected to the platform is much more enjoyable because I'm pretty sure we all have the same odds.

I didn't realize it was off topic; tell me how to move it and I'll do so. Sorry tho!

Naturally, because I am a gambler who is dominant in playing slots, so I will choose point A. Maybe because I rely on luck according to what I have in terms of gambling knowledge. I know that it is a big risk that the funds will often lose rather than win against the casino house itself. But for me controlling losses is a good way, even though we will be played by the house in gambling, it doesn't mean we are lazy and don't have a strategy. If the victory has been obtained, then I prefer to withdraw it first in order to minimize losses.

A game should be fair, even if luck is sometimes part of what makes it entertaining. I'll go with B since I don't want to risk with other factors that may or may not favor one of us. If I play using my skills, I have a fair and high probability of winning because my experience and observations are based on them.
Playing against an opponent gives me an advantage in determining my opponent's next move and plans, but playing a game with the house is always a no for me because only a few players emerged as winners.

Bottom left side corner of this thread, you will notice that there is an option to either move / lock topic

https://i.imgur.com/sTzPi0p.png

Take this as a friendly suggestion but I think you should probably lock this thread after you move it to gambling discussion board. Thread like this has the potential to become another mega spam thread

There is a significant difference between playing against a player and playing against the odds xd

Thanks a lot for helping me out with moving this topic. I'm really interested in hearing others opinion on this topic, so don't you think locking this thread won't match with my interests?

I will go with the B answer but you should set how much will be deducted for the house as a service fee. If we can play agaist each other in a decentralized app where nobody can control the system or manipulate the rules, it would be amazing in social gaming. Betting against other players is more transparent and funny than betting against the house. I think the great majority of users will choose option B, however few other may chose option A because their favorite games can't be played in groups.

Let's say a 5% fee!
Check out this thread if you're interested in such an idea.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5352967.0

There being only 1 winner in the B scenario is a deterrent against selecting that option. Having been in crypto for years, I remember there being a player versus player (pvp) trivia website where players could compete for crypto winnings. Some suspect the owner of the trivia website participated in games. There was one player who knew the answer to every question who won a lot more than they probably should. Those types of potential scams, which have been around for many years, raise suspicion with the "1 winner per game" format.

That said, I think I would still prefer option B over option A. Simply due to it giving the impression that chances of winning might be more fair or balanced than competing against a house algorithm.

If you want to make profits with the money you have and you are offering only one between these two then B is better choice because pvp games maybe mich easier comparing against winning the house but still there is no assurance of winning it.

I chose A, because option B I can do it in real life. LOL

This question is basically whether you prefer to play against bots (code) or humans. Not the main consideration for choosing a casino platform because the two options are just variants of the game which one company can provide all of them. I can bet weekly for my favorite sports clubs and while I can play crash every day.

I'd choose casino A here I know i'll get crushed by the house edge later on but on the other hand I suck at those last man standing type of games where there's only one winner so from my perspective i'm better off taking my chances against the house compared to pvp games. I still like gambling against others once in a while like lotteries and certain contests but they're somewhat difficult to maintain I remember there's one casino who tried launching a coinflip gambling site then it ended up failing due to lack of interest.  

Well, if I have to play a game that requires the skills to compete with other players, then why not choose casino b over casino a? I mean it is a no brainer to participate on something where strategic gameplay influences the chances of winning rather playing based on pure luck.

And I'd rather play with human than with bots.

I can not give a clear A or B answer to that because it always depends on in what mood i currently am. To be honest most of the times i just want to gamble a little without having to be totally focused and alert all the time and then i just listen to some music and watch some Videos and stuff like that while i play the slot machine for example. Whenever i feel like playing in a more competitive way then i choose games like poker where i can play against real opponents.

It depends on the time that's available to gamble for me. Casino B would likely take a lot of time and require focus than Casino A which I can easily set on auto. I'm not the type of player that's really good at these games but playing against other players was definitely fun based on personal experience though.

Whatever games you'd love, you can really play and enjoy it.
I personally loved playing the house games, like crash games online and the dice game but I'm not trying to beat the house because its not possible, I just love playing it. If I do have extra fund, I play poker because I know having a good capital on this can bring you in a longer games. This will always depend on your gambling plan, $100 is already a good amount to start with I'll go for the games that I'd love.

This is misleading as the option B also has fees, thus both are negative-sum from players' perspective. Then, in the option A, players also compete against other players in the form of luck, thus the narrative of option A against the house, vs option B against other player is not accurate.

The more accurate is in option A, the luck factor is the most dominant in deciding a winner, whereas in the option B, skill also is an important factor. Option A also has higher fees compared to option B (usually).

I'll always pick slots, not because of profit et al., but because I like the game.

It's subjective on every players and there might be a person who can choose both if it's available in the same casino. I'm into skill to be honest so my bet would be on the option B and more likely on poker game.

Assuming I have that money and if I like both type of game, I will split the money. $50 for the A and other $50 for the B. Why I should choose one of them if I like both. I think it will give a better chance not to lose all the money unless I get bad luck on those two games.

Blackjack doesn't rely on luck, if you can card count then it's probably a skill based of some sort. In my opinion, this is a matter of perspective, to be fair, there's more chances of winning in Casino A if you only play Blackjack and you can do a card counting.

It really depends on the likes and abilities of the players, if players don't have game skills at Casino B, they certainly won't choose it, even though playing at Casino A is really based on luck, but playing games that require skills but don't have it the winning probability will be smaller compared to a game based on luck. I'm prefer to choose Casino A and play slot because I like the image show by it's games.

And you have me who like to play many gambling games... I will play slots, poker, blackjack, roulette, etc... with any deposit! Of course, you need to be aware of minimal bets on some games, and how can you play with your bankroll!
I guess whenever we deposit some money to gamble we would like to make some profit, but it's not like you can make a profit every time, especially if you play some lucky-based games, with poker is similar as with some other card games, skill-based games yes, but cards can be a bitch from time to time...


It's the point, in the end, we need to choose a game we like to play, and whether we win or lose to have a nice time while playing it!
I will choose slots most of the time, but I like to mix things and play different games... which one depends on my mood in specific moment and of course if there's some ongoing promotion for some specific game!

Casino B is much better because you're competing against players and it's not the players who always wins but it's the house so it's the right thing for many to casino B since playing against other players means that you're more likely to win than lose.

Before I select which casino I will play, I will take a look at what games that each casino had and then I will search if my favorite gambling games are at one casino or both casinos.
If both casinos have the game, I will search for the next gambling games that I play after the favorite one until I can find three gambling games then I will select the casino.
If the casino only has BlackJack, Rollet, Slots, Ludo, Poker, Rummy while I can not find my favorite games, I will not select both casinos and will search for the other casino.
Related to the money, I will only use $20 to be used for playing gambling and will keep the rest for the other things because I am not big gamblers who use big money to gamble.

B sounds more fun. Not that I'm against (Actually am) the idea of A, but playing against others seem to be way more fun than playing against the house. Tbf, I'd actually only play black jack really, since it's one of the games that I really enjoy, but other than that, I'd rather choose to play against other players. If the goal was to earn in the quickest amount of time, just based on the duration of each round, most would actually choose 1, but if it was enjoyment, most would choose 2 due to the nature of its games. Not saying that no one would choose 1, it has it's own charm but it gets tiring after a few games or so tbh.

Yes it all depends on mastery and pleasure in choosing a game because choice A or B most casinos provide both, and if the OP prefers a game of luck, choice A includes a game that relies more on luck and most importantly you understand it in playing and operating it.

and I personally prefer option B which is a poker game, because it relies more on skill than luck and will make the game feel challenging which can test the adrenaline when the opponent bluffs and that's where skill is needed.

No, I don't think so, both of them are similar in terms of time consumption and sometimes Casino A is much more time consuming because of how fast the games happen so you psychologically think that you're not consuming a lot of time. And as OP has said, it's against the house and you know that the house will do anything to keep you playing.

I'd go with B. I don't really care about the profits for it will be my bonus but I will still try to play well. Poker will be my choice in Option B and would just like to enjoy it. Maybe I could perform better if I know I am just enjoying the game. Winner take all, that sounds good too me. May the best man win.  ;D

Just out of curiousity, what are this questions for? A survey?

Of course, there is no guarantee of winning, but there is a better chance of winning, a chance that has nothing to do with how much other players are winning and losing at that specific time.

Well I like slots and roulette but I will choose B.

The idea of the game that skills has a participation is better because it depends on how you will play the game and your strategy, though luck is also necessary. Plus these games requiring skills are more exciting to play especially poker.

I would choose "B", that way I can use my skills and if I lose, at least I can learn and improve my skills. Maybe most gamblers will choose a luck-based game but for gamblers that are ambitious and realistic at the same time, they would choose to risk on skilled based games.

In Casino A, you only need one thing and that is luck. No other factors whatsoever.
In Casino B, you need 2 things at least and that is luck and skills. You have skills, you have higher chances of winning and vice versa.

If I will choose between the 2, I will go with Casino B although my chances of winning there isn't that high still because I don't have skills :D. The skilled or we can call them the professional gamblers are the ones who might win the most because they know what they will do in every situation because of their skills and experience too. Compare to an average gambler, a gambler who has a lot of experience has more chances of winning and for sure he has some skills that he may use to win.

My choice of casino (A).

Has a special attraction for me to play BlackJack, Rollet, Slots, of course there are certain reasons that make me happy and enjoy the game.

In three categories of gambling games I am more fond of Rollet games, my experience with $100 capital was unintentional, only luck was on my side at that time, experience, $10 + $ 10 I put on the numbers 2x out, I tried the third one at 14x the bet was placed at that time $50, luck was on my side with $50 capital I made $700 in three rounds, 2 lost, one won, for that as you mentioned, if I have a capital of $ 100 at this time, of course I will try my luck the umpteenth time, that's my principle, in option A.

I clearly mentioned the option to set the game on automatic in casino A which means I can just input the settings that I want and then leave it rolling/spinning. That allows me to stay away from the game after that and focus on other stuffs. You cannot do that in casino B.

I actually believe that you can't win consistently if you go with games that are purely based on luck, therefore I would choose B to use my skills and I'm confident I could win against anyone, however, my confidence does not speak that I'm really good in gambling but I would also choose a game that I think I will win.

$100 is not much, but if you value that money, you will not waste it on games that will not challenge your skills.

Just saying.  :)

What do you mean by you can't win consistently? In pure gambling games, you will mostly win as many times as the theoretical probabilities of the game say it. That is to say, if you have 48% chances of winning, you can easily win almost every other time. On the contrary, at a skilled game, if you are worse than the other players your chances to win will heavily drop.

I don't really understand what you're trying to ask here.  In scenario A you mention playing against the house and relying on luck..are you saying that there is no skill allowed here?  Games like Blackjack for example are won by players whom have a whole lot of skill.  Of course you can always get lucky, but there are reasons that people buy blackjack books to study how to play.

You can do that in casino B, if they are offering open API, so you can develop a bot to play on your behalf with the strategy that you have set in advance.

You confident? x'D

He already said that he want to rely on his skills rather than luck. Also, as a matter of probabilites, your probabilites of winning in a particular time relies on how much money people are losing to the platform on the same game. So if there is no one losing money at that time, your chances of losing will increase/ If there is a lot of users losing money at that time, your chances of losing will decrease.
That's one of the reasons why developers despise online casinos.

Agree and clearly interested in option A.
Is that some kind of trick you're trying to use? Or did you purposely randomize the roulette system and make a fortune? I often find a lot of techniques like what you do, namely by making randomizations by increasing the bet, reducing the bet, with certain criteria and then making automatic bets.
is this method effective the second time?

so, the thread is an advertisement?

anyway, I'd pick casino A. as much as I love going against people when gambling. I also do love gambling at my own pace(which I can't really do when you are playing against people. especially if it is a tournament).

I actually find option B more thrilling and exciting as a player. It feels different to go against other gamblings and winning by skills and not just by luck. Having our own strategy would be an advantage rather than playing against the house which has a bigger risk of losing.

Just be careful, just because you are playing against humans that doesn't mean that there could not be something going on, for example one of the great problems of playing poker online is that two or more people can decide to play as a team on the same table, this means that they have more chances of getting good cards than the ones that you have which means that if you are playing against them you're most likely going to lose.

In my opinion, most players will choose option B because the game with people is more trusting of each participant and also in this option can use their skills. Another good argument is that when playing against a casino our chances of winning will always be lower.

By choosing the casino (A), you are about to defeat the house which depends on pure luck, just like it happened to you with the 100$ bets. I think you choosed it because of your favorite games are all against the house and not require too much skills, but does this mean that they are really better than casino (B)? Against a house, the chance of winning will always be lower than those games with real players. You can see that the great majority of users posting in this thread prefer casino (B).
I wonder how someone can choose casino (A) when he can win in casino (B) based on his skills.

I will go with the option no 2. The reason is that it is not easy to compete with the house and you need luck in order to win against house.
However in a P2P match, you can win easily if you are more skillful than the opponent. Since you know that you are playing against the house, it may give you more pleasure and entertainment.

There is no such thing as luck being involved when you're playing versus the house. One way or another the house will eventually walk away with all of the money if you follow a lifestyle that involves gambling. They can analyze so much information, playing patterns, huge datasets of historical information and will always have a house edge - if for no other reason than to pay for the basics of keeping that gambling company at breakeven, regardless of profit. Someone has to pay for all the licensing, infrastructure updates, support staff and latest flashy games to keep players enticed. At least with option B you have the chance of paying off the house edge while also taking advantage of your skills and intelligence to drain money from other players.

I would definitely choose B!

I don't like games where I rely solely on luck.
I prefer games that involve a minimum of reasoning/skill or sports games where the probability of winning the bet is linked to factors that go beyond pure luck.
Also, betting against other players makes the game much more dynamic and fun.

Same here without any doubt but there are really times which you do really feel out on playing those luck based games specially dice and its still popular nowadays and theres really some demand into it.

Just like on what others been saying that this is something a personal choice or doesn't really need to make out some choosing because we can deal with both if we wanted to.

We do have the money to spend on and its our own decision whether what kind of games we are intending to play.

I agree. However, your remark made me wonder how blackjack dealers can make a profit while playing against thousands of people?

Combine my response below with yours, and poooof, we've just described the majority of online casinos.

He already said that he want to rely on his skills rather than luck. Also, as a matter of probabilites, your probabilites of winning in a particular time relies on how much money people are losing to the platform on the same game. So if there is no one losing money at that time, your chances of losing will increase/ If there is a lot of users losing money at that time, your chances of losing will decrease.
That's one of the reasons why developers despise online casinos.

I'll pick option 2 if I have the skill at least on this option I have a chance to showcase my skill and maybe if I'm good against the other guys
I can beat them with my skill, it's still a game of luck though because you do not know the other side's skill.
Option number one is for gamblers who find enjoyment and excitement by throwing caution to the wind these people are those who play slot dice and mine etc.

Means you'll be profitable in the long run, most gamblers do not focus on luck-based games as there's a house edge, and regardless of the house edge, no one could win consistently due to the word "edge". Look at the casinos, the most profitable games for them are roulette, dice, and other related games that have a house edge, it attracts gamblers because it's fun but looking at consistency, it's on the house, not the visitors.

it's nice to observe deviation of probabilities as well, of course on the long run the tendency is to have these x% chances of winning @Saint-loup talks about, but life is surprising and sometimes we can have long win sequences and long losing sequences before coming back to the norm.

would love to read more on this subject and also learn more about the different probability of winning on each style of game

In those examples mentioned I will go with Casino B. You do not expect to win betting against a gambling house. If you do it must have to come out very tough because there is always going to be hard manipulations from the casino owners. It is like a servant trying to beat his master at a game. That is the way I see it with A. In B it will be servants playing against another servant. With B no player will have an undue advantage except them relying on their individual skills at cards.

I'm picking option number 2 it's hard to beat the house edge and its fact, and if you are competing with each other you have a good chance to win the match if you have better skill than all the players playing against each other, option number one will end up with no winners if they all run into a stroke of bad luck, at least on option number two one of you will win.

Why not both? I think a casino will have more users if the users have more than one option. Games vary and a good casino should be offering as many games as possible whether they are luck-based games or skill-based games, or they are playing against the house or against other players.

But if these are the only choices, I think I will have to choose Casino A. If I play against the house, at least the fairness is provable. If I play on a table with other players, I wouldn't know if the other players know each other and their cards.

If you asked it few years ago, I'd go with B but now I'd go with A definitely. I like to play slot games only for more than 1 year now. Anyway, nice way to promote your own gambling project, so good luck with your project. It wont be easy thing for you to manage pvp based gambling project.

You should set up a poll for this there are people picking option 1 or 2 and both, but so far majority picked option number 2


You can't beat the house edge it could end up all players losing while on option number 2 at least one player can win the jackpot and take home the pot, you have an equal chance of winning it depends on who has the better skill on all the players playing.

The house edge is almost impossible to beat without cheating, so I understand many gamblers would prefer Casino B. But the problem is that not
all gamblers are obsessed with winning when playing gambling, there are gamblers who play gambling just looking for entertainment. Like I prefer
Casino A because I am very entertained playing games such as Slots or Dice. Winning for me is just a bonus, the most important thing is that
I can be entertained by playing gambling based on luck.

its hard to win in the casino b because theres only one winner and for sure there are lots of skilful gamblers that will join and compete for the given prize  .
i will go for the casino "a" if the rules are about winning because there are luck games that im good at such as dice and blackjack .
i think i can be able to win some and then i will stop before my winning turned to losses .

Both A and B, will make the house rich. Dont you know that there is a fee on the B? Lets say poker, you are paying something called by rake. The more you play, the more rake the house earn and it will make them rich.

I would rather go to play the option B which required a skills and a pinch of luck rather than playing on an option of A which is purely luck-based. It would be hard to beat the house and you're purely relying on the luck and at some point the house has the control over the machine or the play while in option B you may have the edge to win but this would rely on how you play the game well and for sure the opponents seated circling on the table were also well-oriented gamer who used to have a better game skills too but here in this type of game you would learn such a great experience that could make you a better player too.

I will play on casino A as I see that slots are in there, although I do not play slots games as often as in the past. I am not familiar with card games such as poker, ludo, and rummy, but it could be interesting to play those cards games, especially if we have some skills in those cards games. If casino B has a dice game, maybe I will select casino B instead of casino A because I like playing dice games. And for the money, using $100 is too big for me and I can not accept if I use all of that money and prefer to use the money to trade to make money than make money from gambling.

The truth is if I have only those two options, I divide them, 50USD for option A, and 50USD for option B, the reason is simple, we have to diversify the games and opportunities, based on the fact that the strategy is very valuable for Winning, also the luck factor has a lot to do with it, you can know a lot about strategy but if you are not lucky it is difficult, it is like swimming against the tide, instead option A, randomness and luck are divided into very good Percentage, strategy also has its weight, when it comes to PVP online games, there is a better chance of winning, but one tends to get tired faster.

Obviously many people here would choose the option B because playing against human is more fun than playing against a machine.
Also, the house edge always favors the casino and so we can never win frequently or stay in profits for a long time when playing against the casino.
On the other hand in the skill based games, the game can be in our favor if our skills are better than the opponent.

I choose option A. It is not clear why most of the respondents choose option B - after all, in this case, you still pay the casino commission (otherwise it cannot exist in this reality). Then what is the benefit? In the hope that you will come across a weaker opponent and you can win? But I think this is somewhat naive because the level of skill in gambling is not great and basically everything is decided by luck.

Obviously you are a big noob who doesn't know anything about gambling.
Why are you promoting a casino if you really think that "no one could win consistently"? You want people to get scammed because of you?
As I said above most of people won't earn money on the long run, and won't lose much money too. But many people will be able to win money on the long run and many people will lose big amounts of money too. That's the mathematical laws of every gambling game.
Saying that "no one" could consistently win because of the house edge is a big bull shit from the common non-gamblers speech.

Well, i did really like the concept of WUNZO. Let's discuss it a little bit.
Few last notes:
- Games to be shared between players are only Poker and Ludo.
- I didn't found any detail in the main webpage about the house fees. Talking about the 5% you've suggested, from whom it will be deducted? and is it really 5% (very high) or it's just a suppostion?
- You are willing to use your own token in the WUNZO platform while not everybody is familiar with binance smart chain (BSC).
And as your platform isn't mainly dedicated for players (gamblers), i would suggest you to lunch more games with the same concept and accept more tokens (btc, eth,usdt in particular).

thinking outside the box, I like it
though what if you have limited time and have to choose only one of the 2 casinos, where would you go? A or B?
if  it's only a matter of one day then getting tired won't matter that much, in this case I'd opt for B

Personally, I'll choose casino B. I prefer skill-based games, especially multiplayer games, over luck-based games. The reason is that on skill-based games the outcome depends mainly on your proficiency level which is something you can improve over time. It's like challenging yoursef. Besides, playing with real players and having the possibility to interacting and talk to them makes the game more fun and more entertaining.

Most likely here on this forum will really choose up skill based rather than with pure luck type of games which i could also consider on having this selection but there are really times
that we do like to play those luck based ones because there are situations where we do seek off with fast or instant results which is only possible when you do deal with luck based ones.
It cant really be denied that strategic type is something interesting since you could really have the edge if you are really good at it.

What other factors are these besides luck?

If I knew the techniques to play skill games like Ludo I would pick alternative B, as those techniques would be useful as a little extra boost when playing against another players, however it's not possible to say skills are a decisive factor on those games most of times, because you still need to be lucky to get the right numbers from dice which will fit on your game.
Moreover, I have the impression games against another players are much more tensive and apprehensive and that is not exactly what I expect from a gambling session. For me it should be cool and relaxing and that is a good reason to pick alternative A.

I am not against any of those till they are fair and square.
There are many Casino A in the market right now and because of their demand,


In Casino B there are many limitations, For example, Player A wants to bet 1 BTC but there is no opposition that can afford this bet so the game in Casino B will not start.
Where as Casino A will not have this problem.

No you're wrong, that's obviously not what Sanitough was talking about. He was just talking about the House Edge that "no one" can beat on the long run according to him. It's not the same thing as what you are claiming here, because you're accusing all casinos and gambling games to be rigged and to cheat their users. That's a bold statement. Do you have proofs about that? Outcomes are usually public in most of casino games, then you would easily find cases of house cheating and being able to expose them if you were right. Moreover could you explain us how platforms manage to cheat their users when the games they are offering are provably fair?

I would definitely choose A.

Most people don't have the time to wait around and be matched with an opponent in a PvP game. Unless there is some element of betting around the house, I don't think that people will be gravitated towards the latter.

We've seen many PvP casinos come and go over the years and they have never stayed.

No need for too much deep and technical explanation about this. $100 bankroll right? I will use it on luck-based games such as slots and roulettes. That was a pretty small bankroll to me to spend time in strategy-based games. I value my time. Instead, I'd rather go all-in that amount in sports betting which I always do.

I only gamble with that kind of bankroll in real-life gambling if we are about to point out strategy-based games. In actual gambling right on the table, my skills in card games are more effective compare to dealing in an online PvP. My overall winning stats is also good playing at this, much worth spending time compare online.

Wow, nice explanation, well, everyone has their own range in gambling, for some $100 maybe too small but for others, it's already a decent amount to start with gambling, and as for me, I will always try my luck on games that I can use my skills, because if I'm good enough and lucky at the same time that $100 will easily become $1000.

This is an important clarification, thank you. The main problem of all PvP games is liquidity - it is very small almost always if we are not talking about the most popular games. But in the most popular games, almost all the strategies are known + there is special software, so in fact, the difference will not even be visible against whom you are playing - a casino or a person.

It really depends on whether Casino B takes a cut or not.

If it's pure PvP and there is no house edge, then only if you are a fool would you take the offer of Casino A.

But at the same time, a lot of gamblers are irrational at heart and won't necessarily go for the option that gives them the highest monetary return - they will go with the most convenient option, which is generally going to be option A.

Maybe he is usually playing gambling with big money so $100 is not affected much to him. But $100 is big money for me to just used for playing gambling and I guess you think the same as me. The slot is a gambling game based on luck to try to win on that game and see your luck. Testing our luck will be okay but we need to control and do not use more money if we already get many losses. Hopefully, with limit money, we can still winning some money.

Some of the gamblers as well are not really into profit, they just want to play the game and that's why they usually choose the option A.

Option B are for more serious gamblers, you have to play against the other players and you really have to outplay them to win and honestly in casinos they always have the cut on this kind of game, because if none then Poker should be the top options since the house is not earning from them if they play this game, you still have the option to play any game because that's your money.

As someone who has prior experience betting against the house, I can comfortably say that I choose option "B". The odds of the house are just too huge for me to risk an amount. Though while I do understand that most people would prefer to bet against the house due to its convenience, I would still choose option "B" for the fact that the diversity it offers are unparalleled.

But if I do not have the luxury of waiting, I would in a heart beat, choose option A due to its convenience and simple mechanic.

Perhaps the OP is attempting to ascertain people's opinions in order to further investigate gambling, it's more about generating income by user pleasure; it's more like a survey than advertising.


Your thoughts on the options are kinda funny, I would have gone for option A if it was profitable in nature and not to make anyone rich, who cares who loses and who wins in casino, its all about beating the opponent, the house or partner gain or loss will never be my concern, which is why I believe everyone is going with option B.

It's true, for those who just wanted to kill some time and spare some money probably they will choose option A, after they run out of balance they will simply stop and quit the game, no additional energy but have some entertainment coming from the game that they played.

Unlike with option B, in which serious gamblers are really after. By knowing their skills and capabilities, the chance of winning is better since it's the intention of them bringing themselves inside the platform.

Different people have their own opinions and self explanations with the options OP just provided. My personal one is also option A, since I'm not betting that much and I don't have special skills. ;D

Exactly, that's what i said.

For most reasons and One of them being that betting against a house is easy and they don't need any waiting time for the bet to begin.
There are also many drawbacks to this one of them being that if the house is faking the amount they can afford for the best and making users go on and on with their bets and eventually winning against the player, There were some casinos that did this but I cannot remember their name atm.

Majority go with the second choice, because players believe it is possible to make use of some tricks and IQ to win few games. The same isn't possible with the games that are listed on the "Choice A" which are much of the luck based games. Only the luckiest can progress whereas the rest keeps losing to the house.

In both the choice the winner is the house, because there is assured earning for the house. In "Choice A" the house gets huge margin and with the "Choice B" house receive some fixed amount on every game.

I would choose casino B because it's more advantageous to play against another player and not just rely on luck but rely on skills, luck is something you don't have constantly every day, so it doesn't make sense to take money and bet on a game where the person just count on luck

But not all strategic kind of games do really interest out people her on this market which means there are still some whom do prefer on playing with dice and other luck based because of that near-instant

kind of results and if you do try to look around on how many current sites that do exist today specially with luck based or simply casino type of games then you could tell that there's really a demand into it.

In my part I do play both things and just like what others been saying about depends on the mood which is actually true.Play for fun and don't aim for making money because thinking off that it was just a bonus aside on the leisure that you had seek of.

Betting on choice A or B, I always play that game at the time I want. There is no benchmark of any choice, because both are quite fun to entertain my vacation time. As long as I make a profit, then I will play, move from room to room, try everything with passion. Everyone has their own favorite game. Gamblers know where to gamble.

That's the kind of attitude I like to maintain, I'd be more favored on the probability than luck because we can never be consistent if we only always count on our luck. This is gambling, although some people say that we should play it for fun, there are games that are more exciting when we are challenged and that is a challenge between player to player.

I would prefer A . because I really prefer to just enjoy the game. compared too competetive with others . always if in games like poker holdem. if you are committed to playing your cards, your capital can be lost all at once. actually this can also happen at casino A. but i still I prefer in A . just not comfortable playing 1v8 at the poker table.

But how much effort do you have to put in in order to win a small amount of money?

You're not going to find "whales" that you can play against every single day - most people who play pvp games are going to be playing with dust amounts that are definitely not worth your time if your objective is to make money.

The only successful pvp games I can think of all had an element of botting, where the site put out bots to give liquidity when there is a lack of players.

I will choose Casino A because of the simple reason that I don't want to spend time playing strategy games on a gambling site most of the time. My skills are not meant for it as I'm better at actual gambling right in front of my opponent. I will only play strategy online games unless there's a good reason that I need to play those.

I really like roulettes especially if I hit free spins and those wonderful graphics. My $100 has a chance to win more decently within just a short timeframe compare to strategy games. I'm not telling it's a sure win but more exciting based on my own experience.

I am going to have to go with the option of why not both?

There are times I want to sit and watch the spinning wheels of a slot while not thinking.
There are other times I want to play some video poker, since although random, there are correct plays that you have to know.
And at other times I do like to go 'head to head' with other players.

-Dave

Playing with both casinos will be okay, as long as you can handle two tabs to check from one casino to the others and that is rare for gamblers to play on both casinos simultaneously.
It is hard to focus on both things at the same time and if you can do that, you have good control over yourself and hopefully, you can win one game or even win both games.
The greediness will always be behind us, especially if we win on one game and that can attract us to play on the other game to win for more.
That is what we need to be careful of, no matter how many gambling games we play later.

I'll go with option B, because in playing with people, i have a certain level of assurance in my heart that the game is a fair game where the luckiest and most skillful amongst the contestants wins. Also knowing that an individual like me who maybe needs the earnings from the gamble more than i do has won it, rather than the house that has won alot of people's money will console me.

^ It should be a P2P game, this game is most likely player-to-player which there is no need to verify a provably fair game. But for me, there is no difference if you will gamble on the against the house edge. If you don't have skills on gambling that are most likely on the P2P games, you can gamble against on the house which is very easy like dice, spinning wheels, and others that are purely based on luck games. However, we have different thought and preferences on which we choose or which we are comfortable in gambling with.

I did feel the same when I was actively playing in some poker sites. I felt the game is fair more than provably fair game, but in fact it is not true since there is no provably fair system on the poker sites that I used to play. There were also many poker sites cheat their players by pretending to be players to play against real players while they knows all the cards own by all players so it gives them bigger winning chance.

The point is, not all games where you play against other player is fair especially if you play in online casino unless the casino is implementing a provably fair system where every single round of the games can be verified. 

There were instances that even the PVP gambling game could be look into for possible fraud and tag a "not-fair" gambling website. If you read what @Hydrogen wrote, you'll understand the possible fraud that even in PVP can happen.
The online casino owner could mess up with the game algorithm to let their own player get the best cards to win the game.



This is a very possible scenario.

However, I as well prefer the option B. I'd always love to compete with other player's luck and skills.

How can you be sure of the fairness of the game if neural networks beat people in all of the existing games now? Neither chess players nor GO players can be sure that their opponent is not using special software to cheat. And if we are talking about games where only luck decides everything, then what is the difference between playing against a person and against a casino in this case?

Very much prefer on dealing or playing against real people rather than on focusing myself into beating the house.It might be time consuming and not really that instantaneous kind of game but
I do have sufficient time to deal with.

Playing with dice and other luck based aren't really that bad either because this is just personal preference because some doesn't really like to get involved or spending too much time.

You can choose on what games you do like because its your money then its your decision on what you would be dealing with.

It's better to see that you're competing against the house but there is no way you can beat them. If you're beating others then you'll think about that when you win, there's someone that losses his money. If you're good with that then it's going to be your option.
I'll choose A since most houses have big bankrolls.

That's my always and usual concern about Player vs Player mode, the fairness of the game. We don't have any assurance that we are competing against a real human and not a bot. Even if let's say they are humans, there's a possibility that 1-2 players in that room do have a 3rd party program to directly help the player or guide them to the next move.

For new sites or doesn't establish yet a good reputation, I might bit hesitant to test their PvP mode. Will only do it on a site that has somehow already been in the industry for a long and already establish a large community and user-based.

In fact, I do not see a solution to this problem (progress does not stand still and bots are getting better) and the long history of the site and its reputation in no way guarantees that players in PvP mode will not use bots or special software. It seems to me that the only way out now is to play live, which is probably why offline casinos will always be in demand despite the rapid development of the virtual world.

The problem of bots can be solved in certain games by implementing an anti-cheat mechanism that detects user behavior and bans them. I tell you an example, I used to play online games PubG and they have such a mechanism where they detect bots and cheaters and ban them instantly. So, if every game can implement that kind of mechanism, the problem of bots will be long gone.

Option-B is more satisfactory and less addictive because you will be bored after losing 10 times against a player but if you lose against the gambling house, you will be tilted.

B is much fair rather than A in my opinion. Playing with other players means that you're up against something you know that is much weaker than the house, even if it is a pro player, unless that player is with the casino, then most likely you'll lose your money no matter how many tries you'll make. Playing up against a house is like fighting a boss in a game while you're just a level 1 character, that's why you don't want to compete with the house.

Those are two different kind of games provided. I would like to play on both "Casino A" and "Casino B" depending on my mood. Playing against the house (Casino A) means you will be getting faster results and most of the games will depend completely on luck. Isn't this what gambling is all about? Being lucky? On other hand, playing against real people (Casino B) would be more fun, but a little slower. It might require a little skill, but the result will also depend mainly on luck. So if you want to play quick games, go for casino A. If you want to be a bit competitive, then casino B would be your choice.

But the rewards also differ when we bet against house and players where luck plays some role in the game.

In my opinion, also B looks great because being completely blind is much worse than having difficulty in vision meanwhile we also need to remember that we are not going to win the game just because we are pro players since luck still plays a role with skill-based games.

Of course, I will choose Casino B....

What is the reason for my choice? 

In luck based gambling, long-term winning is not possible.  In such casinos on large timeframes, the casino itself always wins. 

Poker and similar games are another matter.  In such games of chance, players play against each other.  This is a zero sum game.  In this case, the payoff depends on two factors - your qualifications and the qualifications of your opponents. 

The second factor is very important.  Improving qualifications is not easy.  Choosing the right poker table is much easier. 

A table where inexperienced beginners play.

I would go with type A casinos and I know it's not a common opinion but the reasoning behind choosing a luck-based casino where we compete against house edge is the lower edge. I have seen that in most platforms and games where a dealer is involved or players play among themselves, the platform charges hefty fees for that and that's much higher than the usual house edge.

If the house edge & platform commission are the same, then no doubt I would play multiplayer games because it's much more fun and engaging while also a good chance to show off the skills and make some money.

I think that given the improvement of bots, sooner or later no one will be able to distinguish them from real people. I heard that YouTube 5 years ago was "deceived" by bots and began to perceive their patterns as human and began to consider real people as bots  ;D
By the way, I think that after 10 losses to a person I will not be bored, I think I will be very angry and will be on tilt.

Haha yeah, a good answer but I think OP is concerned about "making money and profits" from the casino and I guess either option can't guarantee profits but playing skill games is more suitable.

Actually, skill games are least fair because you might be playing against a computer script or simply an opponent who is far superior than you. In contrast, luck games are much more fair because they work on a provably fair system and you can verify your bets.

To me, the ideology of making money with gambling itself has a big hole in it.

If I indeed have to choose one of them, I would prefer to pick the first casino. Reason? I think it is due to the variety of its game options, on the first casino they provide lots kind of games I could play so it wouldn't easily get bored on my gambling session. As for the second casino, besides it lacking the variety of its games, it's also quite bothersome to found a good reliable casino these days in order to play that kind of game (PvP) since there's not many casinos provide it.

It is not asking about the variety of games, it is all about which you are preferred. Gamble that against the house edge or gamble with the real opponent through P2P or player to player games. In poker games, I rather like or choose the p2p gambling that did not against the house edge because there is a possibility that you will increase your potential of winnings. In my own, it depends where did you prefer to use it. Against the house edge of P2P games, all we wanted to have is the entertainment on gambling, not the serious profit that could get.

They have the house edge on their side, so even if you play the perfect basic strategy you still have no chance of making profits over the long term and the number of players does not matter even if they decide to play as a team if the only thing they are using is the basic strategy, however this changes if people use card counting, blackjack dealers know about this so if they see you are card counting you are going to be asked to get out of the casino, however if under those circumstances people use team play that is when they can beat the casino while playing blackjack.

Casino A all the way.

I don't have the patience to have to play against others or to have to train up myself before I can play the Peer vs Peer brand of the game.

And I think that generally, when people want to gamble, they are simply seeking a quick entertainment and not anything extended. They don't want to have to install an app, enter a training tutorial, and wait for people to come online.

Well it does not matter --P2P games or against on the house are the same thing as entertainment or perhaps the purpose is to have entertainment while you are in gambling not typically about the money. If I have $100 to start in gambling, perhaps dice and roulette would be better, and then P2P like blackjack and poker games also I have preferred. Perhaps, I always preferred a gambling site that I enjoyed the variety of games, it seems when you enter a gambling casino, there are a lot of games that you can choose from.

Oh among the things been said on here this is the first thing i do hear out on someones who do choses up Option A - Casino A. :D.You do actually have some point though because majority of gamblers are really that impatient when it comes to games that theyre dealing with and thats why we do see some demand into those dice and slot games out there which do offer instantaneous results.

Its actually a matter of preference because some do like to play strategic type of games and some doesnt really matter at all as long the results are instant or can be known without needing to wait up longer.

Knowing that gamblers are really way too impatient when it comes to gambling where some doesnt really like on waiting up for that long and want fast results.

I think that Casino B is more attractive to me due to the community engagement aspect.

However, I can see why most people would still default to Casino A.

People like consistency and knowing that they're always going to get a provably fair outcome despite the lower odds of winning that they may have. You have to understand that when you do your R&D in this space. Perhaps include a play against house option alongside your option B?

I would rather compete with my fellow gamblers to be lucky to win a bet. It is very difficult to win against the house cause the house has different ways to make sure that the game is out of the hand if the gamblers. Winning against the house with a big success can be as a result of high altitude luck that might have tricked the house of possible outcomes.

I play on luck so my choice is on option number 1 most of my activities on gambling sites are luck-based I love playing on luck games because I'm not good at games that require skills and concentration it's time-consuming to try how to learn various skills on Poker, Blackjack and besides I have good success in luck-based games.

Well thats true, some gamblers prefer to play games that purely rely on luck. Special skills are not needed whom gamblers dont also want to learn first before they can able to play. Its a bit hassle since you only want is to enjoy the game and hoping to earn. But still, I prefer games which require skills because you are not only relying on luck but you can also apply what you have learn through experience on playing that particular game.

For me I'll rather choose B  than A cause  in the Casino B which mean that  you can win by  your skills and luck than Casino A waiting for your luck to win the game. In Casino B you have carry your victory by your skills of you are good and have greater ideas than the other player  you probably win the game.

That also means that you have to be better than the other gamblers.
I think it is also better if there will be the choice that you can be against the house in skilled manner but that's unlikely.

 Yes that's what I mean for my own strategy that it is better to used skill and competing other opponent there's a big possible to win than to wait our lucky time so I choose casino B . Besides that we can practice and enhanced our skill to be more good in the game for me that's the advantage for the casino B.

I would rather compete against the other players. (In your example it is "casino B") It is because it is almost certain that you are going to lose against the house. ("casino A") But people on the other hand can be dumb sometimes (that includes you too) unlike the house. It means you can win more often against the real players.

However, I haven't looked at how "casino B" really operates but I assume that it also gets his share from the players because otherwise the casino wouldn't be able to make profits. If casino B provides this platform for the players, they have to take something from the players, unless they get their money from the ad givers which is very unlikely. So, in any case, the casino still always wins whether it is casino A or Casino B.

The reason it has a high house edge is to cover operating cost since they don't have any source of income compared when the house is directly playing to players. There's a pros and cons in both option and it solely depends on the skills of the player. If the player has good skill per se poker then it will be good for him to play against other players instead against House even the house edge is much bigger, In the end he will have huge profit for his skill advantage which he can't use if he play against the house.

But only few casino will offer a pure Player to Player game due to a lot competition out there. Imagine a huge operating cost for a small profit on house edge which you can't guarantee if many people will play on your table.

Depending on my mood, but most likely I would choose B as for I love playing using my skills and its more fun. But in some days, that you don't want to think and just waste down some money... I would probably go for A

Actually in gambling it's very rewarding if you got to end winning either you win depending on your luck or win depending on your strategy and we do have our own choices which one do we like to play with that could be most entertain for us. But I am a type of a gambler that wanted to win in a competition like using my skills and wanted to develop more strategy so that winning in this kind of gambling will be more rewarding for ma so that's why I choose casino B than casino A.

I love to gamble against other person and not against computer , this makes me more competitive and aware of the situation that just playing online or against programmed game.

actually before pandemic i constantly go to a friends house just to gamble and only visiting crypto gambling site whenever i succeed in trading or received my payments from bounty/campaigns.

so obviously i will choose the one that is not totally an online gambling.

  Yeah it's true Gambling is rewarding but it's depends also if we know how to play the game , that's why as a Gamblers we need to practice our skills to make more advanced and competing other opponent it's more likely to play with them cause it makes fun while playing in the Gambling.

Both are good and you have a chance to win on both, but there are too many risks playing in poker I'm not a good poker player I only play poker with my friends and I lose many times and to think of my friends are not good on poker too, so I have to go for option number 1 which is relying on luck to make a profit.

I'm also not a good poker because I can be that emotional when there's a streak that I've got no good hands.

This is also hard, you're going to depend on your luck if you target for the profit. It's a hard choice if you're for the profit.

I have read all comments above there are different preferences upon choosing a gambling casino, there are some who say it is much better if you will try them both and others says it is good if you will not against the computer or the house edge. But for me, yes, both are profitable or maybe it will easily wipe out your all balance in a matter of a minute while on gambling. That is true, both of them to are very risky but I think the risk was already there and all you have to do is manage the risk because if there is a high risk means a high potential of gaining profit. So in my opinion, you can choose both and it depend on where you are comfortable at.

If you decide to practice your skills to have more advanced, you need to consider that it will require more money to learn unless you learn and practice without using money. If so, you can do that but the feels will be different if you do not use and maybe you will not get the thrill of playing gambling. Besides that, when you play with money, the sensation will be there and you will feel that playing gambling will be excited.

I have not thought like that, if there are bot then it will not be a fair game at all as it is impossible to defeat the bot. I am sure there are people who can identify these bots. I am not an expert in card games and hence i am not too worried about that or nor does i understand the fairness every gambling sites provides. If you doubt the team then they can also mess around the provably fair system.

You cannot approach gambling as a means of making money but approach as a means of trying your luck.

I believe most gamblers are preferring to play against other gamblers because they are believing when they are competing against another human then there will be less possibilities of manipulation even in the probably fair environment. I'm not going to justify their opinion is right or wrong but when we are looking for instant gambling then we need to go for playing against house because there cannot be some player will be waiting for you to arrive and join to compete against you all the times. This is the reason why playing against houses kind of gambling is more popular and widely available everywhere.

There is fun in playing with other people and the chance that we can win depending on our opponent. It will boost our confidence and starts to think we were good at that game when we already starts to won. There are already live casinos now who offers gaming with others and provide a chat box for interactions. The online casinos evolving  gives many gamblers option to discover what they think they prefer more with real people or just against themselves or the house.