G A M B L E R S ❗❗ What are your thoughts on this?

[Saint-loup]

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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?

[Kyraishi]

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.

[harizen]

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.

[Finestream]

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.

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.

[KTChampions]

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.

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.

[hello_good_sir]

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.

[michellee]

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.

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.

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.

[samcrypto]

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.

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.

[qwertyup23]

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.

[Dragonfund]

so, the thread is an advertisement?

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.

For me, it's Casino B, at the least I don't make the house rich with those games since it's the players that takes the wins and not the house plus, you have more chance of winning in a skill based game compared to a odd based game plus you make the house much fatter.

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.

[Fredomago]

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.

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.

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.

[worldofcoins]

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.

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.

[Vaskiy]

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.

[Slow death]

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

[Lanatsa]

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.

[maju69]

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.

[Kelvinid]

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

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.

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

Assume you have $100 and must choose between the two casino versions shown below to turn a proft. Which will you choose?

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.

[Kyraishi]

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 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.

[chaser15]

Assume you have $100 and must choose between the two casino versions shown below to turn a proft. Which will you choose?

1. Casino A:
Players in this casino compete against the platform (house) in games such as BlackJack, Rollet, Slots, etc... .
In this type of casino, players must rely on luck and other factors to make a profit.

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.