Betting strategy question

[pawel7777]

There was one certain time around 2021 when some sports prediction codes were shared among gamblers, but after the game, there were a lot of winnings, and the betting site cancelled the game due to the many winnings. As of then, I knew of a guy who won about $17k; I can't remember how much he staked then, but the game was cancelled.

Not sure what type of game are you referring to, but ususally when the game is cancelled then there are no winners or losers. If the bet was won and casino decided not to pay out the winnings - then it was nothing but a fraud.

...
30% is what I can afford to lose, but had the roll been repetitive, I would just split BTC0.25 into 5 places and play it 5 times.

VERY bad idea. If you have a mathematical edge over casino, for the repetitive bets, the best tactic is to play with minimum bet increments to reduce the risk of going bust in case of a long losing streak.

Statistically, you'd only win one in six rolls, so losing streak of 5, or even 10 or 15 is very likely to happen. If I recall correctly the longest losing streak recorded on JustDice was over 30 with the odds of 50%.

... In such a case betting more than you can easily afford to lose is not a wise move.

Betting 100% of all you CAN afford to lose is probably not a wise move, given the 83% chance of a loss. I mean depending on how you define the amount you can afford to lose, I guess. Could mean a different thing to different people.

[1715558817]

1715558817

[1715558817]

1715558817

[1715558817]

1715558817

[1715558817]

1715558817

[dimonstration]

There was one certain time around 2021 when some sports prediction codes were shared among gamblers, but after the game, there were a lot of winnings, and the betting site cancelled the game due to the many winnings. As of then, I knew of a guy who won about $17k; I can't remember how much he staked then, but the game was cancelled.

Not sure what type of game are you referring to, but ususally when the game is cancelled then there are no winners or losers. If the bet was won and casino decided not to pay out the winnings - then it was nothing but a fraud.

There’s some instances on tennis match that the game is mark as canceled when the player retired on the middle of the game. Some bets are still tag as cancelled even if it won already like bets on total score due to the game didn’t finish at all as per ToS of some sportsbook. It’s important to read ToS because some of them includes rule to make some situations in favor to them.

On his example. I think he is pertaining on old issue that sportsbook cancelled all the bet of the player due to the involvement of user to shady bets such as fixed match and arbitrage bets. There’s no reported issue that casino cancelled match while it is won without a valid reason.

[pawel7777]

...

There’s some instances on tennis match that the game is mark as canceled when the player retired on the middle of the game. Some bets are still tag as cancelled even if it won already like bets on total score due to the game didn’t finish at all as per ToS of some sportsbook. It’s important to read ToS because some of them includes rule to make some situations in favor to them.

On his example. I think he is pertaining on old issue that sportsbook cancelled all the bet of the player due to the involvement of user to shady bets such as fixed match and arbitrage bets. There’s no reported issue that casino cancelled match while it is won without a valid reason.

That's what I mean, if the game is not finished, there are no winners or losers. If the bets were "canceled" after the game was finished, then it's nothing but a fraud. But yeah, In case of fixed games, things can get a bit more complicated - but still they could freeze the funds of suspected players and contact authorities. Canceling the game because the THINK it might have been fixed is still not right.

ToS are not very reliable as usually any business reserves the right to change them and essentially are wording them in a way to give themselves a maximum privilege over players. It's important to remember that ToCs do not supersede the law.

And there's absolutely nothing shady about arbitrage bets

[dimonstration]

ToS are not very reliable as usually any business reserves the right to change them and essentially are wording them in a way to give themselves a maximum privilege over players. It's important to remember that ToCs do not supersede the law.

And there's absolutely nothing shady about arbitrage bets

And what law exactly if you willfully accept it during the registration process. I once a believer too of what you are believing but the recent event on the crypto world that show great example of this.

If you don’t mind sharing a little bit OT on gambling. Celsius holders lose already there money on court battle.

The judge, Martin Glenn, found that Celsius’s terms of use — the lengthy contracts that many websites publish but few consumers read — meant “the cryptocurrency assets became Celsius’s property.”

If ToS is not legally accepted then how come a crypto company use it to win a court battle?

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

Not sure what type of game are you referring to, but ususally when the game is cancelled then there are no winners or losers. If the bet was won and casino decided not to pay out the winnings - then it was nothing but a fraud.

It is not a casino but just a local betting platform in my place, and according to them, the winning was too high, so what they came up with is that there was an error in the prediction code. That was a fraud, but I also think that if they have paid out that much money to the gamblers, their business will suffer.

VERY bad idea. If you have a mathematical edge over casino, for the repetitive bets, the best tactic is to play with minimum bet increments to reduce the risk of going bust in case of a long losing streak.

Statistically, you'd only win one in six rolls, so losing streak of 5, or even 10 or 15 is very likely to happen. If I recall correctly the longest losing streak recorded on JustDice was over 30 with the odds of 50%.

I am still new in the casino, so I don't have an advantage, I am only using some experience I have gained from some betting platforms.

But are you saying that in six rolls, only one win is possible?

Does it also mean that "minimum bet increments to reduce the risk of going bust" is the best strategy?

[seoincorporation]

30% is what I can afford to lose, but had the roll been repetitive, I would just split BTC0.25 into 5 places and play it 5 times.

VERY bad idea. If you have a mathematical edge over casino, for the repetitive bets, the best tactic is to play with minimum bet increments to reduce the risk of going bust in case of a long losing streak.

Statistically, you'd only win one in six rolls, so losing streak of 5, or even 10 or 15 is very likely to happen. If I recall correctly the longest losing streak recorded on JustDice was over 30 with the odds of 50%.

Splitting the bet into smaller bets to chase a win isn't a bad idea, but isn't the worst way to bet, while more bets then there is a bigger chance to win but we get less profit.

To know how we would roll the bet, we have to set one goal, if the goal is to win big then we need to make some 'Yolo' bets like

1Btcx6(16.5%chance to win)=6Btc
6*6=36Btc
36*6=216Btc.

And this would be the right way to hit the moon, but we need a lot of luck to get that 3 bets streak with those low odds.

[pawel7777]

...
And what law exactly if you willfully accept it during the registration process. I once a believer too of what you are believing but the recent event on the crypto world that show great example of this.

If you don’t mind sharing a little bit OT on gambling. Celsius holders lose already there money on court battle.

The judge, Martin Glenn, found that Celsius’s terms of use — the lengthy contracts that many websites publish but few consumers read — meant “the cryptocurrency assets became Celsius’s property.”

If ToS is not legally accepted then how come a crypto company use it to win a court battle?

I don't know much about Celsius, but I don't think that article means what you think it means. Most centralised exchanges would have all the customers' deposit pooled and just hold the records in the ledger. So in a sense, you would cede the ownership of your deposit in exchange of CEX's obligation, meaning you become their creditor.

Funny enough, another failed enterprise - BlockFi, are trying to do something opposite and petition the bankruptcy court to allow customers to withdraw from wallet accounts saying it's THEIR funds, but unlikely the court will agree to that IMO, as it would be very unfair to other users.

That does not mean that anything that's put in the T&Cs is legally binding. Quite obviously.

Common myths about contract terms
Just because terms are written and signed, it doesn’t make them legal.

...
Splitting the bet into smaller bets to chase a win isn't a bad idea, but isn't the worst way to bet, while more bets then there is a bigger chance to win but we get less profit.
...

That's somewhat true for the usual, real life bets, but not for the scenario discussed.

[nullama]

~snip~
But are you saying that in six rolls, only one win is possible?

Does it also mean that "minimum bet increments to reduce the risk of going bust" is the best strategy?

It's just math, they're saying that if you throw a dice, each number has one in six chances of appearing. That's it.

The minimum bet simply means they can continue to play for a longer time, so that eventually they would win in that scenario(where you have advantage against the house). The lesser you bet, the more bets you can make with a fixed amount of money.

The issue is that you eventually either lose all your money, or you might also hit the maximum bet (if you keep doubling your bets to try to win)

[LUCKMCFLY]

For the sake of interest, I bought lotteries several times, but this is boring, I have never won, and only lost money, it was no avail. There are those who are constantly playing with the hope of winning Jack Pot, but it looks like an illusion, because there are very few winners and, to be honest, I even doubt that the choice of the winner will without the intervention of the organizers of this lottery. Therefore, I do not see the point of participating in lotteries.

Lottery is not something you buy tickets so you could win, it is something you buy tickets so you are not missing out. Why? Well if you have just one ticket per draw, that means you at least have a chance and it is a much much bigger chance than zero, the difference between 1 ticket and 100 tickets is smaller than having zero or one.

I know that it is not going to end up being the great thing that we all hope for and we may win, I know we will lose 99.99999% of the time, but at least you got a ticket. That is why many buy tickets, even if just one, because it would give you a chance that you could end up with winning something much better in the long run, a possibility.

In statistical terms, it is very possible that those people who manage to play a lot in the lottery and above all buy many tickets, their probability of winning increases, but it is not enough to guarantee that they can win, other factors must be taken into account that can be predictable in a possible raffle event, and this is associated with the luck factor, or what some prefer to call the randomness factor and that buying more tickets totally decreases the randomness factor, it is something that is not denied but never it will be a sure thing, because there are many who can buy 1 ticket and that is the winning ticket.

[Betwrong]

... In such a case betting more than you can easily afford to lose is not a wise move.

Betting 100% of all you CAN afford to lose is probably not a wise move, given the 83% chance of a loss. I mean depending on how you define the amount you can afford to lose, I guess. Could mean a different thing to different people.

Indeed, it's a different thing for different people. For me personally it's around the amount of money I can earn in one day. Yes, it is still painful, losing the money you were working for for the whole day, but it's acceptable, it's not the end of the world, you know.

But that's about the money I can afford to lose without bad consequences. Talking about the money that I can easily afford to lose, than it's about a quarter of what I make per day, and that's what I would bet on the single die roll, you are asking in the OP.

[pawel7777]

Indeed, it's a different thing for different people. For me personally it's around the amount of money I can earn in one day. Yes, it is still painful, losing the money you were working for for the whole day, but it's acceptable, it's not the end of the world, you know.

But that's about the money I can afford to lose without bad consequences. Talking about the money that I can easily afford to lose, than it's about a quarter of what I make per day, and that's what I would bet on the single die roll, you are asking in the OP.

That's a sensible approach that can work for you but is not universal. Obviously, for someone with a low income and a tight budget, who struggles to pay the bills (aka half of the UK right now after massive electricity rates hikes lol), a daily pay (or even just 25% of it) is probably too much.

Personally, for the sake of regular gambling, I'd define the "amount I can afford to lose" as excess (or leftover) money at the end of the month, after paying all bills and usual living expenses and also after making a regular contributions to saving/investment accounts.

But that definition and my risk tolerance would change for things like say investment opportunities with lower risk and positive expected returns. In such case I'd be potentially willing to risk any amount that won't cause a massive disruption to my life.

[minime0105]

People's ideology differs when it comes to betting some person bet what the can afford to loose or bear while some individual bet on on a smaller odd with a higher money believing that the will win no matter what it takes the continue rolling over but to me betting is an unforseen circumstance that requires an individual whose mind is sound to always trade with caution in other not to regret later, note your prediction does not determine the actual/final outcome of any game.

[jostorres]

Indeed, it's a different thing for different people. For me personally it's around the amount of money I can earn in one day. Yes, it is still painful, losing the money you were working for for the whole day, but it's acceptable, it's not the end of the world, you know.

But that's about the money I can afford to lose without bad consequences. Talking about the money that I can easily afford to lose, than it's about a quarter of what I make per day, and that's what I would bet on the single die roll, you are asking in the OP.

That's a sensible approach that can work for you but is not universal. Obviously, for someone with a low income and a tight budget, who struggles to pay the bills (aka half of the UK right now after massive electricity rates hikes lol), a daily pay (or even just 25% of it) is probably too much.

Personally, for the sake of regular gambling, I'd define the "amount I can afford to lose" as excess (or leftover) money at the end of the month, after paying all bills and usual living expenses and also after making a regular contributions to saving/investment accounts.

But that definition and my risk tolerance would change for things like say investment opportunities with lower risk and positive expected returns. In such case I'd be potentially willing to risk any amount that won't cause a massive disruption to my life.

It's important to remember that gambling should always be done responsibly and within your means. It's easy to get caught up in the excitement of potentially winning big, but it's important to remember that the odds are usually in favour of the house and there's a high chance of losing. It's also important to consider the potential consequences of losing a significant amount of money and how it could affect your daily life. Setting clear boundaries and sticking to them is crucial for responsible gambling.

It's also important to understand that gambling should never be used as a means to solve financial problems, as it will likely only make them worse in the long run. It's always best to consult with a financial advisor and/or professional help if you have any concerns about your gambling habits.

[pawel7777]

...
 It's easy to get caught up in the excitement of potentially winning big, ...

That's true but I bet that what really puts people in trouble is the desire to "win back" what they lost. Usually happens when losing more than you're comfortable with. That's some weird psychological reaction that can switch you to a "degenerate" mode.

...
It's always best to consult with a financial advisor and/or professional help if you have any concerns about your gambling habits.

You got carried away a bit here lad. Financial advisers will not be much of a help for gambling problems.

[n0ne]

Strategies are just the calculated outcome, but we don't know how far the expectation gets fulfilled. It needs luck. In such situation I'll go with the minimum bet value for the maximum outcome, because I've experienced massive losses going for roll above 2 and the dice rolls within 2. Gambling is all about luck and strategies are just a way to keep ourselves positive on the outcome. The strategy that worked for our friend won't be successful for us, which is the reality we need to understand.

[LUCKMCFLY]

Indeed, it's a different thing for different people. For me personally it's around the amount of money I can earn in one day. Yes, it is still painful, losing the money you were working for for the whole day, but it's acceptable, it's not the end of the world, you know.

But that's about the money I can afford to lose without bad consequences. Talking about the money that I can easily afford to lose, than it's about a quarter of what I make per day, and that's what I would bet on the single die roll, you are asking in the OP.

That's a sensible approach that can work for you but is not universal. Obviously, for someone with a low income and a tight budget, who struggles to pay the bills (aka half of the UK right now after massive electricity rates hikes lol), a daily pay (or even just 25% of it) is probably too much.

Personally, for the sake of regular gambling, I'd define the "amount I can afford to lose" as excess (or leftover) money at the end of the month, after paying all bills and usual living expenses and also after making a regular contributions to saving/investment accounts.

But that definition and my risk tolerance would change for things like say investment opportunities with lower risk and positive expected returns. In such case I'd be potentially willing to risk any amount that won't cause a massive disruption to my life.

What happens is that when you think you have extra money that you can lose, it's not really like that, because few people in the world have that ability to spare money, that is, most people have tight budgets for their expenses, that is to say, if they have to pay bills, taxes, some rents, other rents, it is very difficult to leave a money totally willing to lose, because they know that a salary for most people is never enough, unlike players who are Considered whales, these things can translate into expenses that don't affect them, it's just like buying sweets for us means playing in a casino.

[pawel7777]

Strategies are just the calculated outcome...

Not really? Are you just playing around with changing definitions?
Strategy - a plan of action designed to achieve a long-term or overall aim.
e.g. Martingale is one of the most popular betting strategies but doesn't have much to do with calculating outcomes.

...
In such situation I'll go with the minimum bet value for the maximum outcome, ...

So if in the set-out scenario there's no defined minimum bet, would you just bet 1 satoshi hoping to earn 11 sats? Why even bother?

...
because few people in the world have that ability to spare money, ...

You're exaggerating a bit. No one in the developed world would go bankrupt or starve if they happened to lose $50 or $100. It could cause some inconvenience but everyone could manage. That's probably also true even for poor countries.

Average people tend to spend beyond their means (i.e. getting expensive cars on finance, buying low-nutrition junk food, paying for subscriptions they don't use etc), but that's a different story.

[RealMalatesta]

Strategies are just the calculated outcome, but we don't know how far the expectation gets fulfilled. It needs luck. In such situation I'll go with the minimum bet value for the maximum outcome, because I've experienced massive losses going for roll above 2 and the dice rolls within 2. Gambling is all about luck and strategies are just a way to keep ourselves positive on the outcome. The strategy that worked for our friend won't be successful for us, which is the reality we need to understand.

There is no way to calculate an outcome in gambling but many are still trying. I guess it can give them a sense of confidence and they think it's better to play this way than just playing the game randomly. Sometimes the expectations can be fulfilled earlier if we are lucky but it can also be fulfilled at a much longer time. We can't end up in more losses if we won't stop or if we will continue to deposit more.

Your strategy is also my strategy as I think it's less risky but avoid those high win chance games as my experience isn't always pleasant on them. I think they are only an illusion for the players to hope and lose more money.

[Gozie51]

Your strategy is also my strategy as I think it's less risky but avoid those high win chance games as my experience isn't always pleasant on them. I think they are only an illusion for the players to hope and lose more money.

High chance games are not illusion because some bettors are confidence to put in their risk money into it. A gambling addict sees it as a chance to increase his money and not just the losing aspect. For example if we are to consider some games played by drake then you will see how the chance games work. If you benefit from it then it won't be considered as an illusion because it is a possibility if you have the moral to try your luck but however you don't play such high games if you can't take the loses too.

[molsewid]

Strategies are just the calculated outcome, but we don't know how far the expectation gets fulfilled. It needs luck. In such situation I'll go with the minimum bet value for the maximum outcome, because I've experienced massive losses going for roll above 2 and the dice rolls within 2. Gambling is all about luck and strategies are just a way to keep ourselves positive on the outcome. The strategy that worked for our friend won't be successful for us, which is the reality we need to understand.

I believe in that as well, also sometimes I just let myself choose whatever I wanted I mean I don't think too much I am just playing and enjoying the game. Luck sometimes takes place and a little amount of being lucky may bring you success in a game. As I read in this forum, I now know that there's a thin line between being lucky and not being lucky. just have fund, who knows you may be lucky and win a game.