gambler has 100% trust in each stake

[madnessteat]

When we place a bet, none of us can be 100% sure that it will turn a profit. It is common sense, because no matter how well teams or individual players play, in sports competitions, as in everything else, there are errors or accidents that can lead to the opposite results. So it is very important to understand that any bet can be a losing one, and betting all your money on one bet is very irrational.

[trendcoin]

...
My question now is, As a gambler would you give 100% to a stake that you trust?

My answer: Absolutely not. Because nothing is guaranteed in this life. Even if I have strong enough data, I would not bet on a match with all my money. In fact, I would not bet with all of my money, even if I got strong news of a match-fixing rumor about a match. Cash management is an important issue in both investments and betting. Taking big risks with all of our money can result in irreparable consequences. More balanced and better planned steps allow us to achieve better results in the long run. I wish everyone good luck.

[QueenVera]

Answering your question directly, I will say yes that I will stake 100 percent on a what I trust despite it being against the gambling rule.
At some point I only have to bet 100 percent on a match if I'm willing to loss all the money because personally I always have a drill never to go all in one bet no matter how promising the bet seems or how sure you are of a game because nothing is guaranteed in gambling.
There was a similar case with a gambler who lost over 1.4 million dollars on a very low odd and still ended up losing the game which simply implies that nothing is certain and one isn't supposed to stake 100 percent on a game for no reason not even trust except you'll willing to loss the money too.

[chaser15]

My question now is, As a gambler would you give 100% to a stake that you trust?

Even if I trust a certain team, if the odds are not interesting, then there's no way I will place a bet for them especially if that team is the heavy favorite. In general, the way I way I'm choosing my bets depends on odds and not mostly because I trust a team.

If I bet on the underdog especially in boxing to support my fellow boxers, I need to trust them 100% no matter what.

As long as we know and understand that not all bets are bound to win, then we should keep it that way instead of turning to an irresponsible person after losing a certain bet. It's normal to lose in gambling and we can always bounce back the next time we place our bets.

[Merit.s]

My question now is, As a gambler would you give 100% to a stake that you trust?

Gambling shouldn't be given 100% trust because it is a thing of luck.  Likewise, in life nothing can be 100% perfect. No matter how good you are in your predictions or how skillful you are in that game betting with 100% assurance is a risk, because this will make you stake with a huge amount believing that you will definitely win. We have seen it in the case of football,when the strongest team will be defeated by a small team. This shows that gambling should be seen as a 50-50 activity. Putting all your trust on your stake can lead to a big loss,and is unethical.

[Kakmakr]

No, you can never trust "humans" ..100%

You can see this with most UFC fighters and/or boxers, where one good or lucky punch or kick can defeat the fighter with the best track record. I have lost a lot of bets on games or fighters that has the best odds to perform, but one the day they might just be unlucky or they had a "off" day.

You might win more on those players or fighters if you continuously bet on the ones with the best statistics, but do not go all-in on a specific player, because you will also lose money on them.  

[madnessteat]

My question now is, As a gambler would you give 100% to a stake that you trust?

Gambling shouldn't be given 100% trust because it is a thing of luck.  Likewise, in life nothing can be 100% perfect. No matter how good you are in your predictions or how skillful you are in that game betting with 100% assurance is a risk, because this will make you stake with a huge amount believing that you will definitely win. We have seen it in the case of football,when the strongest team will be defeated by a small team. This shows that gambling should be seen as a 50-50 activity. Putting all your trust on your stake can lead to a big loss,and is unethical.

In my opinion, to minimize losses due to random match outcomes, you should not bet all your money on one game, but spread it out over 10, 20 or 50 games. This way even betting on favorites in most matches you will have an advantage compared to betting all your money on one match. Although if you look at it from the other side, each individual match has nothing to do with the previous or subsequent match, which means each of them can end randomly. But I still stick to the rule of not betting too much on one game.

[kenshi222]

The gambling is based on the luck,mostly gambling people use their luck to win the game.When the gambling is based on the sportsbet,you can use of background of each players.If the gambling is based on the boxing,based on the two players we can guess who is the winner.Because every player had their records and positive and negative.

If the game is based on the football,most of the football addicted person know the value of each player.The stamina of the players may vary with certain period of time.So sometimes the strategy of the gamblers also fail based on the player stamina on the particular day.

[Lida93]

My question now is, As a gambler would you give 100% to a stake that you trust?

Except they are a fixed game and was given me through the right source of official outside this window I dare not give 100% trust and assurance to any stake no matter the team or player I may be placing my bet on. There's no such thing as 100% trust when it comes to gambling, just do your analysis and stake an amount you can easily let go in case you lose it cause nothing is sure in betting or gambling. Even the so-called Arsenal that are leading in the top position in the EPL table has ones lost to a smaller team this season apart from Manchester United they also loss to.

[dothebeats]

I don't trust the player or tean, I trust their output and their current performance. And even then, that trust can still be easily broken if the components of this team isn't complete and they're missing a few key people to get the gears turning. If you still believe in a team that has 88% winning rate that slumps on the current tournament, and has a very bad streak, you are playing by emotions and no longer playing rationally, which you want to avoid as much as possible because decisions led by emotions turn out to be destructive for the most part.

EDIT: some words

[Hispo]

My question now is, As a gambler would you give 100% to a stake that you trust?

No, I do not think so. In fact, I thought that always keeping in mind there is a chance to lose it was a good practice among responsible gamblers and those who partake in sport betting.

Because if you trust 100% in some team or player, that could mean you believe there is guaranteed success over your bet and such assumption can lead to reckless and irresponsible behavior. In both gambling and sport-betting one needs to have a good sense of risk management and assuming no risk is a lack of management, in my humble opinion.

You should check this thread someone opened a while ago

Gambler Loses 1.4 million USD in a bet with lower than 1.01 odds!

[harizen]

My question now is, As a gambler would you give 100% to a stake that you trust?

I placed a bet for it and risk my money, why should I not 100% trust my bet?

I won't risk my money for that in the first place if I don't trust my own analysis regarding the bet. But to be clear, it doesn't mean that I trust that specific team in general but it's just that I trust 100% that my bet for them does have a good winning chance.

In sports betting, we are not joking here. The moment you placed your bet on a certain team, especially with a decent amount, trust our analysis,

[Fivestar4everMVP]

My question now is, As a gambler would you give 100% to a stake that you trust?

Haha,
I've learnt the hard way mate, I can never again, give or bet 100 percent of my fund to a stake that I trust.
I have done this before and it failed, and that how I lost all my money, which included money I pulled out from my business, thinking that with that bet, I will double it, then return the money back to my business after taking my profit, but unfortunately, everything went down the drain and the shock landed me in hospital for several days, cus I couldn't  believe I lost the money.

There is a good reason why are advised to always gamble only with an amount of money we can comfortably loss, in betting, I've learnt that even the best team can disappoint when bettors least expect it, for this reason, never put 100 percent funds in one stake.

[goinmerry]

My question now is, As a gambler would you give 100% to a stake that you trust?

Are you referring to a 100% bet amount or giving 100% trust to a certain bet?

If it's about 100% amount, I don't consider giving an all-in bet to a team or player even if I trust it. It was a risky move to go all-in.

If it's about giving 100% trust, then obviously I will do that way since I need to trust my bet to win.

[rahmad2nd]

In the game of sports, winners are always categorized based on the team with the highest performance. For example, in English football (EPL), Arsenal Football Club and Manchester City are seen to have good tactical skills, making them stand out as winners in each of their games. Therefore, a gambler establishes trust in those teams because they have won almost 88% of their games. The gambler stakes high on each of these teams because they believe that the money invested in each team will bring out good returns.

The same thing goes for when a gambler wants to stake on players. They must know the performance of that particular player before any trust can be established. For example, Harland of Manchester City is known for goal-scoring, and Saka of Arsenal is known for good finishing. This is how trust in gambling is established, although this trust sometimes fails.

My question now is, As a gambler would you give 100% to a stake that you trust?

Referring from what you describe in this thread. a big mistake if you bet based on their performance without first knowing the team that will be the opponent. remember, a strong or a team with high performance, will not always win every game. which means, they could slip at any time, depending on the opponent, they could even be beaten by weaker teams. Also remember, in a match, and during 2x45 minutes, anything can happen. and this is football, there is no exact count, nor do we refer to statistics alone. plus, we also have to refer to the available odds, is it worth it for us to bet. everything can be considered, even though City and Arsenal often dominate every game.

In essence, we are not going to place bets carelessly just because the team's performance is the highest. we will refer to all the existing players, patterns and formations applied by the coach. also, the factor of injured players is our concern. so ideally, we will conduct studies and research to analyze the teams that will compete, looking for all the latest information. plus, refer to the available odds. after that, we will conclude a prediction that has gone through a series of previous analyzes. but remember also, regarding the results later. we will never know before the fight ends, in essence, in betting there is always a risk involved.

[Accardo]

Trust is not always a thing in football, that's why it's called gambling. A team or player that looks promising may end up not delivering his/their skills when you place all trust in them. The Arsenal game played today, alot of people had trust in Saka to score yet he didn't and a different body, Nelson, came from the bench to surprise fans. Sometimes these players play fine, hence considering their weekly performances 100 percent is wrong because being in form is not consistent. In gambling don't trust the player's just gamble with your techniques.

[DaNNy001]

It's not always 100% on every bet because there will definitely be other considerations that will make us want to make sure that our bets can give us a win. It will be 100% if we find the opposing team is completely unable to fight the team we choose but that usually rarely happens, especially if the match has already started. Everything can change in the middle of a match so our predictions which were originally 100%, could change so we have to be prepared for that.

Its not rational to give a bet or an odd you want to stake a 100% confidence, especially when its sport betting like soccer game. Even the least team with the poorest of form on a good day can FCK up a big team with their giant odd given to them, I have seen a lot of cases where a team with small odd win a very good team and I have also been a victim of such outcome. For me I will say it's imperative that a gambler always know that no odd is a hundred 100 % sure prediction.

[nakamura12]

No I don't trust it 100% unless I also gather data from the opposing team and then compare both of it before I made my decision on which team will most likely to win when the match start. Trusting 100% will not also work and even gathering both data is nothing if the game is fixed where one of the team will make their team lose purposely but not in an obvious way. In football, trust is not what you can always rely on when betting so once again my answer is NO.

[uneng]

To never put all your eggs on the same basket is also a valid guideline when talking about betting. It's not a good idea to go with 100% of your funds into a single bet that you believe to be a guaranteed one, because after all there is always a little chance the underdog overcomes the favorite, besides the fact will be risking big money for low odds. Diversify your bets, make your bankroll last longer.

[DoublerHunter]

Trust is not always a thing in football, that's why it's called gambling. A team or player that looks promising may end up not delivering his/their skills when you place all trust in them. The Arsenal game played today, alot of people had trust in Saka to score yet he didn't and a different body, Nelson, came from the bench to surprise fans. Sometimes these players play fine, hence considering their weekly performances 100 percent is wrong because being in form is not consistent. In gambling don't trust the player's just gamble with your techniques.

^Definitely right!
Even the most reliable and consistent players can have an off-day, get injured, or face unexpected challenges during the game that can affect their performance. That is why gambling is called a game of chance. It involves risk-taking and uncertainty, and there is always a chance that your prediction or bet may not come through. While knowledge and research can help inform your decisions, it is essential to approach gambling with a responsible attitude and only stake what you can afford to lose. This highlights the unpredictable nature of sports and why it is crucial to manage your expectations and that we should prepare for any outcome.