Gambling irresponsibility; what could be the criteria?

[Mia Chloe]

please let this topic remain on point and don't let the views of others influence yours...

Gambling responsibility is one of the major qualities a gambler is expected to have, infact it's so important that it's a generally preached topic by basically every casino. Undoubtedly just like a majority of other activities gambling too has values and I like to group them into General Values and Personal Values. The point is irresponsibility comes in when a gambler defies the General Values in particular.

Personal Values count but I don't think it's a criteria since most gamblers are bias in their judgements based on the Personal Values. For example;

Consider two persons say John who buys a lottery ticket for fun versus David, who borrows from rent for his. The difference lies in a loss of control: which Is a general value. John can stop David can't more like his gambling runs him. Now forward to the winnings, regardless of if John wins or loses most gamblers consider it a responsible move ( Because of general values). But for David's case, if he looses based on personal values he's irresponsible but if he hits a massive jackpot some gamblers see it as a responsible move from a risk taker.

Outcomes shouldn't define a if a bet is a responsible one or not, the reason and conditions for the bet should!!!!

[Churchillvv]

Let's make it straight, most of the people who judge by winnings are more likely to be like David in the example in real life and since one is likely or has some behaviour like the other he or she will likely support the move with an excuse covered with a valid name "risk taker" while in reality it's a sign or irresponsibility.

Judgements are biased based on mirror effect, the person who judges based on winnings mirrors themselves to likely take irresponsible actions. While the person who judges based on general values is considering but the before and after effects which the action could cause.

[SmartGold01]

Everyone has their own way of judgement or expressing a responsible gambling.. to me responsible gambling connotes that one must stay within their limits and not above their limits. I can also take an instance: gambling with $100 per month could be my limits and I can term it to be responsible because in this, we have bankroll management and of course I wouldn't for any day just finish all the 100$ I budgeted for a month in Just a day or two days but I have to manage it and whenever a there is a game which I have made my analysis and see that there is likelihood of winning I may take at least 4-6$ to bet, and whenever the game plays and either I win or lose I wouldn't for any day chase after what I had already lost, with this I have maintained a responsible gambling and I do not gamble out of proportion.

Now, when talking about irresponsibly gambling and of course we know that it's mostly comes from gambling without control or limits whereby keep chasing what we had already lose, not having proper timing or adequate planning. Gambling at all time or trying to always break through the house with this can say such person is an irresponsible gambler because there is no signs of cordiality or even applying a proper bankroll management, all these attribute to the criterias of irresponsible gambling. And like I mentioned before, everyone has their own ways of judgement.

[DaNNy001]

Everyone is entitled to their thoughts and opinions, the fact is that we all have different views and we cannot always agree on a a particular thing...in this case, when a gambler goes out his way or makes a risky move to place a bet whether he ends up winning a big amount of money it's an irresponsible decision, there's a chance that the bet would have been lost and the outcome would have lead to regrets and anxiety

[ryzaadit]

Goings debts, use more money can be spend, not using a cold - money.

Basically, It's about financial. We all know, the problem for gambling is starting from financial. Once gambling > getting financial problem > borrow money > debt > then family the one who got the pay.

So, everything is always spending more money than we can afford + going to debts.

[Wiwo]

For some reasons what differentiate both John and David is what have kept the discussion on going, but the fact that reality on both of them may differs due to the source of their gambling funds, but then if we want to carry out a sampling we then have to give them equal amounts of money and conditions, this way we may know what influences their gambling behaviour more.

David already FUP by borrowing money from rent to gamble with, since gambling shouldn't be done when under any pressure, because of emotional impact of such pressure on the gambler.

[stadus]

I think the main way to tell if someone is gambling responsibly is whether they’re keeping it within their limits or not. If a person is betting more than they can afford to lose, that’s already a red flag.

The issue with irresponsible gamblers is they don’t even set a clear limit in the first place, they just go on playing without knowing how much they’re really willing to lose. That’s what leads to chasing losses, because it's human nature to try and recover what we’ve lost. So we top up again and again until there’s nothing left. And if that becomes a habit, it easily snowballs into a serious problem, even bankruptcy.

[GeorgeJohn]

Responsible gambling and irresponsible gambling, most of us falls in lines of irresponsible gambling This are the following points of irresponsible gambling.


IRRESPONSIBLE GAMBLING  

¤ Gambling with a reserved funds
¤ Gambling without targets
¤ considering gambling first, before your family
¤ Staking what you can't afford to lose.

RESPONSIBLE GAMBLING  

¤ Have a limits in the gambling
¤ knowing what we can't afford to lose in time
¤ making research before gambling
¤ Do not gamble on durance

[rachael9385]

please let this topic remain on point and don't let the views of others influence yours...

Gambling responsibility is one of the major qualities a gambler is expected to have, infact it's so important that it's a generally preached topic by basically every casino. Undoubtedly just like a majority of other activities gambling too has values and I like to group them into General Values and Personal Values. The point is irresponsibility comes in when a gambler defies the General Values in particular.

Personal Values count but I don't think it's a criteria since most gamblers are bias in their judgements based on the Personal Values. For example;

Consider two persons say John who buys a lottery ticket for fun versus David, who borrows from rent for his. The difference lies in a loss of control: which Is a general value. John can stop David can't more like his gambling runs him. Now forward to the winnings, regardless of if John wins or loses most gamblers consider it a responsible move ( Because of general values). But for David's case, if he looses based on personal values he's irresponsible but if he hits a massive jackpot some gamblers see it as a responsible move from a risk taker.

Outcomes shouldn't define a if a bet is a responsible one or not, the reason and conditions for the bet should!!!!

The outcome shouldn't be what determines if the bet is a responsible one or not it's the decisions while betting on that game that actually matters. A gambler that uses 90 percent of what he has to gamble and somehow manages to win and another gambler that uses 10 percent of what he has and ends ups losing the person that's gambling responsibly here is the second guy whether he lost or won. Gamblers need to change their mindset about this

[irhact]

Outcomes shouldn't define a if a bet is a responsible one or not, the reason and conditions for the bet should!!!!

This is how it should be but people still won't do this instead it's the outcome of the bet that'll determine if the bet to them was an irresponsible one or a responsible one. When they win they'll consider the risk they took as a responsible one because they won and anything that made them to win can't be seen in any negative way in their eyes. People will always make decisions based on their own way of thinking and not based on what the general public says. For me irresponsible gambling is when we don't plan our gambling activities and doing things that's considered high risk to us, it doesn't matter if we win or not from that bet.

[Reatim]

Let's make it straight, most of the people who judge by winnings are more likely to be like David in the example in real life and since one is likely or has some behaviour like the other he or she will likely support the move with an excuse covered with a valid name "risk taker" while in reality it's a sign or irresponsibility. 

there’s a difference between taking risks when you have calculated it and taking risks head first with no plan the 2nd one would be foolish and should not be tolerated nor celebrated

not all risks should be taken especially if it is the stupid ones

[Alphakilo]

I think that an action that happens one time is not enough reason to categorize it into responsible gambling or not. Unless we know at that moment the personal circumstances and context behind it that's when we can judge.

For an action in gambling to be considered to be irresponsible, it must have been repeated over and over again that even the person involved would know that what they are doing is causing more trouble and no long fun gambling.

If David has borrowed some money, how long has he been doing it? If it is just his first time because his other gambling money is stuck somewhere then we can't say it is irresponsible gambling regardless of whether he wins or losses. It becomes irresponsible gambling if that is repeated over and over again.

[peter0425]

Even if the gambler won, depending on what did he do to make the bet it would still be irresponsible. Like for example if this person was just spending their money on gambling and not keeping money for basic necessities then that is irresponsible. If he won, he would just be lucky and not a risk taker.

[Wiwo]

Even if the gambler won, depending on what did he do to make the bet it would still be irresponsible. Like for example if this person was just spending their money on gambling and not keeping money for basic necessities then that is irresponsible. If he won, he would just be lucky and not a risk taker.

agree with you on that and that is why i made that statement above that if we really want to know if the behaviours of both gamblers are responsible or not, we first have to check and balance and make sure both of them have the same financial conditions before gambling, that is the funding should be made available by a third party, that is the only way to judge how emotionally stable both of them are.

Someone may not lend money from rent to gamble wit, but could be using money that he supposedly set for investment for the gambling, so regardless it still not necessary a basis to set judgement of what responsible gambling is all about.

[coin-investor]

The only criterion I know is gambling with money that you can afford to lose, like using the money you just loaned. I’ve been there, done that several times. I know the outcome and the hurt, and when you’re playing to make money from cash that you don’t own, you are putting yourself at risk, which is irresponsible gambling.

In your story, we should follow John’s goal of playing for fun and money that you can afford to lose. When you do this, you are safe and you’re following the golden rule of playing responsibly.

[Churchillvv]

Let's make it straight, most of the people who judge by winnings are more likely to be like David in the example in real life and since one is likely or has some behaviour like the other he or she will likely support the move with an excuse covered with a valid name "risk taker" while in reality it's a sign or irresponsibility. 

there’s a difference between taking risks when you have calculated it and taking risks head first with no plan the 2nd one would be foolish and should not be tolerated nor celebrated

not all risks should be taken especially if it is the stupid ones

Even the so called calculated risk fail most of the time so I don't consider unnecessary calculated risk as it's the same with a fine tuned name, which is meant to cover up for ones irresponsible self if the risk pays off and if it doesn't then the plan B might kick in which a long the line could result to serious issues or social problems. As long as the risk is taken within what is meant to be in the disposal income or expenses income then it's a wrong risk.

[HelliumZ]

Failure to use gambling properly is considered a cause of negligence in gambling responsibilities. If someone does not have enough money to gamble, taking out a high-interest loan or borrowing money is one of the reasons for neglecting gambling responsibilities. Borrowing money from someone and not being able to pay it back on time. Repeatedly betting to recover after losing a gambling bet. Participating in gambling outside of your budget. Participating excessively outside of a certain time of the week. All of these fall under gambling irresponsibility.

[Felicity_Tide]

~snip

Outcomes shouldn't define a if a bet is a responsible one or not, the reason and conditions for the bet should!!!!

From neutral point of view, outcomes ought not to be the criteria for placing judgement, but in the society that we live in today where outcomes/results are what people look forward to, we've now become the judge of what is good and bad, depending on the necessary criteria that is being met.

Of course, John approach to gambling is okay, and shouldn't cause any emotional and mental harm, but David's approach still remains stupid even if he ends up winning something. Risking what isn't fully at your disposal is literally an insane move that can destroy one's financial life. And that is why, we have so many people today that are in debt, just because they followed David's footsteps, that probably didn't end well for them.

[_BlackStar]

The source of the gambling budget should not be from something that is still needed for other things and it is never good to borrow just because of the desire to gamble. If someone takes out a loan and gets a budget, then they gamble with it - then I can safely say they're a problem gambler with a flawed approach to gambling. Gambling this way is completely unacceptable - it seems forced in the hope of winning and paying off the loan.

Of course, it's not about how much someone wins or how lucky they are that day - but it's clear that such gamblers are the hallmarks of irresponsible gamblers. I never advise anyone to gamble from any financial source - but if they want to gamble, make sure it's from a safe source and certainly a budget that exceeds their own savings or income.

[uchegod-21]

If anyone is going to determine who is responsible or not by the outcome of the game, then they should ask themselves if they would be comfortable seeing their child constantly selling off the family's properties and taking loans just to gamble, even if he usually wins most times? I really don't believe any parent will be comfortable. Some assets ain't worth selling, even though you are going to replace them later.

How about someone who spends all day gambling and disassociates himself from family and friends, then becomes extremely antisocial just to focus on gambling alone. We all will call him a weirdo right?

When one begins to gamble above the normal way that people begin to feel concern, then he should know he is becoming irresponsible. He can be winning and people will still notice some negative behaviours which needs to be worked on.