Does the risk have to be significant?

[liasbaa]

I once read an interesting book about risk management and wealth creation, and one sentence in it really got me thinking. It said, "The risk has to be significant (otherwise, what's the point)."
In my opinion, if you take risks, you're essentially tempting fate. You're simply delaying the moment of losing your money. Does the risk have to be significant? Significant risk essentially means you're repeatedly putting your capital at risk, and sooner or later, you'll lose your money. Do you have such a significant edge that it allows you to win more often than you lose, even with the odds? I think when people write that it's not just about winning, it means they're gambling for the thrill and excitement.

I read in an article that you have to take risks to be successful. But they didn't say where you should take risks and where it is too risky. Personally, I like taking risks but I find taking risks in gambling to be too risky. This is because the chances of winning in gambling through skill are very low. You can invest in crypto through market analysis. To be successful, we have to take significant risks. I don't give it much importance because applying capital in ways that are easy to earn in a short time and without effort is a waste of time and risky.

Taking risks in uncertain matters like gambling is a sure way to lose funds. Taking risks is good but you should take risks with a risk tolerance or backup. I don't think taking risks in gambling is rational but in trading I am ready to take risks because there is a possibility of high profits in the future because long term investment in the best crypto has risks but the possibility of high profits.

[Agbe]

The risk is significant, that is why gamblers are  continuesly using their hard earned money to gamble by the hope of winning the game and once they win, they will add the profit to the capital and use it to pay bills. And it is that risk management make us to understand that we should not gamble what will make us to regret or be sober. Risk management is one of the best thing to do in gambling.

[michellee]

That is a book about risk management and wealth creation and not about risk in gambling. Gambling can indeed makes you lose money anytime so you should know and avoid the big lost. Playing gambling needs to manage the risk so that will not increases but you can still enjoy the gambling games.

But the risk in gambling is different as you can lose all of money you have without high chances to get it back but if you can manages or prevents more losses, that means you can deal with the risks not becoming big. You can playing gambling responsibly without spending too much money.

After all, if you having fun in gambling using limits money, that means you also managing the risk.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

What I usually think any time I see those kind of statement is that the person that wrote it has be able to achieve success and greatness through a significant risk which they took, so they are just coming to tell other people that they have to take significant risk like they did for the person to become as successful as them, that's what it is.

 If I achieve a huge success today and I was to write a book about it, I will give an explanation of how I made it, right? My own procedure will also be different from what another person did before they become successful, so the process is not same for everyone. Maybe the person that wrote the book you read, took a significant risk but it's not same thing that will work for everyone. In my opinion, the risk does not have to be significant and I don't even risk what I can not be able to handle because I have heard stories of people that died of heart attack because their investment failed and they had all their eggs in that investment.

[WhoYouCantKill]

I once read an interesting book about risk management and wealth creation, and one sentence in it really got me thinking. It said, "The risk has to be significant (otherwise, what's the point)."
In my opinion, if you take risks, you're essentially tempting fate. You're simply delaying the moment of losing your money. Does the risk have to be significant? Significant risk essentially means you're repeatedly putting your capital at risk, and sooner or later, you'll lose your money. Do you have such a significant edge that it allows you to win more often than you lose, even with the odds? I think when people write that it's not just about winning, it means they're gambling for the thrill and excitement.

I think the quote you read is only applicable and would make more sense if you already have some kind of edge. But if you don’t, then significant risk would be nothing more than just a much slower form of repetitive loss, just like you pointed out.

But the moment you’ve got an edge and the odds are more likely in your favour, then risks goes beyond just temptation or thrill, and more about the cost of exposure to opportunity.

[iv4n]

Your entire post is hard to understand, you tried to mix a few ideas, and it looks messy... but your threads are usually like that.

In my opinion, if you take risks, you're essentially tempting fate. You're simply delaying the moment of losing your money. Does the risk have to be significant? Significant risk essentially means you're repeatedly putting your capital at risk, and sooner or later, you'll lose your money.

So, your opinion is that all risks are the same, and whatever we do, we will lose eventually... Things don't work that way, even games with negative EV will not necessarily ruin you instantly. All depends on how you play it, what you are chasing, and how much you are willing to risk... there's some form of bankroll management in our heads even when we are just spinning slots...

[Dreadboost]

The risk don't have to be significant unless such a gambler is simply enjoying the fun as well. But in cases where the risk is significant that means he is acquiring many losses, then the win as well should be significant to actually create balance. Gambling for the thrill is a way of deriving fun from both win and losses. When the loss occurs more often, it is no longer fun, and when the win occurs more often, it is no longer fun for them. Well, how people derive fun in gambling is none of my business. For me, I wouldn't want to lose more than I win, it will hurt the most. I enjoy every bit of the game, but in situations where I im left with a small bankroll, the wins should outweigh the losses for it to be fully fun.

[YellowSwap]

That book is obviously innocent, there is no where in that book that says gambling is the right place to risk it all on, and I don't have alot to tell OP than to try it himself, go get your life savings and go on a popular online casino and let's see what happens.

You become what you believe, like some people like to say, maybe you can prove all of us wrong that all it takes to win big is to risk a significant amount of money.

There is a big difference between a calculated risk and a mere risk, you can't use all what you have on something that depends entirely on luck,  that's gambling, there is nothing to apply here than to risk what you can afford to lose.

[SFR10]

It said, "The risk has to be significant (otherwise, what's the point)."
[...]
I think when people write that it's not just about winning, it means they're gambling for the thrill and excitement.

You're right... I do it to satisfy my needs ^{[it has a dopamine effect on my brain]}, so it doesn't matter if I win or lose since I never have come close to spending the full amount that I usually allocate ^{[in other words, the risk doesn't have to be significant to please me]}.

[Mhizlove]

The risk should be very high should not be what you should apply to gambling and do not think you can use gambling in wealth creation, gambling is better for entertainment. If you do not see gambling as something that is entertaining, the best is to just not to be gambling.

Another thing is that in wealth creation, it is better to think maturely than what you will regrets later. Risking high is something off to hear for me, risking maturely and be thoughtful of the risks very well. Not all risks are worth it.

In addition gambling should not go through your mind as an investment because if you start seeing it as a means of making money that's where problem starts because the odds are not your favour at all so if you intend on gambling let it be for entertainment only and with money that when you lose you won't feel the pain because if you start seeing it as a place of business then you're just deceiving yourself.ypu see real wealth do come from planning, making start decision and lastly patience and not by chance or luck

[Cryptmuster]

In gambling, it's impossible to do otherwise, if you want to win big, you have to take risks. You can either place small bets at huge odds (but the probability of winning will be very low), or place large bets at low odds, but in this case there's a high risk of losing a lot quickly. So in both cases, I think the casino has the advantage.

The risk can be worth it if you're a good player and can make a profit on small deposits. In that case, you can try the same approach with a larger deposit and increased bets. But I believe this should be done gradually, because you need to get used to higher bets, so if you want to try to make money in gambling, everything should be done gradually. And if you can't win with smaller bets, then there's no point in betting more...

[aioc]

I once read an interesting book about risk management and wealth creation, and one sentence in it really got me thinking. It said, "The risk has to be significant (otherwise, what's the point)."
In my opinion, if you take risks, you're essentially tempting fate. You're simply delaying the moment of losing your money.

But if you overcome the risks, the rewards will be great; that's the whole meaning of that word. The book is about risk management and wealth creation. This kind of book teaches you how to solve, overcome, and avoid risks, so if you ever go on a venture where you will have to take risks, the reward should be worth it, like you are going into a business deal, and if you succeed, you will likely become a pioneer and make a lot of money, its about potential reward that you're going to take and the things that you are going to lose.

[giammangiato]

I think when people write that it's not just about winning, it means they're gambling for the thrill and excitement.

Risk is always significant when there is money involved.
The very fact of playing 2 or 3 euros in a single play is money that you have worked hard to get anyway, so it is worth the time spent on your work.
You're literally risking your time, which is ultimately priceless, because no one can refund it and get it back to us.
I gamble by limiting my time and money, for this reason.
I gamble for fun but the goal is obviously to get a win, otherwise if I don't intend to win a penny there would be no point in taking risks, I would play something else without money.

[Dunamisx]

In taking risk, we can't make a justification to it as long as it is risk because we stand the chance of either losing or winning, it is more better if we can afford to take such risk to avoid it, gambling is fun and we should not make ourselves get into me not be suitable for us all in the name of playing games I'm going for the risk you can't take any longer it's possible outcome.

[obuoma]

I once read an interesting book about risk management and wealth creation, and one sentence in it really got me thinking. It said, "The risk has to be significant (otherwise, what's the point)."
In my opinion, if you take risks, you're essentially tempting fate. You're simply delaying the moment of losing your money. Does the risk have to be significant? Significant risk essentially means you're repeatedly putting your capital at risk, and sooner or later, you'll lose your money. Do you have such a significant edge that it allows you to win more often than you lose, even with the odds? I think when people write that it's not just about winning, it means they're gambling for the thrill and excitement.

Gambling is generally built around risk and that is what makes it gambling. The higher the risk, the higher your reward will be and vice versa. You must not take big risk if you don't aim for big reward, this is where freedom comes into play. You can decide to be betting on a team like Bayern munic to score in every of their match, the odd for such bet will be around 1.09 to 1.10, very low but the success rate is over 90%. If you want to win more than this, they you raise the bet to Bayer Munic score 2 goals and the average odd is around 1.5 and this is higher risk and higher payout.

What I am saying that risk is always there in gambling so each one must take the risk he can shoulder putting in mind that what they aim to achieve is directly proportional to the level of risk they should be willing to take.

[SPIDERMAN008]

The risk don't have to be significant unless such a gambler is simply enjoying the fun as well. But in cases where the risk is significant that means he is acquiring many losses, then the win as well should be significant to actually create balance. Gambling for the thrill is a way of deriving fun from both win and losses. When the loss occurs more often, it is no longer fun, and when the win occurs more often, it is no longer fun for them. Well, how people derive fun in gambling is none of my business. For me, I wouldn't want to lose more than I win, it will hurt the most. I enjoy every bit of the game, but in situations where I im left with a small bankroll, the wins should outweigh the losses for it to be fully fun.

I agree with you. Even if someone gambles purely for entertainment, they never want to keep losing. And they get their entertainment by taking small or big risks to win. But if someone keeps winning regularly, I don't think it will reduce their fun. In my case, I get more pleasure if I can win regularly. Although I haven't been able to win for several days in a row. Only when the winning amount is higher than loss then only can gambling actually be felt as entertainment. It is quite normal to feel upset if you lose. Some can accept it easily. Someone feels it difficult to accept. But at the end of the day, the purpose of taking risks in gambling is to win.

[YOSHIE]

I once read an interesting book about risk management and wealth creation, and one sentence in it really got me thinking. It said, "The risk has to be significant (otherwise, what's the point)."

Have you read all the contents of the discussion written in the book entitled "The risks must be significant" as far as I know, the book reminds us about the potential dangers of carrying out gambling activities, about things that could happen suddenly regarding losses, negative impacts, our actions when gambling, making decisions whether in online or offline gambling.

A significant risk situation in my understanding is a threat that could cause the gambler serious financial loss or could harm him or herself and his family.
For this reason, it is very necessary for gamblers to need special understanding and attention before gambling, because it requires significant risks so that gambling users understand and are required to carry out financial management. special mitigation measures and also extra good supervision before placing bets and all types of games, so that we will easily win and get rich.

[rachael9385]

I once read an interesting book about risk management and wealth creation, and one sentence in it really got me thinking. It said, "The risk has to be significant (otherwise, what's the point)."
In my opinion, if you take risks, you're essentially tempting fate. You're simply delaying the moment of losing your money. Does the risk have to be significant? Significant risk essentially means you're repeatedly putting your capital at risk, and sooner or later, you'll lose your money. Do you have such a significant edge that it allows you to win more often than you lose, even with the odds? I think when people write that it's not just about winning, it means they're gambling for the thrill and excitement.

Increasing the risk or making them significant only means that you are aiming for a bigger reward and it doesn't really increase the chances of winning it is actually very risky and could lead to huge losses in the long run. It is better to Stake an amount of money that you can afford to lose because gambling is a game of luck, you can win and lose at anytime.

[TheUltraElite]

I dont trust books that talk about making money because I feel its another disguised scamming method to get rich by selling books. Still then, the people who are always going around making money are not followikg books

When it comes ro risk, I understand that there is something also known as risk appetite. If you cannot handle high risk, dont go for it, it becomes counterproductive.

Gambling is one of the high risk things and to be honest this rhymes with rich people having fun not poor people trying to earn a living.

[Strongkored]

I once read an interesting book about risk management and wealth creation, and one sentence in it really got me thinking. It said, "The risk has to be significant (otherwise, what's the point)."

There's some truth to this statement.
In gambling, if you're too cautious to minimize your risk of loss, your results will be mediocre. For example, if you play with the minimum bet and aim for the maximum win, your returns won't be as high as those of high rollers.
However, I believe everything depends on what you can afford to lose. Gambling is already risky without increasing your risk, so don't lose control just because you want to win more, because even if you win big, it might not cover your previous losses.