Does the risk have to be significant?

[junder]

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.

The most obvious fact is that as players we cannot win more often than we lose because the odds are such that the probability of losing is higher and the probability of winning is relatively lower and this holds true in the long run, if not permanently.
That is why we often tell each other to gamble within our means, because we must be prepared to bear the risks. Gambling beyond our means means we are not prepared to bear the risks, and that is a mistake.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

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.

Risk may not have to be significant but then, like what you read in the book which you talked about, if a risk is not significant, what is really the essence? We all know that significant risks often comes with significant rewards, a significant risk that does not come with a reward that is as significant is not a good risk..

So for me, I like to take risk when making money is really the goal, but when I am gambling to have fun, I know for sure that I am gambling to have fun so I gamble with minimized risks, there is this common phrase "take the risk and join the billionaires" one doesn't make significant money in the game of gambling with less risk, you are either ready to pay the prize for what you want or keep procrastinating.

[Muba20]

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.

Do not put wealth creation and gambling in one sentence. I don't know any gambler, who has built huge wealth just by gambling. Taking big risks to become rich by building a business or investing in assets is one thing. Taking big risks at the casino is another thing. I do agree that most of the modern day self-made billionaires are people, who took big risks in the past with building startups and going bankrupt several times before they eventually succeed. Taking big risks in gambling usually backfires and leads to no success at all, because the game is rigged against you in the long term.

Taking risks in an investment and taking risks in gambling are two different things. If the person taking risks in a business can survive in the long run at one point he can succeed in that business, but those who take risks in gambling will lose their wealth in the long run, even if they gain temporarily. Taking risks here means certain loss. But if someone tries to enjoy the pleasure of gambling for a short time despite knowing it, then he can profit, but in the long run, taking risks through gambling will be completely useless. It is true that just as one should take risks for gambling or any investment, It is also necessary to carefully consider where and for what purpose the risk is being taken.

[lombok]

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.

Do not put wealth creation and gambling in one sentence. I don't know any gambler, who has built huge wealth just by gambling. Taking big risks to become rich by building a business or investing in assets is one thing. Taking big risks at the casino is another thing. I do agree that most of the modern day self-made billionaires are people, who took big risks in the past with building startups and going bankrupt several times before they eventually succeed. Taking big risks in gambling usually backfires and leads to no success at all, because the game is rigged against you in the long term.

Taking risks in an investment and taking risks in gambling are two different things. If the person taking risks in a business can survive in the long run at one point he can succeed in that business, but those who take risks in gambling will lose their wealth in the long run, even if they gain temporarily. Taking risks here means certain loss. But if someone tries to enjoy the pleasure of gambling for a short time despite knowing it, then he can profit, but in the long run, taking risks through gambling will be completely useless. It is true that just as one should take risks for gambling or any investment, It is also necessary to carefully consider where and for what purpose the risk is being taken.

Initial fortune frequently results in great errors since it gets rid of a sensible fear of hazard. You are too sharp to think that initial victories are merely coincidences that will blind one into proceeding. You should have this vigilance to ensure that you are not deceived by false hope. Keep yourself concentrated on the fact that to be financially stable you need to go to work.

[justdimin]

I don't think if you get the point the author of the book was actually trying to make about risk being significant. Significant risk should be calculated risk. There are risk that aren't worth taken and such risk are insignificant, they are as good as not taken any risk at all. So I think the risk needs to be significant for it to be worth taken. Putting money in a business or investment that ones lack basic knowledge of is like taken insignificant risk and the person may end up losing all his income. In terms of gambling, putting all ones money into gambling with the thought of winning or becoming rich is still insignificant risk.

While risk needs to be high to make it worth it, the return potential should be high to make it worth it as well. If I told you, would you bet on a 50% chance to win, but odds will be 3.00, you would take it, because it should be 2.00 instead, and you would take it as many times as possible because you are winning more and losing less.

But if I told you the same, a flip of a coin, but odds are you will win 1.4 or lose it all, then you would not take it. So risk could be high, but it has to be good odds to make it worth it. When there is no risk involved, I am sure that gambling industry itself would not survive. So, risk needs to above significant so that gambling will get its full shape.

[Pandu Geddon]

The most obvious fact is that as players we cannot win more often than we lose because the odds are such that the probability of losing is higher and the probability of winning is relatively lower and this holds true in the long run, if not permanently.
That is why we often tell each other to gamble within our means, because we must be prepared to bear the risks. Gambling beyond our means means we are not prepared to bear the risks, and that is a mistake.

That is the reality experienced by all gamblers who have been at it for quite some time. We know that our wins are certainly fewer than our losses. But gamblers will not consider that as a reason to stop. We have experienced wins, even if not in large amounts, but the casino pays them and gives the confidence that we can win too, not always lose. So just have fun with gambling, because if we calculate everything, the likelihood is that we will feel regret.

[purple_sparkles]

The most obvious fact is that as players we cannot win more often than we lose because the odds are such that the probability of losing is higher and the probability of winning is relatively lower and this holds true in the long run, if not permanently.
That is why we often tell each other to gamble within our means, because we must be prepared to bear the risks. Gambling beyond our means means we are not prepared to bear the risks, and that is a mistake.

That is the reality experienced by all gamblers who have been at it for quite some time. We know that our wins are certainly fewer than our losses. But gamblers will not consider that as a reason to stop. We have experienced wins, even if not in large amounts, but the casino pays them and gives the confidence that we can win too, not always lose. So just have fun with gambling, because if we calculate everything, the likelihood is that we will feel regret.

Gambling is no secret, the algorithms are designed in such a way that the casino always stays profitable. No amount of practiced skills can change that. It’s better to treat a casino as a service provider, not as a source of wealth, and that perspective will put everything into place. It’s no coincidence that so many players repeat the same advice, only gamble with money you can easily afford to lose. As they say, the truth is always on the surface.

[coin-investor]

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)."

If you put this in gambling, it just means that you could lose everything that you have, like playing with borrowed money, which could have an adverse effect on your finances.
This should not be followed in gambling; never play with significant risk that could put your finances and well being in jeopardy,
This is a thing that should be avoided in gambling.

Significant risk refers to the likelihood of a substantial negative impact on an individual, organization, or system due to specific hazards or vulnerabilities. This type of risk is often assessed in terms of potential financial loss, safety concerns, or reputational damage. Identifying significant risks is crucial for effective risk management.

https://math.answers.com/math-and-arithmetic/What_is_significant_risk

[o48o]

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.

Definition of significance vary from the person you ask about it. And since it's out of context, that phrase could mean just about anything.

For example: "The risk has to be significant for the money i chose bet" has completely different undertone to "The risk has to be significant" when that risk could be about anything.

Because by definition, you are risking the money you are betting, but how much you choose to bet is a different issue. It's pointless to risk your livelihood, but when you bet, you are already accepted probable loss.

[qwertyup23]

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 riskessentially means you're repeatedly putting your capital at risk, and sooner or later, you'll lose your money.

Hmm this is an interesting topic about risk and reward.

We are always taught that in life, you should always choose the highest gain with the lowest risk if it is possible. However this is not usually the case due to the fact that there are certain situations that require you to choose only one. Perhaps the answer here would depend on how much big of a risk it is. If the risk is too much that will put you in a position where recovery would be significantly difficult, then in my opinion, it is just not worth it.

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.

In sports-betting, you can lessen the risk of losing by applying actual information in deciding which team to bet on. With that information on hand, you can at least make an accurate guess which can put you in a better position compared to others but it is not absolute in results.

[xenomorfo]

Risk may not have to be significant but then, like what you read in the book which you talked about, if a risk is not significant, what is really the essence? We all know that significant risks often comes with significant rewards, a significant risk that does not come with a reward that is as significant is not a good risk..

So for me, I like to take risk when making money is really the goal, but when I am gambling to have fun, I know for sure that I am gambling to have fun so I gamble with minimized risks, there is this common phrase "take the risk and join the billionaires" one doesn't make significant money in the game of gambling with less risk, you are either ready to pay the prize for what you want or keep procrastinating.

Big risks bring big rewards.
But a big risk also means less chance that it will work, so in most cases you lose everything.
The question to ask yourself, would the loss cause me problems? If so, another question to ask is, is it worth it?

[Wakate]

Big risks bring big rewards.
But a big risk also means less chance that it will work, so in most cases you lose everything.
The question to ask yourself, would the loss cause me problems? If so, another question to ask is, is it worth it?

Big risk can bring big reward even when you think you have taken a risk that really worth your stress going to be profitable for you.
Gambling will be profitable if you have a good skill so you don't have to be hoping on luck for you to be making money.
Luck that will make you win big may not be available and that is why you need to have a skill to separate you from the rest.

[Dunamisx]

Once you are gambling, then have the consciousness of taking the risk in it either you are aware or not, because generically you are taking risk in gambling, but we also don't have to complicate things and add up to the one on ground by how we play our games and the decisions we made, risks are not in categories or types, once we are gambling we are taking risk already.

[Judith87403]

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.

The mindset of gamblers has already be on getting high or big wins, which they bet with a small amount of money, which is not the case though, as far as they are gambling responsibly and making sure they are having their fun in it, instead of  staking high and also expecting to win big, which their plans might not work and this lead into gambling irresponsibly which leads to addiction. So, they should just accept gambling for what it is, to avoid them chasing after their losses.

[Byebyebtc]

Umm I'm not really sure that book was talking about gambling..
Gambling is a totally different story, it is for entertainment and not for wealth creation.

Meanwhile when gambling if you need a significant cash out, I guess you have to make a significant risk,
But gambling is not a way of making money, so that's another case you have to consider l.

[Orpichukwu]

Once you are gambling, then have the consciousness of taking the risk in it either you are aware or not, because generically you are taking risk in gambling, but we also don't have to complicate things and add up to the one on ground by how we play our games and the decisions we made, risks are not in categories or types, once we are gambling we are taking risk already.

Every gambler is a risk taker, and they all should be aware of that, but this risk of a thing has levels to it. Not all risks are worth it, and not all risks are supposed to be taken. We should gamble and stake money which we can easily let go of, knowing fully well that it might not come back. Shaking higher than you can is a great risk and a very risky one that can cost more than just losing it.

[lombok]

Once you are gambling, then have the consciousness of taking the risk in it either you are aware or not, because generically you are taking risk in gambling, but we also don't have to complicate things and add up to the one on ground by how we play our games and the decisions we made, risks are not in categories or types, once we are gambling we are taking risk already.

Every gambler is a risk taker, and they all should be aware of that, but this risk of a thing has levels to it. Not all risks are worth it, and not all risks are supposed to be taken. We should gamble and stake money which we can easily let go of, knowing fully well that it might not come back. Shaking higher than you can is a great risk and a very risky one that can cost more than just losing it.

Any unnecessary risk is just going to cause stress which will interfere with your daily work and life. You have also shown an ability to have inner clarity as you came to the difference between weighed courage and pell insanity that will harm your future. You must still strongly pressurize the long term well being, and it is not recommended that you indulge in some weak, speculative gains. You have inner peace when you do not have that responsibility of the debt or when you do not have a heavy burden of finance regrets.

[Makus]

It is true that you have to take big risks sometimes but you need to ask yourself if the risk is actually worth taking especially if you are not in a position to take those steps comfortably. what i mean by that is simple, someone who isn't financially stable should not be considering to take big risks. The goal is to win big but remember that there is a possibility that you might end up losing all of it. I will always prefer to play safe even though I don't win much, this has been able to control the losses that I have incurred so far, you have no business with taking such steps unless you are rich.

[STT]

The risk does not have to be big like not every sport or task has to be a deadly challenge or even a world record beating event to be valid.   The difference is how much fun and involvement the player feels without needing to amplify the challenge from normal to large in order to enjoy themselves.
   I always say walk away if you aren't having fun, in a variety of ways forcing yourself to continue is the wrong direction imo.

[Kelvinid]

What's the point of gambling around when risks aren't significant at all? It's like you are gambling for nothing worth valuable, you are wasting your money without thrill and excitement from the very beginning.

Of course, risks have to be significant because you are not just gambling without expecting for returns, but you are gambling your hard-earned money even your life savings and that any time they will be gone from you if you never execute risk management and set limits from your gambling activities.

However, a gambler is a risk-taker itself. You gamble without guaranteed returns, that's one of the risks that we can never put certainty when gambling.