Failed psychology playing casino originals

[Satofan44]

It's the Illusion of Control

No, it is not. I have described what concepts are at play and why this happens, it is not "illusion of control" -- that would only apply if it would apply in the opposite case too, i.e., that the user believes that he could make himself win by doing a certain action which is not the case here.

You're talking about this game like you think there is a 50/50 chance of winning in the first place - there isn't. Casinos have no incentive to offer a game that doesn't have a house edge so you're not "flipping a coin" but actually playing a game that you will lose if you play for long enough. Compounding that problem you seem to think that all the plays in your session are some how connected, rather than understanding that each attempt at the game is entirely disconnected from all other plays and the casino does not owe you anything at all for losing, in fact that is the only outcome you'll get. Even probably fair will not help when there is a defined house edge involved, but it does boost transparency.

They are not connected, well at least they should not be, but the regression to the mean must apply in the long term so absolutely it will give you a perception of being connected. If this was not the case, then exceptional things would happen more often than not and the whole game would go bust along with the casino. I have explained which things are at play here. The gambler's fallacy of "next time it must be red" is indeed a fallacy but it also indicates at something true, eventually it must be "red" the issue is that the gambler is trying to determine an exact time when it must be red not that it must be red "soon". Exceptional streaks of one-sided outcomes must always be followed by a change to the opposite outcomes "soon" otherwise the game would be rigged or broken, but nobody can say when that "soon" will be or how exactly will it come (whether in streaks, intermittent, intermittent streaks and so on). These things are actually quite basic, but most users do not have any understanding at all here unlike you.

[r_victory]

A gambler cannot be averse to change, since every decision involves risk. That is why I don't have "lucky numbers"; if I didn't bet on them and they were drawn, the frustration would be greater than the actual loss. I mentioned lucky numbers because I know people who have been betting on the same lottery numbers for years; they’ve never won, yet they never change them. I always try something different.

[Agathamay]

I guess many of us that occasionally play originals games know this. Lets say on dice you choose a side, at coin flip you choose one side or at limbo you choose a multiplier and then play. Mostly I, and I know many others do the same, stay on the one side and stick with it, often just adjusting the wager if a losing run comes to smaller bets (hopefully).
I for example often had the (I know it's wrong) mindset that when I switch the side my original side would come more, and actually in my history it always does all of the sudden.
I know all the babbling about “provably fair” and so on, yet that’s my personal experience.

So why not changing the side? Is it because of not trusting fair play, or is it because of being superstitious, or something else?

lol
I guess that's why gambling still remains unpredictable.
I enjoy playing tower related games like the tower legend and the fruit tower on Bitz and in most times I always stick to the first box or thicks when playing and sincerely, it has been more successful but there are times I just randomly have to try my luck on another box and boom I miss the shot and suddenly when I want to return to my usual pick, the game still messes me up and times like that, makes me want to doubt how probably fair a casino and truly be.

[junder]

I agree that psychology has a huge impact when playing casino originals. After a few games, some players may be tempted to believe that they have found a repeatable formula and get complacent. But random games aren't like that. Bankroll management and self-discipline are helpful skills. But cannot affect the actual result or the house edge. This is where most of the gamblers make their mental mistakes, particularly when they persist in increasing their bets in order to make up for their losses rapidly or chasing on losing streaks. It is crucial to be able to recognize the distinction between skill and luck. One of the most important pieces of advice for any bettor is to have a calm mind. Have realistic betting expectations, and know when to quit.

It does make sense to say that gambling is a psychological game, because it can indeed affect a person’s psychology.

For those who are addicted such as those chasing their losses or trying to recoup their losses by continuing to gamble even though the results remain disappointing there is clearly something wrong with their mindset, and that can be categorized as a psychological issue.

You’ve made some valid points, and all of that can be addressed with a wise mindset.

[Hispo]

A gambler cannot be averse to change, since every decision involves risk. That is why I don't have "lucky numbers"; if I didn't bet on them and they were drawn, the frustration would be greater than the actual loss. I mentioned lucky numbers because I know people who have been betting on the same lottery numbers for years; they’ve never won, yet they never change them. I always try something different.

Actually, gamblers are supposed to be super flexible and open to change, since they need to be prepared to see their bankroll to up and down suddenly through time and with a tendency of it to get smaller and smaller, due to the effect of the edge of the house.

In the case of lucky numbers, people tend to stick to them because those numbers hold some meaning to them. Here in my country is common to see people gambling on numbers they have dreamed last night and stuff like that.
Whatever helps one to avoid feeling disappointment with lottery and casino games is welcome.

Ironically,.those people who play lottery with their lucky numbers have much faith through time on them, even if they have only made them to lose money in the long term.

[TheUltraElite]

Changing sides as in when betting a 9900x type bet on dice from the lower number side to the higher number side? If that is what the OP is asking then I would say that in the long run the results will be equal for both sides. It might seem in the short term that you just missed a number on the other side of the number line but the same will happen when keeping the roller on the other side too.

What I understand is that gambling is a game of luck and if you get lucky you will win otherwise you will lose. Superstitions are common here just like in any difficult undertaking in life.

[justdimin]

I'm glad you understand it doesn't guaranteed wins and in my own opinion, I also think that luck has its hand in it, one can be strategic or can analyse well but they still need luck to act its part, which is why one should just bet with what they can comfortably lose just incase it doesn't fall in their place, they won't either feel hurt or disappointed, as they understand that gambling can't be predicted actually. So, the game its just about control or being fully in charge of their emotions to keep them strong, so that they won't react negatively if they lose.

Even in any poker game, luck will play a big role, no matter how great you are. Because we do not get to see someone who is a world poker champion, playing against someone who has never played before, we end up seeing people who are closer to each other in talent, at least at higher levels, and when you look at a few dimes blinds, you do not see professionals there usually, who plays 1-2 blinds if they are professionals.

So at a place where talent level is close, luck will play a big role and it is not going to be easy to ignore that. I get that it is not going to be something that will make you lose all the time, you will not be unlucky all the time or even be lucky all the time, hence it is not a decisive thing for the long term, but short term it might be.

[xenomorfo]

Even in any poker game, luck will play a big role, no matter how great you are. Because we do not get to see someone who is a world poker champion, playing against someone who has never played before, we end up seeing people who are closer to each other in talent, at least at higher levels, and when you look at a few dimes blinds, you do not see professionals there usually, who plays 1-2 blinds if they are professionals.

So at a place where talent level is close, luck will play a big role and it is not going to be easy to ignore that. I get that it is not going to be something that will make you lose all the time, you will not be unlucky all the time or even be lucky all the time, hence it is not a decisive thing for the long term, but short term it might be.

Obviously luck plays half of everything because you can be as good as you want at poker or other card games, but if luck doesn't send you the right cards you can practically do nothing, you can only fold the hand and wait for a better hand. In fact, in the game you cannot calculate how much you earn, but you just have to play to have fun.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

Even in any poker game, luck will play a big role, no matter how great you are. Because we do not get to see someone who is a world poker champion, playing against someone who has never played before, we end up seeing people who are closer to each other in talent, at least at higher levels, and when you look at a few dimes blinds, you do not see professionals there usually, who plays 1-2 blinds if they are professionals.

<...>

Obviously luck plays half of everything because you can be as good as you want at poker or other card games, but if luck doesn't send you the right cards you can practically do nothing, you can only fold the hand and wait for a better hand. In fact, in the game you cannot calculate how much you earn, but you just have to play to have fun.

A successful poker player doesn’t care what happens in a single hand or session, just as a profitable sports bettor doesn’t care what happens on an individual bet. In both cases, they can’t control the outcome of a single hand or bet, but the reason they’re good is that they’re able to make a profit over large samples.

The psychological aspect is important in those disciplines too, but I very much doubt that it has any bearing on traditional casino games, as the OP suggests; beliefs on the matter are nothing more than superstition.

[xenomorfo]

A successful poker player doesn?t care what happens in a single hand or session, just as a profitable sports bettor doesn?t care what happens on an individual bet. In both cases, they can?t control the outcome of a single hand or bet, but the reason they?re good is that they?re able to make a profit over large samples.

The psychological aspect is important in those disciplines too, but I very much doubt that it has any bearing on traditional casino games, as the OP suggests; beliefs on the matter are nothing more than superstition.

Yes, it's true that a successful, professional poker player doesn't care about what happens in a single hand, but I'm not a professional poker player, so the fact that people think it's a legacy thing is wrong. They're doing it wrong, it's just fun.

[libert19]

The autobet system will be at disadvantage as it will make me keep on gambling until I have exhausted the money in my account but if I am the one in charge then I can stop anytime I want and it will all be my decision.

I have used auto-bet feature a few times but don't remember much anymore, don't auto-bet has feature(s) with which you can stop after certain losses/wins? I am throwing assumption there but there ought to be.

Casinos know that with the autobet system they can make more profit and that is why that feature.

If what I said above is correct, auto-bet isn't any different for casinos than manual gameplay. Absolute automated betting without any limits would be dangerous and I don't think any sane gambler would be using it.

[Ever-young]

Obviously luck plays half of everything because you can be as good as you want at poker or other card games, but if luck doesn't send you the right cards you can practically do nothing, you can only fold the hand and wait for a better hand. In fact, in the game you cannot calculate how much you earn, but you just have to play to have fun.

Better to just play for fun like you said than for one to think they can beat the game and win when luck is not there to support them, as they will keep losing and losing until they got stressed out or frustrated, which will do them no good but harm, as it will take away their peace of mind and even take control of their bankroll making them to go broke or spend carelessly. So, that's why its good to avoid any attitude that will not make one to gamble responsibly.

[Junii]

So why not changing the side? Is it because of not trusting fair play, or is it because of being superstitious, or something else?

I do not think changing sides makes any difference because if the odds remains exactly the same whether you stay on one side or switch every round does not matter at all . Also the feeling that your old side starts winning after you switch is most likely a psychological effect because i noticed we tend to remember the outcomes that make us regret our decisions and forget the countless times nothing unusual happened. That is why i prefer to stick with one side not because it increases my chances but because of strategy and also to avoid emotional decision making.

[SportbetOne]

I guess many of us that occasionally play originals games know this. Lets say on dice you choose a side, at coin flip you choose one side or at limbo you choose a multiplier and then play. Mostly I, and I know many others do the same, stay on the one side and stick with it, often just adjusting the wager if a losing run comes to smaller bets (hopefully).
I for example often had the (I know it's wrong) mindset that when I switch the side my original side would come more, and actually in my history it always does all of the sudden.
I know all the babbling about “provably fair” and so on, yet that’s my personal experience.

So why not changing the side? Is it because of not trusting fair play, or is it because of being superstitious, or something else?

I for example often had the (I know it's wrong) mindset that when I switch the side my original side would come more...
I think that's mostly confirmation bias. You tend to remember the times you switched and your original side immediately started hitting because those moments are the most frustrating and easiest to remember.
From what I've seen over the years, most players stick to one side simply because it's mentally easier. If you stay on "Hi" and lose, you blame variance. If you switch and guess wrong, you blame yourself. The RNG doesn't know or care what you click, so the house edge stays exactly the same either way.

[davis196]

I guess many of us that occasionally play originals games know this. Lets say on dice you choose a side, at coin flip you choose one side or at limbo you choose a multiplier and then play. Mostly I, and I know many others do the same, stay on the one side and stick with it, often just adjusting the wager if a losing run comes to smaller bets (hopefully).
I for example often had the (I know it's wrong) mindset that when I switch the side my original side would come more, and actually in my history it always does all of the sudden.
I know all the babbling about “provably fair” and so on, yet that’s my personal experience.

So why not changing the side? Is it because of not trusting fair play, or is it because of being superstitious, or something else?

The outcomes of such gambling games(dice, limbo, slots, crash) are supposed to be random, so all the feelings and thoughts a gambler has about the outcomes of such games are most likely a variation of the "gamblers fallacy". This is the illusion, that a sequence of random gambling results can be somewhat correlated to each other. I do believe that I've come to a state of mind, where I don't fall a victim of the gamblers fallacy. I just know that all outcomes are random(assuming that the games aren't rigged) and it's not me, who is making the wrong decisions. I don't mind changing sides and adjusting my bets. Some gamblers prefer trying different bets, while others stick to one bet.

[Gozie51]

So why not changing the side? Is it because of not trusting fair play, or is it because of being superstitious, or something else?

It is more of superstition from what I have noticed. Gamblers who maintain one single position in their choice feel they don't need to change as they feel it will get to their turn,so they don't wish to change despite the losing streak. While young playing street P2P gambling on dice, card, I choose and maintain a particular spot for a start. But however, that didn't really mean I got favoured because such games are not really about expertise but random luck that a player doesn't have choice over. It is intertwined with superstition especially if you are in a losing streak.

[Porfirii]

So why not changing the side? Is it because of not trusting fair play, or is it because of being superstitious, or something else?

It is more of superstition from what I have noticed. Gamblers who maintain one single position in their choice feel they don't need to change as they feel it will get to their turn,so they don't wish to change despite the losing streak. While young playing street P2P gambling on dice, card, I choose and maintain a particular spot for a start. But however, that didn't really mean I got favoured because such games are not really about expertise but random luck that a player doesn't have choice over. It is intertwined with superstition especially if you are in a losing streak.

In my country there was an urban legend that consisted of Chinese citizens knowing the mechanisms of slot machines and knew when it was close to giving a prize or when it was not, with a few spins. But you didn't have to be Chinese to believe that, if it hadn't been a long time since it had given out a prize, the machine was "hot" and it would be close to giving it, and vice versa.

Perhaps it is a similar belief or superstition that suggests to some gamblers that, when one side has not won for a long time, it means that victory due to a change of trend towards that same side will be near.

[Free Market Capitalist]

So why not changing the side? Is it because of not trusting fair play, or is it because of being superstitious, or something else?

It is more of superstition from what I have noticed. Gamblers who maintain one single position in their choice feel they don't need to change as they feel it will get to their turn,so they don't wish to change despite the losing streak. While young playing street P2P gambling on dice, card, I choose and maintain a particular spot for a start. But however, that didn't really mean I got favoured because such games are not really about expertise but random luck that a player doesn't have choice over. It is intertwined with superstition especially if you are in a losing streak.

In my country there was an urban legend that consisted of Chinese citizens knowing the mechanisms of slot machines and knew when it was close to giving a prize or when it was not, with a few spins. But you didn't have to be Chinese to believe that, if it hadn't been a long time since it had given out a prize, the machine was "hot" and it would be close to giving it, and vice versa.

Perhaps it is a similar belief or superstition that suggests to some gamblers that, when one side has not won for a long time, it means that victory due to a change of trend towards that same side will be near.

I've put those words in bold because this is a very common fallacy: the confusion between a streak and an individual bet. If you’re playing red or black, always betting on red, and you get 7 blacks in a row, you’ll likely keep betting on red because you think there can’t be 8 blacks in a row (or 9, or 10, or however many), when in fact you aren’t betting on a series of events—you didn’t bet at the beginning that there wouldn’t be 7 blacks; you’ve been betting on each individual roll.

With slot machines, it’s a bit different—especially the physical ones that use cash—because there comes a point when the machine is so full that it has to start paying out prizes.

But in most cases like the ones the OP describes, these are just superstitions.

[purple_sparkles]

Anything can happen in gambling.Back in the days of old land-based slot machines, people would sometimes watch the machines closely or even bribe employees to find out which machine had already been fed enough money and might be ready to pay out a jackpot.Today, however, casinos use much more sophisticated algorithms designed to keep players engaged for as long as possible while paying out just enough to maintain their interest and encourage them to keep playing.If you have clear limits and stick to your own rules, you can enjoy gambling responsibly,sometimes you'll win, sometimes you'll lose, but you can still have fun and enjoy the experience.

[YellowSwap]

So why not changing the side? Is it because of not trusting fair play, or is it because of being superstitious, or something else?

Most of the time, I play original games with auto bet feature on to make every bet faster since my goal is just to accumulate wager as much as possible while I don’t care much on the result.

Back then when I’m still seriously playing dice, I rarely switch side because I think that sticking and just wait for the winning streak is more convenient rather than chase the won on each side since everything is random.

It’s more on convenience for me.

Almost everyone use auto bets feature once in a while, some can't even do without it, I am not a fan of dice 🎲 but I use auto features on slots too, but if I found the soundtracks very good then I can do things on manual myself.

How many times I can roll is my own goal, all I have to do is risk what I can afford to lose, the more chances you have to keep rolling the likely of you getting something, this is how I think.

I've won few times like this, there was a time that I kept losing after many rolls but later things changed, I don't increase anything from the very start to the time that everything changed.