Is AP Gambling? (Split from Why are you an AP)
Quote: Mission146...a recreational AP...
I'm sure that's a contradiction in terms.
Quote:In other words, I gamble at an advantage so I can gamble at all otherwise, I would probably almost never gamble.
If you play with an advantage then you're not gambling at all.
Quote: Nareed
.
If you play with an advantage then you're not gambling at all.
Bingo!
Quote: NareedI'm sure that's a contradiction in terms.
Quote:In other words, I gamble at an advantage so I can gamble at all otherwise, I would probably almost never gamble.
If you play with an advantage then you're not gambling at all.
Of course you're gambling! Where both the possibility of winning money and losing money exists simultaneously, that's gambling!
I found an Ultimate X machine with some multipliers left behind on Sunday, for example. $1 denomination, ten hands, $50 bet. I'm not embarrassed to admit that a $50 one-shot bet for me is pretty substantial, actually, that may well be the biggest single bet that I've ever made other than Sports Bets and Prop Bets. If not, it's pretty close.
I also don't think Recreational AP is a contradiction or otherwise an oxymoron. I play at an advantage, and do so on a recreational basis. I'm not counting on it for income, and I'm doing it for fun. People seem to think AP implies 'Professional,' and I disagree. Not only am I decidedly not a professional gambler, but also, I've seen people who are recreational players that typically play losing games 'Accidentally,' engage in advantage plays in that they did not know they were playing at an advantage...often the case with Progressives.
Quote: Mission146Of course you're gambling! Where both the possibility of winning money and losing money exists simultaneously, that's gambling!
No, that's risk. Yes, as a player may experience positive variance so many times they come out ahead, an actual AP might experience negative variance so often they come out behind. But that's risk, an rather measured. If you have the bankroll to see you through, then you're not gambling. the casino has the advantage over most players, ergo the casino doens't gamble. But it may fail to secure enough customers, or to secure credit, or to overspend in construction and/or ancilalry areas (lodging, food service, shops, etc), and lose money. That's risk.
I'm still sure "recrational AP" is a contradiction in terms. recreational implies for fun and on ocassion, not for profit and constantly.
Quote: NareedNo, that's risk. Yes, as a player may experience positive variance so many times they come out ahead, an actual AP might experience negative variance so often they come out behind. But that's risk, an rather measured. If you have the bankroll to see you through, then you're not gambling. the casino has the advantage over most players, ergo the casino doens't gamble. But it may fail to secure enough customers, or to secure credit, or to overspend in construction and/or ancilalry areas (lodging, food service, shops, etc), and lose money. That's risk.
Gambling is by definition putting money against something that has risk.
Quote: NareedI'm still sure "recrational AP" is a contradiction in terms. recreational implies for fun and on ocassion, not for profit and constantly.
AP implies for profit; it has nothing to do with constant.
Quote: wudgedGambling is by definition putting money against something that has risk.
Gambling means risking money on a random outcome.
Risk in an investment is largely measured and not random, besides insurance and hedges for investments do make sense.
Derail IMHO, please split the thread on this topic. Thanks. "Is AP gambling?"Quote: NareedIf you play with an advantage then you're not gambling at all.
Quote: NareedGambling means risking money on a random outcome.
Risk in an investment is largely measured and not random, besides insurance and hedges for investments do make sense.
Using card counting as an example, the outcomes are still random; each possible outcome of a deck/shoe just isn't distributed the exact same as it would be against an infinite deck.
It's still gambling whether the risk is measured and/or random or not. As long as there is a chance to lose money on something, however small it is, it is gambling.
Quote: teliotDerail IMHO, please split the thread on this topic. Thanks. "Is AP gambling?"Quote: NareedIf you play with an advantage then you're not gambling at all.
Concur; also, of course it is. Gambling is consideration, prize, and chance. Having the odds in one's favor doesn't make it any less of a gamble. Were it otherwise, you'd end up with the nonsensical conclusion that when two people are betting on an uncertain outcome, only the underdog is gambling.
Quote: NareedQuote: Mission146...a recreational AP...
I'm sure that's a contradiction in terms.
Absolutely not. You can pursue advantage plays while in a casino while not relying on your winnings to pay the bills.
Quote: Nareed
Quote:In other words, I gamble at an advantage so I can gamble at all otherwise, I would probably almost never gamble.
If you play with an advantage then you're not gambling at all.
Sure, whatever, nomenclature. Replace "gambling" with "participating in games of chance."
Quote: AcesAndEightsSure, whatever, nomenclature. Replace "gambling" with "participating in games of chance."
There is no distinction. Whether you have the edge or not, you are gambling.
Now, if you play with the edge for long enough (and size your bets properly) your chances of winning over a long period of time become very, very high... maybe even to the point that it is "barely gambling". But, as long as there is a non-zero chance that you will lose, it's gambling.
Quote: teliotDerail IMHO, please split the thread on this topic. Thanks. "Is AP gambling?"
Please
Quote: AcesAndEightsAbsolutely not. You can pursue advantage plays while in a casino while not relying on your winnings to pay the bills.
I keep picturing "amateur professional" along with "recreational AP," <shrug> (the former would not be a contradiction in etymology, BTW)
Quote:Sure, whatever, nomenclature. Replace "gambling" with "participating in games of chance."
The concensus here is that casinos don't gamble, not at the tables and slots (maybe a little by offering positive return VP, but even that is rather rare). So if the casino, with the house edge, is not gambling, then the AP, with their edge, is not gambling either.
Quote: NareedI keep picturing "amateur professional" along with "recreational AP," <shrug> (the former would not be a contradiction in etymology, BTW)
Well I identify as a recreational AP. So if you say that recreational AP's don't exist, then you are invalidating my identity.
Quote:The concensus here is that casinos don't gamble, not at the tables and slots (maybe a little by offering positive return VP, but even that is rather rare). So if the casino, with the house edge, is not gambling, then the AP, with their edge, is not gambling either.
Casinos participate in games of chance. APs participate in games of chance. Ploppies participate in games of chance. I don't see a problem with my replacement of nomenclature.
Quote: AcesAndEightsWell I identify as a recreational AP. So if you say that recreational AP's don't exist, then you are invalidating my identity.
I didn't say they don't exist. I said the phrase is a contradiction in temrs. It wouldn't be the only one in use, either. I mean other phrases like "honest politician" "good baseball game" "edible avocado" "boring history lecture." As I said, there are plenty.
Quote:Casinos participate in games of chance. APs participate in games of chance. Ploppies participate in games of chance. I don't see a problem with my replacement of nomenclature.
You can play games of chance without gambling. For example, if there is nothing at stake.
So there :P
Quote: NareedI said the phrase is a contradiction in temrs. It wouldn't be the only one in use, either. I mean other phrases like ... "edible avocado"
I. I...uh. You just broke my brain. I can no longer associate with you.
Quote: AcesAndEightsI. I...uh. You just broke my brain. I can no longer associate with you.
I think this is recognition of the everlasting and overwhelming superiority of my brain ;P
Quote: Nareed
The concensus here is that casinos don't gamble, not at the tables and slots (maybe a little by offering positive return VP, but even that is rather rare). So if the casino, with the house edge, is not gambling, then the AP, with their edge, is not gambling either.
The casino does gamble a little, but its large volume of games where they have a clear long-term advantage makes it a very, very safe gamble for them. I have heard of stories of casinos yanking higher denomination Ultimate X machines after big hits because they are scared about gambling "too much" after a big hit.
In January, one of my local casinos, Lumiere Place, lost about $33,000 on their $10 and $25 denomination of slots and video poker. They also only had a $12,985 hold (1.08% hold) on double deck blackjack. Overall though, the casino had a gross revenue of $10,328,332 for the month. A below average month for them, but still "profitable".
Quote: RonCNevermind.
No, really, what were you going to say?
That's what gambling is taking a risk or making a wager with something of value in order to win something. It does not have to be on occasion only at your leisure, someone may have more leisure time then anything.Quote: NareedNo, that's risk. Yes, as a player may experience positive variance so many times they come out ahead, an actual AP might experience negative variance so often they come out behind. But that's risk, an rather measured. If you have the bankroll to see you through, then you're not gambling. the casino has the advantage over most players, ergo the casino doens't gamble. But it may fail to secure enough customers, or to secure credit, or to overspend in construction and/or ancilalry areas (lodging, food service, shops, etc), and lose money. That's risk.
I'm still sure "recrational AP" is a contradiction in terms. recreational implies for fun and on ocassion, not for profit and constantly.
You can be an AP for leisure and fun only. Making money is just a bonus.
You can make advantage plays and have them be a major gamble. even if you are over funded.
Lets just say Lion Share IS in fact +EV .
Some multimillionaire could stocks their business in order to became a full time AP and play only Lion Share because he really enjoys gambling he knows he has an advantage and has plenty of leisure time. He could play it 16 hrs a day. for a long long time he is not guaranteed to come out ahead even if he put in many thousands of hours. he would be now GAMBLING leisurely as an AP with zero guarantee. It would seem that an AP is a gambler, and you can be a recreational AP, all at the same time.
Another example is someone could have a $500 video poker machine that's 100.01% even with a 10 cycle bankroll he could lose this would absolutely be gambling and the person could be a advantage player.
Quote: beachbumbabsNo, really, what were you going to say?
I'm sorry, Babs. I don't know how that wound up where it did. I was drunk. I got an email from someone telling me they were coming to Montana to work plays. I thought I would show them some Montana hospitality.
Gambling: risking money or other valuables in a game whose outcome is completely random.
Casino gambling: same as above, but with the proviso that the house advantage renders a negative expectation in the long term
Now, any kind of real AP (advantage play) renders the outcome not completely random, otherwise there would be no advantage in the first place. The distribution of outcomes remains random, but the expectation turns positive. Therefore any AP at a casino is not gambling as it does not meet the negative expectation part of the definition. If you are an advantage player, you do not gamble at the casino.
Logic. It just works :)
Of course there are subtleties, nuances and technicalities to consider. And of course there remains risk. Will your bankrolll sustain you long enough, for one. And of course the casino(s) may not let you get away with your scheme. If there is a gamble, that last is it.
What is the difference between "completely random" and "random?"Quote: NareedCompletely random.
Quote: NareedI keep picturing "amateur professional" along with "recreational AP," <shrug> (the former would not be a contradiction in etymology, BTW).
If we want to talk about two words that don't belong together then let's talk about these two here "professional gambler." I'm sorry but those two words don't belong together.
Quote: Nareed
Casino gambling: same as above, but with the proviso that the house advantage renders a negative expectation in the long term
Interesting definition, considering a casino is defined as a place that houses and offers gambling. There is nothing about requiring the gambling to be negative player expectation.
Quote: teliotWhat is the difference between "completely random" and "random?"
"Random is not cyclical. Cyclical is not random." Dan Paymar
Quote: NareedWhen in dubt, define.
Gambling: risking money or other valuables in a game whose outcome is completely random.
Casino gambling: same as above, but with the proviso that the house advantage renders a negative expectation in the long term
Now, any kind of real AP (advantage play) renders the outcome not completely random, otherwise there would be no advantage in the first place. The distribution of outcomes remains random, but the expectation turns positive. Therefore any AP at a casino is not gambling as it does not meet the negative expectation part of the definition. If you are an advantage player, you do not gamble at the casino.
Logic. It just works :)
Of course there are subtleties, nuances and technicalities to consider. And of course there remains risk. Will your bankrolll sustain you long enough, for one. And of course the casino(s) may not let you get away with your scheme. If there is a gamble, that last is it.
Sorry, no. Your logic would imply that a card counter is "gambling" when the count is negative, but is not "gambling" when the count is positive. What would they be doing, then? The count is the same for everyone, so what do you call it when someone doesn't know the count but makes a bet when it's positive anyway? Are they "not gambling" because they have the advantage even if they don't know it?
A gamble is simply the staking something of value property (consideration) in an attempt to win a reward (prize) in a game of chance (chance). That's it, no proviso regarding which party that chance favors, or even whether that chance is "completely random" (which is a term you just made up and doesn't have any meaning). PRNGs are entirely deterministic, so there is nothing "completely random" about any PRNG-based slot machine that has been built over the past 30 years, and I don't think you'd argue that a slot player isn't gambling. Even if they're playing a progressive game with a meter that pushes the RTP over 100%.
Both parties to a gambling game are gambling, regardless of the edge of the game, which party it favors, or whether that edge fluctuates.
Quote: NareedWhen in dubt, define.
Gambling: risking money or other valuables in a game whose outcome is completely random.
Casino gambling: same as above, but with the proviso that the house advantage renders a negative expectation in the long term
Now, any kind of real AP (advantage play) renders the outcome not completely random, otherwise there would be no advantage in the first place. The distribution of outcomes remains random, but the expectation turns positive. Therefore any AP at a casino is not gambling as it does not meet the negative expectation part of the definition. If you are an advantage player, you do not gamble at the casino.
Logic. It just works :)
Of course there are subtleties, nuances and technicalities to consider. And of course there remains risk. Will your bankrolll sustain you long enough, for one. And of course the casino(s) may not let you get away with your scheme. If there is a gamble, that last is it.
Here is the more accepted definition of gambling:
Gambling is the wagering of money or something of material value (referred to as "the stakes") on an event with an uncertain outcome with the primary intent of winning additional money and/or material goods.
One of the problems with using random in your definition is that it would make sports games, dog/horse racing and other proposition bets not gambling. With this new definition all types of classic gambling (races, cards, slots) are included as well as several others not generally considered gambling (stock market). Under it AP play could be considered both as gambling and not as gambling.
In the short term it would seem to be gambling because the outcome is indeed uncertain. I've lost many thousands of dollars on what seemed like great bets while counting cards for example.
In the long term it wouldn't seem to be gambling because the outcome can become essentially certain. However there is then the issue of a grey area between the two. A card counter can run the risk of an insufficient bank roll and with only a 13% chance of losing everything or doubling their money still lose. It's still gambling, a good bet, but gambling.
Quote: teliotIn my "Advanced Advantage Play" seminar, I have a slide that defines advantage play as: "The act of legally exploiting procedural or structural weaknesses in some aspect of casino games or operations in a way that generates an edge over the casino."
I'm not sure that covers being a sports-betting sharp or being a better poker player than your opponents. In both cases, you have the edge because you're smarter than the other guy, not because you're exploiting an inherent weakness in the game or its operation. Or do you not consider pro poker or pro handicapping to be AP per se?
I suppose no definition can be sufficiently broad to encompass all possibilities, but I am open to any improvements you want to offer.Quote: MathExtremistI'm not sure that covers being a sports-betting sharp or being a better poker player than your opponents. In both cases, you have the edge because you're smarter than the other guy, not because you're exploiting an inherent weakness in the game or its operation. Or do you not consider pro poker or pro handicapping to be AP per se?
Quote: AxelWolf
Another example is someone could have a $500 video poker machine that's 100.01% even with a 10 cycle bankroll he could lose this would absolutely be gambling and the person could be a advantage player.
In theory a game could be made with any ev over 1 that could easily bankrupt players regardless of their bankroll. An infinite ev game could just as easily bankrupt ya.
Quote: MathExtremistI think you just make a distinction between the definition of AP (advantage play = wagering at a game when you have the advantage, either on one play or in the aggregate) and examples of AP (counting, hole carding, pro poker/handicapping, picking off progressives). Then distinguish between advantage in cash and advantage in the aggregate, including comps. A game can be -EV in cash but +EV overall if you care about free rooms, drinks, or salad tongs. LVH was doing a promo for salad tongs this week...
Can you be more specific about the material and finish of these salad tongs? This sounds like a great ap play. I know a guy that will pay handsomely for kitchenware. Hr has a cool blackjack system too, something about doubling after every loss
Quote: djatcCan you be more specific about the material and finish of these salad tongs? This sounds like a great ap play. I know a guy that will pay handsomely for kitchenware. Hr has a cool blackjack system too, something about doubling after every loss
The salad tong promo is next week and they're some wooden hand tong things that look like claws.
http://www.thelvh.com/m/casinoevents?e=290&year=2014&month=2&day=4
Now if you want a real +EV play the week after that you can get Vinegar bottles. Money in the bank yo.
Quote: teliotIn my "Advanced Advantage Play" seminar, I have a slide that defines advantage play as: "The act of legally exploiting procedural or structural weaknesses in some aspect of casino games or operations in a way that generates an edge over the casino."
I disagree, Progressive-Hunting, for example, is not caused by a procedural or structural weakness in the casino: It's caused by a mechanism that the casino deliberately put in place and does not lose money on. Furthermore, most VP advantage play, especially those games that are 100%+ right off the top, are games that the casino is fully aware of.
Quote: MathExtremistSorry, no. Your logic would imply that a card counter is "gambling" when the count is negative, but is not "gambling" when the count is positive.
Not sorry, yes. Read the bit about the LONG term in the definition of casino gambling.
You would have to define long term when it comes to an individual. There have been AP's that have lost over their lifetime with many Hr's put in. Casinos have lost and went out of business as well. Sports books have had losing years. Bookies have went broke. Good poker players often go broke. All of them had an advantage but the the gamble didn't pay off.Quote: NareedNot sorry, yes. Read the bit about the LONG term in the definition of casino gambling.
Its clear you are wrong on both accounts. AP is gambling and you can be a recreational AP. Give up, it seems you are one of the only people who have this view point. Considering you are not an AP and probably spend very little time gambling(compared to most). Even if you were to find a technicality in the definitions, You would still be wrong as far as what 95% of anyone that counts thinks.
It seem like you are not interested in learning something or hearing what people have to say
It seems you are now just arguing/discussing this for arguments/discussions sake and refuse to admit you might be wrong.
I already pointed out even if on paper you have a 99.99% guarantee of winning something you may still be gambling on payment.
Advantage player is a fairly new term. it comes from advantage gambling in the first place. It was a way to soften the gambling part and explain whats happening while you are gambling.
Quote: treetopbuddyIf you play with an advantage then you're not gambling at all.
Bingo! Sort of like when Chuck Norris goes hunting they call it killing because the word "hunting" implies some element of potential failure?...
Not sure what you mean by this, unless you were just agreeing with what I said. I think I said this?Quote: nmacgreAn infinite ev game could just as easily bankrupt ya.
Possibly you were just pointing out that I didn't even need to use such an extreme example of what might bankrupt someone.
Depending on how the % of the +EV is distributed I agree. There are somethings with a you can almost guarantee yourself to win even after only a short period of time. With a very small number of units/bankroll.
Now would that be gambling? I have used Nareeds theory to explain to my Mother I'm NOT really gambling because its almost impossible that I will lose.
This way she completely understands I'm not standing at the craps table shouting, "Daddy needs a new pair of shoes!" and praying my numbers come up, while risking everything I have on the next roll of the dice. I have to explain I use computers, statistics and well though out guess work to make sure I will win in the long and short run. Not sure she totally understands but, she knows I can afford to send her some extra money if she needs it and I am the only one of her kids that has never asked for anything.
Quote: Tarzan
Bingo! Sort of like when Chuck Norris goes hunting they call it killing because the word "hunting" implies some element of potential failure?...
Well this isn't the movies and we cant make a script where everything ends how we want it to.
When you find that has zero potential of failure let me know.
Even "the best" AP's have failed.
Something I would say after hustling at pool and the chump was out of earshot.
" Even "the best" AP's have failed."
So have some of the best businessmen.
And on another note from other posters :
While I am it, if you think the AP's lifestyle stinks, who asked you anyway ?
Quote: NareedNot sorry, yes. Read the bit about the LONG term in the definition of casino gambling.
You've made up an incorrect definition on the spot and now you're trying to use it to justify its own correctness? Circular logic is prima facie invalid.
And there is no short or long term involved in the EV of a game. It is what it is, whether you play it once, a thousand times, or never even play it at all. If I fade you on the pass line in street craps, we're both gambling even though I have the edge. The same is true if we just flip a fair coin and neither of us does.
No need to ask someone. For some people, Its called Jealousy.Quote: Buzzard
While I am it, if you think the AP's lifestyle stinks, who asked you anyway ?
Think about it this is supposed to be a site for gamblers. Why would come here that didn't like gambling in the first place (other then to troll)? The truth is Most people here love gambling and think its great fun, some people dream of doing it for a living. People often feel they are smart and they to should be able to make a living gambling. If they can do it I can do it. Once they realize they cant do it. They became bitter and envious and start to loath anyone who can or does. They need a reason to justify to others or themselves why they cant or wont do it.
Its kind of like when your a kid and some other kid says you cant do this. Something you wish you could do. Rather then admitting that to them. You say, " that's stupid. I wouldn't want to do that anyways"
:I love the reasons people come up with.
:Casinos are evil. (So what)
:It not productive or add anything society (So what? That's not what people are in it for. Who said a job has to add something to society or be productive? If you want to give to others and be productive, use your money to give to others or donate some time to charities.)
:AP's don't have fun. ( how would they know? They failed or never tried or they meet the wrong people)
:Its boring ( how would they know? They failed it was boring because they didn't do it right, or they never tried or meet the wrong people) I find most of what other people do boring.
Quote: AxelWolf
:It not productive or add anything society (So what? That's not what people are in it for. Who said a job has to add something to society or be productive? If you want to give to others and be productive, use your money to give to others or donate some time to charities.)
I don't know many people who can honestly say without twisting the truth that what they do is productive to anything, let alone society. If you boil down 99% of employees amibitions for working it's for that check. Lots of people enjoy being unemployed, since they just go through the motions to find a job and sit back and collect that govt cheese.
or riceQuote: djatcI don't know many people who can honestly say without twisting the truth that what they do is productive to anything, let alone society. If you boil down 99% of employees amibitions for working it's for that check. Lots of people enjoy being unemployed, since they just go through the motions to find a job and sit back and collect that govt cheese.
