So Am I A NIt?

[OPportunist]

[ QUOTE ]
I was assuming as much as possible similar stations in life. It was only the amount of "gamble" that would be different.

I would bet about ten percent. Any good gambler who says more than 25 percent is a moron. Probably 80% of poker players would bet a bit more than me. Thus I am to them a nit. But the average amount bet by non gamblers is probably less than 3%.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice made-up numbers, nit. Very rigorous.

[JimmyGunz]

5 percent i think , and its a little nitty

[CaseS87]

First of all, I think MANY Americans would choose to pass up on this bet because of the negative stigma that gambling holds.

And, [ QUOTE ]

im always really surprised at these poor families who pass up on 100k to go for more, when they have a 1 in 4 (or whatever) shot of getting like $50.

[/ QUOTE ]

the reason they take the gamble is because they feel as though they are freerolling.

[shaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Any good gambler who says more than 25 percent is a moron.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I''d bet 50% of my roll @ 7:5

[/ QUOTE ]

you sir are a moron

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't agree at all...someone with the tendency (in other words degeneracy) to gamble far higher percentages of their net worth on -EV gambles would be morons NOT to wager much, much more than 25% on a 7:5 flip. That would be the extreme other end of the Nit Spectrum, and I could also see plenty of people in the middle-ground, over-rolled to whatever degree, who would be wise to do it for 50% (or whatever number seems absurd to you but works with someone else's concept of money). Depends on priorities in life, utility of the money/financial responsibilties, risk of ruin with the remaining %, philosophy on money, etc. Definitely not moronic, per se.

[Dima2000123]

I'd wager my entire bankroll and then sell most of it in pieces of myself at slight discount.

[spino1i]

im a giant nit because currently I wouldnt do this with more than 2% of my bankroll (which is like 86k). I just wouldnt want to risk more than like 2k on something like this, the problems having less money outweigh the rewards of having more money.

[DannyOcean_]

What you have to remember here is the marginal utility of money.

If you have 1mil USD, it gives you about 10,000 utility (made up). The next 1 mil on top of that that you get will give you less than 10,000 utility, maybe like 9,200 or wahtever number you like.

This is the reason that someone worth 100K would gladly take 1mil over a 1/2 chance of 2.2mil. The utility of the first 1mil is greater than 1/2 the utility of the 2.2mil. You would probably be a moron if you took the 1/2 chance of 2.2mil, either that the value of money does not decline for you. But in reality, it declines for everyone.

This has to be factored in when considering the 7:5 shot. Earning an extra X dollars onto your net worth or bankroll will not make you as happy as losing X dollars will make you sad. In a 50/50 flip, you should not go because of the marginal utility of money. You stand to lose more when you lose X dollars than to gain when you gain X dollars.

This phenomenon would be likely to make rational people more risk averse than you might think, although how much so is debateable.

[Reef]

The thing with DS is that I am pretty certain he has a ton of passive income coming in regularly so going broke wouldn't really be an issue.

[Jay.]

i guess i'm an moron. at 22, i'd bet everything i'm worth apart from a 5/10 br and living expenses for a year. I'd change my plans if i was worth > 1.5m though.

[rakemeplz]

"Any good gambler who says more than 25 percent is a moron."

Care to briefly explain why? IDNCY.