to build upon what you have said...would anyone claim that someone proficient at counting cards and consistently takes money from the house based on these methods was gambling? I wouldn't...but rather would say they are employing the fruits of their labor and effort to master a skill that stacks the odds in their favor. Blair Hull is a perfect example of this.
Gambling or investing?
- Thread starter Trader Curt
- Start date
Agree. Counting cards is NOT gambling... it's a learned skill.... as is proper trading.
I've often made the argument that proper trading is a lot like counting cards. That is, "when the odds are in your favor... that's when you put your money down".
%%
NO, not the get rich quick crowd;
investors /traders may make it work /with work...………………………………………………………...
Exactly. Or like hold 'em. Poker is a game of skill as well. Knowing pot odds, opponent ranges, stack sizes etc...
Used to play blackjack for fun using bloch's excellent strategy tips
Interesting you mention that.
Years ago Texas prohibited "gambling".
A big poker game was raided and players were arrested (or perhaps only cited?). In any event, the case ended up in the Texas Supreme Court... where the court concluded that "poker was NOT gambling but rather a game of skill".
It sounds like one of those irregular verbs; I invest, you trade, he just gambles.
In a sense buying or selling shares, indices, currencies or commodities or whatever else is always gambling, as they may go up or down in price. Most 'investors' would not want to call it this though, as gambling is BAD. But even with the odds in your favour you can still lose on any one punt.
However, if the odds are in your favour, even by a small amount, in the long run if you keep 'gambling' eventually you will win, which is how Las Vegas was built (by the casinos of course, who have an edge, not by their customers).
So the argument is all semantics really, and what you understand investing and gambling to mean.
In a sense buying or selling shares, indices, currencies or commodities or whatever else is always gambling, as they may go up or down in price. Most 'investors' would not want to call it this though, as gambling is BAD. But even with the odds in your favour you can still lose on any one punt.
However, if the odds are in your favour, even by a small amount, in the long run if you keep 'gambling' eventually you will win, which is how Las Vegas was built (by the casinos of course, who have an edge, not by their customers).
So the argument is all semantics really, and what you understand investing and gambling to mean.
%%
Depends on what + where you are counting; we never considered counting cards in monopoly/throwing those dice gambling.
Counting cards in blackjack wins is considered the worst sort of gambling you win+ may get kicked out of the house/LOL
Every now + then a low probability trade makes sense;
not because the turtles made millions/billions that way. Some body that takes ONLY what he or she considers highest probability trades investments =most likely thinks he or she can predict...……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….It can vary from state to state.
In TN most gambling is illegal;
but a lotto/stupid tax on people that cant do math is OK, because TN makes many millions for ''education'' LOL
There is also a slight difference in say putting money on card counting at blackjack or playing poker, compared to trading the markets.
That is because with the former there is a limited problem space, and you can work out the odds of winning or losing exactly if you had enough computation power because there are only so many cards, and you know the exact odds of drawing an ace and so on.
With the markets, the problem space is effectively infinite as there are so many variables involved, and (with perhaps a few exceptions like arbitrage maybe) you can not calculate the chances of winning, but estimate them based on some research on how the markets have reacted in the past.
So it sort of amounts to the same thing, in that you are gambling with the odds in your favour, but your edge in the markets by its nature is going to be fuzzier than in card counting at blackjack.
That is because with the former there is a limited problem space, and you can work out the odds of winning or losing exactly if you had enough computation power because there are only so many cards, and you know the exact odds of drawing an ace and so on.
With the markets, the problem space is effectively infinite as there are so many variables involved, and (with perhaps a few exceptions like arbitrage maybe) you can not calculate the chances of winning, but estimate them based on some research on how the markets have reacted in the past.
So it sort of amounts to the same thing, in that you are gambling with the odds in your favour, but your edge in the markets by its nature is going to be fuzzier than in card counting at blackjack.
Its simple really. There are two sorts of gambling but the English vocabulary tries to use the same word for both.
The difference has to do with whether skill, knowledge and experience can affect the outcome. So, in roulette or the lottery, there is nothing the player can do which will affect the outcome of the game - the spin of the wheel or the draw of the lottery balls is entirely random and so is their probability of winning that game.
However, the outcomes of games such as poker, blackjack and maybe even betting on race horses are affected by the player's skills. As in trading. If a player decides not to use those skills, that changes his experience but it doesn't change the nature of the game.
The difference has to do with whether skill, knowledge and experience can affect the outcome. So, in roulette or the lottery, there is nothing the player can do which will affect the outcome of the game - the spin of the wheel or the draw of the lottery balls is entirely random and so is their probability of winning that game.
However, the outcomes of games such as poker, blackjack and maybe even betting on race horses are affected by the player's skills. As in trading. If a player decides not to use those skills, that changes his experience but it doesn't change the nature of the game.