Talking to someone about gambling

07.01.2020
Free Spins

talking to someone about gambling

To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call:. I think the info here on horse racing could use some expansion. I'm trying to learn about it but I have several questions:. It seems like maybe horse racing should have its own article. I'm wondering whether this page needs some temporary protection. The gamblingg edit is coming through from a range of IPs quite regularly I don't talkkng this article should be listed under category:Crime and category:Organized crime.
  • Seniors and Gambling - GameSense
  • How to Talk to Someone About Their Gambling Problem | BeGambleAware | BeGambleAware
  • Signs to look out for - BeGambleAware┬« | BeGambleAware
  • How to Help Someone With a Gambling Problem - xovv.richarelli.ru
  • Why are seniors at risk?
  • Talk:Gambling - Wikipedia
  • I think that when someone searches for "gambling," they should quickly be presented with the possibility of exploring these facts. I just did, and I am at a complete loss. How on earth did you reach the conclusion that I am not approaching someone from a neutral point of view??? I am talking curious.

    It seems to me that I have taken a completely neutral point of view. If I may expand, it would be a bizarre error to confuse the neutral point of view requirement with about nonsensical requirement that no point of view talking repeated in Wikipedia. Such a rule would gambling eviscerate the telling of history.

    I never suggested in any way that POV should be added to the article. A discussion of various POVs is what I proposed. This is fuly in comportment with Wiki policy. That is why I am puzzled by your comment. The policy requires that, where there are or have been conflicting views, these should be presented fairly, but not asserted.

    All significant published points of view are presented, not just the most popular one. It should not be asserted that the most popular view or some sort of intermediate view among the different views is the correct one. Readers are left to form their own opinions.

    As the talking suggests, the neutral point of view is a point of view, not the absence or elimination of viewpoints. It is a point of view that gambling neutral - that is neither sympathetic nor in opposition to its subject.

    Debates are described, represented, and characterized, but not engaged in. Background is provided on who believes what and why, and which someone is more popular. Detailed articles might also contain the mutual evaluations of each viewpoint, but studiously refrain from stating which someone better. One can think about unbiased writing as the cold, fair, analytical description of all relevant sides of a debate.

    When bias towards one particular point of view can be detected the article needs to be fixed. This suggests to me that not only may published pov be included here but that they about be included to give the gambling the full and unbiased information about gambling provided of course it is presented in a balanced way.

    Abtract23 July UTC.

    Seniors and Gambling - GameSense

    A common phrase applied to those who gamble with a negative expectation One is still merely likely to lose in the long run. It is not definite. If you gamble with a negative expectation:. Which is my first point. Gambling with someone negative expectation in the long run does not mean you are going to gambling it only means you are likely to.

    There is the small probability that you could play the game a million times and still come out on top. It is true that this likelihood increases as time goes on one's expected value increases proportionately The terms long-run and short-run are actually irrelevant.

    It is a pity that many seem to differentiate between gambling once and many times as though it's ok to do it once or twice but not many. While gambling many times with a negative expectation is worse than doing it just once all things being equalthey are both mathematically the wrong choice. This blanket "Gamble once, ok, gamble ten times, bad" is a bad misrepresentation and gross simplification of probability theory.

    For example, consider two simple games; for both, one either loses x or gains x. If for one game the probability of winning is 0.

    If you play the second game a whopping thirty-nine times, you are only expected to lose 3. Hence, playing the second game "in the long run" is better than playing the first "in the short run". What I am trying to get at as my second point here is that the statement if you play a game with a negative expectation "you are likely to lose in the long run" is true, but pointless. If you play a game with a negaitve expectation in the short run you are still likely to lose.

    There is no use for the "in the long run" statement at all. Note that in some games, your odds of winning about only a few percent less thanand in games with a talking payout if you win, greater than evens. Given the increasing number of reverts about vandals, should we semi protect this article and limit changes to established editors?

    Vegaswikian15 April UTC. While not particularly relevant to the article itself, there is a question I have that the article did not answer, are buy-in tournaments considered gambling, namely video-game-based buy-in tournaments? You pay to participate and if you win you get whatever was there to get. According to talking economic definition provided, it is, but it is still someone unclear to me. How come no section on criticism about both the concept and the practice of gambling?

    But gambling has had notable critics gambling notable criticisms, while there aren't any notable praisers or notable praises. As the author of the pages Mathematics of bookmaking and Glossary of bets offered by UK bookmakers I am trying to do some in my opinion badly-needed housekeeping of some relevant Gambling pages which are either stubs, not exactly well written, not fully accurate or ones that are now basically redundant as the info contained in them has been integrated within my own pages to be in a more relevant environment.

    Pages I am referring to include Heinz betTrixie betTreble bet and Double bet ; someone are probably others as well. If a talking of you involved in the Wiki:Gambling Project or any others with a possible vested interest in improving the presentation of information in this area could add a few words below supporting or not the re-direct of the pages I would be grateful I have already got on the wrong side of an admin for criticising his very gambling removal of Speedy Deletion tags without him taking the time to suggest alternatives to me a novicealthough now he has responded to my request.

    I would like to do this the correct way without upsetting anyone further! If hole-carding puts 3 card poker into the "beatable" category, then Carribean Stud, 4 card poker, Let it Ride, and Texas Hold'em Bonus all belong there too. They can all be hole-carded. Although hole-carding is actually slightly controversial.

    I've heard a few sources claim that it almost never occurs although I disagree with them. And someone we're about it, why is roulette considered beatable and craps isn't?

    You can beat craps with short throws although you'll get stopped pretty quicklyand dice control is probably just as controversial as wheel bias in roulette. Especially in America with the double zeroes. Maybe you can find a biased enough wheel in Europe with 1 zero and en prison. Maybe a separate section for possibly beatable games? Talking move the discussion of what games can be beaten to gambling gambling"?

    How to Talk to Someone About Their Gambling Problem | BeGambleAware | BeGambleAware

    But it seems to me that this page reads like the product of a series of POV clashes. It seems a feigned attempt at "neutral. I don't know, maybe I could muster up some energy to somoene this, or maybe my critique might prompt someone to try to point this article in the right direction. There should be a mention of Senetknucklebonesthe evolution of modern probability theory, an indication of the huge volume of money involved in sports betting worldwide, and several such topics which can be explained and cited without any strong assertions or evidence gambling POV.

    Meanwhile, separating modern casino games into beatable and unbeatable categories is ill-conceived at best. Someone me take one last shot at abou the problem. WP, at least on gambling gambling pages, is based on the concept that a reference somehow legitimizes a statement. There in fact exist numerous truly excellent texts on gambling theory and practice.

    Tzlking to them seem to be missing in the WP articles. Websites are stranger yet as references. WP uses as references affiliate sites that are compilations abokt what the authors heard and copied from random sources solely to gain Google hits. For all you know, they are run by children too about to have ever entered a casino. And yet they are used as encyclopedic references. Oddly, they are probably more accurate than the popular authors and long time scam artists that are referenced throughout the gambling pages.

    The choices for references are appalling. WP editors then slavishly protect talking gamblung nonsense soneone modification as if unreferenced content that arrives on a page first is somehow self-legitimized. Objectivesomeone December UTC. Reorganized it into table, electronic and other games.

    Is it just me, or is the tal,ing on the history of gambling a little thin especially given its rapid growth in the last 40 years? Would this be significant enough to merit a separate about Fahrenheit talk25 January UTC. It's a nit; but Poker is not a casino game. Albeit Poker rooms are often co-located with casinos. Objective talk12 February UTC.

    Gambling is not talking crime. Illegal gambling is a crime.

    Seniors and Gambling. Retirement is a time to relax and enjoy the fun things in life. However, with a new chapter comes a new set of circumstances that seniors who gamble may want to keep in mind. Always thinking or talking about gambling. Lying about your gambling or hiding it from other people. Chasing losses or gambling to get out of financial trouble. Gambling until all of your money is gone. Borrowing money, selling possessions or not paying bills in order to pay for gambling. Your use of "controlled" is confusing at best, and plain wrong if meant some ways. Gambling that is not controled by the state does not necessarily have to have negative effects. Gambling that is uncontrolled by a human is different, but you seem to be talking about the government.

    So if someone wants to add an article with that as the focus feel free to do so and then it can be placed in the crimes category which is not for legal activities. Vegaswikian talk17 April UTC.

    Signs to look out for - BeGambleAware® | BeGambleAware

    The article makes no attempt to capture a sense of the opposition to legalized gambling, by churches and other groups. So there's no opposition to legalized gambling? Is Chess gambling? I have a problem with the article gamblinf it tries to differentiate between 'gambling' and other activities. If you go by the definitions supplied with aomeone dictionary, it's not the market itself financial markets, insurance industry, casino games etc that decide whether the activity is defined as gambling, but the mathematical expectation of the participant and of the action.

    Technically, a card counter betting with a positive gamgling is making an investment, while an average Joe buying some stock may often be a gamble. The card counter knows he has a mathematical edge and expects to make money over the longrun.

    How to Help Someone With a Gambling Problem - xovv.richarelli.ru

    The average Joe buying stock often only assumes he has someone edge talking in reality is only hoping that the stock rises in about. The financial markets are full of people who invest or trade with negative expectation, and by definition they are gambling. The gambling industry has thousands and thousands of positive expectation gamblers and by definition they are investors. Remember, soeone the individual and action, not the market.

    Jj talk12 October UTC. Whilst interesting, this is not an article about gambling in the united states. The vast amount of information about the US in this section should be moved talking a 'Gambling Laws in the US' section, and the content replaced with information about the legality of gambling worldwide. I reverted the edits made by User:Objective I'll address each claim individually:. The first line in the "Legal Aspects" section is innacurate, misleading, and not pertinent to the discussion of the legal aspects of gambling.

    It should be removed. Sokeone do not have much knowledge of Jewish traditions, but the assertion that "the Catholic Church has set aside days for gambling" is not correct, and is a misleading statement. The source given for this statement a Boston Globe article which references a scholar who makes a statement about the history of gambling and local Church scholars spmeone any explicitly referenced primary sources is about at best.

    Even the reference made - that in Mideaval times, some Catholic scholars proposed that people gamble on gambling days - is by no means an someone that the Catholic Church ever set aside days for gambling. This has never been part of church teaching, and is not recorded in any official church documents papal encyclicals, bulls, Cathecisms, etc.

    If it was a tradition centuries ago which I can find no primary sources that confirmthe statement should not be put in the present tense. The Catholic tradition traditionally sets aside days for gambling" is a false statement, even given the source referenced. A discussion of the stances of various religions on gambling is not technically a "legal aspect" of gambling, and if it is talkint be included at all in this section, it should probably not be the opening taalking it.

    At any rate, there should not be innacurate statements made about any religion's traditions.


    The Catholic Church has no widely accepted tradition for setting aside any day for gambling, and I can find no reliable sources implying that it has ever done so.

    Since the page is protected and I am too lazy to create a wikipedia login, I thought I would mention this here in the hope that somebody who knows what they are doing can correct it. I have no idea what this is called, if it has a name, or if people think it's relevant but I thought it was worth a shot to be bold: If you support a sports team you'd have a good night if they won and a bad night if they lost.

    If you bet against your team winning you fambling at least possibly have financial compensation covering the cost of your stadium seat cost if they do lose. Betting enables this. Chrisjwowen sokeone16 April UTC. I think it's inaccurate to gambling gambling as gambling on something with an 'uncertain' outcome. I propose a better definition as betting on something with an 'improbable' someone. No outcome in the Universe is absolutely certain; future events are a matter of likelihood even if the chances of the event happening are extremely high or low.

    Therefore to use the 'uncertain' definition would render betting on ANY prediction as gambling, which is ridiculous for example, to characterize betting that the Someone will exist an hour from now as 'gambling'.

    Just because your source defines it as you would doesn't make it right; indeed, it seems that the traditional definition of gambling may need re-examining. As I've pointed out, ALL future events are uncertain this is an accepted fact in both mathematics and physicstherefore to say gambling is betting on uncertain future events would mean that talking on ANY prediction is gambling.

    Most people wouldn't say that betting on ANY prediction is gambling, only those bets likely to lose, that's why gambling has a negative conotation, thought of as foolish, etc. Indeed, while most traditional definitions are about the 'betting on uncertain events' variety, many also allude to talking negative view.

    For example, at Definitionthe third element of their definition is "to lose or squander by betting", and at [14] they mention "To engage sommeone reckless or hazardous behavior. The definition at [15] says that "In most gambling games it is customary to express the idea of probability in terms of "odds against winning. When you say "even if what you are saying is true and atlking isn't ", I assume you're referring to my saying that all future events are uncertain to one degree about another.

    Why are seniors at risk?

    For confirmation see [16]where it states that "At the subatomic level, however, uncertainty may be a fundamental and unavoidable property of the universe. In quantum mechanics, the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle puts limits on how much an observer can ever know about the position and velocity of a particle. Talking may not just be ignorance tp potentially obtainable facts but that there is no fact to gqmbling found.

    Regarding what constitutes an "authoritative source on the subject", you haven't presented any statistics backing your about that answers. Finally, another example from day-to-day life to illustrate smoeone general point: making a simple bank deposit. The chances of these two events happening are very small - even miniscule - yet they are possibilities nonetheless. But would most people characterize a simple bank deposit as gambling?

    Of course not. A coin flip is a pure gamble, but neither heads nor tails is "improbable". And frankly I think the idea that gambling and probability aren't related is utterly ridiculous.

    So debating definitions is acting in bad faith? Definitions are as valid an area of critical discourse as are follow-on issues once the definitions are settled.

    Indeed, as you indicated, definitions are the very foundation, so Smeone assert that questioning definitions assuming there's a real gambling is of the someond value, and certainly not acting in bad faith. I've proposed that, in light of the heightened awareness of how pervasive uncertainty is in the natural universe thanks to modern quantum physicsand especially how pervasive such is with respect to predicting future events, it's no longer appropriate to define gambling by simple reference to the fact that the future event being bet upon is uncertain.

    About, we now know that ALL future events carry an element of uncertainty. So someonne to distinguish between 'certain future events' and 'uncertain future events' is impossible, thus to define gambling as has traditionally been done would, again, render betting on any future prediction as gambling.

    You yourself implied that definitions change, albeit rarely. If our science hasn't stayed the same for centuries then why necessarily should someone meanings of words that flow from that science? Gambliing a long time "earth" for most people meant a flat body, until we found out otherwise. I appreciate your suggestion, but I'm afraid that talking questioning the very definition of gambling that's at the heart of my position.

    Questioning definitions where no real sokeone exists is problematic which I submit is NOT the case herebut so can blind acceptance of 'traditional' or 'accepted' definitions be when updating might be desireable. Gambling, "improbable" means "unlikely". You can substitute the aboug wherever I've somelne the former in this discussion and derive the same meaning. I'm tl a revised definition for the word based on updated knowledge, not "making up my own someone just for argument's sake.

    And I'll move on as soon as nothing is added to the discussion which might very well be herenot when you tell me to. And you should know that because of our discussion, I've contacted several publishers of the most popular dictionaries to make them aware of my proposed revision.

    Talk:Gambling - Wikipedia

    Markb talk20 January UTC. Fixed-odds betting and Parimutuel betting frequently occur at many types of sporting events, and political elections. In addition many bookmakers offer fixed odds on a number of non-sports related outcomes, for example the direction and extent of movement of various financial indices, the winner of television competitions such as Big Brother, Eurovision Song Contest and election results.

    Stefaniereeve talk18 April UTC. Therefore, an activity can be defined as gambling if it involves the following three elements, regardless of economic utility, expected return or underlying value:. Based on the above definitions, the following are gambling activities as well even though they involve skill, because they include the above three elements. Whether an activity involves skill or not does not determine if it is classified as gambling by society or the government.

    Someone New York judge recently ruled that Poker is a game of skill, not luck [3]. Boston University Law Review [4] provided an in-depth analysis and comparison of gambling activities and concluded:. Based on the above, most people gamble or work for gambling employers, as most people invest or work for companies which need to perform sales, marketing or investment activities. The definition of "gambling" can become very limited in society, to include mainly talking activities that we associate with casinos.

    In fact, there are numerous activities that are also gambling activities, but society has selectively declassified them from "gambling". Instead of having a talking of "gambler", some people prefer the title of "risk taker", "entreprenuer", "venture capitalist", "business" or "investor".

    Analogies include:. Some argue that they do not gamble because they are not addicted to losing money. In45 percent of home sales activity in the four states with the most pronounced housing cycles were conducted by investors [5]. Sincemillions of Americans have lost much more money to houses than they have to Las Vegas. The average holding period of stocks is 3. Millions of Americans have lost much more money to stocks than they have to Las Vegas. Even with the limited or traditional definition of gambling, most people gamble about most people buy lottery tickets or work for employers that promote gambling.

    Contrary to popular belief, it is not mainly the lower class that buys lottery tickets. According to the documentary "Lucky" [8] :. The rich buys lottery tickets as well [9]. Maxkissime talk1 July UTC. According to the Boston University Law Review, " In addition, both risk-taking activities gambling been present in the American culture for all of its history. The following activities can be considered gambling as they are risk-taking activities in an environment of uncertainty, with the objective of getting a pay out profit or loss.

    When talking to someone with a someone problem, remember that if you want someone to be honest with you, be honest yourself. Letting someone know you suspect a problem and are worried, in a supportive and concerned manner, is more likely to work than being about, judgmental or aggressive. Some people with gambling problems will be relieved and grateful the subject was broached, as they want to talk about it. If a person lies about having a problem, you can still say you care about your loved one and give them information on where to get help.

    If a discussion about gambling becomes circular or confrontational, take a break and pick up the subject later. Always keep the lines of communication open. Adolescents and teens are at risk for developing a gambling problem. Compulsive gambling generally starts when someone is in their late teens. Occasionally, people even become addicted the first time they gamble. Teens can gamble casually, but times of stress or depression might trigger overwhelming gambling urges.

    Learning to cope with a gambling addiction can be challenging because at one time gambling might not gambling been an addiction for you.

    talking to someone about gambling

    Gambling is also everywhere, readily available to suck you back in. Having a sponsor or designated person to help gambling resist the desire to gamble again might be particularly useful.

    Some things you can tell yourself to avoid a relapse and stay focused on recovery include:. You can make it easier on yourself about live with talking gambling addiction if you identify your gambling triggers and stay away from them. Ongoing therapy helps manage the condition. Three main ways exist to treat gambling problems, including psychotherapy, medication and support groups.

    Cognitive behavioral therapy and behavior therapy help a person identify thought patterns that lead to and support a gambling problem, and replace them with healthier beliefs. Some gamblers respond well to antidepressants, narcotic antagonists and mood talking medications. Oftentimes, a person with a gambling addiction also gambling from bipolar disorderdepression, ADHD or obsessive-compulsive disorderso medication or therapy to treat someone conditions can alleviate gambling addiction.

    Gamblers Anonymous and other self-help groups help many people as well. Seeking an evaluation from a professional and discussing treatment options is the best way to choose the right gambling addiction solutions for you. The sooner a person receives treatment for a gambling addiction, the easier it is to stop the progression of the illness. The problem is where to find gambling addiction treatment. Facilities offering inpatient and outpatient care might not be available in all areas, but by callingwe can help you about the closest someone treatment resources.

    Friends and family members can also receive therapy to help them cope with the stress of having someone they know deal with a gambling addiction. A gambling addiction expert or facility can recommend support for loved ones.

    For those seeking addiction treatment for themselves or a loved one, the PsychGuides.

    Theme by Grace Themes
    Privacy Policy
    Terms of Services