I know you have a different definition, but I'm not sure what it is. You say that for it to be gambling, there has to be an outcome determined by chance. Does it have to be entirely by chance, like your die rolling example, or can it be partly chance like say a sports event? Wagering money on events entirely decided by the skill of the players is also considered gambling isn't it? Also you give the die rolling example as also not gambling when it is entirely decided by chance. Your reason being very high expactancy. So at what exact expectancy does gambling become not gambling? Negative expactancy is only mentioned in one of the definitions quoted earlier i.e #3; which is the one I thought you were using. I think of trading as analagous to walking into a casino with a computer in your shoes. It's gambling, but gambling to win using superior information and a statistical advantage rather than gambling for fun.
Trading and gambling do have a lot of similarities and share a lot in common... but at the end of the day, they're two completely different exercises in odds and probabilities. Not to mention that one actually serves a valid, legitimate purpose and function. ####################################### For retail*s -no ,author support point of view that retail have no any edge . By long game ,chance of loss ######################## is more ######### For professional with good chance yes . Advantage of roullte in casino with event game in Montecarlo 51.60 to 48.40 It is enough to make multiple mln $ per years with mutiple 1000 of operations Advantage of market -maker as Oanda ,if this fair (what is with good chance no ...read regulary investigations report*s of SEC,CFTC,NFA) some comporable 52-53% With mln operations per year it is enough to have multi mln $ profit
I know you have a different definition, but I'm not sure what it is. ########################################## Better use not dictionary definition ,as this adressed moral by smal citizenchip group by scientific definition by work*s of J von Neumann ,Morgenstern , Shannon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Shannon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_von_Neumann Economics and game theory Von Neumann's first significant contribution to economics was the minimax theorem of 1928. This theorem establishes that in certain zero sum games involving perfect information (in which players know a priori the strategies of their opponents as well as their consequences), there exists one strategy which allows both players to minimize their maximum losses (hence the name minimax). When examining every possible strategy, a player must consider all the possible responses of the player's adversary and the maximum loss. The player then plays out the strategy which will result in the minimization of this maximum loss. Such a strategy, which minimizes the maximum loss, is called optimal for both players just in case their minimaxes are equal (in absolute value) and contrary (in sign). If the common value is zero, the game becomes pointless. Von Neumann eventually improved and extended the minimax theorem to include games involving imperfect information and games with more than two players. This work culminated in the 1944 classic Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (written with Oskar Morgenstern). The public interest in this work was such that The New York Times ran a front page story, something which only Einstein had previously elicited. Von Neumann's second important contribution in this area was the solution, in 1937, of a problem first described by Léon Walras in 1874, the existence of situations of equilibrium in mathematical models of market development based on supply and demand. He first recognized that such a model should be expressed through disequations and not equations, and then he found a solution to Walras' problem by applying a fixed-point theorem derived from the work of L. E. J. Brouwer. The lasting importance of the work on general equilibria and the methodology of fixed point theorems is underscored by the awarding of Nobel prizes in 1972 to Kenneth Arrow, in 1983 to Gerard Debreu, and in 1994 to John Nash who had improved von Neumann's theory in his Princeton Ph.D thesis. Von Neumann was also the inventor of the method of proof, used in game theory, known as backward induction (which he first published in 1944 in the book co-authored with Morgenstern, Theory of Games and Economic Behaviour).[9] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory
ElCubano, I think Maestro answered a similar question, once you realise how to reverse the odds in your favour it stops being gambling, it becomes something else. Once a casino realises you are counting cards, you won't be getting any more free drinks Then try & tell them that you a pro gambler, see what they say. In gambling we are not meant to reverse the odds, it's meant to be entertainment where majority lose & occasionally some lucky dude/ss will scoop a jackpot. Can one follow a trend when gambling? No.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory Application and challenges Game theory has been used to study a wide variety of human and animal behaviors. It was initially developed in economics to understand a large collection of economic behaviors, including behaviors of firms, markets, and consumers. The use of game theory in the social sciences has expanded, and game theory has been applied to political, sociological, and psychological behaviors as well. Game theoretic analysis was initially used to study animal behavior by Ronald Fisher in the 1930s (although even Charles Darwin makes a few informal game theoretic statements). This work predates the name "game theory", but it shares many important features with this field. The developments in economics were later applied to biology largely by John Maynard Smith in his book Evolution and the Theory of Games. In addition to being used to predict and explain behavior, game theory has also been used to attempt to develop theories of ethical or normative behavior. In economics and philosophy, scholars have applied game theory to help in the understanding of good or proper behavior. Game theoretic arguments of this type can be found as far back as Plato.[1] [edit] Political science The application of game theory to political science is focused in the overlapping areas of fair division, political economy, public choice, positive political theory, and social choice theory. In each of these areas, researchers have developed game theoretic models in which the players are often voters, states, special interest groups, and politicians. For early examples of game theory applied to political science, see the work of Anthony Downs. In his book An Economic Theory of Democracy (Downs 1957), he applies a hotelling firm location model to the political process. In the Downsian model, political candidates commit to ideologies on a one-dimensional policy space. The theorist shows how the political candidates will converge to the ideology preferred by the median voter. For more recent examples, see the books by Steven Brams, George Tsebelis, Gene M. Grossman and Elhanan Helpman, or David Austen-Smith and Jeffrey S. Banks. A game-theoretic explanation for democratic peace is that public and open debate in democracies send clear and reliable information regarding their intentions to other states. In contrast, it is difficult to know the intentions of nondemocratic leaders, what effect concessions will have, and if promises will be kept. Thus there will be mistrust and unwillingness to make concessions if at least one of the parties in a dispute is a nondemocracy (Levy & Razin 2003). [edit] Economics and business Economists have long used game theory to analyze a wide array of economic phenomena, including auctions, bargaining, duopolies, fair division, oligopolies, social network formation, and voting systems. This research usually focuses on particular sets of strategies known as equilibria in games. These "solution concepts" are usually based on what is required by norms of rationality. In non-cooperative games, the most famous of these is the Nash equilibrium. A set of strategies is a Nash equilibrium if each represents a best response to the other strategies. So, if all the players are playing the strategies in a Nash equilibrium, they have no unilateral incentive to deviate, since their strategy is the best they can do given what others are doing. The payoffs of the game are generally taken to represent the utility of individual players. Often in modeling situations the payoffs represent money, which presumably corresponds to an individual's utility. This assumption, however, can be faulty. A prototypical paper on game theory in economics begins by presenting a game that is an abstraction of some particular economic situation. One or more solution concepts are chosen, and the author demonstrates which strategy sets in the presented game are equilibria of the appropriate type. Naturally one might wonder to what use should this information be put. Economists and business professors suggest two primary uses.
In the UK gambling profits are free of capital gains, because majority simply can't win consistently enough, also losses can not be offset against tax bill. On the other hand providers do pay taxes on gains, which means they simply can not justify their activities as gambling.
ElCubano, I think Maestro answered a similar question, once you realise how to reverse the odds in your favour it stops being gambling, it becomes something else. Once a casino realises you are counting cards, you won't be getting any more free drinks Then try & tell them that you a pro gambler, see what they say. In gambling we are not meant to reverse the odds, it's meant to be entertainment where majority lose & occasionally some lucky dude/ss will scoop a jackpot. Can one follow a trend when gambling? No. ################################ For retail sector trend ,fundamental ,market santiments are only means of desinformation ,which used from professional*s "Buy on rumour ,sell on news " one of example of Wall Street adgio
So you are in the gambling=negative expectancy camp? That gives you a very rigid definition. Are you aware of the other definitions that are in common usage? Chance affects all business activities but they are not generally referred to as gambling when they have some other purpose or utility. The casino business doesn't. That is pure gambling. Perhaps we should be discussing the purpose and utility of trading.
I am more than certain that gambling house's lawyers have looked into definitions of the word gambling, wouldn't they benefit from officially being recognised as a gambling entity? Of course they would. But, it's not possible, therefore one can only conclude that there is something in definition of that word that distinguishes it from a businness operation. Odds/probabilities (other nuances)?
I am more than certain that gambling house's lawyers have looked into definitions of the word gambling, wouldn't they benefit from officially being recognised as a gambling entity? Of course they would. But, it's not possible, therefore one can only conclude that there is something in definition of that word that distinguishes it from a businness operation. Odds/probabilities (other nuances)? ######################### Public moral ,which based on political doktrin and scientific facts are different things . Most popular book is this ,which is no related to scientific facts Bibel . Propaganda ,that is most important for profit . Implant in head*s of broadly mass demand ( investment ,consum &) and make profit from that . But that all related to game theory . Outcome can be near 1 ,but no 1 . As example most heavy Investment Banks crashed in 2008