Quote from: Tytanowy Janusz on February 26, 2019, 02:39:43 PM

Quote from: shoreno on February 26, 2019, 02:26:58 PM

Maybe he was trying to say that the op is not a pro gambler because he is depending on his algorithms or methods/strategies . pro gamblers are already aware that there are no working strategies because gambling only based on luck . if they lucky they win and they save thier winnings , they use their winnings on other profitable and less riskier activities but they play still gambling on other times .

Poker is more like trading. You need to cut losses and know when to pass even if you already put tones of money on table. Here strategy might work because you don't play against casino where you have 47% probability of winning where casino has 53% (roulette example). In poker, you play against another player. Before looking into cards you and your opponents has exact the same probability of winning and this probability changes after each card you see. With bad cards you have low probability of winning that's why you should cut losses. And that's strategy that would work in poker.

This raises a bigger philosophical question of what exactly is gambling.

It could be argued that when I was playing poker full-time, I wasn't really gambling. Sure, luck impacted whether or not I won on any particular day, but I played several million hands over a few years, and I had enough data to predict very accurately how much money I would make over, say, a period of 100,000 hands.

Equally, if you play slots, are you really gambling when you know the payout is 94% (or whatever). Is it gambling when in the long-run you will lose all your money (if you were to gamble into infinity).

Once you introduce certainty into a game (which you do the more you play it) does it cease to become gambling?