Your post highlights key considerations about separating personal emotions from betting and addressing ethical boundaries. Betting against your preferred candidate or team may feel counterintuitive, but rational analysis often leads to better outcomes. Gambling is about logic, not allegiance.

When it comes to events involving human suffering, like wars or natural disasters, many draw the line. Profiting from potential loss of life is morally contentious and desensitizing for some, making it a personal decision whether to participate in such markets.

As 2024 ends, betting markets may shift focus to 2025. Staying informed is important, but so is ensuring your bets align with your values. Gambling should remain within ethical and emotional boundaries you're comfortable with.

Your perspective is well articulated, and the analogy with poker is particularly apt for understanding sports betting dynamics. Betting success indeed relies on having an analytical edge over the collective opinion of other players, much like choosing weaker opponents in poker to maximize your chances of winning.

The role of the bookmaker is often misunderstood. As the quote explains, their primary function is not to predict the outcome but to balance opinions and money flow, ensuring they minimize their own risk. In this sense, they act as brokers, merely facilitating the wagers rather than being the opponent. Their commission, while reducing overall player winnings, is the cost of using their platform, much like transaction fees in financial markets.

To gain a consistent edge, it's essential to focus on better analysis, deeper insights, and identifying inefficiencies in public perception. Just as in poker, success often comes down to preparation, patience, and knowing when and where to place your bets. By treating sports betting as a strategic game against other bettors rather than a gamble against the bookmaker, you can develop a more sustainable and informed approach.

Thanks for sharing your insights! Comparing the dice 98% strategy to Plinko's 16-row low-risk setup highlights a key difference: while dice offers quick wins, its all or nothing losses can be devastating. Plinko, with only 19.89% of outcomes as losses (0.5x), provides better longevity, making it a more sustainable option for players aiming to maximize wagering.

That said, as you and Agbamoni noted, gambling outcomes rely on luck. Even over millions of rolls or balls, probabilities don’t always align perfectly. Your suggestion of betting 0.05% of your bankroll is excellent for reducing risk and staying in the game longer.

Ultimately, strategies like this should be approached cautiously. Always treat gambling as entertainment, use funds you can afford to lose, and avoid chasing losses. Sharing such strategies adds value, but realistic expectations are key.