You should all leave betfair........

That's the idea state to be in from a money making perspective though.

interesting so you don't feel anything after a win ???

Strangest thread ever :|

a bit of both really, but most people do feel sometrhing after a loss. Might be sadness, angry or even elation.

wierd but true. if you feel nothing after a win your in trouble imo.

If you don't feel anything after losing then withdraw whatever you have left, get yourself excluded, never ever gamble again, and seek professional help.

When I lose 10K+ I am absolutely elated. Is that wrong?

you should wait for the feeling when you lose 20k betfairy.

If you let emotions get the better of you after a loss you are likely to want to recoup straight away which leads to chasing, if you show a profit over the long term and use sensible staking/bank management losers are part and parcel of game why should an every day occurence make you leave betfair?

Actually sometimes when I have a loss I feel quite relieved, it's all part of it and when you have a run of winners your mind starts racing at the possibilities, if only you'd doubled up the stakes etc etc. A nice loss here and there brings you back to the real world.

jesus big tuna


you are supposed to enjoy your job ??? I would hate to be in the situation if being full time on here was all about the numbers.

or what came first


the buzz then the gamble


or the gamble then the buzz

lol, i used to enjoy betfair but now for me it's just boring and the same things every day, althought i do feel good when i'm on a good run

The best is when you think youve lost, only to find a last minute goal saves you. Sheer joy at that.

I remember the opening game of the 2005/2006 season when I stuck a load on Chelsea to beat Wigan. Wigan being the new boys I thought Chelsea would absolutely batter them. At 1.3 i saw it as an easy 600 pounds for a 2k stake. I watched the game, it was 0-0 after 90 mins. Ref added 3 mins on. 92 mins and still nothing. I accepted I had done my money.
Last 20 seconds and Crespo banged a shot straight into the top left hand corner.... I was jumping around the room in a state of ecstacy.
I felt as though I had won 2600 - Not 600, as I had already accepted my 2000 loss.

this is what a shrink says i think he needs a meeting with himself

The fact that millions of people play games which give negative average profits indicates that the hyperrational "economic man" is often not a very good surrogate for a dumb/real person. Models of bounded rationality can account for this:

1. Humans are not optimal and only in some cases locally optimal;

2. Assumptions made by cognitive modelers about how an agent performs architectural tasks, which Anderson labels unnecessary, are subsequently tacitly repeated by him in his analyses;

3. Data regarding human behavior on isomorphic task domains explicitly denies the theory. (Question: Item 2 in Anderson's recipe states that one must model the environment to which the agent has adapted. Does this not limit the task to domain to particular isomorphs and thereby negate the criticism?)


Evolution did not give rise to optimal agents, but to agents which are in some senses locally optimal at best, locally satisfactory in norm, and becoming extinct at worst. Thus, a theory based upon optimal behaviors is tenuous at best.

Optimization implies that the goals of the agent are known explicitly. When synthesizing or tasking an agent one can know or determine the goals of the agent, but when analyzing the behavior of an arbitrary agent, one does not know the goals. In fact, the range of rational goals can lead to such variant behavior that assumptions about the goals cannot be made with confidence. The example cited in depth by Simon is that of economic predictions.

Another implicit assumption underlying optimization is that the utility functions are known (see recipe item 3). In fact, real agents must often act with insufficient knowledge by estimating these. Estimates will range from accurate to wrong, from simple to sophisticated. Since rational analysis- a variant of which lead to the economic theories plagued with these problems- does not account for these phenomena, it cannot be taken as a panacea paradigm for analysis.




answers on a postcard if you have any idea what he is saying about the gambling gene

"interesting so you don't feel anything after a win ???"

I don't watch the races, just check my balance at the end if the day. That way I don't get emotionally involved in what is going on. If I've had a good day I do feel something, but it dulls down gradually with time and I feel less and less as the years on here have gone by.

much more important that you dont feel anything after a loss imo.

why jason ??

I also find that if you dont withdraw, you get sloppy with selections with the thought... if it doesnt win, its only winnings lost.
Stop Stop Stop... Discipline Is Key I keep telling myself.

It is footsoldier.

Chasing losses is a problem many of us encounter I imagine. That's a good reason to not feel anything after a loss.