Can a bet that loses have value?

[Peep]

I think so.

Some don't.

As High Times puts it...

It's a "Mirage" that any losing bet has/had value after it loses.

Sounds good, but "Zero" is zero no matter how much you want to believe it isn't.

The only time a bet has value is when you scalp or middle the bets. Then you can see how you can take a bet and turn it into value whether it wins or loses. Other then that no losing bet can you ever say had/has value.

[luegofuego]

Whoever the **** High Times is, he's just stating his worthless opinion. He doesn't argue for it. Why do you post that as if it's interesting?

[MadTiger]

I say yes.

Look at a basketball analogy.

Just because a high-schooler catches Ray Allen on a bad day, and beats him at a three-point shooting contest, you still will bet on Ray Allen EVERY TIME, because he has a tremendous edge. Betting on Allen on that particular day was a losing proposition, but it still had value.

[aggieshawn]

xero is zero

[Dark Horse]

Yes.

Instructive Value.

[u21c3f6]

I think a lot of people misunderstand the concept of "value" as applied to sports wagering. I think most people believe that only one side of a wager can have "value". But that is only true if you know the exact probababilities and that simply does not exist in sports betting. Rather that rewrite what I have previously written (as well as many others), I am going to bump a thread that discussed "value".

Joe.

[Data]

It's a "Mirage" that any losing bet has/had value after it loses.

That is absolutely true and there is no paradox here. The bet may have had value before the game started. Then, during the game the value went down and became zero with the final whistle.

I have no idea what the poster meant but what he said was right.

[Pancho sanza]

That is absolutely true and there is no paradox here. The bet may have had value before the game started. Then, during the game the value went down and became zero with the final whistle.

I have no idea what the poster meant but what he said was right.

Thats not what is being debated, of course the bet ticket is worthless if it loses.

[Data]

Thats not what is being debated

That was my tongue-in-cheek point that one should not waste time debating a person who cannot even create a verbal argument but instead emits a bunch of words that the audience can interpret as they please.

[BettingWizard]

Of course.

If a casino takes my roulette bet, and I win, they still had value (odds) on their side.

end of thread

[RollPlayer]

Value is only about the long run. Say you somehow get the Patriots at +400 against the Jets this weekend. If the Patriots lose the bet still had value because if you could make a similar play again and again then you will ultimately end up positive, despite the fact that the one bet lost

[Borat38]

Yes. Instructive Value.

Couldn't agree more.

[Flying Dutchman]

Some of the best lessons were learned from losing situations.

...I got this from chess, you always learn more from losses than from winners because if you really hate losing, you tear apart your logic to see where you went wrong.

So, you can have right situation, wrong outcome, i.e. setup was correct, but luck wasn't on your side.

[donjuan]

That is absolutely true and there is no paradox here. The bet may have had value before the game started. Then, during the game the value went down and became zero with the final whistle.

I have no idea what the poster meant but what he said was right.

Oh really? Read the rest of the quote:

Other then that no losing bet can you ever say had/has value.

[Data]

Oh really? Read the rest of the quote:

I did, so what?

[kisado]

Of course. This is what many sports bettors don't understand. For instance if someone were giving you +110 on heads or tails on a coin flip, wouldn't you bet on it? Value. In the long run, you'd be filthy rich. Though you will lose 50% of the time, the play did and still has and always will have value.

[donjuan]

I did, so what?

The bet may have had value before the game started.

no losing bet can you ever say had value.

Lost in translation?

[IrishTim]

HT is an idiot who has also argued that openers are sharper than closers.

[Data]

Lost in translation?

Lots of asumptiopns yet lack of reading comprehension on your part. The first quote explicitly tells us of about "before the game" while the second quote may be only referring to the "after the game".

[donjuan]

Nope, lack of reading comprehension in your post and arguing over something that the initial poster clearly did not intend, as is par for the course with you.

[Data]

something that the initial poster clearly did not intend

I am glad you are getting closer.

The OP meant one thing but said something else. What he meant was a nonsense but what he said was true. Hence the irony.

[DevilCheese]

Once a play loses it has zero value. Any play with any chance of winning has some value before it loses, but once it does it becomes zero. The outcome doesn't change the expected value it had before it won/lost.

[andywend]

If I offer you 2 to 1 on a coin flip and you call tails and the coin comes up heads, you lost the bet but it still had tremendous value.

[TakeIt]

another classic think tank discussion.

[sideloaded]

I am glad you are getting closer.

The OP meant one thing but said something else. What he meant was a nonsense but what he said was true. Hence the irony.

Data how are things on the USS Enterprise? Score any tail yet? One question since you're not human and know everything why post on the board? Isn't beneath a being like you?

[jgilmartin]

If I offer you 2 to 1 on a coin flip and you call tails and the coin comes up heads, you lost the bet but it still had tremendous value.

Exactly.

[Data]

One question since you're not human and know everything why post on the board? Isn't beneath a being like you?

The (futile) purpose of life is reducing entropy. I have some non-trivial experience and knowledge that I want to share with young thinking individuals who may benefit from these. This way I support an intelligent life. The "intelligent" is a key word because I think that the intelligent life is going to be the first victim. If a non-intelligent life form is being offended in the process I could not care less. They currently have an overwhelming advantage in their growing numbers, so, as a minority and an underdog, I see no reason to protect their feelings since converting them is impossible either.

[Kaabee]

It's a "Mirage" that any losing bet has/had value after it loses

has (no), had (yes). simple as that.

[saratoga1927]

Kaabee is spot on: "It's a "Mirage" that any losing bet has/had value after it loses
has (no), had (yes). simple as that."

As is I believe Dark Horse is: "Yes.
Instructive Value."

[luegofuego]

I'd guess that the people with the +110 coin flip examples ITT are dumber than op

[Borat38]

Positronic brain hits back

The (futile) purpose of life is reducing entropy. I have some non-trivial experience and knowledge that I want to share with young thinking individuals who may benefit from these. This way I support an intelligent life. The "intelligent" is a key word because I think that the intelligent life is going to be the first victim. If a non-intelligent life form is being offended in the process I could not care less. They currently have an overwhelming advantage in their growing numbers, so, as a minority and an underdog, I see no reason to protect their feelings since converting them is impossible either.

Ice cold!

Yet somehow funny!

Android 1, Human 0.

[Jive]

You guys are splitting hairs on terms. Or more likely, using the same word differently. The word "value" has different meaning when speaking of wagering than it does in other areas of life. You wouldn't say an antique vase worth $5k has any value left after it has been shattered into a million pieces on the living room floor. In that use of the word, any bet that loses has no value. But when people use the word "value" in relation to sports betting, they are aren't speaking of isolated instances. Everything is viewed as a lengthy series, so that is why some say that a bet that loses can have value, because the same bet placed 1000x will produce a positive outcome.

People are misunderstanding the use of the term by the other side. One group defines value as the result of one wager, while the other group sees it as the result of 1000 similar wagers.

Look at it like this. You give me 2-to-1 on a coin flip and I say heads but it lands on tails. If I have no additional attempts at the same 2-to-1 odds, then that toss had no value. It has good potential value, but in the end the potential wasn't realized. However, if you are going to give me 100 flips at those 2-to-1 payouts, then the losing flip does have value because the same wager can be repeated 99 more times, ensuring I will come out ahead.

[BallU13]

Interesting idea....it makes sense, it just depends what you consider value.

[LegitBet]

I see two clear examples of a losing wager having 'value'.
That losing wager can help camophlage(sp) winning bets, thus increase one's time at a profitable book.
Second, one may be able to offset tax implications resulting from winning, once again gleaning ''value'' from a losing bet.

[FreeFall]

I'll leave you with this.

I flip a fair coin
Heads is +100000000000000000000000000000000000 odds for you to win

I flip the coin it lands tails.