Gamblers and money players are too kinds of people .

[ultramafic]

See, here's the problem. You have no problem betting a few dollars, table time, or a drink with people you know. Actually, that is what MOST of this thread is actually about IMHO. Yet, so many are so adamantly against it.

When I started playing pool, it was in the student center of the university. I would go down there with a buddy of mine and we would always play "loser pays" - whatever it was, $5/hr or something. I'd win about half the time, he would win about half the time, and it worked out. Over the course of the year, I was winning a greater percentage of the games and after he had to pay 10 times in a row or something, he decided that he didn't want to play "loser pays" anymore and we just split the cost of the time. Didn't bother me in the slightest. Did it make it a bit less interesting? Sure. But I didn't think any less for him for it. Hell, he was smart enough to figure out that was a losing deal - props to him!

 

[CreeDo]

And this is what I don't understand. Well, I understand being pissed off because you lost - no one likes to lose money.

That's one part of it. Also, the money signifies a 'serious' match. If you play serious and still lose, that's a feeling of personal failure. You may get an ugly realization that you're not half as good as you thought you were. So there's a second reason to get pissed. A third reason, if we're counting, is that the locksmith may have gone to some lengths to dupe you into thinking you had a chance. So you have this sort of betrayed/lied-to feeling that can almost make you more angry than the rest.

And all of this is a realistic, normal result of Locksmith vs. Sucker.
Whereas the typical expected result of Employer and Employee is both walk away happier... the employer spent money to make even more money. The employee converted his free time into cash.

If your goal is to have a "50/50" chance of winning, why not just save a bunch of time and flip a coin? Same outcome, without the expense of table time - and more time efficient too.

We're actually on the same page here. I don't get into games where I have a good chance of losing. I don't do a thing to hide my speed, so if someone wants to spend a few bucks on trying me anyway... then I accept their money. I don't get any special thrill out of playing for money with a completely uncertain outcome.

 

[8up]

I just don't understand this view. How is this stealing? How is betting on a sure thing to earn some cash any different from going to a job and earning some cash? That's also a sure thing, and not generally considered stealing. They're both money earned for time spent. In the case of the "sucker" - he made a choice to play you, and in the case of the employer, "he" made a choice to hire you. I just don't see a difference. People can argue that the "sucker" didn't have complete information, but we have to make decisions every day based on incomplete information. Those decisions don't generally result in accusations of theft just because we don't like the outcome.

A man that goes to his job and does no work is a thief too. I have found these thieves at every place I was ever employed.

Gambling is easier. Just never bet more than you can afford to lose.

 

[Pushout]

What makes you think they are two kinds of people?? You're making a big generalization here. Both play for money, "gamblers" often bet other things besides pool, horses, cards, sports, golf, chess, backgammon, etc. Gamblers, by my definition, will bet just about anything, sometimes even taking the worst of it. There are all kinds of nits who will only play people they can beat, even at things besides pool. The way I see it, gamblers put their money in action and concentrate on it from dawn to dusk. But, I'm not talking about "problem gamblers", either. They absolutely have to bet on something, all the time. The guy who makes his living gambling, and I have known a few, is a different animal. I'm not sure I understand the term "money players" as you have used it.