I mostly agree with BG but I would summarize as such:
Risk implies some degree of an unknown outcome.
Probabilistic events like gambling are the classic example of risk. Most gambling can be modeled as a Gaussian distribution, in which case 99.7% of the possible outcomes are contained within +/- 3SD, however there are still 0.3% of outliers, hence a degree of the unknown. Also, the Gaussian distribution is typically a model, so there can be some modeling error, but this can be fully known and hence the degree of modeling risk removed.
Player error, or more properly machine error, has a great degree of the unknown. You could be dealt a straight flush with the intention of holding it but one of the keys switches on you and you draw nothing or the spot light was right on one of the cards and you thought it was a different card, and so on. In the past, casinos would honor obvious errors, but this is rare today. It's well known in the industry that you don't shine spot lights at visual displays, so the use of spot lights in casinos can only be intentional. Likewise the effects of over 85db noise are well known, again this can only be intentional.
Overbetting your bankroll has a degree of the unknown because your demise is not absolutely known. You face a large risk, but you could just get lucky. You face a "risk of ruin", but it's just a risk, there is the unknown in there.
Taxes are commonly considered a risk, because there is very much the degree of the unknown. Tax rules are complex, particularly for gambling, your tax preparer does their best, but there could always be an audit, which might or might not go in your favor. Tax rules and interpretations can also be changed on the fly, you might or might not get grandfathered in, and so on.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Posted by: nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (2) |
