# Resolved: Betting. Betting is not permitted for any purpose, including but not limited to fun, charity, or for the sake of argument **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [September 17, 2023, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230 "2023-09-17T03:59:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2023, 12:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/61 "2023-09-22T12:09:16Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > There was a former poster here who was probably the biggest proponent of betting on politics. I accepted four $100 bets with them, and won three, netting $200, plus an additional $100 to my favorite charity. This could be 2-3 people, IIRC, but if it’s the person I’m thinking of, I had one interesting interaction where I actually figured out his grift. One day he did his usual thing of challenging me to bet a large sum of money on something he thought would never happen. Somehow I had the presence of mind to say “Sure, let’s go 1/7 odds on it.” And he replied “I’m even-money certain, not 1/7 certain”. Now you can see the game. By raising bet challenges in contentious debates, he exploits the other party’s emotionally amped state. They’ve bought into the simplistic schoolyard-bet even-money standoff, thinking of their honor and not the numbers, so there’s a strong tendency to either take bad odds, or back away from a prediction that has _some_ merit at less than 50%. Coming back round to the point, I feel like giving odds are the _real_ measure of commitment to the point. Anything else is “put up or shut up”, and this frame advantages people who have more disposable income, and a mind to press a shyster’s angle. So without a sort of bookmaking and odds-laying mechanism, I wouldn’t want to see betting as a routine feature of debates. Maybe there are online social spaces that would benefit from it, but I can’t really see it improving the environment around here. ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2023, 12:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/62 "2023-09-22T12:12:56Z")
I don’t like betting. I wouldn’t participate in any forum where betting was a routine feature of debates. I’ve never thought much about that rule, but i guess if that’s what it’s there to prevent, I’m happy for it. ---
**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2023, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/63 "2023-09-22T22:48:37Z")
> [@Dr.Strangelove](#): > > Just change the denomination of the bet. Instead of dollars, bet words. Why would that make any difference at all? You’re doing a good job of justifying why the rule is in place. I’m not sure if that was your intent. (If so, well done.) ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2023, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/64 "2023-09-22T23:28:55Z")
> [@Atamasama](#): > > Why would that make any difference at all? For one thing, if the writer doesn’t cheat, then writing imposes an equal cost on everyone, so it neutralizes the wealth factor. (Although I suppose some people have more time to waste.) ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Strangelove](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr.strangelove/32/6613_2.png) [@Dr.Strangelove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Strangelove)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2023, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/65 "2023-09-22T23:29:24Z")
> [@Atamasama](#): > > Why would that make any difference at all? Dollars come with the downside of having different value to different people. To some, $100 is a triviality. To others, a loss means skipping meals. That difference makes it hard to come to any agreement about what “put your money where your mouth is” means. Denominating in time instead of dollars removes this effect, at least. And words are a crude approximation of time. Some Nordic countries impose fines for speeding, etc. based on a percentage of income rather than an absolute number. That’s another way of achieving the same goal. But imposing hours of community service would work as well. ---
**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2023, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/66 "2023-09-22T23:49:55Z")
The point is that a bet that results in public shaming and forced labor is just as toxic and distracting as one based on money, if not more so. It’s still just as bad and it’s a damn good thing that’s not allowed here. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Strangelove](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr.strangelove/32/6613_2.png) [@Dr.Strangelove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Strangelove)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2023, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/67 "2023-09-23T00:01:43Z")
But on the other hand, we have this: > [@HMS\_Irruncible](#): > > Somehow I had the presence of mind to say “Sure, let’s go 1/7 odds on it.” And he replied “I’m even-money certain, not 1/7 certain”. > > Now you can see the game. By raising bet challenges in contentious debates, he exploits the other party’s emotionally amped state. They’ve bought into the simplistic schoolyard-bet even-money standoff, thinking of their honor and not the numbers, so there’s a strong tendency to either take bad odds, or back away from a prediction that has _some_ merit at less than 50%. And that’s betting working exactly as designed. The other party was making extreme claims, but when actually pressed into a bet, they backed off. _Even without the bet actually happening_, everyone could see that there was a gap between what they believed vs. what they said they believed. It’s toxic to have people make statements that are much stronger than the actual level of belief. And yet that is what happens today in every remotely contentious thread. The threat of a bet–even if it doesn’t actually happen (because the parties can’t agree to odds, etc.)–helps keep that in check. ---
**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2023, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/68 "2023-09-23T00:21:31Z")
> [@Dr.Strangelove](#): > > It’s toxic to have people make statements that are much stronger than the actual level of belief. And yet that is what happens today in every remotely contentious thread. The threat of a bet–even if it doesn’t actually happen (because the parties can’t agree to odds, etc.)–helps keep that in check. That’s complete nonsense. There is no such thing as “the threat of a bet”. It’s a toothless gesture devoid of value. It’s no more than a way to insult someone. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Strangelove](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr.strangelove/32/6613_2.png) [@Dr.Strangelove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Strangelove)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2023, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/69 "2023-09-23T00:27:47Z")
**HMS\_Irruncible** gave an explicit example above where a person, despite _apparently_ having a very high degree of confidence in their claim, wouldn’t agree to a 7:1 bet, and backed off to even odds. It’s obvious that people make these kinds of claims all the time. There is a gap between the expressed level of confidence vs. what they’d put to stake. Just the process of forcing people to lay odds on a thing, or heck, even just nailing down the claim that’s being made to something concrete, is a benefit. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2023, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/70 "2023-09-23T00:43:04Z")
I suppose one could achieve the same result _given willing honest counterparties_ by asking the question in the form of odds, rather than just outcome. But it doesn’t have to be a bet. e.g. > So, @Dr.Strangelove, you sure sound confident with your claim that trump will be the R nominee in 2024. I disagree, but that’s not important now. Where do you place his odds? Surely not merely 50/50 given your evident confidence, but what are they in your view? 60/40, 75/25, 95/5, or a total absolute 100/0 shoo-in? The rest of us want to know what you think. etc. If the goal is to discover their assessment of the odds, ask them their assessment of the odds. Which will “force” them to noodle on that and respond, or “force” them to shut up, or “force” them to weasel. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Strangelove](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr.strangelove/32/6613_2.png) [@Dr.Strangelove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Strangelove)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2023, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/71 "2023-09-23T00:48:18Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > I suppose one could achieve the same result _given willing honest counterparties_ by asking the question in the form of odds, rather than just outcome. But it doesn’t have to be a bet. e.g. Agreed. An actual bet still requires some honesty on the part of the participants. If we are assuming a certain baseline level of honesty–and we should–then just getting people to phrase their claims in the _form_ of a bet gets you almost all the way there. But my impression is that even this type of hypothetical bet is still frowned upon by the mods. ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2023, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/72 "2023-09-23T01:05:06Z")
You mean in the form of odds? ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Strangelove](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr.strangelove/32/6613_2.png) [@Dr.Strangelove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Strangelove)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2023, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/73 "2023-09-23T01:11:27Z")
Odds plus the concrete claim. For something like “Trump will be the R nominee”, it’s obvious that 2024 is meant. But not all claims are so obvious. For instance, in the Cybertruck thread, we had competing claims of “Cybertruck will be fairly successful” vs. “Cybertruck will be a flop”. Not concrete enough to evaluate. “Cybertruck will deliver at least 100,000 units in calendar year 2025” is, though. ---
**Author:** ![Superdude](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/superdude/32/13450_2.png) [@Superdude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superdude)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2023, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/74 "2023-09-23T01:29:57Z")
> [@Dr.Strangelove](#): > > Just the process of forcing people to lay odds on a thing, or heck, even just nailing down the claim that’s being made to something concrete, is a benefit. Not to the other people in the thread who have no interest in having such a hijack inserted into a thread they’re participating in. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Strangelove](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr.strangelove/32/6613_2.png) [@Dr.Strangelove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Strangelove)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2023, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/75 "2023-09-23T01:42:17Z")
Different people value different things in threads. Personally, I consider strong but low-context predictions to be fairly worthless. They have much more value when paired with odds and a concrete version of the claim. Otherwise, you just have people talking past each other. ---
**Author:** ![Superdude](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/superdude/32/13450_2.png) [@Superdude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superdude)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2023, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/76 "2023-09-23T01:55:29Z")
But a wager, no matter the stakes, is nothing but a hijack. The mods have done a great job of keeping those to a minimum. And unless you take it to PMs, all you’re doing is bogging down a conversation with a side conversation that not everyone is interested in having. It’s not just about the people making or proposing the wager; I’d say the majority of the participants in a thread have no interest in a contest to see who is more right. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Strangelove](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr.strangelove/32/6613_2.png) [@Dr.Strangelove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Strangelove)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2023, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/77 "2023-09-23T02:01:43Z")
A worthless claim is already a hijack by that standard. If someone is going on and on about how Trump is definitely going to win the R nomination, they should either put a number to their degree of confidence, or never have made the claim in the first place. Either one would be preferable than littering threads with predictions that can never be called out later. ---
**Author:** ![Superdude](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/superdude/32/13450_2.png) [@Superdude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superdude)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2023, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/78 "2023-09-23T02:11:25Z")
You have to take the other posters into consideration; you’re focusing on the two people involved in the wager, without thinking about all the scrolling that everyone who doesn’t give a shit about the bet has to do. The only way that it’s acceptable is if it goes to PM instantly. That way no one else has to skip past the dick-waving contest that a wager is. ---
**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2023, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/79 "2023-09-23T02:24:12Z")
> [@Superdude](#): > > The only way that it’s acceptable is if it goes to PM instantly. That way no one else has to skip past the dick-waving contest that a wager is. Bets in PMs don’t bother me at all. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2023, 2:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230/80 "2023-09-23T02:46:08Z")
Thanks for the replies everyone. At some point I’d like to discuss alternative language for the rules, but not quite yet. For fun I looked up past betting on this message board. Back in 2012, I offered Bricker a bet on Obama v Romney. Click through for his reply. > [@Is there much chance Obama won't be the next US president?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-much-chance-obama-wont-be-the-next-us-president/609024/190): > > You sound confident, Bricker. Very confident. Will you extend me odds? I get 2 units if Obama wins, you get 1 unit if Romney does. Heh. …I suppose I’d be taking on some counterparty risk. slight_smile ETA: Nitpick: Actually Gore won the election in 2000: Bush was appointed by the Supreme Court. Double nitpick: well, I suppose it depends upon the terms of the original prediction. Triple: Not gonna win this fork with Bricker… Here someone pit someone else for not accepting a bet. > [@"Why I don't think OMG ABC believes his own bullshit"](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-i-dont-think-omg-abc-believes-his-own-bullshit/638984?page=3): > > Because OMG a Black Conservative consistently refuses to put his money where his mouth is. I actually am not interested in betting him money that Obama will win the election. I’m interested in shaming him (and risking shaming myself) by offering to bet that the loser will put something embarrassing in his sig line, something along the lines of “I was embarrassingly wrong about the 2012 election, pretending to have confidence in an outcome that did not happen” and there’s been a remarkable lack … Things quickly calmed down after I posted my thoughts. (LOL no) > [@measure\_for\_measure](#): > > OMG hems and haws. I think he’s full of horse pucky – but so are most people when asked to back their opinions with something tangible, even if it’s of rather symbolic importance. In other words, most bold pronouncements in real life and on political television are BS. Not all though. Nate Silver pointed out that the predictions on the McLaughlin Group are equivalent to coin tossing. And some pundits (Dick Morris, IIRC) are worse (though a few are better - Clarence Page, for example). ["Why I don't think OMG ABC believes his own bullshit" - #41 by Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-i-dont-think-omg-abc-believes-his-own-bullshit/638984/41) Again, if the board wants to ban haranguing, they should ban haranguing. I had a perfectly civil betting discussion with Bricker back in 2012. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-betting-betting-is-not-permitted-for-any-purpose-including-but-not-limited-to-fun-charity-or-for-the-sake-of-argument/990230.md?page=5)