Difficulties in Betting and How to Overcome Them?

We all love to consider ourselves reasonable people. When we bet A instead of bet B, it seems to us that we do so because we carefully weighed all the pros and cons – the coefficient, the probability, etc., – and decided that the bet A has a larger overweight over the line. And if someone asks us why we made this choice, we will be able to present a whole list of arguments that seem convincing to us.

Cognitive distortions can seriously harm your well-being, if you regularly admit them. Fortunately, if you study how they work, you can train your brain to resist them. The following five most popular misconceptions and tips on how to protect from them.

Distribution

To show how this error works, let’s play the guessing game. Do you think the highest tree in the world is below or above 300 meters? Anyway, what, in your opinion, is its height?

If you are not a specialist in trees, you might think that the tallest tree in the world should rise above the ground just by these 300 meters or so. Maybe you suggested that it is lower or higher, say, only 150 meters or as much as 450 meters. In any case, your answer was inevitably affected by the number you heard in the question.

This is an example of the binding effect-the propensity to rely on the information that was obtained first. Since the value of “300 meters” is the only thing that could help you, this number became a binding for your assumptions about the height of the tree, and those willy-nilly pushed away from him. If it were not announced, your answers would fluctuate in a wider range (if you are interested in the correct answer, in reality the tallest tree in the world reaches 115 meters).

How does it steal money from you?

The binding effect can cost you money, if you find the first factor on the selected event attractive. For example, you saw an advertising action in a popular betting shop: an increased coefficient for a favorite, from 1.80 to 1.95. At first glance, a very attractive offer, almost like a bonus, and so it seems to you because the original 1.80 ratio worked as a binding. But if you go to the coefficient comparison service, you will see that most bookmakers have a coefficient on this favorite 1.95 or even higher, and it becomes quite unlike the bonus.

How to overcome this?

The most obvious way is always to check before the bet, what are the odds in other bookmakers.

Staginess sense

It encourages us to join the choice already made by most people, instead of developing their own opinion. First of all, this, of course, is the tendency to bet on popular favorites.

We are all subject to a herd feeling, and in some cases it is justified, for example, when men wear pants rather than skirts, because that’s what most of the males do in their surroundings. But sometimes we obediently follow the opinion of the crowd, although this is not necessary. The brands we buy, the music we listen to, or the candidates for the elections, for which we vote only because the majority does this. The most popular bets of the day are from the same series. In such cases, do the same as everything, not necessarily, and sometimes even harmful.

How does it steal money from you?

Well, you probably already understand. The more popular the bet, the less the coefficient is beneficial to it, and the less likely it is that there is a positive expectation for the player.

How to overcome this?

As already mentioned, following the opinion of the crowd is not always wrong. The real mistake is to do it thoughtlessly. Maybe, in a particular case, the popular bet is really beneficial. But you must come to this opinion on your own. Before you put money, analyze everything yourself.

Distorted perception of the made choice

This is when you watch the match that you bet on, and suddenly realize with horror that you just throw money in vain. It’s such an unpleasant feeling that we sometimes start to convince ourselves that for this bet we had certain reasons, and that it really should be done.

This is called a distorted perception of the choice made. It often occurs in ordinary life, especially when it comes to shopping, and not only. For example, if you voted for a certain candidate in the election, you will be more inclined to justify his actions. The realization that this politician is terribly fulfilling his duties will make you admit that you made a bad choice in voting.

How does it steal money from you?

The problem is that when you are looking for excuses for a wrong decision, you will most likely ever repeat it again.

For example, you bet on a favorite by a factor that he clearly did not deserve, and later realized it. Then you begin to highlight the advantages of this favorite, dismissing his shortcomings, and, in the end, convince yourself that the favorite is in perfect order, and the coefficient is actually worthwhile. And next time in a similar situation you will make the same bet, having made the same mistake.

Or you really wanted to bet on some team, but the bookmakers gave her a much lower coefficient than what you expected. It is more correct to refuse this bet or wait, suddenly the coefficients will grow. But you have already chosen to do it and do not want to hear the voice of reason. Then you begin to convince yourself that it is unforgivable to miss such a sure bet, it must be bet right now and at any bet. And it turns out that, instead of saving money on the right decision, you lose them on the wrong one.

How to overcome this?

The first way is to consider each decision on the bet regardless of what was the last time. Do not try to find excuses for what you did before. Instead, concentrate on what choice is best made in this particular case.

Also there is an option to fix the minimum losses by the opposite bet or Cash-Out button in the live, once you saw that your expectations from the game are not justified, if the current score of the match still allows it.

Strength to confidentiality of own opinion

People are more likely to hear only those arguments that confirm their own point of view, and with which they agree, without perceiving the contrary. Thus, at the risk of missing out on really important information that can change their opinion.

This cognitive distortion often goes hand in hand with the previous one – a distorted perception of the choice made. When we want to convince ourselves that we have made the right decision, we are only looking for information that confirms the correctness of the choice we have made.

How does it steal money from you?

When you need to choose a solution that can cost you money, you need to carefully analyze everything. Studying a subject from different angles, you learn to choose wisely. Unfortunately, the propensity to confirm one’s own opinion is confusing, hindering this process.

For example, wanting to bet, you are looking for reasons why it should be done, instead of looking for arguments for and against this bet. As a result, you accumulate a bunch of news, statistics and everything else that says in favor of this bet, but do not pay any attention to anything that might make you doubt it.

This can strike a double blow on you. First, you are most likely to make a loss bet. And secondly – by missing important information about the shortcomings of the team that you are going to bet on, you can miss the opportunity to make a really good bet against it, right now instead of bad, or in the next match.

How to overcome this?

The best medicine is to cultivate an unbiased attitude to information. Somehow, look for a targeted search for only those data that contradict your point of view.

In fact, you must look for the strongest arguments against your opinion. Then compare them with the information that you already know, and see what turns out to be more convincing. If your views do not stand up to such a test, then it is not worth while sticking to them.

Limits on framework

Time of sociological survey. How do you feel about these two statements?

1. People should be allowed to speak out publicly against democracy.
2. Speak publicly against democracy should be prohibited by law.

Logically, the first statement is simply the opposite of the second. If you agree with one of them, you must disagree with the other.

However, in the experiment described in the book of Plaus Scott’s “The Psychology of Evaluation and Decision Making” of 1993, people reacted differently to them. More than 60% disagreed with the first statement, but only 46% agreed with the second. In other words, people perceive the same idea in different ways, depending on the form in which it is expressed. This error has been called “framing” or the limitations of the framework.

How does it steal money from you?

To illustrate this with an example, imagine that you come to the store to buy a sofa for 50,000 dollars and a lamp for 4,000 dollars. When you are already there, you learn that in another store the same lamp costs 3000 dollars. However, it is 10 minutes away.

If you are the same as most people, you, of course, say that it’s worth spending 10 minutes in order to save a lamp 1000 dollars. In the end, this is 25% of its value. You really would not like to overpay for the lamp so much.

But imagine now that, having gone to another store, you can buy not a lamp, but a sofa, for 49 thousand dollars instead of 50,000. It is not worth it for many people, somewhere to go to save just 1% of the cost goods.

But in fact the saved sum in both cases is the same. The original price should not influence your decision, the question should be only whether it is worth to go 10 minutes in order to spend 1,000 dollars less. But when this thousand is an appreciable part of the price, it seems to be a more profitable saving than there really is. Your brain plays with you a cruel joke, pushing to the conclusion that in the first case it is necessary to go, and in the second – no.

Similarly with the betting coefficients. You will definitely go to another betting shop to put your bet there for 1.10, when in all the others it is given 1.05. But between 5.00 and 5.05, many will not see the difference, for which it is worth spending extra time to go to another bookmaker.

How to overcome this?

This does not mean that you must necessarily, or vice versa, do not have to go 10 minutes for an extra 1000 dollars. The solution depends on many factors, such as: how much you have free time, or how much this trip will cost you in the form of the cost of gasoline. That is, again, the decision you must take, weighing all the objective factors “for” and “against”. Other arguments, such as the initial price of both items, just in vain distract attention.

To get around the limitations of frames, just remove these frames. In this example, they are the price without a discount. Distract from it and ask yourself the question: is it worth spending 10 minutes on a trip, in order to save 1000 dollars, or not? This will give an answer that will be of use to you no matter what you buy.

Conclusion

It’s very important to know about these missteps. For example, if you are aware of what a binding effect is, you can take care not to rush to the first factor that you saw. Likewise, knowledge of the propensity to confirm one’s own opinion may prompt you to be more open to other points of view.