How Science is Taking the Luck out of Gambling – with Adam Kucharski

From the statisticians forecasting sports scores to the intelligent bots beating human poker players, Adam Kucharski traces the scientific origins of the world’s …


  1. Just found this but what a great lecture from a professional. Breaks down gambling in a great way making it easy to understand and digest. Thoroughly enjoy the depth and thinking in the lecture.

  2. I dont have a 100% way of winning in roulette everytime.. but I have a strategy where the casino only has 6 numbers they will win on and I have 12 numbers I win on and 18 numbers I break even on.. so I have 30 numbers and they have 6.. it's actually pretty crazy.

  3. Old vid but I played world of tanks where you get a random group of 29 other players, 14 on your team and 15 on the enemy. 49% of the time you will win if you do nothing (This is luck) the 51% chance to lose (draws where classed as losses) was only influenced by you. Some players have would have a win rate of 80% some would have a win rate of 48%. This is where skill comes in, you are mitigating your luck but no matter what you cannot always mitigate it.

    I imagine this is like poker where the cards you are dealt is your team and your ability to read/buff your opponents is your skill. While you can win the game on bad cards you cannot always rely on your skill 100% you need to get lucky.

  4. There is no such thing as "luck" in gambling or anywhere else. Science can't take credit for re-discovering a natural law that gamblers have known about since Caesar cast his die. Relying on luck is for suckers.

  5. i have a cousin that got a coupon for a pack of free cigarettes, so he went to kinkos and printed out over 500 coupons and went too cvs gas stations, groceries stores , got the free packs of cigarettes and then sold loose cigarettes at his college. he charged .75 per cigarette . each pack of cigarette= 20 cigs x 500 packs=10,000 cigarettes. so .75×10,000= $7,500 he made for doing that!

  6. When he’s talking to the RI about gambling, he’s quite articulate. However, lately I heard him on TWIV, which is commonly NY/Texan in articulation, he’s more like George VI. But the americans were very friendly. Can he adjust his speech to the audience?
    Here in Holland he’s taken very seriously on epidemiology, although hardly understood. I prefer Adam Anderson, who’s more clear about epidemiological modeling, speaks more articulated, and not so uptight.

  7. So, the gov tried to stop all of the possible combos from being bought, so that the chance of any possible winner was eliminated (if they had their way). They don't want you to win; they only want to give you the illusion you can.

  8. there is no way to beat roulette rng, BUY MY BOOK IN AMAZON, ROULETTE RNG ONLINE. THE TRUTH BY ANALYSIS. and discover why is impossible to beat roulette rng. analazing rulette rng for years, i saw numbers without hitting for 190 times, columns and dozens for more than 25, no one can predict what random rng

  9. All your theories would break if the universe wants to pre-update/inform you.
    Or what if the universe + you mutually found a way to pre-inform you.
    You need personal experiance of that to understand what exactly I claim.

  10. I've been learning a lot about memory and how to "chunk" data. It was very easy for me to remember that number. I guess this is why this video popped up for me to begin with and also I watch a lot of poker. 😭

  11. It is simply futile to try to come up with some sort of formulation in answer to the question: "what is time?"

    Therefore do not even bother simply change to the question two: "how do I e-x-p-e-r-i-e-n-c-e time or what I call time?

    All attempts at formulations are futile

    Interestingly enough that great philosopher scientist Mel Brooks came up with the following which can be of assistance in what would otherwise be merely a process of chasing one's tail or whining up in some sort of psychological feedback loop:

    search youtube for "when will then be now"

  12. I chunked the twelve-digit number as 610-260-1000-91, but I would have recited it back as individual digits. It helped that there were so many zeros in it.

    I had a summer job as a food service cashier for an amusement park, and employees could get a 50% discount by presenting their employee ID card. I had to enter the ten-digit ID number in order to process the discount, and I would take the card, look at the number for a couple of seconds, hand the card back, and then enter the number from memory.

  13. Went to casino years ago and we had$100 each to gamble with I walked around looking at what I wanted to play by the time I found it everyone else was out of money so I was winner of the day I walked out with$100 in my pocket and I had to buy lunch for these losers!

  14. What's the point of identifying a winning scratch off ticket after you've bought it? I have a system for that too. I call it "scratching it off". Unless he's going to resell the losing tickets, what's the point?

  15. Ive worked in the sports betting industry for 20 year and I’ve met a lot of people that say they want to win money betting sports. As with most things in life you can tell how badly someone wants to achieve a goal by what they are willing to sacrifice to obtain it. Most bettors don’t have the time, energy or discipline to win long term. Paying someone for picks is NOT a way to win long term, you have to invest in yourself and learn how to identify value and find predictive indicators in the market. There’s the art and the science in sports betting. I run a sports betting educational platform focused on teaching bettors everything I’ve learned over the past 20 years. Follow me on IG @TBN_Lefty to learn more on how to join the best sports betting educational community there is.

  16. Further commentary regarding the horseracing system: Firstly, the 25% aforementioned, if actually attainable, provides an edge of 10% nett offtake from the prizepool. Perhaps 20% edge for a nett of 5% is more sensible when estimating maximum outlay per individual bet, so that losing streaks don't bankrupt you. A good system for determining bet magnitude is to work with a small fixed percentage of your entire capitalisation that is set aside to use as the grubstake – say, 5%. The number of factors to be calculated into the system far exceed what our lecturing friend here puts forward. The horses have to be graded by course; distance; track condition; breeding (therefore "Group"); age (a bell curve peaking in the middle); performance over a season since last spell both in terms of prizemoney and placings; how long till the next spell is due; whether the horse is a leader, box-seater, mid-pack runner or tailer; a consistent winner (picket fencer), consistent placer, alternator, intermittent or unplaced; and in some of these cases reckoned against the performance pattern including whether the horse performs well early in its season and fades, is consistent throughout the season or slowly improves as the season progresses; jockey's performance record; the starting stall position; weight handicap; the trainer, the breeder, the owner and their respective performance records; and even such tricky considerations as whether the trainer/breeder/owner wants the horse to win the particular race, or may be playing it for favourable handicap in a more lucrative forthcoming race, or warming the horse up for a forthcoming race, etcetera. So in scenarios like this, a high class horse with big winnings running in a race with mediocre prizemoney does not indicate that the horse is almost sure to win. Factoring all these variables into a system formula constitutes a fulltime occupation, so one must be very sure of one's system, if one is to make a serious living out of it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


44 − = 38