What would you rather for

[HorseRacingKing]

£105 top or £395 into a rainbow riches for £500 pot

[Nixxy]

The topic doesn't make sense.

But I think I see what you're trying to say, and my answer is the £105 top, providing it didn't cost more than £105 to achieve.

[Spyder]

yet another post by you that makes no sense

you could put £200 in a machine and get a 105 top, meaning you were 95 down

so, although i woudnt want to stake £395 in the first place, id rather have the win instead of the loss..

now send me my £105..

thankyou

[anfield road]

rather get £500 but not theese days its a guarenteed IOU which brings you on top!

[jonnyg323]

£105 top on fruitie, as it would have meant far less agony as u waste tenner after tenner hoping to win some of your money back on a b3.

But as mentioned above, what was the point in this thread?

[mr lugsy]

if you are player number 1 then i am player .0001

[JG]

back to OPs point. I'm assuming he is saying £105 profit on an AWP, perhaps by some small wins then £105 top OR £105 profit on B3 by getting £500 off £395.


I'd rather the first one, as the second one would indicate a lack of discipline and going on tilt. Regardless of result, this indicates weakness in character and is not something to be proud about.

[jonnyg323]

back to OPs point. I'm assuming he is saying £105 profit on an AWP, perhaps by some small wins then £105 top OR £105 profit on B3 by getting £500 off £395.


I'd rather the first one, as the second one would indicate a lack of discipline and going on tilt. Regardless of result, this indicates weakness in character and is not something to be proud about.

too blooping right

[Spyder]

back to OPs point. I'm assuming he is saying £105 profit on an AWP, perhaps by some small wins then £105 top OR £105 profit on B3 by getting £500 off £395.


I'd rather the first one, as the second one would indicate a lack of discipline and going on tilt. Regardless of result, this indicates weakness in character and is not something to be proud about.

yes true, but, you could recycle the wins on a machine to get to the 105 top, and you could put 10/20/30/40 in to get 100ish back

you do sometimes see sec16's showing quite a worthwhile profit from a few quid, so it is more likely that you would win a small profit from the sec16 easyer and faster and cheaper than you would win by recycling a few small wins then achieving a top without going on tilt on the awp,

although, it totally depends on what kind of profit you were aiming for...

if id gone on a awp and put say £5 in and collected £15 in small wins, i wouldnt think of putting it back in for a go at getting the top feature, you have to agree that this kind of playing style isnt very consistent? surely if you were testing for blocks/profile tells of paying out you wouldnt collect the small wins in the first place,

so basicly, the original question, although thought provoking is flawed completely by the original posters inability to work out simple mathematics!

what stake are we talking for the win on the awp?

£40 seems like a acceptable amount to pull off a 105 top, without being too wallet damaging, so lets rephrase the question:

would you rather:

a) put £40 in an awp to take out £105 (65 profit)

or

b) put £190 in a sec16 to take out £500 (310 profit)

BUT OP has stated 395 into the sec16, not a ratio but the profit staying the same,


playing either an awp or a sec16 aming for a profit of £105 doesnt seem very viable, £105 is a bit ambitious on thte AWP, and doesnt seem quite worth it on the sec16....


basicly, i dont give a fuck! BUT i am being very very moody... maybe im on my period?