This kinda just sounds like my normal life. I may already hold a world record...

The only thing he has to do is jerk off basically but if people are watching him that's unlikely. Really difficult bet with 0 light (if you're not blind) but I'd do it for 100K if there was no tax implications.

i think there was an experiment done like this with circadian rythem and offsetting a 24 hour day but not as long. not only does this guy have no shot hes gonna start hallucinating after a few days.

also there may be affects to your eyes with seeing no light for that long. i know you can lose vision over a long time not sure how long. so yeah , id bet all i have that he cant do it.

Does a radio count as human contact?

If he’s married he is a huge favorite.

A more interesting prop bet would be can Kessler go a year without starting a thread or a month without slots.

I am interested in the details about (medical) emergencies.

The person in the room can obviously create one very easily by stopping to eat/drink. But the other side could also find a doctor who tells them to abort.

My money would be on the bet being voided after max 2 weeks.

1;1 is nuts. I dont know what are the right odds but it should be closer to a free roll. Good luck and godspeed to whomever is trying this.

You do realize it's common to challende deals in court post factum based on the fact that one side didn't fully understand or realize consequences of the agreed deal?

Borgata vs Ivey?
Sapkowski vs CD Project?

Bottom line is there are almost 8 Billion people on the planet now. We can afford to lose a few.

Doyle said it's not Huck on the stream last night. It's a reg in the Bellagion NLHE game.

The problem with the bet is that there's got to be a huge information imbalance here. Knowing what I (and, apparently, most people in this thread) think, the guy going into solitary confinement for a month is a huge dog.

Yet, he's only getting even money.

Thus, either
a) there's something big that people commenting in this thread do not know (maybe he can drug himself somehow? or there's some sort of activity he can do?).

or

b) the bettor does not know how dangerous and unlikely this bet is.

With (most) normal bets, they "feel" fair and reasonable 'cause people can legitimately argue whether something is a 55% or a 45% favourite (or whatever). In this case, however, it seems that this is a 99%:1% (or worse) situation.

In that case, the guy going into solitary confinement appears to be essentially drawing dead, and that's what makes it feel like an unfair swindle of the guy.

Only Ashy Larry could pull this off

since when do we feel bad for people educated in the word of gambling who take the wrong side of a bet? This isnt some off the street sucker, there isnt some arbitrary line where someone who knows the ins and outs of gambling gets a pass because they took a ****ty bet. Otherwise the punter112345's of the world are just freerolling you.

I agree with you.

I don't feel bad if Goldman Sachs makes an investment in a complicated and risky financial "asset" that turns to ****, because they have the competency to make that judgement. But I feel bad if Mom + Pop investors do - because I suspect they'd have been misled to make the investment.

It is, however, possible to deliberately swindle Goldman Sachs in some ways (eg, by misleading them somehow) which would make GS a victim of fraud etc.

I don't know what happened here, which is why I don't understand why the bet is happening at these odds. It seems likely that the guy going into solitary confinement is probably either an idiot (unsophisticated Mom +Pop investor in my analogy) or maybe a victim of fraud. It is, of course, possible that I'm an idiot and there's something I don't know. I don't like any of those three options. I don't see how else to explain this.

To clarify, these are the three most likely explanations of the situation here to my mind (in no particular order):

1) I'm an idiot and there's something big I don't know.
2) The guy going into solitary confinement is an idiot, and there's something big that he doesn't know.
3) The guy going into solitary confinement is the victim of being misled/defrauded in some way.

Each of these suck, imo.

agree with your point on fraud, but I can't see it applying at all here. The bet isnt at all dangerous like people are laughably trying to make it out to be, the guy can walk out of the room at any time, so its not like the ability to judge the correct odds of a bet have put him in any harm.

Does the opposite apply then? What if like you said it turns out this guy is some monk who routinely spends a month in a closet meditating and hes actually 99.9% to win this bet? Does the loser on the other end get to claim hes been tricked and not have to pay?

Does the guy who drove the golf ball 500 yards down the frozen river have to give the money back now?

for the people saying it not possible and he wont last a week, i will take 100:1 on this guy making it.

my $50 to your $5000, escrow required.

how rough is your life that youd do this for $5K? Thats like min wage or something

As a person who has spent sometime in confinement I think this would be extremely difficult however it is possible. The person would have to be a very strong minded person who is either very financially motivated or just little off their rocker. The 3 days I spent locked up I have no human interaction other then a single visit from a bail commissioner for all of 1 min. The lights were on 24 hours a day however instead of off, but both are very difficult to deal with either way, also had nothing but trash bag like material as a blanket to sleep on a concrete "bed" and a toilet, a random police officer would drop off a meal 3x through a tiny slot in the door. I would certainly not be willing to do this for $100k, realistically would have to be at least $250k to consider it.

720 hours of isolation in the dark

Drawing dead.

Well, I don't know that.
I think that would fall under category (1) - I'm an idiot - because that would be a very big and material piece of information that I didn't know about.
I dunno. It seems to me that much of the propbet gambling world is probably a Massuain gift economy without normal markets, trading, etc.

In a normal market economy as we experience daily, you'd have competition setting prices. Whereas in the 500 yard frozen river example (and the solitary confinement bet) there's no competition, and people are just making deals that seem to push the edge of what they think they can get paid on - both in the present deal, and by establishing a future reputation to earn more propbet wagering gifts in the future.

How do we know that person isn’t a sucker? Only because it’s supposed to be a Bellagio reg doesn’t mean he is knowledgeable enough to not accept ridiculously bad terms on a wager.

On Saturday somebody with a PhD was looking to bet his $100 against my $100 on Auburn beating Bama. Needless to say I took the bet and then got out my phone to put $5 on Auburn to hedge the bet.

im betting on this guy - not me