$1 Billion Gambled away!!!!

In your example the $10 would be the total they played or action and the net they lost was $7.

In this case the total she played was over $1.5Billion if we can accept the numbers thrown around on VP free. Her W2s alone amounted to $1billion. If all she lost was $13million she would be far ahead. She lost the $1billion she won plus more. It is like you sitting down at a VP machine and hitting a royal for $1,000. That is money you won and is yours. You continue to play and lose that plus another $10. You havent just lost $10, you lost $1,010 but your net is only $10. You won $1,000 and lost $1,010 which left you with a net of minus $10.

Thiink of it this way. Providing she itemizes (and can offset wins with losses), when it comes to her taxes, she must claim that $1billion (actually however much of that she won is a specfic year) and then list her losses. Bet she didnt say she just lost $13million! To simplify make it one year. She would say she won $1billion but lost $1.13 billion so owes no taxes for her winnings. She lost over $1billion.

Could we commit to each other to speak English?

If a woman drops one billion dollars in quarters into the little coin slot at the top of the video poker machine, and then, by the grace of God, is fortunate enough to somehow scoop $987 million worth of quarters out of the shiny tub at the bottom of the machine, let's say she lost $13 million.

Because that's what she lost. $13 million.

I think she might have been playing dollars.

We are speaking English. First she did not drop in $1 billion, she dropped in much more. She won over $1 billion which she lost. She didnt take out $987 million. It was not one event.

I once again refer you to filing a tax return. She must list, as winnings since W-2s were issued, the $1 billion she won. So you are advocating, in the area on the form for losses, telling the IRS she lost only $13 million? I believe, the correct process and the entries, at least according to taxes we have filed, is to list all winnings. Then, since we itemize, we list all losses. Then we list a net. If positive we owe money on that amount. If negative we owe nothing on winnings but can not, unless our profession is professional gambler, cand we use that negative to offset any other income.

LMAO

Have to disagree, think may have been playing $3 bills actually

The only thing I'm going to clarify is that I am a Man... although for my avatar I use a pretty girl that looks similar to The New Mrs. Blade.

Carry on.

Where did you get that information from? It's not in the Associated Press story linked at the top of this thread.

I realize that there are surely more stories about this foolish woman. But where did you get the information that she wagered "much more" than $1 billion?

If, as you claim, she wagered "much more" than $1 billion, yet held her losses to just $13 million, she may just wind up being remembered as among the most fortunate casino gamblers in history.

From the article
"She won about $1 billion from 2000 to 2009, according to winnings that casinos reported to the Internal Revenue Service, but lost even more. Iredale said her net gambling losses topped $13 million."

According to the folks on VP Free, as I stated, they estimated that, playing video poker, her action would have to have been in the neighborhood of $1.5 billion wagered, given the statistics and varience in the games, for her to have won $1 billion.

But in any event, as I said, she lost $1 billion. If we use your thinking then if I go on a trip this month and win $10,000 playing video poker and then go back in November on another trip and lose $10,000 why I have lost nothing. I may have a net of zero but when I go back in November and I come home $10,000 lighter then when I showed up I lost $10,000.

As to be luckiest I dont know. I do know that even a negative game like 9/6 jacks or better where with perfect pay the return is 99.54 that even if figuring you lose .5 or half of one percent the expected loss on 1.5 billion is 7.5 million. How she is the luckiest gambler when she lost nearly twice that net beats me.

marcr- Be careful using logic- you will get bombarded with graphs and charts.

Well, no she didn't, she lost about $13 million according to every credible news source I've seen to date. But I can see you're just not going to bow to what the AP reported when you have anonymous people making guesses on an internet forum to rely on.

In this life, we all get to choose what we believe, so I'll move on.