Would You Rather Your Partner Know Your Full Search History or Full Betting History?

My percentage would be similar to Klaus.
Sports, betting analysis, statistics.
Occasionally weather.
 
mines probably worse than 6%... cant remember the last thing i searched that wasnt sports or betting related... maybe a takeaway menu... thats about it...
 
Back to the original question though.

I've landed on an answer. Search history.

Because my betting history doesn't just show what I bet. It shows the timestamps. Every bet at 11pm when I said I was going to sleep. Every weekend morning when she thought I was just watching sport casually.

The timestamps are what would end things. Not the amounts. The pattern.
 
Fade the timestamps point is really important.

A betting history with timestamps is basically a lie detector test for every time you said "just watching the game."
 
Yeah the timestamps are devastating.

"You said you were grading papers."
"The bet was placed at 9:47pm while you were supposedly grading papers."

No defense.
 
Oh god the timestamps.
"Bronwyn I'm just watching the match."
Betfair shows 14 bets placed during that match.
That's not watching.
That's working.
 
Timestamps reveal behavioral deception independent of financial loss.
Partner may accept losses.
Partner cannot accept systematic lying about presence and attention.

Timestamps are relationship evidence not financial evidence.
 
Klaus correct.
Loss of money - negotiable.
Pattern of deception over years - not negotiable.

Betting history is deception evidence. Search history is curiosity evidence.
Very different categories.
 
emma used to say she didnt care about the money as much as the lying... the not knowing what was real... the timestamps would have confirmed everything she suspected but couldnt prove...

she was right to suspect it... betting history would have been the end much sooner... in some ways wish she had seen it... wouldve saved us both time...
 
Conor mate that's heavy.
"Wish she had seen it."
That's an honest thing to say.
 
Conor raises something important - the betting history being discovered eventually versus never being fully known, Margaret knew everything so there was no accumulation of hidden truth, I wonder if that honesty was better for us as a couple even if it meant she watched me spend thousands of hours on this, at least there was nothing hidden, the relationship was built on accurate information about who I was.
 
Prof and Margaret having full transparency probably made their relationship more solid than most of ours.

We've all hidden things.
Amounts. Frequency. Losses.

The hiding is often worse than the thing itself.
 
That's probably the real answer to the question.

Neither history should contain surprises.

If showing either one to your partner would damage the relationship, the problem isn't the history. The problem is the gap between who they think you are and who you actually are.
 
Easy to say.
Hard to actually do when you know the honest answer would cause a fight.
 
Honesty would have required changing behavior.
Hiding behavior allowed continuation.
Classic short term comfort over long term integrity.

All of us chose this path.
 
No partner means I've never had to make this choice.
But I've hidden it from family. Same principle.
They don't know the real scale. I haven't shown them. Easier.
 

Similar threads

ParlayPrincess_88
If you could bet on ANY event in history, what would it be?
Replies
1
Views
172
TaffyTipster
TaffyTipster
CoachTony_Bets
The 'Sliding Doors' Bet: If You Could Know the Outcome of One Historic Bet, Which Would You Choose?
2 3
Replies
57
Views
724
Klaus
K
Betting Forum
Guide Why Course History Matters in Golf Betting
Replies
0
Views
149
Betting Forum
Betting Forum
Betting Forum
Guide Turning Your Bet History Into a Coaching Tool (Not Just a List of Wins/Losses)
Replies
8
Views
869
ThePuntingProf
T
ParlayPrincess_88
If You Could Never Tell Anyone About Your Wins, Would You Still Bet?
3 4 5
Replies
91
Views
1K
SharpEddie47
SharpEddie47
Back
Top
GOALLLL!
Odds