Admittedly, I'm not an expert at this stuff, but it seems like strictly using expected values to calculate optimum decisions can get you into some strange situa

Admittedly, I'm not an expert at this stuff, but it seems like strictly using expected values to calculate optimum decisions can get you into some strange situations, like infinite expected value [1]. For some reason the author brings up lump sums vs annuities, which I don't think is at all comparable to betting (annuities from the US govt are guaranteed payments). That aside, a number of people have already mentioned Kelly criterion [2]. This strategy would tell you that you should take the guaranteed $1 million, but this is a long-run strategy. I personally would take the $1 million because it is guaranteed. I'm also not sure if relying on math for a one-off event like this makes sense. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Petersburg_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Petersburg_paradox [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion