Conducted 3 experiments in which undergraduate males (N= 261) chose their preferred bet from pairs of bets and later bid for each bet separately. In each pair, 1 bet had a higher probability of winning (P bet); the other offered more to win ($ bet). Bidding method (selling vs. buying) and payoff method (real-play vs. hourly wage) were varied. Results show that when the P bet was chosen, the $ bet often received a higher bid. It is concluded that these inconsistencies violate every risky decision model, but can be understood via information-processing considerations. In bidding, S starts with amount to win and adjusts it downward to account for other attributes of the bet. In choosing, there is no natural starting point: amount to win dominates bids but not choices.(PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)