The cool thing about the Wolf is that while he frequently gives credit where credit might be due, he's also not shy about stepping back to make his position clear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolf
Printable View
The cool thing about the Wolf is that while he frequently gives credit where credit might be due, he's also not shy about stepping back to make his position clear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolf
A mid 7 figure mansion.
Playing blackjack with Montreal Canadians when they were quarantined in Canada.
$100- $5000 bet spread playing double deck blackjack for 10 hours at the sweatiest casino on strip.
7 months worth of daily reports totaling a million dollars (retracted in one sentence)
This past January daily reports of winning 1.3 million dollars when you actually lost.
All the fucking other claims of winning when you high end comps practically prove you are a long-time losing player.
Dawg your lying is about you very claim of being a winning player. Any lies I have told are about minor details not associated with my actual claim of who I am. And I told these lies because yes, I sometimes reveal too much and there are sleazy little haters like you looking to out, dox and harm me.
Your ENTIRE claim of who you are and any winning you have done is a lie!
When I talk about blackjack and card counting and what I do, anyone that knows anything about card counting KNOWS or should know that I am telling the truth. When you talk about your gambling we get "betting into streaks" and that you are rainman. :rolleyes:
I know you wanted and tried to have some glamourous tale of a winning high roller. But EVERYTHING you say and claim fails the math and way casinos work test. You REALLY should have picked a different kind of forum where there weren't real players that play for a living and know how things work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfFYI, I have known people who wanted certain people for their sports picks just so they could take the opposite of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestion
Well, if your assessment is correct, I guess Billy Walters hired me for my looks. Or are you arguing that Mr. Walters lacks the ability to track down handicappers' historical records, interview people who know them, evaluate the handicappers via conversations, vet them, and figure out if they know what they are doing? Is that your argument, that he lacks the sophistication and wherewithal that you, account, would certainly bring to the table?
LOL.
You are, as ever, a maroon.
How do we know why or what Billy Walters actually hired you for? Is there any record or details on this? I have no clue, I'm not disputing your claims, I'm just asking.
If someone had access to Billy Walters and was able to ask, would eve Billy Walters even know or acknowledge Who You Are?
You should probably ask him. Dial him up.
Now here's what I love. You have an anonymous "AP," the illustrious Axelwolf. You have me, who has not said one incorrect or even exaggerated thing on this forum in more than 10 years -- much less one wrong thing regarding my personal history -- and I'm posting under my own name and address.
And Axelwolf's theory is that I'm bullshitting while posting under my real name, thereby opening myself up to being factually disproven by anyone reading this who has interacted with me in my life.
Axelwolf, here's what I recommend. You're supposed to be tight with Mr. Flowers. Ask him if he knows what the deal is supposed to be with me. Or ask Munchkin, who has sources beyond what he advertises. He and my superior half have some, shall we say, institutions in common. Or dial up Playbook and ask Marc Lawrence.
But you won't. Because you'd rather do some anonymous speculating about whether I'm a public liar, even though there is not a soul who will report that I have lied or exaggerated on this forum or any forum.
This is just laziness on Axelwolf's part. He is one of those guys who claims to "have googled something" as if that demonstrates some actual research. And then you ask him if he read the google results for two minutes, 10 minutes, a day, or a week, and he has no answer. Personally, I think he was insulted when I declined his offers to go to the Super Bowl parties, but that's just my speculative opinion.
I love Axelwolf's communication style, by the way. He thinks it's okay to do the "Oh wait, Axelwolf, did you beat your wife multiple times when you were drunk? I googled it and there's nothing about you not being a wife beater."
It's obvious kew doesn't realize the number of times he contradicts his own claims & statements. It's also obvious how he immediately turns to denials about himself at those points, then spews more lies about those who've exposed him--in some sort of girly-man retaliation, I guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
And even then…often gets it wrong.
When you don’t really play and are just reciting theory you read about, it’s easy to get mixed up.Quote:
Originally Posted by coach bellyOh really?Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Nickel and dime unrated players never get any promo or free bet chips anyway, have only read about them. Of course the UNKewl story often shifts. One day she’s never played rated, next she’s getting comped rooms.
UNKewlJ should stick to what she knows…male prostitution, extortion and retaining her status asQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
The kind of doofus only a mother could love....except that she threw him out of the house long ago.
Too funny. You have no way to respond so you fall back to having briefly worked for a man decades ago. What I typed tracks pretty fucking close and you have yet again ignored my attempts at a real conversation via questions.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestionI wouldn't treat Redietz seriously. Look, he's probably break-evenish. Given that he probably gets 5-20k from a few people every year but they don't care because it is all entertainment for them while Redietz takes it seriously. If you expect Redietz to be break even the real question is whether he is trustworthy and I'd feel comfortable giving him very low 5 figures if I knew him. It could be fun. This doesn't mean he's particularly successful. If so - he wouldn't be taking on investor money at his age. I'm really not sure what his deal is but Kim Lee probably pegged it pretty close. I've known a few professional sports bettors and none of them are even similar to Redietz.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
When I pointed out in simple and straight-forward terms how he is wrong - he has now ignored the question more times than I can count on my fingers. I should give up but his arrogance is top-notch and goads me on.
Well, if your assessment is correct, I guess Billy Walters hired me for my looks. Or are you arguing that Mr. Walters lacks the ability to track down handicappers' historical records, interview people who know them, evaluate the handicappers via conversations, vet them, and figure out if they know what they are doing? Is that your argument, that he lacks the sophistication and wherewithal that you, account, would certainly bring to the table?
LOL.
You are, as ever, a maroon.
When you can't answer you go to crickets or Billy waters or Marc lawnremce's (a computer programmer btw) out of print booklet.
All facts
Quote:
Originally Posted by smurgerburgerQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Evidently truth, like politics, makes strange bedfellows.
Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestionToo funny. You have no way to respond so you fall back to having briefly worked for a man decades ago. What I typed tracks pretty fucking close and you have yet again ignored my attempts at a real conversation via questions.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestion
Well, if your assessment is correct, I guess Billy Walters hired me for my looks. Or are you arguing that Mr. Walters lacks the ability to track down handicappers' historical records, interview people who know them, evaluate the handicappers via conversations, vet them, and figure out if they know what they are doing? Is that your argument, that he lacks the sophistication and wherewithal that you, account, would certainly bring to the table?
LOL.
You are, as ever, a maroon.
When you can't answer you go to crickets or Billy waters or Marc lawnremce's (a computer programmer btw) out of print booklet.
All facts
So let me get this correct. If Billy Walters hired me, because it was decades ago, whatever reasons he hired me for are not currently applicable. Okay, that would make me past tense. That's a reasonable argument.
Let me also get this correct. If I had the best or second best ATS record in The Wise Guys for a span of 20+ years, competing against a bevy of well-known handicappers and, in the case of Southern Comfort, pure gamblers, and I retired from that three years ago, then the intervening three years makes me dated. Okay, fair enough.
But I thought this was all about having sufficient data to go on? You know, years and years of plays and all that before anyone can evaluate someone's ability to make money betting sports.
Evidently, accountinquestion thinks not.
But that's okay. I won Week One this season, and Week Two, and Week Three, and Week Four. But I did lose Week Five.
I guess Week Five is what counts, according to account's professional evaluation.
Really, I'm a loser. I lost last week, and that's the evidence for it. I should retire (wait, I am retired). Well, I should double-retire then.
Thanks, account. I needed your clear thinking and AP insights to enable me to see the light. I appreciate it.
Meanwhile, how 'bout them Red Raiders? LOL. Not sure how long they'll last. They lost their QB last week.
I said nothing about any week. I don't care. I don't follow you closely. You and your riddle nonsense. Kim Lee seems far more sensible than you and his commentary tracked. I don't care about those publications. All the sports bettors I've known didn't either. Sure there are some big contests that people play kinda like WSOP and that definitely gives them bragging rights but outside of that? Who cares. Money speaks. All professional gamblers know this. The fact is you've been in this for decades and still asking for investment money. Something here is missing.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestionToo funny. You have no way to respond so you fall back to having briefly worked for a man decades ago. What I typed tracks pretty fucking close and you have yet again ignored my attempts at a real conversation via questions.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
When you can't answer you go to crickets or Billy waters or Marc lawnremce's (a computer programmer btw) out of print booklet.
All facts
So let me get this correct. If Billy Walters hired me, because it was decades ago, whatever reasons he hired me for are not currently applicable. Okay, that would make me past tense. That's a reasonable argument.
Let me also get this correct. If I had the best or second best ATS record in The Wise Guys for a span of 20+ years, competing against a bevy of well-known handicappers and, in the case of Southern Comfort, pure gamblers, and I retired from that three years ago, then the intervening three years makes me dated. Okay, fair enough.
But I thought this was all about having sufficient data to go on? You know, years and years of plays and all that before anyone can evaluate someone's ability to make money betting sports.
Evidently, accountinquestion thinks not.
But that's okay. I won Week One this season, and Week Two, and Week Three, and Week Four. But I did lose Week Five.
I guess Week Five is what counts, according to account's professional evaluation.
Really, I'm a loser. I lost last week, and that's the evidence for it. I should retire (wait, I am retired). Well, I should double-retire then.
Thanks, account. I needed your clear thinking and AP insights to enable me to see the light. I appreciate it.
Meanwhile, how 'bout them Red Raiders? LOL. Not sure how long they'll last. They lost their QB last week.
Again - since you managed to duck the below 6 times and counting - let me ask them again.
Why do we always hear about how Billy Waters hired you and never why he fired you?Quote:
Isn't there a general consensus that tends to drive the money? A shared set of views outside those of the fans of either team (or pro bettors)? And would this sentiment which translates into wagered money have value in being labeled for discussions? Ie "the public"
Also if a trend wins for many years then redietz claims it will be corrected in the lines but what if the same mistakes are made by "the public" every year and the weakness in the lines helps the books in general? It does not follow that the trend would be corrected. It simply does not make sense to the books. Given how sharps are always being limtied/cut-off, it helps ensure that the vast majority of action is with the public. If the trends being discussed consistently help the books and hurt "the public" then why would they change it???
Let's be clear - since there seems to be more confusion. It isn't the games that have trends it is that the lines have trends. At least that seems to make more sense to me.
I've actually told the Walters story while being interviewed by my filmmaker friend. We are saving it for a podcast because it's a good story with many gambling lessons and implications. Munchkin, surprisingly, while interviewing Walters for his Gambling Wizards book, came away with many of the same observation vis-a-vis Walters as I did.Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestionI said nothing about any week. I don't care. I don't follow you closely. You and your riddle nonsense. Kim Lee seems far more sensible than you and his commentary tracked. I don't care about those publications. All the sports bettors I've known didn't either. Sure there are some big contests that people play kinda like WSOP and that definitely gives them bragging rights but outside of that? Who cares. Money speaks. All professional gamblers know this. The fact is you've been in this for decades and still asking for investment money. Something here is missing.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestion
So let me get this correct. If Billy Walters hired me, because it was decades ago, whatever reasons he hired me for are not currently applicable. Okay, that would make me past tense. That's a reasonable argument.
Let me also get this correct. If I had the best or second best ATS record in The Wise Guys for a span of 20+ years, competing against a bevy of well-known handicappers and, in the case of Southern Comfort, pure gamblers, and I retired from that three years ago, then the intervening three years makes me dated. Okay, fair enough.
But I thought this was all about having sufficient data to go on? You know, years and years of plays and all that before anyone can evaluate someone's ability to make money betting sports.
Evidently, accountinquestion thinks not.
But that's okay. I won Week One this season, and Week Two, and Week Three, and Week Four. But I did lose Week Five.
I guess Week Five is what counts, according to account's professional evaluation.
Really, I'm a loser. I lost last week, and that's the evidence for it. I should retire (wait, I am retired). Well, I should double-retire then.
Thanks, account. I needed your clear thinking and AP insights to enable me to see the light. I appreciate it.
Meanwhile, how 'bout them Red Raiders? LOL. Not sure how long they'll last. They lost their QB last week.
Again - since you managed to duck the below 6 times and counting - let me ask them again.
Why do we always hear about how Billy Waters hired you and never why he fired you?Quote:
Isn't there a general consensus that tends to drive the money? A shared set of views outside those of the fans of either team (or pro bettors)? And would this sentiment which translates into wagered money have value in being labeled for discussions? Ie "the public"
Also if a trend wins for many years then redietz claims it will be corrected in the lines but what if the same mistakes are made by "the public" every year and the weakness in the lines helps the books in general? It does not follow that the trend would be corrected. It simply does not make sense to the books. Given how sharps are always being limtied/cut-off, it helps ensure that the vast majority of action is with the public. If the trends being discussed consistently help the books and hurt "the public" then why would they change it???
Let's be clear - since there seems to be more confusion. It isn't the games that have trends it is that the lines have trends. At least that seems to make more sense to me.
If you don't understand the basic nature of bookmaking, buy a book. You got the process reversed or backwards in the post above. It's kind of scary that you think you know what you're talking about.
Sharps -- LOL -- do you wear a shirt that says "I'm a Sharp?" Do you carry Sharpies in your pocket protectors, you know, like an in-signal like hookers in LV wearing pink?
Read Munchkin's Gambling Wizards book, and you'll get a hint why, in general, people who win do not get cut off. Now we may get our bonuses slashed and promos cut, but very rarely will we actually be told to hit the dusty trail unless we are betting 50K a game or more. And sometimes we are told to hit the trail and then invited back.
People who win get cut off all the time. You just don't even know real pro sports bettors. I've sat around guys talking about having an action junky sports bettor as a friend and how that account has so much value. I've heard it so many times. You live in some weird-ass state of sports betting from 30 years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzI've actually told the Walters story while being interviewed by my filmmaker friend. We are saving it for a podcast because it's a good story with many gambling lessons and implications. Munchkin, surprisingly, while interviewing Walters for his Gambling Wizards book, came away with many of the same observation vis-a-vis Walters as I did.Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestionI said nothing about any week. I don't care. I don't follow you closely. You and your riddle nonsense. Kim Lee seems far more sensible than you and his commentary tracked. I don't care about those publications. All the sports bettors I've known didn't either. Sure there are some big contests that people play kinda like WSOP and that definitely gives them bragging rights but outside of that? Who cares. Money speaks. All professional gamblers know this. The fact is you've been in this for decades and still asking for investment money. Something here is missing.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Again - since you managed to duck the below 6 times and counting - let me ask them again.
Why do we always hear about how Billy Waters hired you and never why he fired you?Quote:
Isn't there a general consensus that tends to drive the money? A shared set of views outside those of the fans of either team (or pro bettors)? And would this sentiment which translates into wagered money have value in being labeled for discussions? Ie "the public"
Also if a trend wins for many years then redietz claims it will be corrected in the lines but what if the same mistakes are made by "the public" every year and the weakness in the lines helps the books in general? It does not follow that the trend would be corrected. It simply does not make sense to the books. Given how sharps are always being limtied/cut-off, it helps ensure that the vast majority of action is with the public. If the trends being discussed consistently help the books and hurt "the public" then why would they change it???
Let's be clear - since there seems to be more confusion. It isn't the games that have trends it is that the lines have trends. At least that seems to make more sense to me.
If you don't understand the basic nature of bookmaking, buy a book. You got the process reversed or backwards in the post above. It's kind of scary that you think you know what you're talking about.
Sharps -- LOL -- do you wear a shirt that says "I'm a Sharp?" Do you carry Sharpies in your pocket protectors, you know, like an in-signal like hookers in LV wearing pink?
Read Munchkin's Gambling Wizards book, and you'll get a hint why, in general, people who win do not get cut off. Now we may get our bonuses slashed and promos cut, but very rarely will we actually be told to hit the dusty trail unless we are betting 50K a game or more. And sometimes we are told to hit the trail and then invited back.
I'd like to say if you're not being cut-off then you're not doing it right however that is clearly not true. I think a proper statement would be "if you've never been cut off nor are your associates being cut off then you're probably not sharp". ;)
Still avoided the questions with fake bravado. Always "read this book. go do your research".
Sucha clown.
Why would sports books allow people to just beard it up and only pick their weak lines? Of course they're not going to allow that. 50k. hahahaha I like it how you're trying to sound like a big shot when everyone knows you're broke in some buster house in bumfuck TN. Sure but nice trees and a small town. ;)
It baffles me that you're so lacking in common sense. If books don't kick off winning sports bettors then they'll just keep doing it in parallel. I mean, I suppose the books can look for anyone trying to hide their location and kick them off for that .. but most likely they're looking at results and the prices people get.
It is far easier for a book to tell you're sharp by the bets you take than your w/l record. Anyway, I always found that interesting because it isn't readily apparent to most of us. You probably don't even know that......
I asked you a while ago if and what I could ask Anthony Curtis about you etc. I got Crickets.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfFYI, I have known people who wanted certain people for their sports picks just so they could take the opposite of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
How do we know why or what Billy Walters actually hired you for? Is there any record or details on this? I have no clue, I'm not disputing your claims, I'm just asking.
If someone had access to Billy Walters and was able to ask, would eve Billy Walters even know or acknowledge Who You Are?
You should probably ask him. Dial him up.
Now here's what I love. You have an anonymous "AP," the illustrious Axelwolf. You have me, who has not said one incorrect or even exaggerated thing on this forum in more than 10 years -- much less one wrong thing regarding my personal history -- and I'm posting under my own name and address.
And Axelwolf's theory is that I'm bullshitting while posting under my real name, thereby opening myself up to being factually disproven by anyone reading this who has interacted with me in my life.
Axelwolf, here's what I recommend. You're supposed to be tight with Mr. Flowers. Ask him if he knows what the deal is supposed to be with me. Or ask Munchkin, who has sources beyond what he advertises. He and my superior half have some, shall we say, institutions in common. Or dial up Playbook and ask Marc Lawrence.
But you won't. Because you'd rather do some anonymous speculating about whether I'm a public liar, even though there is not a soul who will report that I have lied or exaggerated on this forum or any forum.
This is just laziness on Axelwolf's part. He is one of those guys who claims to "have googled something" as if that demonstrates some actual research. And then you ask him if he read the google results for two minutes, 10 minutes, a day, or a week, and he has no answer. Personally, I think he was insulted when I declined his offers to go to the Super Bowl parties, but that's just my speculative opinion.
I love Axelwolf's communication style, by the way. He thinks it's okay to do the "Oh wait, Axelwolf, did you beat your wife multiple times when you were drunk? I googled it and there's nothing about you not being a wife beater."
You DO REALIZE that professional sports bettors ARE PART of the AP community, don’t you? Maybe you don’t.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestion
There are so many logical problems in what you just wrote that it boggles the mind. It would take me an hour to deconstruct that post above, and frankly I won't bother to do it here.
But all that aside, you realize all you are doing is aggrandizing personal opinions by slapping some "EV" labels on them and doing some pretend expertise dance? And expecting people "outside the 'community'" -- I'm running out of apostrophes for this stuff -- to buy what you're selling because you know grade school math and use some jargon. You don't even have records of results, and if you did, you'd explain the losing by importing some "aw shucks, it was variance killed the beast." That was a line from the end of King Kong, by the way.
It's amazing you're not all flat broke, but keep with the sports betting. You'll get there.
P.S. I have to add this. You do realize that the "sports betting community" dwarfs the "AP community" by a factor of what I'll generously say is 10 but could be a hundred. And literally everybody knew about the underdog-first-two-week-NFL-schtick. So you have a perverted and inverted view of your gnostic knowledge. You were in the ignorant minority compared to the "sports betting community" when it came to this particular angle. There were likely 50,000 people who were aware of this before kewlJ ever put finger to keyboard.
The arrogance of you dudes is friggin' amazing.
Why do you think I used an anti-angle for the Heritage contest and all other similar contests the first week? Because everyone was doing what you were doing. This is not rocket science, and you guys are not Einstein.
Sportsbettor: I made a million dollars working rollover.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJDamn right I have an angle. It is the 150% to 200% bonus that I get for every deposit. Then all I have to do is get through the rollover amounts without eating all the bonus money. And the sooner I do that (volume betting) the sooner I am through that cycle and onto the next cycle with a new bonus.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Multiply by 6 books at 3 or 4 cycles a year per book and here we are.
Truly amazing. Nothing like working grandma and the third cousin for those sports book bonuses.
Yep, that thar "volume betting" is the ticket to bonus perpetuity and living on the Las Vegas strip.
Redietz: You shouldn’t do that. You’ll get banned by the books.
Sportsbettor: That would make me cry all the way to the bank.
He obviously doesn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmYou DO REALIZE that professional sports bettors ARE PART of the AP community, don’t you? Maybe you don’t.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestion
There are so many logical problems in what you just wrote that it boggles the mind. It would take me an hour to deconstruct that post above, and frankly I won't bother to do it here.
But all that aside, you realize all you are doing is aggrandizing personal opinions by slapping some "EV" labels on them and doing some pretend expertise dance? And expecting people "outside the 'community'" -- I'm running out of apostrophes for this stuff -- to buy what you're selling because you know grade school math and use some jargon. You don't even have records of results, and if you did, you'd explain the losing by importing some "aw shucks, it was variance killed the beast." That was a line from the end of King Kong, by the way.
It's amazing you're not all flat broke, but keep with the sports betting. You'll get there.
P.S. I have to add this. You do realize that the "sports betting community" dwarfs the "AP community" by a factor of what I'll generously say is 10 but could be a hundred. And literally everybody knew about the underdog-first-two-week-NFL-schtick. So you have a perverted and inverted view of your gnostic knowledge. You were in the ignorant minority compared to the "sports betting community" when it came to this particular angle. There were likely 50,000 people who were aware of this before kewlJ ever put finger to keyboard.
The arrogance of you dudes is friggin' amazing.
Why do you think I used an anti-angle for the Heritage contest and all other similar contests the first week? Because everyone was doing what you were doing. This is not rocket science, and you guys are not Einstein.
Real sport bettors are Advantage Player's who AP sports and ANYTHING +EV.
I can Guarantee you most PRO Sports Bettor who are publicly known nowadays such as.Frank B, Randy, Munchin,.Curtis ALL engange in slot, VP, BJ,Table games etc +EV plays.
Anyone can claim to be a sports handicapper.Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
Walters fired you after one season.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestionI wouldn't treat Redietz seriously. Look, he's probably break-evenish. Given that he probably gets 5-20k from a few people every year but they don't care because it is all entertainment for them while Redietz takes it seriously. If you expect Redietz to be break even the real question is whether he is trustworthy and I'd feel comfortable giving him very low 5 figures if I knew him. It could be fun. This doesn't mean he's particularly successful. If so - he wouldn't be taking on investor money at his age. I'm really not sure what his deal is but Kim Lee probably pegged it pretty close. I've known a few professional sports bettors and none of them are even similar to Redietz.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
When I pointed out in simple and straight-forward terms how he is wrong - he has now ignored the question more times than I can count on my fingers. I should give up but his arrogance is top-notch and goads me on.
Well, if your assessment is correct, I guess Billy Walters hired me for my looks. Or are you arguing that Mr. Walters lacks the ability to track down handicappers' historical records, interview people who know them, evaluate the handicappers via conversations, vet them, and figure out if they know what they are doing? Is that your argument, that he lacks the sophistication and wherewithal that you, account, would certainly bring to the table?
LOL.
You are, as ever, a maroon.
It comes back to one thing. Dietz is NOT a winning sports better. He may bet a little on sports. But so do about a billion other degen -Ev people every Saturday and Sunday. Redietz IS and made his money as a tout. That is somebody selling something. It so happens he is/was selling sports picks. But he might just as well have been selling used cars or time shares.Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfHe obviously doesn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Real sport bettors are Advantage Player's who AP sports and ANYTHING +EV.
I can Guarantee you most PRO Sports Bettor who are publicly known nowadays such as.Frank B, Randy, Munchin,.Curtis ALL engange in slot, VP, BJ,Table games etc +EV plays.
Here is a modern day example. The gamblers on Youtube. Lets say you have someone that plays blackjack regularly on youtube. Blackjack lady or someone similar. Their blackjack play results in an overall loss. BUT they make more money than they lost by being on youtube (however that works). Are they a professional blackjack player? Of course not.
And Dietz wasn't a winning sports bettor. He was a tout selling pick.
Are you assuming that all or most sports bettors AP ANYTHING +EV...or just the real ones?Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolf
How about APs, do all or most APs bet sports?
I think redietz is distinguishing between most sports bettors, and APs who may or may not bet sports.
His point is that there are 10x (or maybe 100x) more sports bettors who do not AP ANYTHING +EV, than the community that includes the publicly known players that you listed.
Don't you agree that he is correct?
Do sportsbooks ban winning sports bettors?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
AI Overview
Yes, sportsbooks can and do ban or limit winning bettors, though it is usually based on how a person wins rather than simply having a winning record. Sportsbooks are for-profit businesses and use risk management to protect their bottom line, so they often restrict "sharp" players who consistently beat them, while welcoming "square" or recreational players who are more likely to lose over time.
Reasons for being banned or limited:
Consistently beating the closing line value (CLV): This is a key metric sportsbooks use to identify sharp bettors. If you place a bet at odds that are more favorable than the final odds, you are getting CLV. Consistently doing this signals to the book that you have an edge.
Betting on "soft" or obscure markets: Sportsbooks often have weaker lines and less information on less-popular events, such as certain player props or less-watched sports. Taking advantage of these markets consistently will attract attention and lead to restrictions.
Arbitrage betting: This is a strategy of placing bets on all possible outcomes of an event across different sportsbooks to guarantee a profit, regardless of the result. Sportsbooks explicitly prohibit this and will quickly ban players caught doing it.
Betting errors or "palpable errors": Occasionally, a sportsbook will post an egregiously incorrect line, known as a "palp". If you frequently and aggressively bet on these error lines, you will be flagged as an advantage player and restricted.
Unusual betting patterns: Wagering very specific amounts (e.g., $117) or placing bets right before a game starts can signal that a bettor is following a sophisticated model rather than betting casually.
Exploiting promotions: Sportsbooks offer promotions to attract new, typically less-experienced bettors. Consistently winning big by using promotional offers, or "bonus hunting," can lead to limits.
Consequences for winning players. When a sportsbook flags a winning player, it can impose restrictions in a few ways:
Lowered betting limits: This is the most common action. Your maximum wager on certain types of bets will be drastically reduced, making it difficult to turn a significant profit.
Reduced access to markets: The sportsbook may restrict you from betting on specific markets, particularly proposition bets, live betting, or other niche areas.
Outright account closure: In the most severe cases, the sportsbook may ban you entirely and close your account. They will still pay out any money owed to you.
Inter-book information sharing: Although not officially confirmed, many bettors believe sportsbooks share information about sharp players. A restriction at one book could make you more likely to be restricted at another.
WHAT SPORTS BOOKS BAN WINNING PLAYERS?
AI Overview
No sportsbook explicitly advertises that it bans winning bettors, as this is a negative business practice they try to conceal. However, many sportsbooks have been reported to ban or limit customers who consistently win, particularly those perceived as "sharp" or professional bettors. In contrast, some sportsbooks are more welcoming of professional action.
DraftKings: Known to limit winning bettors, sometimes extremely heavily, especially those who exhibit patterns of profitable betting.
FanDuel: While sometimes considered less harsh with limitations than DraftKings, it has still been reported to reduce limits on winning accounts.
BetMGM: Some professional bettors report that after a winning streak, their betting limits were drastically slashed.
William Hill (now Caesars): Historically known for banning winning bettors in Nevada and the U.K.
PrizePicks: Considered one of the worst sportsbooks for sharp or profitable players.
Yep which throws the whole brag into questionable value. What did Walters uhhh not see in redietz?Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmWalters fired you after one season.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestion
Well, if your assessment is correct, I guess Billy Walters hired me for my looks. Or are you arguing that Mr. Walters lacks the ability to track down handicappers' historical records, interview people who know them, evaluate the handicappers via conversations, vet them, and figure out if they know what they are doing? Is that your argument, that he lacks the sophistication and wherewithal that you, account, would certainly bring to the table?
LOL.
You are, as ever, a maroon.