How much have you lost betting sports ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seedvalue

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Monet, I'm well aware of people who laid 105 instead of 110 routinely on everything they bet when they bet it, but that was for 50K on up per game. I'm also aware of the occasional 5K in free play that could be used towards sports bets if one chose (M used to do that). I think when all is said and done, if you are completely diligent and organized, yeah, you could manage to make a profit winning 50 to 51% of your bets.

Where Ivey got in some trouble (and Mickelson) was hooking up with a certain high stakes sports bettor originally from my neck of the woods. That was a whole 'nother world.

---

You can make 2% -3% knowing absolutely nothing about sports using a simple formula tracking lines that are off/line shopping. Multiple online accounts+ time and dedication and you could make a living. If you were really motivated, dedicated and added more tools such as odds boosts, bonuses, rebates promos, etc, and had lots of friends and family accounts you could do quite well. No fancy handicapping or knowledge about any of the sports. Just some math that shows you either have a +EV bet or you dont.

---

The people I’m talking about do none of this.

I’m also not talking about multi accounting signup bonus’s or working the online bonus / freeplay system like we do in physical casinos. I’m talking about the majority who can beat certain casino games then blow it betting on sports. It’s Just something I have been noticing lately.

I just think most APs would have more success if they tripled down on what they are good at instead of trying to master multiple disciplines.

---

Exactimundo. My phrase is "stay in your lane." People become all full of themselves. They think a little genius and narrow expertise can be applied broadband. You can't master multiple disciplines unless you're Dracula or Jesus and you've got forever to learn.

A little intellectual arrogance is the quickest way to bury yourself.

I mean, really, I cannot imagine me thinking I could make a contribution to my earnings playing blackjack. LOL. I'd feel like a blithering idiot. And I could count cards 40 years ago.

I hang out with a lot of academics, and one thing they know is that it's all specialization. Say what you will about academics, but almost none of them think they are geniuses-of-all-trades.

Seed, I think the phrase "situational leadership" is helpful here. You have to recognize when you're nowhere as expert as the real experts.

Like the saying goes, "A little expertise is a dangerous thing."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

And regarding the initial question, unless you're buying off three, getting two free points on NFL sides all year for every game and laying -110 any given year is not going to yield any enormous advantage. At all. Unless you're working off three.

---

Come on man. The fucking 7 is huge too (obviously not as much as the 3) and a fucking ton of the weekly slate would cross either the 3 or 7 given 2 free points. Just stop pretending a free 2 points wouldn't be a coup.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdaewoo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

And regarding the initial question, unless you're buying off three, getting two free points on NFL sides all year for every game and laying -110 any given year is not going to yield any enormous advantage. At all. Unless you're working off three.

---

Come on man. The fucking 7 is huge too (obviously not as much as the 3) and a fucking ton of the weekly slate would cross either the 3 or 7 given 2 free points. Just stop pretending a free 2 points wouldn't be a coup.

---

Since rules change, and we're talking about the now, I suggest charting this season and working it out yourself. Easy Peasie.

And you do realize there is a contradiction and inherent problem in what mickey is conflating here? Getting two free points is not per se numbers shopping, so it is a hypothetical (and mythical, therefore useless) question. "Getting the best of the number" while varying numbers exist simultaneously, is no guarantee of anything. It depends on the sport and when in the sport.

I was waiting to see if anyone did the legwork. I guess not.

Since the question is put present tense, rather than past tense, one can do with the following ballpark info what one will. I did this counting on my fingers while doing other stuff, so I'm sure I'm off by a game or two but double-check it yourselves.

As far as NFL getting two free points that take you through the number 7, there were roughly 43 opportunities this season where you would have pulled the trigger with two free points. In three of them, it would have made a difference and a loser would have become a winner. But you would have bet 40 other games to win those three.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

I was waiting to see if anyone did the legwork. I guess not.

Since the question is put present tense, rather than past tense, one can do with the following ballpark info what one will. I did this counting on my fingers while doing other stuff, so I'm sure I'm off by a game or two but double-check it yourselves.

As far as NFL getting two free points that take you through the number 7, there were roughly 43 opportunities this season where you would have pulled the trigger with two free points. In three of them, it would have made a difference and a loser would have become a winner. But you would have bet 40 other games to win those three.

---

So why would a legitimate AP want their name to be known on a forum? You haven't even given one reason.........................

Well, there's two pretty obvious reasons, no, make that three, although the third one doesn't apply to me.

Let's see if you can guess any of them.

This is what I love. Instead of thinking for a second or two outside the box of your own life, perspective, and attitudes, you figure "the other" must be irrational or something.

I'll respond on Monday. Try to use your neurons.

The reason I'm so disdainful is that the other day (while cleaning out an old Toyota that is now a cat shelter) I stumbled onto a copy of the first interview I gave, back in '79 or '80. In the interview, I give one of the answers to your question, and I must admit, for being 21 or 22, I stated it pretty clearly and sound like I have a mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Well, there's two pretty obvious reasons, no, make that three, although the third one doesn't apply to me.

Let's see if you can guess any of them.

This is what I love. Instead of thinking for a second or two outside the box of your own life, perspective, and attitudes, you figure "the other" must be irrational or something.

I'll respond on Monday. Try to use your neurons.

The reason I'm so disdainful is that the other day (while cleaning out an old Toyota that is now a cat shelter) I stumbled onto a copy of the first interview I gave, back in '79 or '80. In the interview, I give one of the answers to your question, and I must admit, for being 21 or 22, I stated it pretty clearly and sound like I have a mind.

---

Put up or shut-up.

There is no good reason. I'm not going to go through this. Multiple sharp people believe you are wrong. Here's a deal, if you can't come up with 1 reason you go nap it out the rest of the year on this forum

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Well, there's two pretty obvious reasons, no, make that three, although the third one doesn't apply to me.

Let's see if you can guess any of them.

This is what I love. Instead of thinking for a second or two outside the box of your own life, perspective, and attitudes, you figure "the other" must be irrational or something.

I'll respond on Monday. Try to use your neurons.

The reason I'm so disdainful is that the other day (while cleaning out an old Toyota that is now a cat shelter) I stumbled onto a copy of the first interview I gave, back in '79 or '80. In the interview, I give one of the answers to your question, and I must admit, for being 21 or 22, I stated it pretty clearly and sound like I have a mind.

---

Put up or shut-up.

There is no good reason. I'm not going to go through this. Multiple sharp people believe you are wrong. Here's a deal, if you can't come up with 1 reason you go nap it out the rest of the year on this forum

---

You're not buying the "getting laid" bit? I'm pretty sure ZenKing claims claiming to be an Advantage Player has the opposite effect. Whatever the case posting your real name VS a handle cannot possibly hep you get laid vs not. I think I could make an argument that having a special name could actually help you more in that area. What if your real name is Dick Face?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

You're not buying the "getting laid" bit? I'm pretty sure ZenKing claims claiming to be an Advantage Player has the opposite effect. Whatever the case posting your real name VS a handle cannot possibly hep you get laid vs not.

---

Based only on how ZK acts and says on this forum, I would guess any "problems" he may encounter in that area more likely are a result of him saying something bizarre and crazy and not that he may be an AP. Just a guess though. :rolleyes:

Isn't there a rule, or saying or just good advice that you don't mix business with pleasure?

I will share a story from my early years that I have never shared before having to do with this topic. It will infuriate some of the Homophobes because of homo implications, but so what.

So it was my Atlantic City days. There was a young dealer at either Sands or Claridge, I forget (they were next to each other), who I found attractive and enjoyed playing at his table. Eventually after a little flirting we met for some fun. That is all I will say...very PG rating. As often happens in these situations, the next time I played his table things were considerably more awkward. He obviously felt uncomfortable, so I stopped playing at his table.

There were only a handful of low limit games that I could play at that time, and this had cost me one of them. So the moral of the story is the old....you don't mix business with pleasure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

You're not buying the "getting laid" bit? I'm pretty sure ZenKing claims claiming to be an Advantage Player has the opposite effect. Whatever the case posting your real name VS a handle cannot possibly hep you get laid vs not.

---

Based only on how ZK acts and says on this forum, I would guess any "problems" he may encounter in that area more likely are a result of him saying something bizarre and crazy and not that he may be an AP. Just a guess though. :rolleyes:

Isn't there a rule, or saying or just good advice that you don't mix business with pleasure?

I will share a story from my early years that I have never shared before having to do with this topic. It will infuriate some of the Homophobes because of homo implications, but so what.

So it was my Atlantic City days. There was a young dealer at either Sands or Claridge, I forget (they were next to each other), who I found attractive and enjoyed playing at his table. Eventually after a little flirting we met for some fun. That is all I will say...very PG rating. As often happens in these situations, the next time I played his table things were considerably more awkward. He obviously felt uncomfortable, so I stopped playing at his table.

There were only a handful of low limit games that I could play at that time, and this had cost me one of them. So the moral of the story is the old....you don't mix business with pleasure.

---

But when I pointed out you were indeed putting out to increase your edge at the table you said I was making up things. I have it on good authority that your intimate relationships with dealers got you special looks at cards and treatment. I also pointed out I didn’t have a problem with these types of things. Glad to see you have confirmed this now. Maybe we will soon get a full confession on Just how much edge you sucked out of dealers and pit bosses in Vegas. Again I don’t have a problem with what you do Just be fully transparent

comrade redietz has done nothing but make himself out to be a complete idiot in this thread. Dude is pushing one false premise after another. Get a clue, dude.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Exactimundo. My phrase is "stay in your lane." People become all full of themselves. They think a little genius and narrow expertise can be applied broadband. You can't master multiple disciplines unless you're Dracula or Jesus and you've got forever to learn.

A little intellectual arrogance is the quickest way to bury yourself.

I mean, really, I cannot imagine me thinking I could make a contribution to my earnings playing blackjack. LOL. I'd feel like a blithering idiot. And I could count cards 40 years ago.

I hang out with a lot of academics, and one thing they know is that it's all specialization. Say what you will about academics, but almost none of them think they are geniuses-of-all-trades.

Seed, I think the phrase "situational leadership" is helpful here. You have to recognize when you're nowhere as expert as the real experts.

Like the saying goes, "A little expertise is a dangerous thing."

---

You think you are talking about professional gamblers but you are really talking about compulsive gamblers. Dudes making money on one side of the casino and blowing it on the other side of the casino has been going on as long as I've been around it.

Back in my linked bank Flush Attack days there were guys "taking shots" all day long. They knew how to grind it out on Flush Attack but blew the money playing sucker slots or blackjack or craps or sportsbetting. They used to have the printouts right on the machine with them.

They couldn't beat all those other games so they were stuck on Flush Attack for years. Would I call them professional gamblers trying to branch out. No fucking way. They were compulsive gamblers. They were "taking a shot."

redietz message is to stay away from sports betting because you don't have the expertise like he does. But he never took his own advice. At one time he was as green as they come. Didn't know shit about it. Someone probably told him to stay away because he would get killed. Did he follow their advice?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Back in my linked bank Flush Attack days there were guys "taking shots" all day long. They knew how to grind it out on Flush Attack but blew the money playing sucker slots or blackjack or craps or sportsbetting.

---

Oftentimes, it was 4 guys sharing one room some smack or crack and a love for the ponies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxelWolf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Back in my linked bank Flush Attack days there were guys "taking shots" all day long. They knew how to grind it out on Flush Attack but blew the money playing sucker slots or blackjack or craps or sportsbetting.

---

Oftentimes, it was 4 guys sharing one room some smack or crack and a love for the ponies.

---

There’s only one true edge that can be systematically repeated without variance. I’m glad everyone bets sports lose everything you have on something completely out of your control. Sharp they say

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Well, there's two pretty obvious reasons, no, make that three, although the third one doesn't apply to me.

Let's see if you can guess any of them.

This is what I love. Instead of thinking for a second or two outside the box of your own life, perspective, and attitudes, you figure "the other" must be irrational or something.

I'll respond on Monday. Try to use your neurons.

The reason I'm so disdainful is that the other day (while cleaning out an old Toyota that is now a cat shelter) I stumbled onto a copy of the first interview I gave, back in '79 or '80. In the interview, I give one of the answers to your question, and I must admit, for being 21 or 22, I stated it pretty clearly and sound like I have a mind.

---

Put up or shut-up.

There is no good reason. I'm not going to go through this. Multiple sharp people believe you are wrong. Here's a deal, if you can't come up with 1 reason you go nap it out the rest of the year on this forum

---

I just went 9 weeks making 24k plus a week without variance. AIQ the fagor climate cuck just been posting nonstop bs making nothing. This guy had no idea about gambling or life

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seedvalue

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Well, there's two pretty obvious reasons, no, make that three, although the third one doesn't apply to me.

Let's see if you can guess any of them.

This is what I love. Instead of thinking for a second or two outside the box of your own life, perspective, and attitudes, you figure "the other" must be irrational or something.

I'll respond on Monday. Try to use your neurons.

The reason I'm so disdainful is that the other day (while cleaning out an old Toyota that is now a cat shelter) I stumbled onto a copy of the first interview I gave, back in '79 or '80. In the interview, I give one of the answers to your question, and I must admit, for being 21 or 22, I stated it pretty clearly and sound like I have a mind.

---

Put up or shut-up.

There is no good reason. I'm not going to go through this. Multiple sharp people believe you are wrong. Here's a deal, if you can't come up with 1 reason you go nap it out the rest of the year on this forum

---

I just went 9 weeks making 24k plus a week without variance. AIQ the fagor climate cuck just been posting nonstop bs making nothing. This guy had no idea about gambling or life

---

Nothing out of the ordinary with the climate the last few months either. It’s completely fucking normal just like every other year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seedvalue

I just went 9 weeks making 24k plus a week without variance.

---

And this is the "running cards" play that DO talks about? Doesn't he also talk about 20k a week?...well he says some weeks. Running cards is the 20k a week play. :D

And what fun is it winning with no variance. I had a big day (night) very recently (not going to be specific), winning just shy of 18k. It is the second single highest day (night) ever for me. Of course that was 90% variance because my EV for the night was about $800. What is wrong with a little variance? Beating variance makes you a man. :)

Oh and BTW, throw in a couple tricks I turned on the street corner and that was a 20K night for me. ;)

Redietz has kindly stuck to his word and is napping it out from this forum.

A little birdy gave me a GF link. Micky correcting Redietz and Redietz making up a ton of shit strawment.

He seems to think everyone is claiming bonus whoring lasts forever. He also seems to think that APs claim they can beat any book. He has no clue. He claims people are claiming shit I've never seen anyone claiming.

Anyone I consider a sharp guy on here is not claiming they can beat any book. We are claiming that with enough bonuses or weak lines then the book can be beat. If the there are no bonuses to use and the lines are too tight then there is no shot. The lesser the sum of these 2 things the lower the EV and the less reason any sharp bettor would fuck with it. Mickey is right, redietz is a buffoon.

Oh well maybe a Hollywood producer will come across his posts LMAO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

Redietz has kindly stuck to his word and is napping it out from this forum.

A little birdy gave me a GF link. Micky correcting Redietz and Redietz making up a ton of shit strawment.

He seems to think everyone is claiming bonus whoring lasts forever. He also seems to think that APs claim they can beat any book. He has no clue. He claims people are claiming shit I've never seen anyone claiming.

Anyone I consider a sharp guy on here is not claiming they can beat any book. We are claiming that with enough bonuses or weak lines then the book can be beat. If the there are no bonuses to use and the lines are too tight then there is no shot. The lesser the sum of these 2 things the lower the EV and the less reason any sharp bettor would fuck with it. Mickey is right, redietz is a buffoon.

Oh well maybe a Hollywood producer will come across his posts LMAO.

---

Good to know there are "weak" lines and "strong" lines. I didn't know weightlifting was part of the AP portfolio.

Good to know that some folks can figure out EV on lines that are designed to balance opinion as opposed to being mathematically grounded vis-a-vis coinflips.

The world of APs is a wondrous one.

I wonder if the "weak" lines have an asterisk next to them. "Hey, bettor, look at me -- I'm a weak line!"

Or maybe the "weak" lines are printed with special ink and they hand out different 3-D glasses at the sports books. One kind for "sharps" and one kind for "squares." Only the "sharps" can spot the "weak" lines. Makes sense.

It's the club, man. The AP Club. It's like Fight Club, except there are no losers. The members are too smart to be losers. Or to use their actual names. Or show their sports book lifetime records. Or have their wins/losses publicly charted.

It's like Mensa, except for cool guys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

Redietz has kindly stuck to his word and is napping it out from this forum.

A little birdy gave me a GF link. Micky correcting Redietz and Redietz making up a ton of shit strawment.

He seems to think everyone is claiming bonus whoring lasts forever. He also seems to think that APs claim they can beat any book. He has no clue. He claims people are claiming shit I've never seen anyone claiming.

Anyone I consider a sharp guy on here is not claiming they can beat any book. We are claiming that with enough bonuses or weak lines then the book can be beat. If the there are no bonuses to use and the lines are too tight then there is no shot. The lesser the sum of these 2 things the lower the EV and the less reason any sharp bettor would fuck with it. Mickey is right, redietz is a buffoon.

Oh well maybe a Hollywood producer will come across his posts LMAO.

---

Good to know there are "weak" lines and "strong" lines. I didn't know weightlifting was part of the AP portfolio.

Good to know that some folks can figure out EV on lines that are designed to balance opinion as opposed to being mathematically grounded vis-a-vis coinflips.

The world of APs is a wondrous one.

I wonder if the "weak" lines have an asterisk next to them. "Hey, bettor, look at me -- I'm a weak line!"

Or maybe the "weak" lines are printed with special ink and they hand out different 3-D glasses at the sports books. One kind for "sharps" and one kind for "squares." Only the "sharps" can spot the "weak" lines. Makes sense.

It's the club, man. The AP Club. It's like Fight Club, except there are no losers. The members are too smart to be losers. Or to use their actual names. Or show their sports book lifetime records. Or have their wins/losses publicly charted.

It's like Mensa, except for cool guys.

---

I'm not sure what to even say if you can't grasp what weak lines are. You do handicapping, right? Or claim to at least.... So lets say your handicapping is better than anyone's and the book's line was set at that exactly what your handicapping suggests. Not to balance action - the book just has the same lines as the best handicapper in the world. That would NOT be a weak line. A weak line would be some book that doesn't attempt to balance action and shades their line against their customer's biggest position. (Not sure how to describe it so wtfever) This would provide value on the other side and "sharps" would get that. They don't need to know handicapping - all they need to need to know is how to find outliers and figure out how much of an outlier it needs to be to beat vig. If the line is sharp and not weak, these opportunities will never present themselves. IIRC Sports Interaction was known for weak lines and people cleaned up nicely. Who knows, maybe SIA made more.

I don't fuck with sports betting, but I apparently know more about it that Redietz.

BTW you're AGAIN doing the same shit I called you out for doing. You used quotes on the word strong. As if I actually used that word. Lol. Pathetic.