Quote:
Originally Posted by ZenKinG
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZenKinG
Everyone writes tiny replies, but, KJ, still with the nutty essays.
Not a single thing said here is true Bob Dietz.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
I didn't claim I died in a robbery. Post where I claimed that? You can't because it never happened. A short time, maybe a week, I don't know after being held up at gunpoint, outside my home, in which the person demanded "my bankroll", I had a medical situation completely unrelated that resulted in my first heart value replacement. Still concerned about this robbery and potential for future specifically because of the mention of "bankroll", I came up with the (ill-conceived) "deathgate" plan, thinking it might solve the problem.
I NEVER named who the attorney was the represented me through the settlement negotiations. I challenge you to post where I did.
Can you show PROOF that the backroom incident didn't occur or that I didn't receive a settlement. (note my intentional not mentioning where as I am restricted from doing so). Show Proof!! You can't because it did happen. I still have the proof, although can't show it on a public forum without inviting a whole host of further legal problems.
Can you show PROOF that I didn't attend Villanova, Bob Dietz?
You have no proof of any of these things you claims. Nor of the bigger claim that I still am a card counter/blackjack AP.
You Bob Dietz, just like the other trolls and haters have specualation, and made up theories. Not an ounce of proof.
I/we have PROOF that singer lied in the RV fiansco (as well as the jackpot on computer screen in his daughters house).
I/we have PROOF that Mdawg lied about his gambling claims, when he on his own (or forced by Wizard) retracted 7 months and millions of dollars in winnings previously claimed.
We have proof that you were a tout and not the greatest sports bettor of the last 50 years, when Kim Lee and expert....YOUR expert showed up here and stated so based on studying the publications you claimed.
What PROOF do you or anyone have that I am not Ap who has supported myself from card counting for 22 years now. You have speculation and made up shit like male prostitution, based on some sort of dislike or jealousy. But not an ounce of proof. Not a single ounce. All you can do is attempt to smear, just like the other trolls, because THAT is what you now are Bob Dietz. You have become just another troll. Maybe you were all along and just hid it better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MHF
It occurs to me that these trolls don't know what the definition of Proof is.
I have given some examples. Singer in the RV at the dealership that he didn't own. Dawg retracting a statement of claims of winning millions over 7 months. Dietz finally coming around admitting that he sold picks rather than was some Billy Walters type great handicapper. These things are PROOF.
What people have on me is speculation and made up shit. That is NOT proof people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MHF
Aw, shucks, red. Why hasnt Druff reported seeing your credit score yet? Whats it been? A year? Do you think it got lost in the mail?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Were you lying? So it ain’t so, redietz.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmAw, shucks, red. Why hasnt Druff reported seeing your credit score yet? Whats it been? A year? Do you think it got lost in the mail?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Were you lying? So it ain’t so, redietz.
We close on a newly built home, which sits in the shadow of Bristol Motor Speedway, in two weeks. Four bedrooms. When Rob makes his way to Asheville next time, he's invited to drop in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Having your ATS selections in public, every week for decades, is handicapping last I checked. And being hired by Billy Walters, well, that would suggest I have some idea what I'm doing.
I assume this was kewlJ's brilliant ploy to evoke a response. LOL. Congrats.
OMG! What is wrong with you Mate?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Having your ATS selections in public, every week for decades, is handicapping last I checked. And being hired by Billy Walters, well, that would suggest I have some idea what I'm doing.
I assume this was kewlJ's brilliant ploy to evoke a response. LOL. Congrats.
1) please let us know, if at any time, you decide to join the rest of us in the 21st century, or if you are going to live out your remaining years in the 1980's.
2) Those contests, posted in publications, served only 1 purpose. They were a tool that you and other touts used to solicit new sucker/customers. NOTHING MORE> . Stop pretending that it was some kind of proof that you were the second coming of Billy Walters.
And speaking of which....I see you name dropped him again. Exactly how long did you work for Billy Walters as a runner. Months?
If someone were to walk up to Mr Walters and mention the name Bob Dietz, what would his response be? My guess is he would say "Who"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcap
Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballs
One final look at PROOF regarding this forum.
Who has attempted to "prove anything on an internet forum?
1) Rob Singer by climbing inside an RV at the RV dealership. :rolleyes:
2) Mdawg by spreading cash and chips out on a bed, as if that proves he won something. :rolleyes:
3) And Now Bob Dietz using these contests and publications from last century (which are a tool for the tout business and NOTHING more) to attempt to prove he is the second coming of Billy Walters.
NONE of these things prove what the person is pretending they do. NONE of them!
Now who doesn't attempt to "prove" anything. That would be any of the real players and APs. Mickeycrimm has NEVER attempted to prove anything. Axelwolf never that I am aware of. Neither have I, or Zenking or any other real AP/winning player. Not Here. Not on any other forum I have ever been on.
We "prove" by knowing what the fuck we are talking about, having the math work and not claiming something that defies how the industry works.
These guys attempt there phony proof because they have demonstrated they do not know what the fuck they are talking about with comments like machines indicating hot and cold cycles (Singer), 60 winning blackjack hands in a row and comments about the casinos not caring about players winning (dawg) and redeitz and his now famous EV quotes and not understand Kelly Wagering or thinking it applies to sports bettors.
No wonder these guys attempt to submit their phony proof, as they have demonstrated beyond any doubt that they haven't a clue about what they are talking about and claiming.
It is almost a "tell" at this point. If someone is trying to submit proof of what they claim, you can go ahead and write it off as fiction. :cool:
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJOMG! What is wrong with you Mate?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Having your ATS selections in public, every week for decades, is handicapping last I checked. And being hired by Billy Walters, well, that would suggest I have some idea what I'm doing.
I assume this was kewlJ's brilliant ploy to evoke a response. LOL. Congrats.
1) please let us know, if at any time, you decide to join the rest of us in the 21st century, or if you are going to live out your remaining years in the 1980's.
2) Those contests, posted in publications, served only 1 purpose. They were a tool that you and other touts used to solicit new sucker/customers. NOTHING MORE> . Stop pretending that it was some kind of proof that you were the second coming of Billy Walters.
And speaking of which....I see you name dropped him again. Exactly how long did you work for Billy Walters as a runner. Months?
If someone were to walk up to Mr Walters and mention the name Bob Dietz, what would his response be? My guess is he would say "Who"?
Well, we have an interesting theory presented by the KewlJ. That theory is that winning for decades with documented ATS records should not count as evidence that handicappers win. Documented plays made public well in advance of the events, or tallied by actual journalists and then published, should not be considered evidence that handicappers win.
Fascinating theory. I notice that there is no evidence that kewlJ wins...at anything. Ever.
And -- LOL -- I was not ever a runner, and specifically not ever a runner for Mr. Walters.
Now I know the kewlJ is chomping at the bit to ask me to prove I was NOT simply a runner for Mr. Walters. But the kewlJ is also bright enough to know that he doesn't really know what he's talking about, so he's not going to ask for that proof. It's actually a sweet little study in how disciplined the kewlJ is. He knows he's wrong, but I'm not blabbing about how he's wrong, so he's going to keep repeating his silly narrative until I correct him.
Well, I'm not going to correct him until (A) about the 50th time he repeats this nonsense or (B) until he wagers on it and the money is in escrow. I could not have been a runner for Mr. Walters. And the reason is pretty obvious. But I need the kewlJ to go with this story of his another 45 times or so before I actually spell it out for him. I want him to make an ass of himself another 45 times. Somebody please start the tally.
Now is KewlJ a male prostitute, as multiple posters have claimed? Well, the evidence for that, while shaky, exceeds the evidence for him making a living playing blackjack. And this is the guy claiming that ATS selections, published in advance and read by tens of thousands of people, should not be considered evidence of handicapping.
This kewlJ is an interesting dude with interesting ideas. Can't say I have ever heard arguments like his before. He feels the best evidence, evidently, is no evidence.
You continue to try to pretend that you made whatever money you made by picking winners and betting on them. YOU DIDN'T! You were a tout. You made your money by selling picks. All those contests were was a tool that touts use to solicit new sucker/customers. NOTHING MORE, Dietz!Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
A real professional sports bettor, makes money by betting sports. Not selling picks (That is a tout). A real sports bettor don't need other people's money, clients and/or customers...whatever you call them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by soxfan
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawgA lightning MDawg copy/paste versus…
In sum, there’s really no way UNKewlJ does much more than live on the internet. Of course he doesn’t claim to have ever done much either (booted out of his own familial home, high school dropout, homeless) but still, he could have at least done something with his life other than spent it trying to convince (unsuccessfully) about a dozen people over and over every day all day that he’s not lying (again).Quote:
Originally Posted by Gottlob1
The truth is … UNKewlJ hasn’t spent 20 years playing blackjack. He’s spent 20 years trying to convince people that he’s been playing blackjack.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Look Dietz, I know you went to Pennsylvania Farmer's college or whatever the original name was, so I will try to explain this so even YOU can understand.
A professional gambler, gambles for a living. That means places real money wager on outcomes of events, casino games, sporting events, what have you. They have to win more than they lose, winning more money than they lose. If they lose more than they win, they lose money and won't last long as a professional gambler (unless they have a family that just keeps giving them money :rolleyes:)
So you Bob Dietz, do NOT meet this criteria is any way. You make you money by selling a service. You are a salesmen. It just so happens that service is related to sports in the form of picks. But You make your money from sales. Might just as well be condo as sports picks.
Unlike a professional gambler you don't lose money if your picks don't win. Oh you may claim you place a few sheckles on some bets, but the majority of your money comes from sales and isn't effected win or lose the wagers.
You Got it so far, PA farmers college boy?
Now you hold out these contests and publications of contest as some sort of proof that they are not. Those things are a tool that touts use to solicit new customers. And everyone knows it. And even that, if you do poorly in a contest, it costs you nothing, moneywise. except maybe you can't hold out that particular contest when soliciting new suckers. You are going to have to re-use some of the older ones that you did better in. In YOUR case, I guess that is 1983. :D
So stop with this nonsense. Just like Singer in the Newell at the dealership and Dawg with his cash and chips on the bed, your proof doesn't prove what you are trying to claim it does. And you just aren't fooling anyone.
THAT is the offensive part. That you people think you can come to a gambling forum (I know this barely qualifies), where there are real professional gamblers and player that play for a living, and think you can pull this shit. It is insulting dude.
.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
.
.
https://i.imgur.com/3nmNeg9m.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozzy
The crazy Canadian Garnabby wants shorter posts. So here goes.
Bob Dietz, you are NOT a professional gambler/sports bettor. You don't understand EV, variance, or Kelly wagering. YOU make your money by selling a service not from gambling. You are a salesman. That service just happens to involve sports. End of story!
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawgUNKewlJ is like a cerebral palsy victim who knows he can't walk straight and is stumbling all over the place, but can't do anything about it because that's the way he's wired.
Try as he might, he can't help sputtering and stumbling and drooling all over himself whenever someone posts anything about him (or MDawg, or Rob, or REDietz), as his hands hit the keyboard and pound out, manically,He's as bad as jungwoo or K.Stone, coming out like a prize fighter at the bell! whenever MDawg makes a post, desperate to be heard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gottlob1
And while MDawg's automated copy/pastes just spit out a response in seconds, these fellows, especially UNKewlJ, spend up to hours crafting their posts every day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gottlob1
But really looking forward to this interview that will never happen Dietz. :cool:
Well, it's good to know I don't gamble. Thank God.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
You know your account at Oddsmaker? That little boutique book? I bet more than half a million there, all on record of course, and it's one of more than a dozen accounts. But it is one of my accounts with the least action. You know me, no 50 bets a day in pursuit of a bonus, thinking the site, God bless them, won't catch on. I'm just not clever enough to do that stuff.
But I digress. You gotta love someone who claims the best evidence is a lack of evidence. How does that line go, according to some posters? KewlJ is known for saying that some people blow what they're talking about, and some people are just talking? Something like that.
Nobody on this forum, other than MrV (who actually is among the least knowledgeable) thinks kewlJ actually gambles. It's pretty funny. The guy who has convinced the least posts the most. I guess this forum desperately needs more people to blow what they're talking about. Or something like that.
For the hundredth time, I Don't have an account at oddsmaker.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
I did, but they were the very first to cut me off (shitty bonuses and rollover requirements) after I transitioned from rec sports bettor to bonus APing. The VERY first well over a year ago. I knew they were never going to be able to handle the volume of wagers and money I was betting, so it was no surprise.
No go ahead and bring up YouWager next. Another sports book that I no longer play. They were the second to cut me off by stiffing me bonus money after I had achieved rollover.
Dietz, you don't know shit about me or what I do. You Bob Dietz are the very definition of a "poser". Not surprising you have latched on to other posers like you have. Is there a secret "Poser" handshake?
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by KewlJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
WHO'S MONEY DID YOU BET?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfWHO'S MONEY DID YOU BET?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Interesting question. Would you be more impressed if I (A) bet all my own money or (B) was entrusted by other people to bet theirs?
Assuming people are generally halfway bright, I would be more impressed with (B). It would mean I had a long-term reputation with a group of individuals who knew each other and felt comfortable plopping down five digits plus in my custody to do with as I pleased.
Now you might have a different response, but frankly I see (B) as much more impressive. Betting half a million yourself at a particular site just means you have half a million to bet. Betting half a million at a site with it being other people's money means the person betting must either (A) have some kind of verifiable track record that would entice them to do so, (B) they would theoretically be so experienced in the business that they have no qualms handing off the money, or (C) I'm able to hypnotize wealthy people to give me money to play with.
Axelwolf, do you really think that was some kind of gotcha question? Have you been imbibing this evening?
And if you're going to capitalize shit, either take a freshman English class or turn on a spell-checker. Christ, Alan Mendelson is turning over right now.
I've bet 100k in an hour on a machine and I'm a putz in the AP world. This guy probably betting some sort of bullshit frequent players points. Notice how red didn't say what he actually bet - just half a million. Lol wtfever. Clowns aboundQuote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfWHO'S MONEY DID YOU BET?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
You keep telling red how it actually is when you're not playing off wife/associate money.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJFor the hundredth time, I Don't have an account at oddsmaker.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
I did, but they were the very first to cut me off (shitty bonuses and rollover requirements) after I transitioned from rec sports bettor to bonus APing. The VERY first well over a year ago. I knew they were never going to be able to handle the volume of wagers and money I was betting, so it was no surprise.
No go ahead and bring up YouWager next. Another sports book that I no longer play. They were the second to cut me off by stiffing me bonus money after I had achieved rollover.
Dietz, you don't know shit about me or what I do. You Bob Dietz are the very definition of a "poser". Not surprising you have latched on to other posers like you have. Is there a secret "Poser" handshake?
I used to say the best poker skill is the gift of the borrow. I believe that to be analogous here.
Betting half a million doesn't mean you have half a million to bet. Get back to playing basketball with people who hopefully can understand this.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfWHO'S MONEY DID YOU BET?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Interesting question. Would you be more impressed if I (A) bet all my own money or (B) was entrusted by other people to bet theirs?
Assuming people are generally halfway bright, I would be more impressed with (B). It would mean I had a long-term reputation with a group of individuals who knew each other and felt comfortable plopping down five digits plus in my custody to do with as I pleased.
Now you might have a different response, but frankly I see (B) as much more impressive. Betting half a million yourself at a particular site just means you have half a million to bet. Betting half a million at a site with it being other people's money means the person betting must either (A) have some kind of verifiable track record that would entice them to do so, (B) they would theoretically be so experienced in the business that they have no qualms handing off the money, or (C) I'm able to hypnotize wealthy people to give me money to play with.
Axelwolf, do you really think that was some kind of gotcha question? Have you been imbibing this evening?
And if you're going to capitalize shit, either take a freshman English class or turn on a spell-checker. Christ, Alan Mendelson is turning over right now.
Yes, I can work with this. Ha.
--->Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Don't Go Near the Water (The Beach Boys song). [First thus solution.]
Say Goodbye (Chris Brown song). [Last thus solution.]
https://anagram-solver.net/The%20cra....?partial=true
Quote:
The statement did not disclose a cause of death. Wilson had suffered from dementia and was unable to care for himself after his wife Melinda Wilson died in early 2024, prompting his family to put him under conservatorship ...9 hours ago
https://youtu.be/ruKCw797JM4Quote:
Music groups: The Beach Boys (Since 1961), California Music (Since 1974 = (2 + 40)*(10 + 37) ---> 241_137).
.
I posted this earlier in the thread:
"one of the main reasons these props are mispriced is because so many are shaded so that the bettor who wants the big payout gets screwed and so few bettors (such as yourself) are willing to plunge for smaller payouts which are very often a much better deal"
and just now I found this info re Fezzik's betting who Red has mentioned - although the bets he's referring to here are not props
quite interesting - he takes this to extremes that I never have and never will - still I recognize him as an expert and his words have value
here are some quotes from him and then the link:
"NCAA basketball favorites of between 22 and 24½ points have won 449 of 454 games since 2006, according to boydbets.com, for a winning percentage of 98.9. That equates to a -9,090 money line, while a 98.0 win percentage equates to -4,999.
So Fezzik believes he has an edge when he can lay less than -5,000 in those games. He said he routinely lays -4,000 and will do so again in the NCAA Tournament.
“I bet $40,000 all the time to win $1,000. But it’s something you probably shouldn’t be doing unless you’re a guy with a documented track record and strong math history,” he said. “The real key number is when you get a favorite above 22 points and I can lay -4,000. That would be the sweet spot.”
Fezzik told me that he actually bet $38,000 to win $1,000 on the Wildcats, who were as high as 24½-point favorites over the Blue Demons, who went 0-20 in the conference in the regular season.
https://forum.bookmakersreview.com/t...ong-run.50748/
.
Hell, one can buy a house with a 4% down payment if they've got a 600 credit score.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmAw, shucks, red. Why hasnt Druff reported seeing your credit score yet? Whats it been? A year? Do you think it got lost in the mail?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Were you lying? So it ain’t so, redietz.
We close on a newly built home, which sits in the shadow of Bristol Motor Speedway, in two weeks. Four bedrooms. When Rob makes his way to Asheville next time, he's invited to drop in.
Quit trying to move the goalposts, ditz. You said you would send your proven credit score to Druff because you wouldn't show it here. Something about it being to easy to post a phony score, you said.
You started this shit because you thought that no way possible AP's would have good credit scores. So you challenged us. You fucked around and found out. We produced our credit scores. YOU ABSCONDED with posting yours saying you would send it to Druff to verify. Well so far ain't nothing been verified.
If you don't show your score then you cheated your own challenge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MHFYes, I can work with this. Ha.
--->Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Don't Go Near the Water (The Beach Boys song). [First thus solution.]
Say Goodbye (Chris Brown song). [Last thus solution.]
https://anagram-solver.net/The%20cra....?partial=true
Quote:
The Santa Barbara Police Department has released the cause and manner of death of former professional surfer Chris Brown.
According to a press release released on Wednesday, Brown died as a result of drowning due to blunt force injuries. On January 19 ---> 911, Brown fell from a cliffside at Hendry’s Beach and suffered serious injuries that made him unable to remove himself from the surfline. Brown drowned below the cliffside where he fell.
Toxicology reports also state that Brown was under the influence of a high level of methamphetamine at the time of his death. It’s unclear if this played a role in his death, but Brown had experienced Acute Methamphetamine Intoxication.
The manner of death certified by the coroner is listed as “undetermined.” The death was not a result of foul play according to investigators.
https://youtu.be/GJ26gAc7BtU
Steve Fezzik heaps high praise on Plus EV Analytics who has been featured in this thread. How about that? A sports bettor named "Plus EV? And Fezzik thinks the guy is great? Didn't someone say EV has nothing to do with sports betting?
https://x.com/fezziksports/status/19...TlRn3nbq5DLvlw
Well, technically, I say that "EV" is fine when used to describe past results and summaries. Where people run into trouble is when they try to import a term best left to random events and apply it to non-random events going forward as if it has some actual precision, which is not the case. Now the argument, I suppose, can be made that it has SOME precision, but realistically, the only way it's useful is if the person doing the wagering going forward is completely at sea and has no real idea what he/she is doing, in which case I suppose any "ballpark precision" -- I love that as an oxymoronic phrase -- has some utility as opposed to having no idea whatsoever what you're doing.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
I'm not saying anything that Wikipedia or a freshman math text doesn't make pretty clear.
I actually love this topic because it segues into a host of gambling discussions regarding the social psychology of human beings and classic psych studies. Hopefully, any interview with me will broach the subject.
God fucking damn. After the results are known it is no longer expected. It is the goddam known value. You thick skulled nimrod.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzWell, technically, I say that "EV" is fine when used to describe past results and summaries. Where people run into trouble is when they try to import a term best left to random events and apply it to non-random events going forward as if it has some actual precision, which is not the case. Now the argument, I suppose, can be made that it has SOME precision, but realistically, the only way it's useful is if the person doing the wagering going forward is completely at sea and has no real idea what he/she is doing, in which case I suppose any "ballpark precision" -- I love that as an oxymoronic phrase -- has some utility as opposed to having no idea whatsoever what you're doing.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
I'm not saying anything that Wikipedia or a freshman math text doesn't make pretty clear.
I actually love this topic because it segues into a host of gambling discussions regarding the social psychology of human beings and classic psych studies. Hopefully, any interview with me will broach the subject.
My guess is you should talk to Dennison more as he seems to be looking after you trying to keep you from embarrassing yourself.
.
That's my point.
Technically, and this goes into the use of tenses when it comes to gambling as was discussed during the late Alan Mendelson's contribution to the classic dice-under-a-cup problem, saying "the EV was" refers to the advocate's estimation of "the EV" in past tense at the point in time in the past the advocate was doing the estimation. It's not mathematically appropriate, but it's linguistically and logically appropriate. In other words, it's subjective and references the advocate making the statement, which most people would consider inappropriate for a math term. But linguistically and logically, it's fine. If somebody wants to reference themselves, which I assume is what you're doing when you make an estimation outside of random events based on your personal opinion, then you say, "The EV was." That frames you as the person who made the estimation, with subjectivity baked in. You are taking ownership of your opinion. It's not a math term at that point; it's an opinion term.
I thought this was obvious. That's why I kept saying you should swap it out for "my opinion is" or "my opinion of the EV was."
Garnabby, you want to explain this? I know I was unfamiliar with the language spelled out regarding tenses in the dice-under-a-cup problem. I wasn't savvy regarding the use of language for that topic.
Walters didnt bet opinions. He bet statistics. Statistics are from the past. His power ratings corresponded to the lines. If team A had a power rating of 7 and Team B had a power rating of 4 then his line was Team A -3. He compared it to the bookies line. He needed the line to be 1.5 different from his in order to make a minimum bet. He didn’t care if Team A was -1.5 or Team B was +4.5, just that the line was 1.5 different than his. And the bigger the difference between his line and the bookies line the more he bet. Why? Because it had bigger Expected Value, of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Didnt you guys discuss that at the Johnson City book club? Because thats what Walters wrote.
At 28:00 Krack talks about the 2-leg baseball parlays the books wont let him bet anymore
https://youtu.be/ko0g9hb7Gn4?si=Tq7oc8tox7cFoZC5
Neither A nor B. I have bet millions of my own money and have been entrusted with 100's of thousands of team money since my 20s.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfWHO'S MONEY DID YOU BET?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Interesting question. Would you be more impressed if I (A) bet all my own money or (B) was entrusted by other people to bet theirs?
Assuming people are generally halfway bright, I would be more impressed with (B). It would mean I had a long-term reputation with a group of individuals who knew each other and felt comfortable plopping down five digits plus in my custody to do with as I pleased.
Now you might have a different response, but frankly I see (B) as much more impressive. Betting half a million yourself at a particular site just means you have half a million to bet. Betting half a million at a site with it being other people's money means the person betting must either (A) have some kind of verifiable track record that would entice them to do so, (B) they would theoretically be so experienced in the business that they have no qualms handing off the money, or (C) I'm able to hypnotize wealthy people to give me money to play with.
Axelwolf, do you really think that was some kind of gotcha question? Have you been imbibing this evening?
And if you're going to capitalize shit, either take a freshman English class or turn on a spell-checker. Christ, Alan Mendelson is turning over right now.
Bull shit, you don't need a half of million dollars to put into action millions of dollars. I would sometimes put 100s of thousands of action in per day, starting with much less than 100k.
Again, I ask whose money were you betting? OPM or your own?
There's enough evidance in the gambling world that can show losing and or untrustworthy gamblers can sucker/hypnotize wealthy people to give them money to play with. >>> Sports touts are still in buissness along with various non-sports related gambling BS.
I say, SHOW ME THE MATH OF THE +EV <<<That's what matters. Whenever I engage in a play with partners, for myself, when I hire people, invest in, offer action or whatever, I can show the EV via math and logic. There isn't much guessing. IE, the math shows a 130% edge with an avrage betting size of X with X expected number of trials/bets and an apprximate hourly rate or total estimated earn. That 130% might be off 5% either way, but one can still see there's a high EV, low risk(sometimes high risk), that can be calculated.
Show us your calculations and logic that back up the fact that you are a +EV sports bettor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jce102jz
Wow greatest post of bullshit you have ever made.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
It seems you still don't get my point. You're just trying to sound smart but too dumb to know how bad you failed. What nutty shit.
I'm not going to repeat what every pro bettor knows but after the event occurs you still don't know what the EV was. You know what the value is.
I'm betting no sane person will understand or agree with whatever the point is you're trying to make. Talk about word salad. Holy fuck.
I don't get what Dietz is saying or trying to say. :confused:
Is he saying that the EV, which is figured before the wager somehow changes after the results are known? I can't imagine even he would think that, but I just can't come up with any other explanation for what he is mumbling at this point. Can anyone help me?
All I can say is the very obvious. EV is not an opinion. EV is the math of the wager or play.
Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Opinion = Just guessing without an overall advantage/ flipping coins with vig.
Of course, someone who is getting a free roll from their investors has an advantage.
When I was heavy into poker I always thought one of the greatest yet unmentioned skills in poker is the gift of borrowing money and specifically without shame.Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolf
fact.
The easiest thing to do in poker is loan money.Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestionWhen I was heavy into poker I always thought one of the greatest yet unmentioned skills in poker is the gift of borrowing money and specifically without shame.Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolf
fact.
I used to loan money to dealers, poker management, and regs all the time. I only got stiffed by one guy, Buck, a black dealer from the Horseshoe/Binions. It was only $200, and he never seemed to have it.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmThe easiest thing to do in poker is loan money.Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestionWhen I was heavy into poker I always thought one of the greatest yet unmentioned skills in poker is the gift of borrowing money and specifically without shame.Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolf
fact.
Better policy to never do it but if you know how to pick your spots for small amounts then it isn't such a big deal. Or even big amounts if you pick your spots. I know a few guys I'll loan a few K to in a room. Now a days all the regs seem to use cash apps.Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfI used to loan money to dealers, poker management, and regs all the time. I only got stiffed by one guy, Buck, a black dealer from the Horseshoe/Binions. It was only $200, and he never seemed to have it.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmThe easiest thing to do in poker is loan money.Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestion
Although I probably don't appreciate the benefits from helping people out.
Just curious...when you poker guys loan money to players what are the "terms?"
Loaning money to poker players - A formula for happiness & success.
Almost as good as loaning money to slot players.
I have no clue what other people's terms were. In my case, it varied; there were many times it was just good for the game. Chances are, if someome is desperate enough to be borrowing money at a poker game, it's probably because they're on tilt and playing very badly.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
Last year, I loaned out 30k to someone, and for each 6 months, I'll get an extra 3k. It's been a year so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfI have no clue what other people's terms were. In my case, it varied; there were many times it was just good for the game. Chances are, if someome is desperate enough to be borrowing money at a poker game, it's probably because they're on tilt and playing very badly.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
I'm 100% positive I'll get paid back anytime I call in the loan, unless of course, God forbid, the person passed away, there are things in place in case that were to happen, but who knows on that aspect, I'm not 100% confident.
And if something were to happen to me, it would go to my wife.
How are you so certain you will ever be repaid? Do you vet these borrowers....is this a secured loan of some sort? Do you utilize notarized documents that ensure your wife gets repaid if something happens to you?Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfLast year, I loaned out 30k to someone, and for each 6 months, I'll get an extra 3k. It's been a year so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfI have no clue what other people's terms were. In my case, it varied; there were many times it was just good for the game. Chances are, if someome is desperate enough to be borrowing money at a poker game, it's probably because they're on tilt and playing very badly.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
I'm 100% positive I'll get paid back anytime I call in the loan, unless of course, God forbid, the person passed away, there are things in place in case that were to happen, but who knows on that aspect, I'm not 100% confident.
And if something were to happen to me, it would go to my wife.
Trusting gamblers who need money? Doesn't sound "AP-ish".
That's a good question. The money isn't for degenerate gambling; it's for Big Boy AP sports betting(Not some penny-annie stuff like Red does), whereas they need as much money as they can get their hands on. They have a lot more money than I do, and I've known them since the '90s. They can actually calculate their +EV.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerHow are you so certain you will ever be repaid? Do you vet these borrowers....is this a secured loan of some sort? Do you utilize notarized documents that ensure your wife gets repaid if something happens to you?Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfLast year, I loaned out 30k to someone, and for each 6 months, I'll get an extra 3k. It's been a year so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolf
I'm 100% positive I'll get paid back anytime I call in the loan, unless of course, God forbid, the person passed away, there are things in place in case that were to happen, but who knows on that aspect, I'm not 100% confident.
And if something were to happen to me, it would go to my wife.
Trusting gamblers who need money? Doesn't sound "AP-ish".
They didn't approach me and ask, I just asked if anybody was willing to pay some interest on a loan.
FYI if I mentioned to Mickey and a few others who it was they would probably say that's a hell of a safe bet.
It's the degenerates that hit you up for chump change. Flip 'em a 20 and you'll never see them again. The worst are the ones you just met, known maybe two hours and all of a sudden they need a loan. I get to laugh in their face when that happens.
Yeah, how desperate people must be to hit up "casino friends" they barely know for money to gamble with.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Just a sick addiction.
Redietz says EV can't be measured for future sports betting events as if he is the final authority. He's not. But many other pro sports bettors say EV can be measured and they use the term in future tense. So instead of saying "EV can't be measured in sports betting" redietz should say "MY OPINION is EV can't be measured in sports betting."Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Expected Value can only be used in future tense. Maybe it is the initials that are throwing Dietz for a loop. Maybe he spelled out the words expected value each time, it would make more sense to him that it is an expectation of future results.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
If you want me to discuss this further, call into the radio show. You missed the whole point of the tense discussion. My fault; Garnabby can probably explain it to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJExpected Value can only be used in future tense. Maybe it is the initials that are throwing Dietz for a loop. Maybe he spelled out the words expected value each time, it would make more sense to him that it is an expectation of future results.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
"EV" should be a probabilistic term applied to random event projections. Oh hell, I'm not going to make you guys appear smarter than you are by tipping off the spiel. Call in and argue your points.
I love you guys.
You brought up the book, Gambling Wizards. Here's an excerpt. The Computer Group fed statistics from thousands of games into software to determine how to bet. No opinions involved.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzIf you want me to discuss this further, call into the radio show. You missed the whole point of the tense discussion. My fault; Garnabby can probably explain it to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJExpected Value can only be used in future tense. Maybe it is the initials that are throwing Dietz for a loop. Maybe he spelled out the words expected value each time, it would make more sense to him that it is an expectation of future results.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
"EV" should be a probabilistic term applied to random event projections. Oh hell, I'm not going to make you guys appear smarter than you are by tipping off the spiel. Call in and argue your points.
I love you guys.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmYou brought up the book, Gambling Wizards. Here's an excerpt. The Computer Group fed statistics from thousands of games into software to determine how to bet. No opinions involved.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzIf you want me to discuss this further, call into the radio show. You missed the whole point of the tense discussion. My fault; Garnabby can probably explain it to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
"EV" should be a probabilistic term applied to random event projections. Oh hell, I'm not going to make you guys appear smarter than you are by tipping off the spiel. Call in and argue your points.
I love you guys.
Mickey, I'm going to assume you're not what you were, as my plumber said to me while looking at my old high school yearbook. You've gotta realize there are half a dozen things wrong with what you just wrote. God bless you and all that, but I just assumed you had more awareness, including regarding the use of language. Now what are the holes in what you just said that make it kind of silly?
If this is your argument, be my guest and call it in, but you've gotta have a better grasp of things than this, I mean just in general. I'm starting to see you as a very narrow Dustin Hoffman type rain man than a savvy dude. If you seriously think you just made a case for something or other, you are wrong, and actually I'd appreciate it if you make this exact argument this way. I'm not yanking your chain. I think it provides an entrance point for civilians to understand what I'll say.
It may, however, come across as if you are a little bit lost in space. I just thought of something. LOL. Have kewlJ call it in. Hey, geezers gotta stick together. I got your back.
"Once the computer has all the statistics....it can answer questions....When Dallas plays Detroit this week who will win and by how much? The computer gives it's answer. For example, Dallas will win by 7. Now the bettor must check with bookmakers to see if there's a discrepancy between the computer's line and the bookmaker's line. The bigger the discrepancy the more he bets."Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmYou brought up the book, Gambling Wizards. Here's an excerpt. The Computer Group fed statistics from thousands of games into software to determine how to bet. No opinions involved.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Mickey, I'm going to assume you're not what you were, as my plumber said to me while looking at my old high school yearbook. You've gotta realize there are half a dozen things wrong with what you just wrote. God bless you and all that, but I just assumed you had more awareness, including regarding the use of language. Now what are the holes in what you just said that make it kind of silly?
If this is your argument, be my guest and call it in, but you've gotta have a better grasp of things than this, I mean just in general. I'm starting to see you as a very narrow Dustin Hoffman type rain man than a savvy dude. If you seriously think you just made a case for something or other, you are wrong, and actually I'd appreciate it if you make this exact argument this way. I'm not yanking your chain. I think it provides an entrance point for civilians to understand what I'll say.
It may, however, come across as if you are a little bit lost in space. I just thought of something. LOL. Have kewlJ call it in. Hey, geezers gotta stick together. I got your back.
redietz, what part of the above statement do you no understand? We can help you with it if you want.
It's your stance on measuring EV that I was interested in. And I wanted to get it on GWAE before they went defunt because they had a wide pro sports bettor audience. Everyone in the gambling world listened to those podcasts. I wanted to see a debate among pro bettors as to the measuring of EV in sports betting. But you've stalled so long that two years have gone by and PFA Radio will not bring on debate about EV in the sports betting world.
I know what your opinion is on it, you've already explained it thoroughly. Nothing you can really add on a podcast. So I won't be calling in because I won't be listening. His shows run late night to early in the morning anyway. He archives the shows on PFA. Maybe sometime down the road, when I have a little time, I'll give it a listen.
I'll be taking my questions elsewhere, to Krack, Fezzik and a host of others. I already know where Walters stands, the computer model does the handicapping for him. It's obvious that you did but did everyone else in the Johnson City Book Club really ignore Walter's computer driven handicapping system? If that's the case then what the hell did you guys talk about, the weather?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm"Once the computer has all the statistics....it can answer questions....When Dallas plays Detroit this week who will win and by how much? The computer gives it's answer. For example, Dallas will win by 7. Now the bettor must check with bookmakers to see if there's a discrepancy between the computer's line and the bookmaker's line. The bigger the discrepancy the more he bets."Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Mickey, I'm going to assume you're not what you were, as my plumber said to me while looking at my old high school yearbook. You've gotta realize there are half a dozen things wrong with what you just wrote. God bless you and all that, but I just assumed you had more awareness, including regarding the use of language. Now what are the holes in what you just said that make it kind of silly?
If this is your argument, be my guest and call it in, but you've gotta have a better grasp of things than this, I mean just in general. I'm starting to see you as a very narrow Dustin Hoffman type rain man than a savvy dude. If you seriously think you just made a case for something or other, you are wrong, and actually I'd appreciate it if you make this exact argument this way. I'm not yanking your chain. I think it provides an entrance point for civilians to understand what I'll say.
It may, however, come across as if you are a little bit lost in space. I just thought of something. LOL. Have kewlJ call it in. Hey, geezers gotta stick together. I got your back.
redietz, what part of the above statement do you no understand? We can help you with it if you want.
It's your stance on measuring EV that I was interested in. And I wanted to get it on GWAE before they went defunt because they had a wide pro sports bettor audience. Everyone in the gambling world listened to those podcasts. I wanted to see a debate among pro bettors as to the measuring of EV in sports betting. But you've stalled so long that two years have gone by and PFA Radio will not bring on debate about EV in the sports betting world.
I know what your opinion is on it, you've already explained it thoroughly. Nothing you can really add on a podcast. So I won't be calling in because I won't be listening. His shows run late night to early in the morning anyway. He archives the shows on PFA. Maybe sometime down the road, when I have a little time, I'll give it a listen.
I'll be taking my questions elsewhere, to Krack, Fezzik and a host of others. I already know where Walters stands, the computer model does the handicapping for him. It's obvious that you did but did everyone else in the Johnson City Book Club really ignore Walter's computer driven handicapping system? If that's the case then what the hell did you guys talk about, the weather?
Mickey, the problem with your summary is pretty simple. It has to do with tenses and obvious questions. Now, as a courtesy, I will walk everyone through the obviousness of what you are saying.
Mr. Walters did not use a "computer driven system" -- singular. He had roundtables of experts, most of which (but not all) who used "computer driven systems." LOL. Now, I ask you, what are the problems squaring what you are arguing with reality?
Let's walk through this slowly, so civilians have no issue keeping up. First of all, if different people are using different systems, then the "EV" as you want to call it, is different for each system. And they are significantly different for many different reasons, most of which I am sure most people can figure out. So if a dozen different people arrive at a dozen different "EVs," then there is no single "EV." If there is no single "EV," then what you are dealing with isn't random probability calculations, or even probability calculations per se. What you are dealing with is better described as various opinions.
Just because somebody uses college freshman math to make calculations doesn't make those calculations something other than opinions. The difference between flipping coins and trying to calculate real life behaviors is that a hundred different people using random probability theory to arrive at "EV" will all come to pretty much the same "EV" regarding coin flipping or blackjack or video poker. So why do they not all arrive at anything close to the same "EV" for sports betting?
Using the letters "EV" as a substitute for the words "my opinion of the EV" does no one actually betting any favors. It aggrandizes the abilities of the handicapper. It implies a consistency in results that does not really exist. It suggests future results can be determined from past results in a way that is overly optimistic. It can be argued that such an approach is, rather than being helpful, a dangerous path lined with overconfidence based on contexts that may or may not currently apply.
"EV" should be a math term, not something that translates into "my opinion."
Now all of this is pretty obvious. So why do people prefer using the line "the EV is" when they should be saying "I think the EV might be?" Well, the answers to this question are self-evident.
And that's as far as I'll go. That's the opening minute of any 20-minute "EV-for-sports-betting" debunking.
Are you going to be hobnobbing at Bet Bash this year Red?
Just skimmed your post. You are a broken record. Once again you should be prefacing your statements with “My opinion is.” And youve voiced that opinion a hundred times.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm"Once the computer has all the statistics....it can answer questions....When Dallas plays Detroit this week who will win and by how much? The computer gives it's answer. For example, Dallas will win by 7. Now the bettor must check with bookmakers to see if there's a discrepancy between the computer's line and the bookmaker's line. The bigger the discrepancy the more he bets."Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
redietz, what part of the above statement do you no understand? We can help you with it if you want.
It's your stance on measuring EV that I was interested in. And I wanted to get it on GWAE before they went defunt because they had a wide pro sports bettor audience. Everyone in the gambling world listened to those podcasts. I wanted to see a debate among pro bettors as to the measuring of EV in sports betting. But you've stalled so long that two years have gone by and PFA Radio will not bring on debate about EV in the sports betting world.
I know what your opinion is on it, you've already explained it thoroughly. Nothing you can really add on a podcast. So I won't be calling in because I won't be listening. His shows run late night to early in the morning anyway. He archives the shows on PFA. Maybe sometime down the road, when I have a little time, I'll give it a listen.
I'll be taking my questions elsewhere, to Krack, Fezzik and a host of others. I already know where Walters stands, the computer model does the handicapping for him. It's obvious that you did but did everyone else in the Johnson City Book Club really ignore Walter's computer driven handicapping system? If that's the case then what the hell did you guys talk about, the weather?
Mickey, the problem with your summary is pretty simple. It has to do with tenses and obvious questions. Now, as a courtesy, I will walk everyone through the obviousness of what you are saying.
Mr. Walters did not use a "computer driven system" -- singular. He had roundtables of experts, most of which (but not all) who used "computer driven systems." LOL. Now, I ask you, what are the problems squaring what you are arguing with reality?
Let's walk through this slowly, so civilians have no issue keeping up. First of all, if different people are using different systems, then the "EV" as you want to call it, is different for each system. And they are significantly different for many different reasons, most of which I am sure most people can figure out. So if a dozen different people arrive at a dozen different "EVs," then there is no single "EV." If there is no single "EV," then what you are dealing with isn't random probability calculations, or even probability calculations per se. What you are dealing with is better described as various opinions.
Just because somebody uses college freshman math to make calculations doesn't make those calculations something other than opinions. The difference between flipping coins and trying to calculate real life behaviors is that a hundred different people using random probability theory to arrive at "EV" will all come to pretty much the same "EV" regarding coin flipping or blackjack or video poker. So why do they not all arrive at anything close to the same "EV" for sports betting?
Using the letters "EV" as a substitute for the words "my opinion of the EV" does no one actually betting any favors. It aggrandizes the abilities of the handicapper. It implies a consistency in results that does not really exist. It suggests future results can be determined from past results in a way that is overly optimistic. It can be argued that such an approach is, rather than being helpful, a dangerous path lined with overconfidence based on contexts that may or may not currently apply.
"EV" should be a math term, not something that translates into "my opinion."
Now all of this is pretty obvious. So why do people prefer using the line "the EV is" when they should be saying "I think the EV might be?" Well, the answers to this question are self-evident.
And that's as far as I'll go. That's the opening minute of any 20-minute "EV-for-sports-betting" debunking.
WALTERS USED A COMPUTER DRIVEN STRATEGY, PERIOD.HE PUBLISHED THE SYSTEM AS A LEGACY. WHEN HE SAID SO CALLED EXPERT HANDICAPPERS COULDNT WIN VERY LONG HE WAS TALKING ABOUT BOB DIETZ TOO.
Your abilty is not on par with your sense of self importance. Stifle yourself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmJust skimmed your post. You are a broken record. Once again you should be prefacing your statements with “My opinion is.” And youve voiced that opinion a hundred times.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Mickey, the problem with your summary is pretty simple. It has to do with tenses and obvious questions. Now, as a courtesy, I will walk everyone through the obviousness of what you are saying.
Mr. Walters did not use a "computer driven system" -- singular. He had roundtables of experts, most of which (but not all) who used "computer driven systems." LOL. Now, I ask you, what are the problems squaring what you are arguing with reality?
Let's walk through this slowly, so civilians have no issue keeping up. First of all, if different people are using different systems, then the "EV" as you want to call it, is different for each system. And they are significantly different for many different reasons, most of which I am sure most people can figure out. So if a dozen different people arrive at a dozen different "EVs," then there is no single "EV." If there is no single "EV," then what you are dealing with isn't random probability calculations, or even probability calculations per se. What you are dealing with is better described as various opinions.
Just because somebody uses college freshman math to make calculations doesn't make those calculations something other than opinions. The difference between flipping coins and trying to calculate real life behaviors is that a hundred different people using random probability theory to arrive at "EV" will all come to pretty much the same "EV" regarding coin flipping or blackjack or video poker. So why do they not all arrive at anything close to the same "EV" for sports betting?
Using the letters "EV" as a substitute for the words "my opinion of the EV" does no one actually betting any favors. It aggrandizes the abilities of the handicapper. It implies a consistency in results that does not really exist. It suggests future results can be determined from past results in a way that is overly optimistic. It can be argued that such an approach is, rather than being helpful, a dangerous path lined with overconfidence based on contexts that may or may not currently apply.
"EV" should be a math term, not something that translates into "my opinion."
Now all of this is pretty obvious. So why do people prefer using the line "the EV is" when they should be saying "I think the EV might be?" Well, the answers to this question are self-evident.
And that's as far as I'll go. That's the opening minute of any 20-minute "EV-for-sports-betting" debunking.
WALTERS USED A COMPUTER DRIVEN STRATEGY, PERIOD.HE PUBLISHED THE SYSTEM AS A LEGACY. WHEN HE SAID SO CALLED EXPERT HANDICAPPERS COULDNT WIN VERY LONG HE WAS TALKING ABOUT BOB DIETZ TOO.
Your abilty is not on par with your sense of self importance. Stifle yourself.
Makes perfect sense. God bless you, mickey.
For anyone reading this stuff, there's a reason, not hard to figure, why Walters would publish some basics vis-a-vis his NFL (not all sports, not college football, not college hoops) handicapping. It's the same reason I was comfortable discussing NFL handicapping with clients. Walters was even tighter than me informationally in that most of what he discusses in his book features data framed by historical rule changes and therefore of limited validity if anyone tries to apply them today. What he published is almost the opposite of a legacy. It's the stuff people want to read, and it's the stuff that wouldn't hurt Mr. Walters or anyone who trained under him going forward.
All of which, of course, makes complete sense and, given Mr. Walters reputation, is what one would expect.
Have a good one, mickey. Live long and prosper. I will still fly you down to LV if you want to float any theories in person or during a taping. That's my legacy offer to you.
Wrap up: And finally, regarding self-importance, I think a college football specialist who preaches that knowing a specific sport, its players, its coaches, its year-to-year rule changes (sometimes month to month) are important to add to arbitrage and bonuses and middles shooting as a way to win, would probably be considered further down the self-importance scale than people who blithely believe college freshman math and a little savvy are the keys to beating all sports in perpetuity. You know, the Leonardo Da APs of the world. They conquer it all, in a sedan cruising the Dakotas. And then tell you about it on YouTube and the VCT forum, probably because they are so humble.
Never known a pro sports bettor needed other people's money after being in the game for decades.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmJust skimmed your post. You are a broken record. Once again you should be prefacing your statements with “My opinion is.” And youve voiced that opinion a hundred times.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
WALTERS USED A COMPUTER DRIVEN STRATEGY, PERIOD.HE PUBLISHED THE SYSTEM AS A LEGACY. WHEN HE SAID SO CALLED EXPERT HANDICAPPERS COULDNT WIN VERY LONG HE WAS TALKING ABOUT BOB DIETZ TOO.
Your abilty is not on par with your sense of self importance. Stifle yourself.
Makes perfect sense. God bless you, mickey.
For anyone reading this stuff, there's a reason, not hard to figure, why Walters would publish some basics vis-a-vis his NFL (not all sports, not college football, not college hoops) handicapping. It's the same reason I was comfortable discussing NFL handicapping with clients. Walters was even tighter than me informationally in that most of what he discusses in his book features data framed by historical rule changes and therefore of limited validity if anyone tries to apply them today. What he published is almost the opposite of a legacy. It's the stuff people want to read, and it's the stuff that wouldn't hurt Mr. Walters or anyone who trained under him going forward.
All of which, of course, makes complete sense and, given Mr. Walters reputation, is what one would expect.
Have a good one, mickey. Live long and prosper. I will still fly you down to LV if you want to float any theories in person or during a taping. That's my legacy offer to you.
Wrap up: And finally, regarding self-importance, I think a college football specialist who preaches that knowing a specific sport, its players, its coaches, its year-to-year rule changes (sometimes month to month) are important to add to arbitrage and bonuses and middles shooting as a way to win, would probably be considered further down the self-importance scale than people who blithely believe college freshman math and a little savvy are the keys to beating all sports in perpetuity. You know, the Leonardo Da APs of the world. They conquer it all, in a sedan cruising the Dakotas. And then tell you about it on YouTube and the VCT forum, probably because they are so humble.
BTW no sharp AP thinks any sport is beatable in perpetuity. It all depends on weak lines.
The nice thing about an AP approach utilizing EV is that you're also told when not to bet.
I've never seen any suggestion you understand these things I just mentioned.
Infact it is possible if redietz understood and had a system to suggest the EV then he would have known when not to bet and would not have needed the money of others.
It really is that simple.
Looks like Bob Dietz has made a shift from 40 year professional sports bettor to "college football specialist". Fitting that he did so when discussing self-importance. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
So the former blackjack card counter, now "blackjack specialist" has a question. Same question I asked back when I was a lowly card counter and not a "blackjack specialist". What kind of money did you (Dietz) make FROM BETTING, not selling, as a "college football specialist?"
We are still back to the same facts that Kim Lee studying all the publications that you mentioned concluded that a winning rate (even as a college football specialist) that would not allow for anything more than breaking even or winning small potatoes. So, it is relevant. How Much? Give a number.
Because frankly, a "college football specialist" who spent 4 months a year, EVERY year in Las Vegas, and lived in the low-end temporary housing that you did, doesn't really square with the grandeur of this new "college football specialist" title. And that is before we even get into the ability to pay your taxes....your singular living expense after inheriting a house. :cool:
Or maybe I have to wait for an answer from an interview that is never going to happen. That seems to be your game now...stringing along to an interview that YOU KNOW is never going to happen.
I want people to understand the context of me asking redietz about what kind of money he made. It isn't about a pissing contest over money "claimed". When a person says "professional gambler" or any of the labels Dietz has used or is now using, it implies a certain monetary level. No hard and fast rule, but what would be considered a living wage.
I like to say I have "supported myself from blackjack play" for 22 years now. But the first 3 years as a 20-22 year old were not much of a living wage, averaging 10k a year. If people want to disqualify those years, that is fair game. A lot of players go through that kind of period early on as you build a bankroll from scratch. But there has to be a point that when someone says, "professional this" or "making a living from that", that we are talking about some kind of real money. :rolleyes:
I will go back to two specific incidents and people, that mislead in this manner.
* The second is the player that was a member here, Moses that passed a few years ago. When Moses burst onto the blackjack scene back on Norm's forum, he labeled himself as a professional blackjack player and sports bettor living and playing Reno. A number of people, myself included, had a problem with that because we knew it couldn't be....not in Reno.
So it turned out the person that posted as Moses, owned a successful business in California. Blinds or shades or something. When he divorced at about age 50, 12 years or so before he passed, he sold his business and moved to Reno. And this is when he began this blackjack and sports betting career. Nothing wrong with that. That is actually an ideal time to be involved with blackjack (I don't know about sports betting), to supplement retirement income...that sort of thing.
And on his deathbed, Moses confirmed that is basically what he did, when he stated he had made about 100k over 10 years. 10k a year supplementing retirement just does not give you the right to call yourself "professional anything". It is misleading. :mad:
* The first, prior to Moses there was another somewhat similar situation. Player called himself Flash, and later like redietz, upgraded to Zenmaster Flash. I am not going to say his real name, even though he is probably no longer with us because that is a "grey" or "Gray" area. :D
So this flash, similar to Moses retired early about age 50, from a teaching job at a university as a professor. A life-long gambler, who had interest in everything from horse-racing (big time) to roulette, craps and blackjack. So he took up card counting and blackjack at which he apparently was successful in playing at an advantage, even though he continues -Ev gambling at other things. So Flash took to mentoring new players and giving himself all sorts of fancy names and titles. By the time he was 70 and I knew him (in an online sense), he referred to himself as a 20 year professional gambler.
Towards the end of his time, like moses, Flash revealed some actual numbers. 300 and some thousand dollars won over those 20 years. So right off the bat you are talking 15ish grand a year. :confused: But it is even worse than that. One year he was involved with a hole-carding team that made good money. he says he made 150k that year. So if you subtract that one year out, over the other 19 of card counting he made less than 10k a year. That just is not a living wage that justifies calling yourself 20 year professional anything. :cool:
The guy was retired, with a retirement income and a wife still working. He was not a professional gambler or any other term you want to use. These are retired guys gambling, maybe playing at a little advantage making a few bucks.
Now Dietz was not retired, so how does this apply to him? It just doesn't appear from the numbers that he made much money from sports betting. Did he make good money as a "tout"? I have no idea. I don't know about that type of thing. But that is not what his claim was. His claim was "professional sports bettor", which now had morphed into "college football specialist". I would conclude a very similar misleading by Mr. Dietz all these years as to the other two blackjack players I mentioned. If you are going to call yourself a "professional" gambler, sports bettor, blackjack player, there HAS to be a monetary level involved that most people would consider a decent living wage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawgAnd now going on a year trying desperately to establish that he's ever placed a sports bet in his tunnel dwelling life.Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
What would be most relevant to the discussion is if someone could answer how many professional sports bettors can dance on the head of a pin?
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJLooks like Bob Dietz has made a shift from 40 year professional sports bettor to "college football specialist". Fitting that he did so when discussing self-importance. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
So the former blackjack card counter, now "blackjack specialist" has a question. Same question I asked back when I was a lowly card counter and not a "blackjack specialist". What kind of money did you (Dietz) make FROM BETTING, not selling, as a "college football specialist?"
We are still back to the same facts that Kim Lee studying all the publications that you mentioned concluded that a winning rate (even as a college football specialist) that would not allow for anything more than breaking even or winning small potatoes. So, it is relevant. How Much? Give a number.
Because frankly, a "college football specialist" who spent 4 months a year, EVERY year in Las Vegas, and lived in the low-end temporary housing that you did, doesn't really square with the grandeur of this new "college football specialist" title. And that is before we even get into the ability to pay your taxes....your singular living expense after inheriting a house. :cool:
Or maybe I have to wait for an answer from an interview that is never going to happen. That seems to be your game now...stringing along to an interview that YOU KNOW is never going to happen.
Three banal and obvious comments:
1) Why someone would think I inherited the house at 1412 Forest Dale Lane is beyond me. The house is in Tennessee. Every relative I have lived in Pennsylvania, Delaware, or New Jersey. But the fact that some anonymous idiot thinks he's scoring points by declaring this is bizarre. I WISH some fine Tennessee resident had decided to will me a home gratis.
2) Mr. Walters has all the money in the world, and access to every bit of sports gambling information on the planet. So the fact he actually considered and consulted me probably means something. Unless, of course, you are an anonymous handle playing at being a blackjack player, in which case it counts for nothing.
3) It doesn't matter if somebody wagers a penny a game if the ATS record is there in black-and-white, stretching back decades. What matters is the documented record of somebody doing this, not how much they wagered per game. Mr. Walters didn't give a rats ass what amounts you wagered per game. What matters is whether you won. And obviously, occasionally, as in the futures tickets posted in the Retro Road Trip thread (not a full accounting, mind you, but a good chunk), I won a little bit. And obviously, if I tallied up half a million in wagers here (say, Oddsmaker) and there (say, Northbet), I have managed to wager a little here and there, especially since I really only bet one sport.
But all of this is obvious and goes without saying.
And Kewlj, I'm moving on up to the East Side in two weeks. Drop on in, baby! We're in the shadow of Bristol Motor Speedway, so we won't be hard to find. I'm sure we'll host Singer and Boz at some point. You may as well join the crowd.
KewlJ, you may as well give up on the anonymous declarations where you get half the facts dead wrong. I'm here, in the flesh, willing to host real people in a real place. Willing to go on broadcasts as a real person who has done real things. Willing to have lunch with any gambling luminary on the planet. And unlike the VCT resident Dracula, able to have his photo taken and sit down with actual gambling writers and real filmmakers.
You are basically, as Tony Stark says at the beginning of Iron Man 3, an assclown.
Aaaaaaaaand, just like clockwork, the sand monkey appears beating his cymbals shortly after KJ plays his flute….total loser lolQuote:
Originally Posted by MDawgQuote:
Originally Posted by MDawgAnd now going on a year trying desperately to establish that he's ever placed a sports bet in his tunnel dwelling life.Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
Oh for God sakes! You inherited the house when your wife died, NOT some distant relative. Maybe "inherited" isn't the right word, but she, a professor with a real Job bought and paid for the house, maybe putting it in both names as married folks do, but she bought the house, and you took ownership after her death. Stop playing word salads.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Did Mr Walters always have all the money in the world? Or did he build up to it by betting (his own money...not investors), winning...repeat, repeat, repeat. All using the safe model of Kelly wagering?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
It doesn't matter how much someone bet? They could bet a penny a game? All that matter is documented results? Spoken like a true tout! It most certainly does matter how much a person bet and WON. See my comments a couple posts up about Moses and Flash, guys that won a few thousand a year and claimed they were professional blackjack players.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
If You or anyone else is claiming to be a professional gambler, players, sports bettor, you better be able to make a living wager, otherwise you are misleading in your claims.
The fact is, and has become very apparent that you may have been involved with sports betting for 40 years (as a tout), but you made no real money from betting on sports. The only reason you were able to do what you did for an entire lifetime is because at first you had someone else supporting you, and then "inherited" the house and basically lived rent free. THAT is why you stayed there in East Bumble fuck all these years. All you had to do is come up with a few hundred dollars to pay the taxes, which at least one year recently you were unable to do. :cool:
And Now you are moving on up to the East side of East Bumble fuck. Congratulations George Jefferson. But you are not moving up due to any success you have had in sports betting/touting. You are moving up because you have latched on to another woman that makes more money than you and is paying for a house. God you are pathetic Dietz.
I really don't care about most of that shit. All I really care about is you claimed you were a "professional sports bettor" for 40 years, when at best you were a professional tout/salesman. I think scammer even fits. And all along the way, you tried to tell us all how fucking smart you were. Smarter than everyone else, with the Hi I.Q and SAT scores. When at the end of day (and your great career) you are just a dude that scammed his way through life. Bob Dietz, great sports bettor, my ass.
God, I would love to hear what Billy Walters had to say about "him consulting you". You were a damn "runner" for a few months.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Oh for God sakes! You inherited the house when your wife died, NOT some distant relative. Maybe "inherited" isn't the right word, but she, a professor with a real Job bought and paid for the house, maybe putting it in both names as married folks do, but she bought the house, and you took ownership after her death. Stop playing word salads.
Did Mr Walters always have all the money in the world? Or did he build up to it by betting (his own money...not investors), winning...repeat, repeat, repeat. All using the safe model of Kelly wagering?
It doesn't matter how much someone bet? They could bet a penny a game? All that matter is documented results? Spoken like a true tout! It most certainly does matter how much a person bet and WON. See my comments a couple posts up about Moses and Flash, guys that won a few thousand a year and claimed they were professional blackjack players.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
If You or anyone else is claiming to be a professional gambler, players, sports bettor, you better be able to make a living wager, otherwise you are misleading in your claims.
The fact is, and has become very apparent that you may have been involved with sports betting for 40 years (as a tout), but you made no real money from betting on sports. The only reason you were able to do what you did for an entire lifetime is because at first you had someone else supporting you, and then "inherited" the house and basically lived rent free. THAT is why you stayed there in East Bumble fuck all these years. All you had to do is come up with a few hundred dollars to pay the taxes, which at least one year recently you were unable to do. :cool:
And Now you are moving on up to the East side of East Bumble fuck. Congratulations George Jefferson. But you are not moving up due to any success you have had in sports betting/touting. You are moving up because you have latched on to another woman that makes more money than you and is paying for a house. God you are pathetic Dietz.
I really don't care about most of that shit. All I really care about is you claimed you were a "professional sports bettor" for 40 years, when at best you were a professional tout/salesman. I think scammer even fits. And all along the way, you tried to tell us all how fucking smart you were. Smarter than everyone else, with the Hi I.Q and SAT scores. When at the end of day (and your great career) you are just a dude that scammed his way through life. Bob Dietz, great sports bettor, my ass.
That's probably why Mr. Walters hired me. I don't know what I'm doing and have no established track record. Makes perfect sense.
The question arises, if someone gets something so wrong as inheriting a house (a pretty bizarre tangent) and declares what they are saying as fact, and they are completely wrong, what does that indicate about the rest of what they are claiming? If you go out on a limb and proclaim that you know something, and you are completely wrong, what does that mean vis-a-vis your credibility?
It probably means the whole schtick is bullshit. No big deal. Everybody knew that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
The question isn't why did Walters hire you. Real sports bettors hire people to get their bets in for them, or at least did in the 80s/90s when we are talking about.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
So the real question is, if you were such an asset to the Billy Walters organization, why did he let you go after a few months Dietz?
Can't wait to hear this bullshit story.