Rob Singer banned

[mickeycrimm]

Redeitz, I remember reading about a guy that owned and published a sports handicapping rag called The Gold Sheet. I think this has been a few decades ago but he was kind of an honest guy in competition with all the bullshit handicappers. He challenged those handicappers to a contest where he put up a $100,000 prize. Any of those touts that could hit 70% winners through 100 picks would get the $100,000. It started with a bunch of handicappers. The last handicapper left dropped out of the contest at about 25 picks. The handwriting was on the wall. No one was going to even come close to 70% winners.

PS: I personally consider consistently winning sports handicappers to be AP's. And I think the rarest of all AP's is a consistently winning horse handicapper.

[redietz]

Redeitz, I remember reading about a guy that owned and published a sports handicapping rag called The Gold Sheet. I think this has been a few decades ago but he was kind of an honest guy in competition with all the bullshit handicappers. He challenged those handicappers to a contest where he put up a $100,000 prize. Any of those touts that could hit 70% winners through 100 picks would get the $100,000. It started with a bunch of handicappers. The last handicapper left dropped out of the contest at about 25 picks. The handwriting was on the wall. No one was going to even come close to 70% winners.

PS: I personally consider consistently winning sports handicappers to be AP's. And I think the rarest of all AP's is a consistently winning horse handicapper.

A copy of the first interview I ever gave regarding sports handicapping was in the "package." The interviewer asked me if I did horses. I said something like, "Too hard. I'd sooner bet on three-legged giraffe races."

Mort Olshan was one of the industry founders with his Gold Sheet. Nobody real shoots for 70%. And straight-up handicapping doesn't tell the whole story these days, either. Numbers move so much and so fast in college football that half the skill is knowing which way they'll move and when they'll move.

The best combined college/NFL year I ever had was about five years ago. I hit 66% (66-34, obviously) over a hundred games, and that was including a 17-game winning streak that I wrote about during the streak. The record and streak were documented in a contest online for handicappers sponsored by a subsidiary of Marc Lawrence and Jim Feist. I did not win -- another dude was unconscious picking college totals in the Pac 12 and Mountain West. He actually beat me. And of course, second place got zero cash.

Anybody winning 55% is doing a stellar job. That's the bottom line.

[bocce ball]

The interviewer asked me if I did horses. I said something like, "Too hard. I'd sooner bet on three-legged giraffe races."

Is that because of the inherent difficulty of handicapping, or because the vig is unbeatable? The latest Nevada gaming revenue report shows a 15.5% win for race books, and only 5.4% for sports (12 months ended August 31st, statewide).

http://gaming.nv.gov/modules/showdoc...cumentid=12385

As for your abilities, you've already given ironclad examples of arb opportunities. But not everyone relies on evidence when evaluating a claim.

[redietz]

The interviewer asked me if I did horses. I said something like, "Too hard. I'd sooner bet on three-legged giraffe races."

Is that because of the inherent difficulty of handicapping, or because the vig is unbeatable? The latest Nevada gaming revenue report shows a 15.5% win for race books, and only 5.4% for sports (12 months ended August 31st, statewide).

http://gaming.nv.gov/modules/showdoc...cumentid=12385

As for your abilities, you've already given ironclad examples of arb opportunities. But not everyone relies on evidence when evaluating a claim.

Don't get me wrong. There are people who have gone through extended periods being able to win at horses (regnis is one). But these people have intimate knowledge of tracks, the tendencies of owners and trainers, why certain jockeys take what mounts, the "non-verbals" of horses in the paddock, and so on. Anyone trying to win at horses without the "in-family" long-term knowledge base is just a civilian, like me.

Plus, the idea of trying to overcome the 15-20% vig gives me the queasy shivers. I wouldn't even know how to mentally deal with that kind of disadvantage.

Quick aside: 30 years ago, back in the good old days, comps for betting sports and races were the same. Back then, it was great. They were lumped together, and you could get real sports comps. Now it's more like a 5-to-1 ratio -- you get five times (at least) in comps for race betting as for sports. Race comps have stayed pretty much the same as 30 years ago; sports comps have been dramatically reduced.

[MisterV]

I wonder how much the action on horse racing has decreased over the decades?

Once about "the only game in town," it is now relegated to near-obscurity due to the proliferation of casinos / other forms of gambling.

[Biloxi Bill]

I wonder how much the action on horse racing has decreased over the decades?

Once about "the only game in town," it is now relegated to near-obscurity due to the proliferation of casinos / other forms of gambling.

I don`t know that the action is dead, but since the implementation of simulcast wagering, on-track attendance is certainly dead....20-25 years ago you could go out to Santa Anita and there would be 30,000 people every weekend....now there's maybe 1/3 of that....no one is willing to pay for gas, drive, pay admission and stand in a line to wager when they can sit in their dens in comfort and do the same thing.....Kind of sad actually, but you could see it coming

[bocce ball]

I wonder how much the action on horse racing has decreased over the decades?

At the Nevada casinos, it's down majorly. From the 1995 report:

http://gaming.nv.gov/modules/showdoc...ocumentid=3751

race win = 88.166m (79 locs)
sports win = 79.415m (119 locs)

Now here's the most recent 12 months:

race win = 44.132m (127 locs)
sports win = 250.070m (194 locs)

Race books are still widely available, but they're not doing much business.

[bocce ball]

Race revenues outnumbered sports every year from 1995 to 1998.

EDIT: That's based on the casino win amounts. Total action was presumably higher at sports, considering the much lower house edge.

Currently, the sports side appears to receive massively more total action than the race side.

[bocce ball]

Update on Rob ... After being dismissed from all the gambling sites, he has taken up residence on a sewing forum:

[regnis]

The interviewer asked me if I did horses. I said something like, "Too hard. I'd sooner bet on three-legged giraffe races."

Is that because of the inherent difficulty of handicapping, or because the vig is unbeatable? The latest Nevada gaming revenue report shows a 15.5% win for race books, and only 5.4% for sports (12 months ended August 31st, statewide).

http://gaming.nv.gov/modules/showdoc...cumentid=12385

As for your abilities, you've already given ironclad examples of arb opportunities. But not everyone relies on evidence when evaluating a claim.

Don't get me wrong. There are people who have gone through extended periods being able to win at horses (regnis is one). But these people have intimate knowledge of tracks, the tendencies of owners and trainers, why certain jockeys take what mounts, the "non-verbals" of horses in the paddock, and so on. Anyone trying to win at horses without the "in-family" long-term knowledge base is just a civilian, like me.

Plus, the idea of trying to overcome the 15-20% vig gives me the queasy shivers. I wouldn't even know how to mentally deal with that kind of disadvantage.

Quick aside: 30 years ago, back in the good old days, comps for betting sports and races were the same. Back then, it was great. They were lumped together, and you could get real sports comps. Now it's more like a 5-to-1 ratio -- you get five times (at least) in comps for race betting as for sports. Race comps have stayed pretty much the same as 30 years ago; sports comps have been dramatically reduced.

I have always said that horses are a full time job. You have to put in the time and my 50 years doing it does help (I started when I was 12). The 20% (approximately) hold is tough. But the key in horses is that you are not playing against the house. You are playing against the other bettors who are mostly uninformed (stupid). That makes up for the hold.

I don't know how much time you put in on a weekly basis Redietz, but I am sure it is quite a bit, even if just shopping the lines. As discussed somewhere on this forum, I worked for and was the top handicapper for a football tip sheet many years ago. I came to a mutual agreement to leave when I was ordered to give out both sides of games. I was doing pretty well at the time with a few plays per week in pro and college football but my "employer" was not someone you argued with. Lately I have considered getting back into sports but realize the time it would take to become knowledgeable again makes it impossible. Despite a few mind bet wins I don't want to delude myself that I have the ability today. But if horses become too much of an effort maybe.

I don't know what the comps are now for sports betting, but the comps for horses are negligible. I usually meet with the race book director and negotiate my rate. Otherwise it is almost not worth even using your card.

P.S.

Never considered myself an AP either. I don't consider knowledge or brains to constitute one being an AP. Someone that beats the system in some way like Mickey vulturing to me is an AP.

[redietz]

Regnis,

During the season, there is no down time. I may go to one movie a month -- that's my hours off. It's 24/7 all the time for about the first 90 days. I'm up to check numbers most nights at 1 AM and again at 4 AM. I'm not exaggerating. I barely have time to process the information I need to process, and then you have to be conscientious about the numbers, so it's every day, all day. The reason I train diligently is because it's helpful when the season starts to cut back some on the training - then it's kind of like being on speed for a couple of weeks, which helps, because the amount of information to take in the first month is enormous.

Then it slows down. But without all of the 40-some year experience (I've been doing this since I was 13 -- LOL), which streamlines everything, it would be impossible for one person to do what I do, really.

Comps for sports used to be okay. Now the best rate is at the WestGate probably, and that's $1 for every $250 wagered or so. Most places it's less than $1 for $400.

[arcimede$]

What an interesting turn of events. I do think Singer has been going downhill for a long time. Nothing really new. I think getting tossed out of his small apartment and forced to live in a trailer park was tough on his narcissistic ego. He just kept getting more angry all the time. I asked him to seek professional help over a decade ago. He should have listened to me.

I guess this also means were never going to see all those goodies in his AZ storage garage. LOL.

[OneHitWonder]

Update on Rob ... After being dismissed from all the gambling sites, he has taken up residence on a sewing forum:

The sewing forums actually are more popular these days? At least, they aren't talking about banned members and terrorism. What have we come to? Lol.

[OneHitWonder]

Speaking of gambling bordom, I just read this at the WoV. "Seriously: This is a good point. To repeat: Can we get a response from someone that runs the site concerning the speed? An estimation of the time it would be fixed or even an acknowledgement that it's being worked on would help. It seems like Babs and Mission are the only admins that have even posted on the site for the past month. (Maybe Face has posted occasionally?) Why are the Wizard and J.B. absent? What is going on? Has the WOV forum had a zombie apocalypse?"

Lol. A lot of boards die out that way, under the guise of maintenance. Incidentally, Gordonm888 has to be the biggest dipshit on a message board, of late. Where do these people come from?

[jbjb]

You tell 'em Garnabby!

[OneHitWonder]

You tell 'em Garnabby!

Ah, you raise a good point. I guess I'm memorable for never having told others to STFU or F-off; and for not having deleted over 6,000 posts in anger, and crawling back; or not actually trolling sites (with questionable claims and other bull-garbage). Gosh, thank you.

[Alan Mendelson]

I wonder how much the action on horse racing has decreased over the decades?

Once about "the only game in town," it is now relegated to near-obscurity due to the proliferation of casinos / other forms of gambling.

As late as the mid 1970s horseracing was the #1 spectator sport in the USA, with the highest attendance.

The #1 spectator sport in the USA today is....

NASCAR.

[Ozzy]

You tell 'em Garnabby!

Ah, you raise a good point. I guess I'm memorable for never having told others to STFU or F-off; and for not having deleted over 6,000 posts in anger, and crawling back; or not actually trolling sites (with questionable claims and other bull-garbage). Gosh, thank you.

+1000 OneHitWonder nice to see someone other then myself call out Ibeatyouraces.

[redietz]

I wonder how much the action on horse racing has decreased over the decades?

Once about "the only game in town," it is now relegated to near-obscurity due to the proliferation of casinos / other forms of gambling.

As late as the mid 1970s horseracing was the #1 spectator sport in the USA, with the highest attendance.

The #1 spectator sport in the USA today is....

NASCAR.

That's a common phrase ("NASCAR is the #1 spectator sport"), but it doesn't really mean what people think it means. Seventeen of the top 20 attended sporting events in the US are NASCAR events, but that's because you don't have a "NASCAR League" with competing events simultaneously as one would find on an NCAA or NFL schedule. It's also because the NASCAR "stadiums" are much larger than NFL or NCAA or MLB stadiums. I live about 35 miles from Bristol Motor Speedway, and it's about twice the size of Beaver Stadium (Penn State). I lived a quarter mile from Beaver Stadium for five or six years.

So yeah, in terms of measuring attendance at single individual events, you can squeeze a contorted definition of "#1 spectator sport" and apply it to NASCAR, but it's a really tortured and, in my mind, inappropriate use of the numbers.

And while this isn't terribly relevant to the point I'm making, the fact is that NASCAR is having increasing trouble filling the huge speedways the last couple of years. The numbers at Bristol are down significantly.

[jbjb]

You tell 'em Garnabby!

Ah, you raise a good point. I guess I'm memorable for never having told others to STFU or F-off; and for not having deleted over 6,000 posts in anger, and crawling back; or not actually trolling sites (with questionable claims and other bull-garbage). Gosh, thank you.

+1000 OneHitWonder nice to see someone other then myself call out Ibeatyouraces.

Keep guessing loser! :-)