The WoV Thread

[jbjb]

Kewlj, what's voodoo nonsense is you being unable to accept that players like Mdawg and Singer can be thousands of dollars ahead making big bets at -EV games.

Right Monet?

In fact, Monet, why dont you tell Kewlj how many $1200 bets you can make before you wipe out that parlay win? And, how many bets do you think you might win before you could lose ALL of that parlay win?

If you believe those 2 retards, I have swamp land on Pluto to sell you.

[Alan Mendelson]

Short term, yes, a player can win playing -EV. Long term he can not.

Monet quit now! Kewlj says so.

[Alan Mendelson]

Kewlj, what's voodoo nonsense is you being unable to accept that players like Mdawg and Singer can be thousands of dollars ahead making big bets at -EV games.

Right Monet?

In fact, Monet, why dont you tell Kewlj how many $1200 bets you can make before you wipe out that parlay win? And, how many bets do you think you might win before you could lose ALL of that parlay win?

If you believe those 2 retards, I have swamp land on Pluto to sell you.

When will you start calling Monet a retard too?

[kewlJ]

Short term, yes, a player can win playing -EV. Long term he can not.

Monet quit now! Kewlj says so.

You don't read do you Alan. We don't know whether monet's plays are -EV or +EV. It appears he is looking for and getting odds on parlays that may make his wagers +EV. Only he can tell us for sure if that is the case long-term. Michael Shackleford does a lot of this during football season. They aren't so much handicapping any teams as putting together teams and odds in a parlay that may make the play +EV. So monet may very well be playing +EV. As a matter of fact, I suspect he is.

[Alan Mendelson]

Short term, yes, a player can win playing -EV. Long term he can not.

Monet quit now! Kewlj says so.

You don't read do you Alan. We don't know whether monet's plays are -EV or +EV. It appears he is looking for and getting odds on parlays that may make his wagers +EV. Only he can tell us for sure if that is the case long-term. Michael Shackleford does a lot of this during football season. They aren't so much handicapping any teams as putting together teams and odds in a parlay that may make the play +EV. So monet may very well be playing +EV. As a matter of fact, I suspect he is.

Your feet are firmly planted in quicksand.

[redietz]

Monet quit now! Kewlj says so.

You don't read do you Alan. We don't know whether monet's plays are -EV or +EV. It appears he is looking for and getting odds on parlays that may make his wagers +EV. Only he can tell us for sure if that is the case long-term. Michael Shackleford does a lot of this during football season. They aren't so much handicapping any teams as putting together teams and odds in a parlay that may make the play +EV. So monet may very well be playing +EV. As a matter of fact, I suspect he is.

Your feet are firmly planted in quicksand.

You can't really put a negative EV or positive EV label on monet because you can't cleanly quantify how good he is at what he's doing. He may be massively expert, which means whatever type of hockey bet he makes, he's going to win long term. This isn't roulette or video poker or blackjack. An example -- 40 years ago, the Kentucky team doctor bet Indiana against Kentucky. Describing what he did as negative or positive EV is missing the point. He was expert because of what he knew. He wasn't a "lock" to win the game, but he had a helluva good chance. Applying math labels to what he did is missing the gist of what he did.

Language is important. I've argued that monet betting parlays is non-optimal, but it's non-optimal FOR MONET. Non-optimal has nothing to do with negative EV or positive EV. It's just a statement that, long term, you could do better.

[monet]

Just incase you guys missed it the Wild won 6-3 and the Capitals won 2-0.
Fun.
Play Again Tomorrow.
I love it at the book.
Song Reco Below.
Sorry tableplay... this is the wrong thread but you know.

Fucking Hockey... the best sport in the world where Fighting is actually allowed and scored LOL!!
You can literally get a Gordie Howe Hat Trick and its celebrated!!!!

Welp, I have to give redietz credit here.
I even have to type redietz this time even though I want to use his other title.
He seems to be the only one who understands that betting sports is different per the individual.
He wants me to wager large amounts on straight bets but that shit hurts when you go 0-6 or 1-6 on the day.
IMO both mechanics can work and he may very well be right that parlay betting is less optimal.
Who gives a shit!?
Let's have some fun and bet some NHL, MLB and NFL!!!
I ain't Fucking around with College Anything or the BLMNBA.
unJon is making me a believer in MMA though.
Can't wait for his next prediction.

You guys do what you want.
I'm not forcing anyone to do anything with their money.
I'm here for entertainment purposes and I hope I am entertaining most of you.
You all can donate to my GoFuckMe Page if you like though.
Mission146 has a queer sister incase you didn't know.

You guys won't believe this shit but NHL games on Saturday are different compared to Weeknights.
And Sundays are a completely different animal.
Figure that statement out!
The problem you squares have is Vision.
It's a Vision Problem.
Confused Yet?
Unless you're jbjb finding weak spots with 125% or better returns you better get some Vision.
When you guys can actually understand the difference between Tom Wilson, Sid the Kid and Evander Kane we might be able to connect.
Ozzy Excluded as he obviously follows this shit.
Oh incase you didn't know... each arena is different... the boards and ice are different and so is the weather.
You think outside weather doesn't make a difference to indoor ice hockey?
Do you guys even understand how line changes work?
Bah... whatever... leave me alone alligator.

[monet]

I don't understand what everyone's problem is!?
97% of players in Vegas Casinos are ahead off the jump each individual session.
How are you all not Multi-Millionaires?

[tableplay]

Just incase you guys missed it the Wild won 6-3 and the Capitals won 2-0.
Fun.
Play Again Tomorrow.
I love it at the book.
Song Reco Below.
Sorry tableplay... this is the wrong thread but you know.

Fucking Hockey... the best sport in the world where Fighting is actually allowed and scored LOL!!
You can literally get a Gordie Howe Hat Trick and its celebrated!!!!

Welp, I have to give redietz credit here.
I even have to type redietz this time even though I want to use his other title.
He seems to be the only one who understands that betting sports is different per the individual.
He wants me to wager large amounts on straight bets but that shit hurts when you go 0-6 or 1-6 on the day.
IMO both mechanics can work and he may very well be right that parlay betting is less optimal.
Who gives a shit!?
Let's have some fun and bet some NHL, MLB and NFL!!!
I ain't Fucking around with College Anything or the BLMNBA.
unJon is making me a believer in MMA though.
Can't wait for his next prediction.

You guys do what you want.
I'm not forcing anyone to do anything with their money.
I'm here for entertainment purposes and I hope I am entertaining most of you.
You all can donate to my GoFuckMe Page if you like though.
Mission146 has a queer sister incase you didn't know.

You guys won't believe this shit but NHL games on Saturday are different compared to Weeknights.
And Sundays are a completely different animal.
Figure that statement out!
The problem you squares have is Vision.
It's a Vision Problem.
Confused Yet?
Unless you're jbjb finding weak spots with 125% or better returns you better get some Vision.
When you guys can actually understand the difference between Tom Wilson, Sid the Kid and Evander Kane we might be able to connect.
Ozzy Excluded as he obviously follows this shit.
Oh incase you didn't know... each arena is different... the boards and ice are different and so is the weather.
You think outside weather doesn't make a difference to indoor ice hockey?
Do you guys even understand how line changes work?
Bah... whatever... leave me alone alligator.

[monet]

tableplay understands.
Ahhh the pop bumpers... classic!

[tableplay]

tableplay understands.
Ahhh the pop bumpers... classic!

This game is a lot of fun. No wonder 13,750 units were made (compare this to runs of 3500 machines or so for the games of the 2000s ).

[tableplay]

Rogan on Tyson's podcast (I'm going to listen to it now so no opinion on it):

[Tasha]

I wonder if Face from WOV is okay. He last visited over a year ago and hasn't posted in almost two years.

[Rob.Singer]

You don't read do you Alan. We don't know whether monet's plays are -EV or +EV. It appears he is looking for and getting odds on parlays that may make his wagers +EV. Only he can tell us for sure if that is the case long-term. Michael Shackleford does a lot of this during football season. They aren't so much handicapping any teams as putting together teams and odds in a parlay that may make the play +EV. So monet may very well be playing +EV. As a matter of fact, I suspect he is.

Your feet are firmly planted in quicksand.

You can't really put a negative EV or positive EV label on monet because you can't cleanly quantify how good he is at what he's doing. He may be massively expert, which means whatever type of hockey bet he makes, he's going to win long term. This isn't roulette or video poker or blackjack. An example -- 40 years ago, the Kentucky team doctor bet Indiana against Kentucky. Describing what he did as negative or positive EV is missing the point. He was expert because of what he knew. He wasn't a "lock" to win the game, but he had a helluva good chance. Applying math labels to what he did is missing the gist of what he did.

Language is important. I've argued that monet betting parlays is non-optimal, but it's non-optimal FOR MONET. Non-optimal has nothing to do with negative EV or positive EV. It's just a statement that, long term, you could do better.

But redietz, kew just said that he suspects monet is in fact playing these parlays at +EV! Then YOU come along and tell us it isn't correct to label monet's parlays in such a way. Are you unwilling to directly & personally slap the serial-lying little bitch down here?

If you've followed monet's pics and betting patterns you'd see that he makes a LOT of bets. His VP play is rarely if ever of the +EV variety, and I believe he simply enjoys playing machines, betting sports, and he has the cash to do it frequently. And thank goodness he hasn't followed your "it's not optimal to bet parlays" advice.

Then you go deeper down that rabbit hole by claiming "parlay betting has nothing to do with mathematics". Do you want to rethink that? Or are you trying to squirt out the notion that parlays are more a product of that complex but very capable computer attached to your neck?

[redietz]

Your feet are firmly planted in quicksand.

You can't really put a negative EV or positive EV label on monet because you can't cleanly quantify how good he is at what he's doing. He may be massively expert, which means whatever type of hockey bet he makes, he's going to win long term. This isn't roulette or video poker or blackjack. An example -- 40 years ago, the Kentucky team doctor bet Indiana against Kentucky. Describing what he did as negative or positive EV is missing the point. He was expert because of what he knew. He wasn't a "lock" to win the game, but he had a helluva good chance. Applying math labels to what he did is missing the gist of what he did.

Language is important. I've argued that monet betting parlays is non-optimal, but it's non-optimal FOR MONET. Non-optimal has nothing to do with negative EV or positive EV. It's just a statement that, long term, you could do better.

But redietz, kew just said that he suspects monet is in fact playing these parlays at +EV! Then YOU come along and tell us it isn't correct to label monet's parlays in such a way. Are you unwilling to directly & personally slap the serial-lying little bitch down here?

If you've followed monet's pics and betting patterns you'd see that he makes a LOT of bets. His VP play is rarely if ever of the +EV variety, and I believe he simply enjoys playing machines, betting sports, and he has the cash to do it frequently. And thank goodness he hasn't followed your "it's not optimal to bet parlays" advice.

Then you go deeper down that rabbit hole by claiming "parlay betting has nothing to do with mathematics". Do you want to rethink that? Or are you trying to squirt out the notion that parlays are more a product of that complex but very capable computer attached to your neck?

If Rob.Singer can provide the post of me saying "parlay betting has nothing to do with mathematics," I will send him my entire net worth tomorrow, including my beloved comic book collection. This is what makes debating anything with him a waste of time. He direct quotes things that have never been said and acts as if his putting things in quotes means they've actually been said.

Of course, if I'd actually said it, he would have lifted the piece from a post. So the quotation marks are actually a tipoff that nothing of the kind has been said.

As for the "thank goodness" line regarding monet, that's nonsensical. If monet bets one $1200 parlay a day, and monet knows this better than anyone, those winnings could go out the window inside of six months. And frankly, after a 130K hit, it takes some discipline to bet just $1200 in parlays per day. Or perhaps conversely, monet is like me and tightens things up after a big score.

[Alan Mendelson]

If monet bets one $1200 parlay a day, and monet knows this better than anyone, those winnings could go out the window inside of six months. And frankly, after a 130K hit, it takes some discipline to bet just $1200 in parlays per day. Or perhaps conversely, monet is like me and tightens things up after a big score.

Tightening up? Is that anything like quitting when ahead?

[The Boz]

If monet bets one $1200 parlay a day, and monet knows this better than anyone, those winnings could go out the window inside of six months. And frankly, after a 130K hit, it takes some discipline to bet just $1200 in parlays per day. Or perhaps conversely, monet is like me and tightens things up after a big score.

Tightening up? Is that anything like quitting when ahead?

Just more proof you are as good at giving it as good as you take it. You stir the pot and then cry when someone attacks you.

If you still worked in journalism, you would be a perfect fit at CNN.

[Alan Mendelson]

If monet bets one $1200 parlay a day, and monet knows this better than anyone, those winnings could go out the window inside of six months. And frankly, after a 130K hit, it takes some discipline to bet just $1200 in parlays per day. Or perhaps conversely, monet is like me and tightens things up after a big score.

Tightening up? Is that anything like quitting when ahead?

Just more proof you are as good at giving it as good as you take it. You stir the pot and then cry when someone attacks you.

If you still worked in journalism, you would be a perfect fit at CNN.

THANK YOU!!

[Rob.Singer]

You can't really put a negative EV or positive EV label on monet because you can't cleanly quantify how good he is at what he's doing. He may be massively expert, which means whatever type of hockey bet he makes, he's going to win long term. This isn't roulette or video poker or blackjack. An example -- 40 years ago, the Kentucky team doctor bet Indiana against Kentucky. Describing what he did as negative or positive EV is missing the point. He was expert because of what he knew. He wasn't a "lock" to win the game, but he had a helluva good chance. Applying math labels to what he did is missing the gist of what he did.

Language is important. I've argued that monet betting parlays is non-optimal, but it's non-optimal FOR MONET. Non-optimal has nothing to do with negative EV or positive EV. It's just a statement that, long term, you could do better.

But redietz, kew just said that he suspects monet is in fact playing these parlays at +EV! Then YOU come along and tell us it isn't correct to label monet's parlays in such a way. Are you unwilling to directly & personally slap the serial-lying little bitch down here?

If you've followed monet's pics and betting patterns you'd see that he makes a LOT of bets. His VP play is rarely if ever of the +EV variety, and I believe he simply enjoys playing machines, betting sports, and he has the cash to do it frequently. And thank goodness he hasn't followed your "it's not optimal to bet parlays" advice.

Then you go deeper down that rabbit hole by claiming "parlay betting has nothing to do with mathematics". Do you want to rethink that? Or are you trying to squirt out the notion that parlays are more a product of that complex but very capable computer attached to your neck?

If Rob.Singer can provide the post of me saying "parlay betting has nothing to do with mathematics," I will send him my entire net worth tomorrow, including my beloved comic book collection. This is what makes debating anything with him a waste of time. He direct quotes things that have never been said and acts as if his putting things in quotes means they've actually been said.

Of course, if I'd actually said it, he would have lifted the piece from a post. So the quotation marks are actually a tipoff that nothing of the kind has been said. .

"Applying math labels to what he did is missing the gist of what he did".

Since I don't speak Martian I simplified your obviously regrettable statement. Nor was I attempting to debate you. That would be pointless, since whenever anyone does so we get a serving-and-a-half of what you claim to have done 20-40 years ago along with how you "know someone or have a 3rd cousin twice removed" who will swear you are right on a stack of MSNBC fake CV's.

[mickeycrimm]

An example -- 40 years ago, the Kentucky team doctor bet Indiana against Kentucky. Describing what he did as negative or positive EV is missing the point. He was expert because of what he knew.

A degenerate gambler had been on a long losing streak. He was at the end of his rope. He was in hoc to the bookies up to his neck. He called his cousin who was the Kentucky team doctor.

He said, "Look cuz, I've lost my ass. I need a good bet to get out of debt with the bookies or they are going to kill me."

"Can't really help you" said the Kentucky team doctor.

"Aw, c'mon cuz! I'm desperate. Anything. Anything at all to get me out of this spot. Puhlease!!!"

"Well, okay" said his cuz. "I'm not really supposed to let this information out so you have to keep it under your hat. We're favored by 13 points against Indiana tonight. But 4 of our starters just came down with the flu. We'll probably get beat by 13 points."

Ok, thank you, thank you, thank you cuz!" said the gambler. "Man, I owe you a big one for that information. This is what I've been waiting for!!! It's huge!! Thank you, thank you, again cuz.

"Oh, by the way" said the gambler to the Kentucky team doctor "Do you know a good team I can parlay this to?"