Responses to Anti-Sports Gambling Op-Ed

[redietz]

Bloomberg Opinion published an anti-sports gambling op-ed back in December, written by Timothy O'Brien, a fine writer and executive editor there.

https://www.pressdemocrat.com/articl...can-bet-on-it/


I responded with both my own short op-ed and a brief analytic follow-up.

https://theskepticalgambler.blogspot...ddictions.html

And the brief analysis.

https://theskepticalgambler.blogspot...-ed-brief.html

[Rob.Singer]

Wonderful. But where are your pre-game picks? You know, like Cincinnati to "win it all"? Or how about what place you would have finished in the Circa Survivor contest if you had the thou to enter?

[redietz]

Wonderful. But where are your pre-game picks? You know, like Cincinnati to "win it all"? Or how about what place you would have finished in the Circa Survivor contest if you had the thou to enter?

At some point, who knows when, it will dawn on Rob that I really do not tell people who to bet and have not for about a decade.

Of course, the line above will be a great mystery to Rob. God bless him.

Rob, why don't you tell the folks about the times I tried to "sell you picks?" Let's hear the details.

[coach belly]

At some point, who knows when, it will dawn on Rob that I really do not tell people who to bet

He's not asking you who to bet on, or to tell him who who to bet on.

He's asking you to post your picks before the games are played...like Druff does,
or screenshots of betting tickets...like monet has done.

[mickeycrimm]

What if Druff were selling his pics to some people but publishing his pics here for free? And they found out about it. What would happen?

[coach belly]

What if Druff were selling his pics to some people but publishing his pics here for free? And they found out about it. What would happen?

Isn't that what the touts do? They publish some picks, and sell some picks.

[mickeycrimm]

What if Druff were selling his pics to some people but publishing his pics here for free? And they found out about it. What would happen?

Isn't that what the touts do? They publish some picks, and sell some picks.

I'm talking about the same pick being sold to one group but given free to another group. What would the group that paid think about it being given for free to another group

[coach belly]

I'm talking about the same pick being sold to one group but given free to another group. What would the group that paid think about it being given for free to another group

It depends on the value of the pick to those who paid for it, and whether they know what anybody else paid for it.

But Rob didn't ask for picks that have been offered for sale.

Those contest picks from years ago that the ditz brags about being available to the public...did somebody object to them being published?

[redietz]

I'm talking about the same pick being sold to one group but given free to another group. What would the group that paid think about it being given for free to another group

It depends on the value of the pick to those who paid for it, and whether they know what anybody else paid for it.

But Rob didn't ask for picks that have been offered for sale.

Those contest picks from years ago that the ditz brags about being available to the public...did somebody object to them being published?

So "Singer" knocks me for not providing free picks to him, but also knocks me for allegedly "trying to sell him picks." Hmmm. The difference seems to be price.

Coach, I love you, man. That's a really succinct a way of putting it. Thanks. I'm not sure I would have ever come up with that. I'm dense.

Man, that Singer is one tight AP dude. Kudos to him. That fuel bill for the Newell taught him real frugality.


Note to non-sports bettors: To put things in perspective, most sites "selling picks" online these charge between $10 and $20 a pop, with an emphasis on the low end, and they don't charge you if the game loses.

[monet]

Everyone here knows that when you sell a sports pick you are nothing but a low down scamming son of a bitch.
Selling a sports pick or charging someone a vig if they win from your sports pick is Pure Evil.
I wouldn't even expect that Evil from kewlJ.
Sickening that its even Legal.
No different than scamming ploppies at the machines with someone tailing behind to scoop up the multipliers or progressives.
Honest Advantage Players... HA!

[redietz]

Does anyone find it odd that Rob Singer is the only poster on all of these forums over all of these years who claims that I "tried to sell him picks?" And that the PMs, emails, text messages, or phone numbers involved have been washed out to sea?

Seems a little odd to me. I mean, of all the posters on all the forums, I target Rob Singer to "sell my picks." Makes perfect sense, I guess. He could probably take those picks and double them up.

It's as Boz says. I'm a helluva businessman.

[monet]

A wise man once said that unless you have inside information betting sports is purely for fun.

[Mission146]

Affleck has a net worth north of 100 million; I'm sure he'll be fine.

My take is that your responses are basically good for how short they are and also the fact that you're taking a nearly indefensible position. The good news is that you're playing offense, since you shot second and are basically just chipping holes in what the O'Brien said.

Also, "PressDemocrat," fucking gag me. Not exactly where I'd be going for my sports, so I'd likely never see the article in the first place.

[mickeycrimm]

The author called Affleck a drunk but conveniently left out that Affleck has been banned from playing blackjack because he is an effective card counter.

[redietz]

The author called Affleck a drunk but conveniently left out that Affleck has been banned from playing blackjack because he is an effective card counter.

Excellent, mickey. I should have included exactly that line. Bad exclusion on my part.

Usually, I don't go back and edit anything as a rule of thumb, so I guess I will let my error of exclusion stand. But if I do an add-on or follow-up, I'll state that and give you credit for the observation. It was a bad miss on my part.

[mickeycrimm]

The author called Affleck a drunk but conveniently left out that Affleck has been banned from playing blackjack because he is an effective card counter.

Excellent, mickey. I should have included exactly that line. Bad exclusion on my part.

Usually, I don't go back and edit anything as a rule of thumb, so I guess I will let my error of exclusion stand. But if I do an add-on or follow-up, I'll state that and give you credit for the observation. It was a bad miss on my part.

You don't have to give me any credit. Go ahead and change it if you want to.

[redietz]

The author called Affleck a drunk but conveniently left out that Affleck has been banned from playing blackjack because he is an effective card counter.

Excellent, mickey. I should have included exactly that line. Bad exclusion on my part.

Usually, I don't go back and edit anything as a rule of thumb, so I guess I will let my error of exclusion stand. But if I do an add-on or follow-up, I'll state that and give you credit for the observation. It was a bad miss on my part.

You don't have to give me any credit. Go ahead and change it if you want to.

Nope. It was your insight. I can refer to you generically (well-known machine pro who travels the country) or something, but it was your insight.

[redietz]

Affleck has a net worth north of 100 million; I'm sure he'll be fine.

My take is that your responses are basically good for how short they are and also the fact that you're taking a nearly indefensible position. The good news is that you're playing offense, since you shot second and are basically just chipping holes in what the O'Brien said.

Also, "PressDemocrat," fucking gag me. Not exactly where I'd be going for my sports, so I'd likely never see the article in the first place.

Mission, it was a Bloomberg Opinion op-ed, not a Press-Democrat. That particular paper picked it up, just as my local paper did, while running a huge photo of the Westgate SuperBook. That op-ed was everywhere. I just picked one at random.

[Mission146]

Mission, it was a Bloomberg Opinion op-ed, not a Press-Democrat. That particular paper picked it up, just as my local paper did, while running a huge photo of the Westgate SuperBook. That op-ed was everywhere. I just picked one at random.

Bloomberg!? Damn, I thought Press-Democrat was bad enough. Guess not. Fuck does Bloomberg know about sports? Bloomberg probably couldn't throw a football ten yards and wouldn't try anyway out of fear of fucking up his manicure.

[redietz]

Mission, it was a Bloomberg Opinion op-ed, not a Press-Democrat. That particular paper picked it up, just as my local paper did, while running a huge photo of the Westgate SuperBook. That op-ed was everywhere. I just picked one at random.

Bloomberg!? Damn, I thought Press-Democrat was bad enough. Guess not. Fuck does Bloomberg know about sports? Bloomberg probably couldn't throw a football ten yards and wouldn't try anyway out of fear of fucking up his manicure.

I don't really read Bloomberg Opinion. I have read stuff by O'Brien, who is a fine writer and usually a decent researcher. But this is one of those deals when somebody does something in your wheelhouse, and you know it's a barely researched piece with a limited view, then you have to think, "Hey, all those things I thought were well-researched, maybe I was wrong."

I have that happen with academic lectures -- you presume somebody's a friggin' genius, then they write about something you know a lot about and they muck it up, so then you wonder, what about all the stuff at which I'm not expert? Do they muck that up, too, and I just don't know enough to notice?