Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 103

Thread: Responses to Anti-Sports Gambling Op-Ed

  1. #61
    Originally Posted by Mission146 View Post
    I would want the people selling sports picks to disclose these things wherever they happen to be selling them.
    You spent energy explaining a hypothetical, but you're not interested in examining the reality?

  2. #62
    Originally Posted by coach belly View Post
    Originally Posted by Mission146 View Post
    I would want the people selling sports picks to disclose these things wherever they happen to be selling them.
    You spent energy explaining a hypothetical, but you're not interested in examining the reality?
    I have examined the reality. The difference between the two of us in this thread is, in my criticisms, I was not talking about Redietz specifically.

  3. #63
    Originally Posted by Mission146 View Post
    Originally Posted by monet View Post
    Originally Posted by Mission146 View Post
    Is he selling something here? Why would he disclose his fees at a place where he is not attempting to make a sale? When I sold furniture, for example, I didn't go to the cafeteria at the university and tell all of my friends about the sales we were having on mattresses that week.
    Yes.
    He is indirectly and directly selling his touting on this site.
    He is not helping people who have a gambling addiction.
    He is indirectly and directly profiting off of their addiction.
    Leech, Vampire... etc. etc.
    Well, not much I can say there. By that standard, I do the same thing in both writing and vulturing. Vulturing because, if nobody lost over the long run, then there wouldn't be any casinos. If other people don't lose, then I couldn't win. The websites, of course, because we literally advertise for casinos.

    The only difference between the two of us in that regard is that I do not directly charge gamblers for anything and do nothing to negatively influence their gambling habits directly.
    Mission, you know not whereof you speak. You are assuming things that are not correct. If you re-read, you should catch the gist. Just because I explain the rationale for certain things handicappers do, does not mean that I am doing them. That's an incorrect assumption.

    Also, note that "do nothing to negatively influence their gambling habits" can be read two ways. Are you saying you do nothing to reduce their (presumably bad) gambling "habit," or are you saying you do nothing to detract from their (presumably profitable) gambling "habit?" Not really clear, especially to a civilian to whom all gambling "habits" are presumed "bad."

  4. #64
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Coach will now not mention the "it's significantly more" because he'll figure it out how wrong he was
    You wrote earlier that your fee is calculated on a percentage of profit basis.

    You wrote earlier that your clients bet $1K+ per game.

    Is your fee 1% or less?

  5. #65
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post

    Mission, you know not whereof you speak. You are assuming things that are not correct. If you re-read, you should catch the gist. Just because I explain the rationale for certain things handicappers do, does not mean that I am doing them. That's an incorrect assumption.

    Also, note that "do nothing to negatively influence their gambling habits" can be read two ways. Are you saying you do nothing to reduce their (presumably bad) gambling "habit," or are you saying you do nothing to detract from their (presumably profitable) gambling "habit?" Not really clear, especially to a civilian to whom all gambling "habits" are presumed "bad."
    Why are you defending yourself against someone who is not criticizing you? My point in that post was, if Monet is complaining that YOU make money as a result of other peoples' gambling, then I couldn't possibly complain about that on the grounds that I do the same exact thing.

    I understand that you are not doing the same exact thing that other handicappers are doing. I never said that you were. I used the $10/pick in my example only because that was an example number that you originally threw out there.

    That said, when your clients make bets, you stand to make more money off of sports betting than you otherwise would if you made the same amount in bets personally and did not have any clients---yes or no?

    I do nothing that would cause an individual person to make one particular bet or another, much less get paid by them, under any set of conditions, to do so. I mathematically analyze propositions, then they can decide whether or not they want to do that and they do not have to pay anything to read my take on it. If they ask questions, then I sometimes answer them.

    My signature on WoV links to a post that says:

    Well, to the extent that the subject is gambling—-I only kind of contribute.

    I do, but let’s not pretend that it matters. They will, one and all, continue to play negative expectation games and they will, one and all, lose.

    They will not play the games any better than they would have prior to talking to me, because they care neither about the math, my advice not to play it in the first place absent an advantage or anything else that I do say or could ever say.

    Three times this with betting system players who, worse than not being concerned with the math, are religiously opposed to the math. So, they will all try their systems and they will, one and all, lose all of their money.

    So, I, ‘Contribute,’ but it’s not like that changes anything.

    You can look at a certain CM whose name I will not even be responsible for putting on this website. Let’s do a comparison:

    CM:

    Says you can win with systems.
    Could not pass third grade math.
    Charges to be part of his group.
    Charges for private, ‘Lessons,’ on using the systems.

    Mission146:
    Says you WILL LOSE, system or otherwise.
    Is slightly better than the average person at math.
    Does not charge to answer questions.
    Will refuse to gamble with you in a casino.

    But, they are not going to listen to me because I am saying, “If you gamble enough, you WILL lose.” They don’t want to hear that.

    They want to hear that you can win.

    Most people cannot win.

    Even if they could, or cared to learn how, they would just lose all winnings and more on something different anyway.

    They don’t want to win. They want to gamble. Negative progression systems, not that they would know it, are designed to create the perception that they can gamble LONGER…which is really what it is they really want to do. Why would a person be willing to risk up to 10k+ in total, on a -EV game, all for the purpose of MAYBE temporarily being ahead $100 and trying again?

    They want to gamble.

    And, deep down, somewhere so deep in the mind that they can’t even access it—-they WANT to lose.


    Any other questions?

  6. #66
    I have nowhere near the expertise and longevity of Redietz, but one of my former jobs for several years was as the primary handicapper for a well known tout sheet/service. Unlike Redietz, this was not an honorable company and did give out both sides of games. My termination from them was based upon my refusal to give out both sides. I also was a stickman for this fine group of gentlemen. When it came to "Lock" games or similar games of the week and the like, they would choose the game and I would have to formulate an opinion as it was rarely a game that I actually liked.
    It seems that Redietz ran or runs an honest operation unlike what I was involved in.
    We charged a fee for weekly, monthly, annual, etc., or just for a key game. "Locks" were a larger fee. I think I recall Redietz saying that he gets paid a % of profit, but he can explain if he desires.

  7. #67

  8. #68
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by Mission146 View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    I think what some people overlook with this is that I never mentioned my sports handicapping until Singer started giving terrible sports gambling advice. You can check it out. I have 6000 posts here. I went about 2500 here without ever saying what I did. Then Singer started with some parlay braggadocio, and that I just couldn't stomach. He was just wrong.

    So to those who think this is all self-promotion, well, I went 2500 posts saying nothing. Most of my blathering is a response to stupidity, which I feel needs to be corrected. You know, stop losses, machine telepathy, win goals, parlays that aren't open, parlays at one shop, just dunderhead stuff that Alan was clueless about.
    I don't think it is. You're not even taking new clients, are you?
    No, I'm not.
    Thatís what Madoff said too...

  9. #69
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    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.
    maxpen, aka dicklicker, is the shit stain in the underwear of life.

  10. #70
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    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.

  11. #71
    Originally Posted by coach belly View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Coach will now not mention the "it's significantly more" because he'll figure it out how wrong he was
    You wrote earlier that your fee is calculated on a percentage of profit basis.

    You wrote earlier that your clients bet $1K+ per game.

    Is your fee 1% or less?

    Gotcha!! LOL.

    Coach, you should stick to free play analysis. Seriously. You are so far out in left field on this, you may as well be on Mars. I mean, c'mon, man, go back and read what I wrote about working on a percent of profit basis. You must have Integrity Sports confused with:




    Instead of trying to be the "King of Gotcha," why don't you try thinking things through? At least a little bit, once in a while. Now how would a guy who has run something called Integrity Sports for 40 years operate on a percent of profit basis? How would he live up to the name?

  12. #72
    Originally Posted by mcap View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by Mission146 View Post

    I don't think it is. You're not even taking new clients, are you?
    No, I'm not.
    That’s what Madoff said too...

    Well, this is what I love. Obviously, mcap could have (A) tried to track me down (since I don't know who he is) and hired me in some way, shape or form. And then after hiring me, he could have used the Madoff quip and exposed me as a bald-faced liar. Or not.

    Or (B) he could just skip the reality-testing part and use a Madoff quip anyway.

    Since he chose (B), that suggests to me he knew how (A) would have turned out.

  13. #73
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    you may as well be on Mars.
    How's the weather on Mars?

    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    How would he live up to the name?
    Entitling your blog's home page Integrity Sports is "living up to the name"?

    Is that how things work on Mars?
    Last edited by coach belly; 01-13-2022 at 07:25 PM.

  14. #74
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by mcap View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post

    No, I'm not.
    That’s what Madoff said too...

    Well, this is what I love. Obviously, mcap could have (A) tried to track me down (since I don't know who he is) and hired me in some way, shape or form. And then after hiring me, he could have used the Madoff quip and exposed me as a bald-faced liar. Or not.

    Or (B) he could just skip the reality-testing part and use a Madoff quip anyway.

    Since he chose (B), that suggests to me he knew how (A) would have turned out.
    I can't help myself here....

    Maybe you just had a senior moment. But otherwise when you don't put it in the sports betting section, whatever's on your mind section, or your 2022 blog but post it here just so that you can generate some action on it, you get what you get.

  15. #75
    Originally Posted by Mission146 View Post
    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.
    Last edited by redietz; 01-13-2022 at 08:06 PM.

  16. #76
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    I don't know how these pile of sports handicappers behave all-around when it comes to their "picks". But it's one thing to perpetually toot your own horn about decades-past performances from obscure contests etc., and quite another to put up some pre-game picks with an explanation or two. The only one I've seen, which was either by mistakenly talking out of turn, or was done with a purpose and a whole lotta prayers, was his touting of Cincinnati to "win it all" in NCAA football. Poof.

    Why am I the only one of maybe TWELVE people to get solicited by redeitz' sports punks? Well guess what--he didn't expect to get excoriated for that nonsense that quickly, so he had his team pull back the reins like any wounded businessman would do.

    It also makes no sense that he wouldn't accept my amateur vs. pro 32-game NFL challenge that had no money or conditions involved other than he pick the source of the lines for both of us. How much simpler could it have been anyway?

    Agree with the poster who called touts who sell picks as the scum of the earth, who need other people's money because they lose their picks. After all, if their for-sale picks are such "locks", then why not just bet MORE on them instead of selling them?
    I wanted to re-visit this post, because it's the kind of post from Rob that got me saying I was a sports handicapper in the first place. Rob thinking that the Bearcats at 150-1 was a bad play or losing play is so bizarre that it's mind blowing.

  17. #77
    The only handicapper that tops the Comrade is Kyle Prescott.........almost forgot bumbling Kevin Davis !

  18. #78
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post

    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.

  19. #79
    Originally Posted by Mission146 View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post

    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?

  20. #80
    I think that's a postulation that we often don't keep in the back of our minds enough, but probably should. Excellent observation.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Anti gambling, anti casinos
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 151
    Last Post: 04-06-2019, 06:36 PM
  2. Anti Facial Recognition
    By ZenKinG in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-03-2019, 10:07 AM
  3. A Theory About Anti-AP Posters
    By redietz in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 01-17-2018, 04:48 AM
  4. Estimating Responses to the Dice Question
    By redietz in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 06-05-2015, 05:20 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •