Page 6 of 105 FirstFirst ... 23456789101656 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 2100

Thread: Professional Sportsbetting

  1. #101
    I have tried to stay out of the jist of this "fight", because sports betting is not my field. I do a small amount for entertainment. But I have seen Red, multiple times now, talk about AP's who claim significant winning via sports betting. Who are we talking about here?

    Most AP's making a living, that I am aware of have their hand in numerous, some many different things to make their money and a living. Even lowly old me, who is considered a one-trick pony in the AP community, have done a number of different things.

    So on this forum, we have a number of members that publicly make some sports picks, starting with Dan Druff, but also Monet, Dannyj, I don't know, maybe one or two other. I don't think any of these people have claimed to be making a living via their sports betting picks or play have they? Druff obviously does other things including poker. Monet once disputed when I even called him and AP or playing with an advantage.

    We have had people like Axelwolf, and maybe there are others in this boat that have casually mentioned some sports betting play based on math type stuff, including bonuses available. But Axelwolf isn't claiming that is how he makes a living. He is a perfect example of a well rounded AP. He probably has a hand in many different things every year and over the years.

    So who are these AP's that claim they make a living or even significant money using math as +EV that Red is so wound up about? Is it another forum, like LVA that I don't read?

    Mickey is pulling up names of I guess known sportsbetters, (unknown to me). Do they call themselves AP's?

    I am just not sure what this arguement is really about?

    In this day and age, with all the online sportsbook and even some brick and mortar sportsbook offering all these bonuses, a player certainly could be +EV and make money just by playing the boneses. Even I do a little bit of that. Not enough to make me anywhere close to a winner.

    I can think of one AP, or guy that labeled himself an AP from these forums, passed away in the last year, that claimed he made a living from blackjack play and sports betting. I challenged his blackjack claim part but no one said anything about his sports betting part, including redietz who was on at least 3 forums with the guys for several years.

    So who the freak are we talking about here that has redietz so riled that he is repeatedly mocking AP's that claim to be winning sport better for a living or at significant levels?

  2. #102
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Redietz, I have a response from Bob Dancer. I had sent him what you wrote about appearing on GWAE. I didn't change a word. I copied and pasted it. He's concerned about whether you intend to trash sports bettors who have previously appeared on the show. If you don't intend to do that then he will clear it with Richard.

    If it's a go then I'll put you in email contact with Bob. I've been on the show 3 times so I know the drill. He will ask you for a list of things to talk about, and he may have some suggestions of his own, so he can formulate the questions. When the list of topics is agreed upon they will do the interview.

    I also told him you appear to be a world class handicapper with a rich history in sportsbetting. So do us all a favor and don't trash us lowlife VCT AP's either.

    It would be a go with the caveat that I would like to do "in studio" in Las Vegas in person. That way I get to meet the principals involved. I prefer doing these things in person when possible.

    I have to get to LV a couple of times in the next four months or so anyway because I'm likely going to do a tour guide thing for a documentary filmmaker who is strictly an East Coast mob expert, but who is unfamiliar with details of Las Vegas. So hopefully I can dovetail the two. If not, I'll do the tour-guide thing later. I'd be doing Mafia Tour 101 while my better half could give the graduate course.

    I'm not going to badmouth the LVA crew. They have some legitimacy. Fezzik is, arguably, the best NFL contest player ever, but the whole contest thing underscores that, as in poker, there are contest guys and betting guys.
    red, I just thought of something. You may not be able to do "in studio." My last interview they were both in their own homes, Bob in Vegas and Richard in California. It was a teleconference. Bob looked like he had just got out of bed. He was in his pajamas.

    Thanks. I'll contact them. I'm not big on Zoom. I mean, look at Rob's Shackleford interview. Rob looked as if he was broadcasting out of a closet. Why do they teleconference if it's just an audio podcast? Mainly, I'd rather fly to LV than have to clean up my workspace to look like a CNN talking head. I guess I could hang some blow-up dolls from the ceiling in the background just for ambience. Plus I might be able to have the documentary guy film the interview if it's in LV. Not sure he's taking a professional camera or not. I guess I'll find out.

  3. #103
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post


    I'm not ridiculing someone for making a 2K bet. I'm ridiculing the idea of people assigning gravitas or expertise or experience to someone BECAUSE they are making 2K bets. Or because they are "limited."

    Account, if you bothered to read what I posted, I said I tried to bet a $250 future at Hard Rock and was limited to $10. So, by your reasoning, I must (1) be making fun of myself because I admit to making a $250 wager and (2) I must also be a helluva bettor, striking fear into the hearts of mortal books.

    No, that wasn't the case. They didn't know me from Adam. The reality was books limit people all the time for myriad reasons. If you don't understand that, you should just stand on the sidelines.
    I will stand on the sidelines as I don't even bet sports outside of recently doing promo stuff for friends of a friend type deal.

    If you were limited to $10 on a bet where they didn't know you - then no my reasoning would not be that they limited you. You stated as much.

    The fact that you don't think limiting is a common thing blows me away. This is like an episode of Quantum Leap.

    So when will we know when you're going to be on GWAE?

    Maybe you didn't mock the guy for making a 2k bet but I don't think anyone here is assigning him "gravitas" because he is making the 2k bet either. You're the only one fixating on the 2k aspect of it.

    Is there a reading comprehension issue? I just said "the reality was books limit people all the time for myriad reasons." You quoted me.

    How does that translate into "The fact you don't think limiting is a common thing blows me away?"

    Account, is it the use of the word "myriad?" What has you confused here?

    You do realize CET had been using a sports betting limit formula based on a combination of tier card status and tier game status? So technically, everyone who bet at CET was being "limited" in the precise meaning in some way vis-a-vis almost all other CET bettors?
    I am talking about being limited for being a winning bettor. That was the sole context. When one is a client at a book and your max bet has been lowered then you are limited and it isn't for some random reason. It is because he book decided you're too sharp and they want to minimize the action they take from you.

    If some random bet has a lower max then that is not YOU who was limited. Likewise I asked around and no one has ever heard of betting limits being raised with your player's card tier. It actually makes some sense so I wouldn't be surprised if this didn't happen somewhere at some point.

    .... buuuuut .... Anyone here willing to back up Redietz's claim about CET? In his world when you stop gambling for a year and your card tier goes down - then the casino no longer wants to book your larger bets? Under what set of rules does the world need to operate for this to be true!??!?!

    Regardless, when we APs refer to someone being limited it means that the max bet size has been lowered on their account. Nothing more. I should not be surprised that this needs clarification in regards to Redietz.

    Redietz, if you were limited on a bet and they have no clue who you are then it was not *you* who was limited. I didn't feel a need to clarify this. It is however you who wants to change around the meaning of limited in this context. You also have some pointless semantic argument about EV in regards to sports. You also want to mock people who refer to others as sharp bettors. You also mock people using the phrase "weak lines".

    Not a good look to anyone who has a partial clue. Seriously. If you want more respect you should just stop arguing with people and stick with telling stories.
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  4. #104
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    If he wasn't on such a high-horse he'd get a lot more respect. .
    You have mentioned this multiple times now. "Condescending, high horse, talks down to". Some really great AP's that I have run into on various forums seem to talk down to people at times, including my one real offline AP "friend" that I associate with. On the forums he has been on, he frequently talks down to people and other AP's, including me, many times. You have to separate that out.

    I don't know maybe that 'chip on the shoulder' type thing is part of the fabric that makes up a good AP.

  5. #105
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    I have tried to stay out of the jist of this "fight", because sports betting is not my field. I do a small amount for entertainment. But I have seen Red, multiple times now, talk about AP's who claim significant winning via sports betting. Who are we talking about here?

    Most AP's making a living, that I am aware of have their hand in numerous, some many different things to make their money and a living. Even lowly old me, who is considered a one-trick pony in the AP community, have done a number of different things.

    So on this forum, we have a number of members that publicly make some sports picks, starting with Dan Druff, but also Monet, Dannyj, I don't know, maybe one or two other. I don't think any of these people have claimed to be making a living via their sports betting picks or play have they? Druff obviously does other things including poker. Monet once disputed when I even called him and AP or playing with an advantage.

    We have had people like Axelwolf, and maybe there are others in this boat that have casually mentioned some sports betting play based on math type stuff, including bonuses available. But Axelwolf isn't claiming that is how he makes a living. He is a perfect example of a well rounded AP. He probably has a hand in many different things every year and over the years.

    So who are these AP's that claim they make a living or even significant money using math as +EV that Red is so wound up about? Is it another forum, like LVA that I don't read?

    Mickey is pulling up names of I guess known sportsbetters, (unknown to me). Do they call themselves AP's?

    I am just not sure what this arguement is really about?

    In this day and age, with all the online sportsbook and even some brick and mortar sportsbook offering all these bonuses, a player certainly could be +EV and make money just by playing the boneses. Even I do a little bit of that. Not enough to make me anywhere close to a winner.

    I can think of one AP, or guy that labeled himself an AP from these forums, passed away in the last year, that claimed he made a living from blackjack play and sports betting. I challenged his blackjack claim part but no one said anything about his sports betting part, including redietz who was on at least 3 forums with the guys for several years.

    So who the freak are we talking about here that has redietz so riled that he is repeatedly mocking AP's that claim to be winning sport better for a living or at significant levels?
    I'm mocking the idea that "exploiting soft numbers," "steam chasing" and "arbitrage," all terms used by mickey, can lead to lifetime sports bet winning. I'm mocking the idea that buying some arbitrage-seeking programs can lead one to Elysian Fields. I'm also mocking the idea that sports gamblers can win across all sports for more than some limited promo time by utilizing "AP" priorities without actually be expert.

    I could see, maybe 20 or 30 years from now, when sports betting is in every state, some virgin bettor setting up shop in two or three states, using the bonuses and promos for a year or two until dry, then pulling up stakes and setting up shop in two or three other states, then doing it in perpetuity -- that person might be able to claim to be a "winning professional sports bettor" without knowing what they're doing, but we're aways from that.

    I'm at loggerheads with mickey more than anyone.

  6. #106
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post

    I will stand on the sidelines as I don't even bet sports outside of recently doing promo stuff for friends of a friend type deal.

    If you were limited to $10 on a bet where they didn't know you - then no my reasoning would not be that they limited you. You stated as much.

    The fact that you don't think limiting is a common thing blows me away. This is like an episode of Quantum Leap.

    So when will we know when you're going to be on GWAE?

    Maybe you didn't mock the guy for making a 2k bet but I don't think anyone here is assigning him "gravitas" because he is making the 2k bet either. You're the only one fixating on the 2k aspect of it.

    Is there a reading comprehension issue? I just said "the reality was books limit people all the time for myriad reasons." You quoted me.

    How does that translate into "The fact you don't think limiting is a common thing blows me away?"

    Account, is it the use of the word "myriad?" What has you confused here?

    You do realize CET had been using a sports betting limit formula based on a combination of tier card status and tier game status? So technically, everyone who bet at CET was being "limited" in the precise meaning in some way vis-a-vis almost all other CET bettors?
    I am talking about being limited for being a winning bettor. That was the sole context. When one is a client at a book and your max bet has been lowered then you are limited and it isn't for some random reason. It is because he book decided you're too sharp and they want to minimize the action they take from you.

    If some random bet has a lower max then that is not YOU who was limited. Likewise I asked around and no one has ever heard of betting limits being raised with your player's card tier. It actually makes some sense so I wouldn't be surprised if this didn't happen somewhere at some point.

    .... buuuuut .... Anyone here willing to back up Redietz's claim about CET? In his world when you stop gambling for a year and your card tier goes down - then the casino no longer wants to book your larger bets? Under what set of rules does the world need to operate for this to be true!??!?!

    Regardless, when we APs refer to someone being limited it means that the max bet size has been lowered on their account. Nothing more. I should not be surprised that this needs clarification in regards to Redietz.

    Redietz, if you were limited on a bet and they have no clue who you are then it was not *you* who was limited. I didn't feel a need to clarify this. It is however you who wants to change around the meaning of limited in this context. You also have some pointless semantic argument about EV in regards to sports. You also want to mock people who refer to others as sharp bettors. You also mock people using the phrase "weak lines".

    Not a good look to anyone who has a partial clue. Seriously. If you want more respect you should just stop arguing with people and stick with telling stories.

    Account -- you really have no clue. Go sit in the corner.

    How do you determine that someone is being limited because they are "a winner" versus "the manager has too much on one side" versus "those are the rules for your card status and the tier of the game" versus "the manager's at lunch; let's limit this guy?"

    The answer -- you cannot.

    I'm limited to $500 futures at a bunch of offshores. You don't see me making YouTube videos to demonstrate it. I was limited to $275 per game on XFL last week at NorthBet. Is it because I'm a "winning sports bettor?" How would you know?

  7. #107
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    I could see, maybe 20 or 30 years from now, when sports betting is in every state, some virgin bettor setting up shop in two or three states, using the bonuses and promos for a year or two until dry, then pulling up stakes and setting up shop in two or three other states, then doing it in perpetuity -- that person might be able to claim to be a "winning professional sports bettor" without knowing what they're doing, but we're aways from that.
    Are we aways from that? How many states have sports betting now? And that isn't really even necessary now with the explosion of online sports books. Add in multiple accounts from friends and family members (sort of the online sportsbook version of the ever-popular multi-carding) and there are endless opportunities for someone who wants to do that. And they never have to leave home.

    Btw Red, your mailbox is full. Just wanted to thank you for answering my question yesterday, but apparently my PM was the one that set you over limit. lol.

    Anyway, I will let you get back to your feud with Mickster.
    Last edited by kewlJ; 02-24-2023 at 01:07 PM.

  8. #108
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    I could see, maybe 20 or 30 years from now, when sports betting is in every state, some virgin bettor setting up shop in two or three states, using the bonuses and promos for a year or two until dry, then pulling up stakes and setting up shop in two or three other states, then doing it in perpetuity -- that person might be able to claim to be a "winning professional sports bettor" without knowing what they're doing, but we're aways from that.
    Are we aways from that? How many states have sports betting now? And that isn't really even necessary now with the explosion of online sports books. Add in multiple accounts from friends and family members (sort of the online sportsbook version of the ever-popular multi-carding) and there are endless opportunities for someone who wants to do that. And they never have to leave home.
    No, for most you have to be in-state to bet. You could set up people in multiple states (kind of how we tried to recruit Egyptians and Brits so we could use Pinnacle -- LOL -- didn't work out) and go from there. But the promos and parlay boosts are gimmicks. They won't sustain. And your accounts will be cross-referenced and data-mined. You have no control over what account info is shared with whom.

    You're not going to be able to hide what you're doing. Then you'll be shut down.

  9. #109
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post


    Is there a reading comprehension issue? I just said "the reality was books limit people all the time for myriad reasons." You quoted me.

    How does that translate into "The fact you don't think limiting is a common thing blows me away?"

    Account, is it the use of the word "myriad?" What has you confused here?

    You do realize CET had been using a sports betting limit formula based on a combination of tier card status and tier game status? So technically, everyone who bet at CET was being "limited" in the precise meaning in some way vis-a-vis almost all other CET bettors?
    I am talking about being limited for being a winning bettor. That was the sole context. When one is a client at a book and your max bet has been lowered then you are limited and it isn't for some random reason. It is because he book decided you're too sharp and they want to minimize the action they take from you.

    If some random bet has a lower max then that is not YOU who was limited. Likewise I asked around and no one has ever heard of betting limits being raised with your player's card tier. It actually makes some sense so I wouldn't be surprised if this didn't happen somewhere at some point.

    .... buuuuut .... Anyone here willing to back up Redietz's claim about CET? In his world when you stop gambling for a year and your card tier goes down - then the casino no longer wants to book your larger bets? Under what set of rules does the world need to operate for this to be true!??!?!

    Regardless, when we APs refer to someone being limited it means that the max bet size has been lowered on their account. Nothing more. I should not be surprised that this needs clarification in regards to Redietz.

    Redietz, if you were limited on a bet and they have no clue who you are then it was not *you* who was limited. I didn't feel a need to clarify this. It is however you who wants to change around the meaning of limited in this context. You also have some pointless semantic argument about EV in regards to sports. You also want to mock people who refer to others as sharp bettors. You also mock people using the phrase "weak lines".

    Not a good look to anyone who has a partial clue. Seriously. If you want more respect you should just stop arguing with people and stick with telling stories.

    Account -- you really have no clue. Go sit in the corner.

    How do you determine that someone is being limited because they are "a winner" versus "the manager has too much on one side" versus "those are the rules for your card status and the tier of the game" versus "the manager's at lunch; let's limit this guy?"

    The answer -- you cannot.

    I'm limited to $500 futures at a bunch of offshores. You don't see me making YouTube videos to demonstrate it. I was limited to $275 per game on XFL last week at NorthBet. Is it because I'm a "winning sports bettor?" How would you know?
    Uhhh Redietz when you are limited on every bet at the sports book and it is far below their posted maxs then you can uhm easily tell vs your scenario.

    You are not even worth insulting over this. It is just embarassing.
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  10. #110
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    I could see, maybe 20 or 30 years from now, when sports betting is in every state, some virgin bettor setting up shop in two or three states, using the bonuses and promos for a year or two until dry, then pulling up stakes and setting up shop in two or three other states, then doing it in perpetuity -- that person might be able to claim to be a "winning professional sports bettor" without knowing what they're doing, but we're aways from that.
    Are we aways from that? How many states have sports betting now? And that isn't really even necessary now with the explosion of online sports books. Add in multiple accounts from friends and family members (sort of the online sportsbook version of the ever-popular multi-carding) and there are endless opportunities for someone who wants to do that. And they never have to leave home.
    No, for most you have to be in-state to bet. You could set up people in multiple states (kind of how we tried to recruit Egyptians and Brits so we could use Pinnacle -- LOL -- didn't work out) and go from there. But the promos and parlay boosts are gimmicks. They won't sustain. And your accounts will be cross-referenced and data-mined. You have no control over what account info is shared with whom.

    You're not going to be able to hide what you're doing. Then you'll be shut down.
    Have 0 knowledge about cash betting but makes some vague reference to needing foreigners to bet on Pinnacle. riiiiiiiiiiight. Ok - maybe don't stick with the stories. lol

    I am understanding now. Your handicapping is so strong you don't need the concept of EV to determine whether a bet is profitable.
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  11. #111
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    I could see, maybe 20 or 30 years from now, when sports betting is in every state, some virgin bettor setting up shop in two or three states, using the bonuses and promos for a year or two until dry, then pulling up stakes and setting up shop in two or three other states, then doing it in perpetuity -- that person might be able to claim to be a "winning professional sports bettor" without knowing what they're doing, but we're aways from that.
    Are we aways from that? How many states have sports betting now? And that isn't really even necessary now with the explosion of online sports books. Add in multiple accounts from friends and family members (sort of the online sportsbook version of the ever-popular multi-carding) and there are endless opportunities for someone who wants to do that. And they never have to leave home.

    Btw Red, your mailbox is full. Just wanted to thank you for answering my question yesterday, but apparently my PM was the one that set you over limit. lol.

    Anyway, I will let you get back to your feud with Mickster.
    Guys at the top who scale and understand it all and put in the work can easily pay for Redietz's house and his property tax for decades when the promos are lucrative. This whole concept of "sustainable" suggests you never win much to begin with ..............................

    Please Redietz I beg of you. For your own sake! Just STOP it. Go back to talking about the old days ... do some name dropping ... create a picture in our heads. That is the good stuff. Get on GWAE. Talk about your history.
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  12. #112
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post

    I am talking about being limited for being a winning bettor. That was the sole context. When one is a client at a book and your max bet has been lowered then you are limited and it isn't for some random reason. It is because he book decided you're too sharp and they want to minimize the action they take from you.

    If some random bet has a lower max then that is not YOU who was limited. Likewise I asked around and no one has ever heard of betting limits being raised with your player's card tier. It actually makes some sense so I wouldn't be surprised if this didn't happen somewhere at some point.

    .... buuuuut .... Anyone here willing to back up Redietz's claim about CET? In his world when you stop gambling for a year and your card tier goes down - then the casino no longer wants to book your larger bets? Under what set of rules does the world need to operate for this to be true!??!?!

    Regardless, when we APs refer to someone being limited it means that the max bet size has been lowered on their account. Nothing more. I should not be surprised that this needs clarification in regards to Redietz.

    Redietz, if you were limited on a bet and they have no clue who you are then it was not *you* who was limited. I didn't feel a need to clarify this. It is however you who wants to change around the meaning of limited in this context. You also have some pointless semantic argument about EV in regards to sports. You also want to mock people who refer to others as sharp bettors. You also mock people using the phrase "weak lines".

    Not a good look to anyone who has a partial clue. Seriously. If you want more respect you should just stop arguing with people and stick with telling stories.

    Account -- you really have no clue. Go sit in the corner.

    How do you determine that someone is being limited because they are "a winner" versus "the manager has too much on one side" versus "those are the rules for your card status and the tier of the game" versus "the manager's at lunch; let's limit this guy?"

    The answer -- you cannot.

    I'm limited to $500 futures at a bunch of offshores. You don't see me making YouTube videos to demonstrate it. I was limited to $275 per game on XFL last week at NorthBet. Is it because I'm a "winning sports bettor?" How would you know?
    Uhhh Redietz when you are limited on every bet at the sports book and it is far below their posted maxs then you can uhm easily tell vs your scenario.

    You are not even worth insulting over this. It is just embarassing.

    Posted maxes are flexible. And in Las Vegas, if you'll notice, very few places even post maxes any longer. If you ask what the maxes are, the majority of places will answer you with a ho, a hum, and some questions so they can find you in their data base and figure out what YOUR maxes should be.

    In fact, I actually did a formal survey in Las Vegas, about 15 years ago, regarding maxes. A summary was published in PlayBook. The majority of places did not want to give a hard-and-fast answer. But some would give a conditional answer. That summary is when I discovered the card-tier and game-tier priorities at CET. I still have some questionnaires lying around if you want to check them out.

    But yes, account, you're an expert to end all experts.

    But don't take my word for it. Go to Las Vegas, show up at windows in all the sports books, and ask what their maximum bets are for such-and-such sport. See how many give you an immediate crystalline answer and see how many do not. And don't cheat by just asking for some limits sheet or brochure. Actually ASK the window people what the limits are. Then see if you get a straight answer or if you get shuttled to the manager, who will likely determine YOUR limits. And dress nicely, so they know you're not some vagabond asking silly questions to kill time.
    Last edited by redietz; 02-24-2023 at 01:44 PM.

  13. #113
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post


    Account -- you really have no clue. Go sit in the corner.

    How do you determine that someone is being limited because they are "a winner" versus "the manager has too much on one side" versus "those are the rules for your card status and the tier of the game" versus "the manager's at lunch; let's limit this guy?"

    The answer -- you cannot.

    I'm limited to $500 futures at a bunch of offshores. You don't see me making YouTube videos to demonstrate it. I was limited to $275 per game on XFL last week at NorthBet. Is it because I'm a "winning sports bettor?" How would you know?
    Uhhh Redietz when you are limited on every bet at the sports book and it is far below their posted maxs then you can uhm easily tell vs your scenario.

    You are not even worth insulting over this. It is just embarassing.

    Posted maxes are flexible. And in Las Vegas, if you'll notice, very few places even post maxes any longer. If you ask what the maxes are, the majority of places will answer you with a ho, a hum, and some questions so they can find you in their data base and figure out what YOUR maxes should be.

    In fact, I actually did a formal survey in Las Vegas, about 15 years ago, regarding maxes. A summary was published in PlayBook. The majority of places did not want to give a hard-and-fast answer. But some would give a conditional answer. That summary is when I discovered the card-tier and game-tier priorities at CET. I still have some questionnaires lying around if you want to check them out.

    But yes, account, you're an expert to end all experts.

    But don't take my word for it. Go to Las Vegas, show up at windows in all the sports books, and ask what their maximum bets are for such-and-such sport. See how many give you an immediate crystalline answer and see how many do not. And don't cheat by just asking for some limits sheet or brochure. Actually ASK the window people what the limits are. Then see if you get a straight answer or if you get shuttled to the manager, who will likely determine YOUR limits. And dress nicely, so they know you're not some vagabond asking silly questions to kill time.
    I've never placed a bet in LV so I am not going to claim I know much there. Just I've never heard of a place limiting bets according to tier card status in this day and age.

    How is the lack of response from a LV teller evidence for your position that people aren't limited by their perceived sharpness!?!? Oh I get it. You're just digging deeper trying to dig on through.

    I wonder how the size of the LV sports betting market compares to the online market and what % of sharp betting occurs in LV books vs online books.

    I would be talking about the one that is far more pertinent from my perspective.

    Get this! Some online books have been known to have 2 sets of lines. One with the soft numbers/weak lines and the other one the sharps receive.

    Anyway, I wish you luck in finding people you can reliably trust so that you can continue beating Pinnacle.

    edit - It does make sense to have bets limited by tier status but it would need to be flipped. If you are an established -EV gambler then you get higher limits but it makes absolutely no sense to have that LOWERED (limited by tier). Still, I have never heard of it. Wonder if anyone else has?
    Last edited by accountinquestion; 02-24-2023 at 01:58 PM.
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  14. #114
    Redietz has certainly proven at least one thing and that is there are people doing a lot of talking that have no clue what they are talking about. AccountinQuestion is at the top of that list.

    If you don't know what you are talking about, you can ask questions (as I do), but for God Sakes don't be challenging the guy, like AinQ is doing. WTF!

  15. #115
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Redietz has certainly proven at least one thing and that is there are people doing a lot of talking that have no clue what they are talking about. AccountinQuestion is at the top of that list.

    If you don't know what you are talking about, you can ask questions (as I do), but for God Sakes don't be challenging the guy, like AinQ is doing. WTF!
    Example?

    BTW I've asked a ton of questions of Redietz which he never bothers to respond to because he can't. Pay attention nitwit. It isn't our problem you're literally too stupid to follow along.
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  16. #116
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post

    Uhhh Redietz when you are limited on every bet at the sports book and it is far below their posted maxs then you can uhm easily tell vs your scenario.

    You are not even worth insulting over this. It is just embarassing.

    Posted maxes are flexible. And in Las Vegas, if you'll notice, very few places even post maxes any longer. If you ask what the maxes are, the majority of places will answer you with a ho, a hum, and some questions so they can find you in their data base and figure out what YOUR maxes should be.

    In fact, I actually did a formal survey in Las Vegas, about 15 years ago, regarding maxes. A summary was published in PlayBook. The majority of places did not want to give a hard-and-fast answer. But some would give a conditional answer. That summary is when I discovered the card-tier and game-tier priorities at CET. I still have some questionnaires lying around if you want to check them out.

    But yes, account, you're an expert to end all experts.

    But don't take my word for it. Go to Las Vegas, show up at windows in all the sports books, and ask what their maximum bets are for such-and-such sport. See how many give you an immediate crystalline answer and see how many do not. And don't cheat by just asking for some limits sheet or brochure. Actually ASK the window people what the limits are. Then see if you get a straight answer or if you get shuttled to the manager, who will likely determine YOUR limits. And dress nicely, so they know you're not some vagabond asking silly questions to kill time.
    I've never placed a bet in LV so I am not going to claim I know much there. Just I've never heard of a place limiting bets according to tier card status in this day and age.

    How is the lack of response from a LV teller evidence for your position that people aren't limited by their perceived sharpness!?!? Oh I get it. You're just digging deeper trying to dig on through.

    I wonder how the size of the LV sports betting market compares to the online market and what % of sharp betting occurs in LV books vs online books.

    I would be talking about the one that is far more pertinent from my perspective.

    Get this! Some online books have been known to have 2 sets of lines. One with the soft numbers/weak lines and the other one the sharps receive.

    Anyway, I wish you luck in finding people you can reliably trust so that you can continue beating Pinnacle.

    edit - It does make sense to have bets limited by tier status but it would need to be flipped. If you are an established -EV gambler then you get higher limits but it makes absolutely no sense to have that LOWERED (limited by tier). Still, I have never heard of it. Wonder if anyone else has?
    Limited by game tier means the games are put into categories based on probable action. So games that would get little action (say, off the top of my head, UTEP versus New Mexico) have lower limits than, say, Michigan versus Ohio State. That's what "game tier" means. So people are limited by their card tier status and the status of the tier into which that particular game is assigned.

    Oh, God. Sharps versus squares again? Why use that lingo? Do you actually think there are categories of people who gravitate to one team versus another based on their what? Betting experience? Clairvoyance? Color of the jerseys? Lack of internet?

    I knew a bookmaker, Mike Stockunas, who could whip through three phone calls simultaneously while putting people on hold, giving three completely different sets of lines tailored to each individual bettor. To say he had memorized them is doing him a disservice. He just flat-out knew the different lines.

    Account, why should anyone who knows what they're doing respond to you? It's The Never-Ending Journey without the cool soundtrack.

  17. #117
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post


    Posted maxes are flexible. And in Las Vegas, if you'll notice, very few places even post maxes any longer. If you ask what the maxes are, the majority of places will answer you with a ho, a hum, and some questions so they can find you in their data base and figure out what YOUR maxes should be.

    In fact, I actually did a formal survey in Las Vegas, about 15 years ago, regarding maxes. A summary was published in PlayBook. The majority of places did not want to give a hard-and-fast answer. But some would give a conditional answer. That summary is when I discovered the card-tier and game-tier priorities at CET. I still have some questionnaires lying around if you want to check them out.

    But yes, account, you're an expert to end all experts.

    But don't take my word for it. Go to Las Vegas, show up at windows in all the sports books, and ask what their maximum bets are for such-and-such sport. See how many give you an immediate crystalline answer and see how many do not. And don't cheat by just asking for some limits sheet or brochure. Actually ASK the window people what the limits are. Then see if you get a straight answer or if you get shuttled to the manager, who will likely determine YOUR limits. And dress nicely, so they know you're not some vagabond asking silly questions to kill time.
    I've never placed a bet in LV so I am not going to claim I know much there. Just I've never heard of a place limiting bets according to tier card status in this day and age.

    How is the lack of response from a LV teller evidence for your position that people aren't limited by their perceived sharpness!?!? Oh I get it. You're just digging deeper trying to dig on through.

    I wonder how the size of the LV sports betting market compares to the online market and what % of sharp betting occurs in LV books vs online books.

    I would be talking about the one that is far more pertinent from my perspective.

    Get this! Some online books have been known to have 2 sets of lines. One with the soft numbers/weak lines and the other one the sharps receive.

    Anyway, I wish you luck in finding people you can reliably trust so that you can continue beating Pinnacle.

    edit - It does make sense to have bets limited by tier status but it would need to be flipped. If you are an established -EV gambler then you get higher limits but it makes absolutely no sense to have that LOWERED (limited by tier). Still, I have never heard of it. Wonder if anyone else has?
    Limited by game tier means the games are put into categories based on probable action. So games that would get little action (say, off the top of my head, UTEP versus New Mexico) have lower limits than, say, Michigan versus Ohio State. That's what "game tier" means. So people are limited by their card tier status and the status of the tier into which that particular game is assigned.

    Oh, God. Sharps versus squares again? Why use that lingo? Do you actually think there are categories of people who gravitate to one team versus another based on their what? Betting experience? Clairvoyance? Color of the jerseys? Lack of internet?

    I knew a bookmaker, Mike Stockunas, who could whip through three phone calls simultaneously while putting people on hold, giving three completely different sets of lines tailored to each individual bettor. To say he had memorized them is doing him a disservice. He just flat-out knew the different lines.

    Account, why should anyone who knows what they're doing respond to you? It's The Never-Ending Journey without the cool soundtrack.
    All nonsensical semantic arguments and excuses. Endless. You would respond to me because I ask tough questions which are the most interesting.. or you wouldn't because you can't.

    All hand-waving smoke-screen bullshit.

    I hope to be proven wrong when you show up on GWAE.

    Anyway, when Kewl is the only one on your side.

    Oh, God. Sharps versus squares again? Why use that lingo? Do you actually think there are categories of people who gravitate to one team versus another based on their what? Betting experience? Clairvoyance? Color of the jerseys? Lack of internet?
    What? And you think all bettors are the same? What lingo should we use? You don't believe in any of these distinctions?

    Yes there are categories of people who gravitate to one team but I'm not even sure what your point is. I believe they're called fans. This is at least partially why local books shade (ie weak/soft) lines against the home team.

    Tableplay must be having a mental breakdown with all the strawmen being thrown about.
    It is official. Redietz will never be on Dan Druff's podcast. "too much integrity"

  18. #118
    I think the funniest part of all this is how redietz has been spewing his ignorance in and out of every gaming forum imaginable for 20 years or so....and neither Dancer nor the Munchkin have ever heard of him! (psst red....maybe you should have sent them that "PR PKG." years ago.... )

    All this long-post blabbering -- it's just the way red likes it, so all his horseshit can get thinned down into mindless minutiae. And simultaneously, his little fairy friend with no life can babble on about how "red's getting mistreated blah blah blah" and be totally ignored.

  19. #119
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    I think the funniest part of all this is how redietz has been spewing his ignorance in and out of every gaming forum imaginable for 20 years or so....and neither Dancer nor the Munchkin have ever heard of him! (psst red....maybe you should have sent them that "PR PKG." years ago.... )
    Munchkin isn't on forums, at least public forums anymore. I first encountered Munchkin at BJinfo, a blackjack forum I was on from 2006-2011. When that closed in 2011, the members from that forum went to a new forum that Norm started, Blackjack The Forum (there...a plug for you Norm, old friend) to replace that void. Munchkin not only went to that new forum, but was named a moderator, the only moderator the forum has had that wasn't Norm.

    But Munchkin didn't stay at BJTF very long. Maybe a year or two at most and then stopped posting. This was about the time that forums stopped being about sharing experiences and learning from other players and started being about pissing contests and putting down others and trolling that we now see dominate gambling forums. I don't think that appealed at all to Richard.

    And of course, like so many other blackjack card counting AP's, Munchkin also moved away from card counting at that time, and into other forms of advantage play.

    So it is not surprising that Munchkin is not familiar with redietz.

  20. #120
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    I'm mocking the idea that "exploiting soft numbers," "steam chasing" and "arbitrage," all terms used by mickey, can lead to lifetime sports bet winning. I'm mocking the idea that buying some arbitrage-seeking programs can lead one to Elysian Fields. I'm also mocking the idea that sports gamblers can win across all sports for more than some limited promo time by utilizing "AP" priorities without actually be expert.
    I didn't use those terms. Frank B and Spanky used those terms. Plus they also used "off-market lines" and "weak lines." And they both said they've been doing it for twenty years. You say it can't be done. They say it can. This entire inquisition is about finding out who is right, you or them.

    Another thing. This 2K betting shit. You are denigrating Spanky as a lowlife 2K bettor. Did you ever stop to think that he thought that was as big a bet as he could get there? If you followed those links I put up you will see that Spanky tried to deposit 100K in a book. They refused and banned him. And in the Ringer article David Hill wrote that Spanky handed him a bag with 100K in it to make bets in Atlantic City. Spanky handed him the money then walked away. In one interview Spanky said he had to make a lot of small bets on a game in each book instead of one big bet in a book because that was the only way he could get the action in.

    You are also hung up on books limiting bets. We all know books limit bets on everyone no matter who they are. But what about not just getting limited? What about being banned. Spanky probably holds the record for bannings.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 13 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 13 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. What are best sportsbetting apps in Vegas?
    By PIGGY BANKER in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-14-2020, 12:44 PM
  2. The Future of Sportsbetting
    By mickeycrimm in forum Sports & Sportsbetting
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-05-2018, 08:03 AM
  3. Sportsbetting ONLY thread
    By LoneStarHorse in forum Sports & Sportsbetting
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 02-05-2016, 04:48 PM
  4. Sportsbetting
    By LoneStarHorse in forum Sports & Sportsbetting
    Replies: 143
    Last Post: 02-03-2016, 07:09 PM
  5. Sportsbetting Anguish
    By Rob.Singer in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 12-21-2011, 11:17 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
  •