Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
You go on an on about how anyone who bets in a -EV situation is a dumb gambler. Do you have any idea what Monet's chances were of this parlay winning?
You are just such a liar. I have said many time on this very forum that I do some sportsbetting as pure entertainment. It is negative expectation and I have the records to prove that I lose right along those lines of expectation. (sometimes more ) The cost of this negative expectation entertainment is a dollar or two per $100 wager. So the cost a month is about what I would pay to go out to say an Applebees and movie. I am fine with that.

AND I have never put anyone who gambles -Ev recreationally down. Just like my little bit of sports betting if someone goes to a casino a couple times a month (or how ever often they want) and plays -Ev and loses....that is fine if that is what they want to do with their money. It is only a problem when....it becomes a problem.

I mean do you realize that AP's couldn't exist if it weren't for many more players (like you) that lose.

I just think if players are going to go to a casino and play for fun (recreationally) and there are a couple little AP type things they can do to win a little or even lose less, maybe they should consider that.

But no matter how you slice it, my issue with you Singer, and this Mdog who is using your exact playbook is not jealousy. It is that your claims are bullshit. I hold the two of you no different than all Christopher Mitchell and the blackjack army guy and all the other you tube scammer. The fact that you are not selling anything makes absolutely no difference. You are peddling bullshit information.

I think the language being used here is not quite right. In sports and horse racing, you can't just announce that something is negative EV for a particular individual. That's because these are not purely mathematically constrained systems with the same expertise being brought to bear by each individual. Sports and horses are games of OPINION, not pure math.

Assuming monet brings some hockey expertise to the table (and he certainly seems to know what he's doing), simple application of math odds is inappropriate. Monet may be positive EV in hockey regardless of whether he's betting parlays or straight bets.

Now having said that, betting parlays is inferior to straight betting in the long term because you are very rarely getting optimal odds for each game in the parlay. If I were coaching monet, I would have recommended betting each game straight as opposed to parlay betting, unless there were some promo or reason to bet every game at one place at one point in time.

The most important point is that when dealing with sports or race betting, simple math analysis doesn't cover the reality. Opinions matter.