Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
I read something by Bill Krakomberger lately about everybody going nuts over March Madness. He says it's a 63 game tournament that lasts for weeks but is equivalent to just a Thursday night in the regular season as far as number of games played.

The big news this week is Steve Fezzik betting 60K to win about 1.3K on the Purdue-Fairleigh Dickinson game. The spread was Purdue -23.5. FD won by 5 points. LOL. Fezzik has been taking a lot of heat on social media for the bet. They're all calling him a clown.His response: Why don't you guys show me some tickets where you had FD +23.5 points. So far all he's heard is crickets.

Fezzik tries very hard to make light of his Purdue bet and how it was just "not his best work". The fact is, he NEVER makes bets over $1000 unless he does as much math as possible and is ultimately extremely confident he made the right choice.

In this video, we see him trying to marginalize his knowledge of what the parameters were surrounding this wild ass bet. He's too embarrassed to say how FD totally performed exactly how a lowly-ranked tournament-worthy team actually was capable of performing, and instead used poorly analyzed Purdue guard play as his excuse. Even I would never make a bet on the moneyline for a -5000 team to win. It has no value. You're treated to Fezzik claiming how he has no idea how much he would have won if Purdue covered--which is obviously untrue.

The point is, he made no mistake--the math told him to bet Purdue, regardless how tiny the EV was, but it failed him. I expect redietz would say he bet on FD because "he knows sports".