There's a reason polygraph results are not allowed as evidence in courts of law.So, since you are the, ahem, honest tout, I'm sure you wouldn't mind providing corroborating evidence that you took USA to task on their sports betting advertising. Or are we supposed to just take a tout for his word?
Well, it's nice to just invent stories, which is what Axelwolf is now doing. Let's try, rather than speculation-without-facts, an actual true event.
Who do you think was the first to take USA Today to task in 1982 (the first year it began publishing) when they ran a full page of ad blocks devoted to services with claims of 82-9 ATS and 108-13 ATS and so on? The ads were running every Friday in every edition.
That would be me, the inimitable founder of something called Integrity Sports, which is corny, of course, but that was kind of the point. That name, attached to my face, made me the most obvious target if I fudged one number, which I never, ever did. I called USA Today directly (no internet in those days) and wrote to them to let them know they were off the factual wagon with what they were allowing as ads. I told them what real numbers would look like, and that what they were allowing was asinine.
Now what will the all-knowing Axelwolf's response be to this pithy history lesson? Axelwolf has no actual information, just surmises based on a lifetime of hanging out with scumbags and gambling addicts. Why speculate when you actually know nothing?
If anyone is an expert on competing against liars and cheats and bullshitters, it would probably be the guy who never fudged a number and ran something called Integrity Sports. I got so much grief for that name (because it is kind of stupid), but people quickly understood what I was about and how I did things. It's why I was invited into the Wise Guys and why I was invited to be in Who's Who in Sports Gambling in 1984. It's probably why magazines like The Humanist vetted me and published me and why I was vetted to present a paper at the National Conference on Gambling and Risk-Taking. My reputation in this business has always been absolutely pristine. Otherwise I wouldn't have lived up to the stupid-or-not name.
P.S. My superior half loved the name, by the way. I think she may have been the only one.
As I said in the first ad I ran in GamePlan magazine (which I still have the ad mock-up for -- found it today in a box), I'll take a polygraph on any of this. Just bet me the cost of the polygraph operator and have the balls to be in the room with me and the operator so I can film it.