BOOKMAKERS VS. BETTORS, WHICH JOB REQUIRES MORE TALENT?

[THE SHRINK]

I recently had some time to spend with one of the more recognized and accomplished bookmakers in the world. While he and I shared out thoughts regarding bookmaking, it became very clear to me that he pereceived the Public as being quite naiive about how hard it is to be a successful bookmaker...

He stated, " I appreciate speaking with knowledgeable people on the subject as opposed to someone who watches ESPN and thinks they know how to be a bookmaker. If I had a dime for everyone who thought that all you had to do is take the bet to make money, I would be a rich man. It is funny as I often heard of the way the bettor would want me to book, but of course, giving the advantage to the bettor. But, working on the other side of the counter and being just as competitive if not more, while always important to be fair, you book to make money, not to make friends."

Truer words could not have been spoken with regards to bookmaking. However, the same thing can be said when it comes to being a successful sports bettor.

So, the question that immediately pops into my head is WHICH occupation requires more overall talent, BOOKMAKING or BETTING ON SPORTS.

One could argue both sides easily. A valid argument that a bookie could make to defend his side is that the bookmaker has to spend so much time trying to come up with a GOOD LINE on EVERY game, whereas the bettor can pick and choose his spots. However, many gamblers I know personally who couldn't make a living at sports betting have done well when they switched to the other side and started booking bets.

So, I'd like to throw this topic out for discussion and save my opinion for later...

Which takes more talent, being a successful bookmaker or gambler?

Thanks for the thoughtful responses in advance,

THE SHRINK

 

[acw]

One thing I know for sure and that is that it is a lot easier being a bookie taking bets of those gamblers that bet into high vig doing zero line shopping than being a gambler shopping all day long for the best no.

 

[ApolloKid]

I think it depends on a couple of issues.

I think it is tougher being a book that actually sets the openers. The few offshores and Vegas shops that hang overnights in all sports and Sunday nights for next week's NFL games deserve a certain amount of respect. It's not easy. The good ones have an idea where sharp/public money may come in, but it's still a best guess. Plus, the info is imperfect, and won't become more solid until usually Tuesday at the earliest in NFL, for example.

That said, I think the clientele of a book can make it easier to be a bookmaker than a player. Locals who do no work and hang market/mostly market lines an hour before kickoff on Sunday have it best.

Overall, players have the option of passing, have more time to research before getting down and can shop. There are other hurdles out there that make it tough to be a player. But I think it requires more talent to be bookmaker at a sharp shop that hangs early numbers.

 

[ApolloKid]

Let me add one more point and ask a question:

Are we talking about recreational or professional players?

Of these three labels -- bookmaker, recreational player or part-time/full time professional player -- I think it is hardest to be a professional player, especially one who does not have the ability to replenish the bankroll through other investments/jobs. I'm not sure how may pros are in that situation.

Books can always find new backers, hire employees to market, perform customer service, etc. The linesman have to worry about lines and that's it. A good book will have others worrying about the other stuff. It's a business and hopefully most of these offshore books run like such.

The professional has a bank and that bank must be protected and used as working capital to make money. OF said in the Corvette thread a few days ago he can't buy the car because he needs money to make money. Exactly.

Sharp bookmakers/professional bettor both require talent, with the edge probably going to the professional because of the bankroll situation. If the bankroll goes or is drastically depleted, that's it. Game over.

 

[wantitall4moi]

Betting for sure.

There are no more real bookmakers anymmore.

One or two places put up a line and a thousand other places post up something similar. How hard is that? These guys thinking they post numbers are kidding themselves. What if Pin,Boyd's, Oly, LVSC had a MOn night game open -6, and these "bookmakers" ownm number was "7" You think they would POST that 7, not frigging likely. They post the 6, or MAYBE 6.5 since probably 2 or 3 hundred other places might offer that number too.

If one book takes a little to much and can't get equal, they just lay it off. Wow, that is hard.

Other than baseball and hockey, "bookmaking" is simply a game of tag. Books that offer extra half points, or a nickle on special days think they are pioneers. Ha, that extra half point might come into play 5% of the time, and only if you push it the right way. And that 5 cents is actually only 2 cents better than what other books offer all the time.

It is all about dividing and conquering. The more books the better. That automatically reduces the risk of the whole industry.

For example use the Superbowl when NE was a 14 point dog. If there had only been say 50 books in the world, they probably all would have gone broke in that game. Contrary to what people want to think the books got crushed in that game, if there weren't a thousand of them sharing that blow it could have killed most if not all.

You don't even have to be a good linesmaker. because even if you do make a mistake, and they do all the time everyday the books can adjust in a second, and/or lay off. Not to mention all the umbrella and conglomerated joints. So they just switch money from within, and each seperate book can tweak their number or odds here or there. 90% of the people betting don't know what books are related. So the books can do this pretty easilly.

All you need to do to be a "bookmaker" is the ability to balance a check book. While most woman can't do it, I am sure if that was your actua job description it might come easy to you.

The real pressure is to make sure you don't get killed if you gamble and don't lay off if you get hammered one way. Then that automatically make them gamblers, not bookmakers, and that basically answers the question you just asked.

 

[THE SHRINK]

Here's something to ponder although I don't think it answers my question...

Compare the % of bookmakers that make a profit with the % of gamblers who do and it ain't even close...

THE SHRINK

 

[wantitall4moi]

Give the profittable gamblers a bankroll and I would bet that 100% of them would be profittable bookmakers.

 

[OMNIVOROUS FROG]

Bookmakers take the vig. Bettors lay the vig. Bookmakers need to balance action. Bettors need to hit 52.4. I have known failed bettors become successful bookmakers. I have never seen a bookmaker become a successful bettor. Plus, the key to the entire game is who you are facing. I rarely face a bad bookmaker, they have the lifespan of a frog that can't swim. I have to beat good bookmakers, the best. The bookmakers have lots of knuckleheads betting with their hearts, betting for fun, betting goofy parlays, or parlay cards, with an incredible hold. Most any cpa could be a good bookmaker, not linemaker. You can count the linemakers on one hand minus a couple of fingers. True 2%ers are very tough to find. Best Wishes...OF

 

[dimeplayersonly]

let me make an adjustment to your post.....

BOOKMAKERS VS. BETTORS WHO WIN, WHICH JOB REQUIRES MORE TALENT?

no brainer.......the bettor...


but as far as non-betting "talent" goes...

bookies hands down......

who else can take multiple bets from players on several different phones, read the newspaper, post topics on sports forums, give line changes to clerks, drink coffee, get a blowjob, calculate figures, change register tape, count money (no-miscounts), all in a hectic loud atmosphere and at the same time....

 

[Muddy]

I think we need an archive forum and all the great gambling related topics should be archived instead I see great topics with very good info are just lost.

 

[Java]

Besides talent, there is also personality. Most people are just greedy, sick degenerates (but the nice kind

).

I think being successful as bookmaker is more a question of discipline rather than raw talent. If you run a clone line (and make minor adjustments to stay balanced) and don't get sucked into a bonus give-away war with your competitors, you should do fine. Also, some bookmakers decide to be bettors as well, by either letting the lines get out of balance because the 'know' better than the bettors, and wind up sweating the games. It takes discipline to beat the bettors, but not let your ego think you are enough smarter than them to be a bettor yourself.

Being a successful bettor requires more raw talent, but also a lot of discipline as well. Don't chase. Don't bet just to have a bet; but rather, bet on good lines/information. Don't bet more than you can afford to lose. Proper money management takes both skill and discipline. Also, the bettor has to research the lines at many books (and find good ones off screen), whereas a boomaker can get by cloning the top lines.

 

[SENDITIN]

No debate on this one...bettors require more talent. Bookies start with the edge in math. It's like asking who has the advantage in a foot race when one guy has a head start over the other.

 

[lurkerforages]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> So, the question that immediately pops into my head is WHICH occupation requires more overall talent, BOOKMAKING or BETTING ON SPORTS. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You answered your own question when you said you knew people who switched from losing bettors to winning bookmakers.

The dumbest bookmaker has an edge because of the juice.
It takes a very smart bettor to first overcome the juice and then make a profit of his own.

If I ever booked I would make a fortune because I would know the things that players like myself are looking for and not offer them!

 

[THE SHRINK]

The notion that a BM has a 52.4% advantage over the experienced gambler on each game is only a theoretical...

Please dont' tell me that the BM has a 52.4% ADVANTAGE over the gambler if the gambler is getting 3 1/2 points in a Football game that closes at 2...

Or vice versa for that matter...

THE SHRINK

 

[Fishhead]

This thread as all the ear markings of a yours trully grilling.

On that note, will hold off on my opinions.

Thank you for your support in this matter.

FISHHEAD,
Attorney at Law

 

[oldmanTED]

Much has been covered already in the above comments so rather then re-state some of the same, I will only add a brief thought.

Respect for both sides of the counter. That being said, however, believe that the bettor faces far more variables to scrutinize and decipher before making an informed decision. Believe the ability to properly sort through all these variables requires significant talent. Since less then 5% of players are successful over the long haul, it could be said that few possess such talent. I dare say that the success rate of bookmakers over the long haul is far greater then 5%. The more difficult something is to achieve, the more talent is required.

 

[Fishhead]

Good post Teddy

 

[miamiman]

1. It's pretty simple, when your a Bookmaker you let gamblers make the decisions, in the long term they don't make good decisions so the bookie wins.

2. The decision process changes a little if the bookmaker is booking to sharper clients, when you set your opening number and put it out there ,you already know where you will attract money - which is what you want, hence you have a bit more input into what they bet.

Listen, a fact that is lost on most people, is books put out weak numbers that make average gamblers look good, and thats when books get into trouble - the books are making the decisions for gamblers and they don't even know it themselves

 

[Scarlett]

SHRINK,
I have known some gamblers and bookmakers. The bookmakers work long, long hours having to make so many different lines at all times of the day and night. To me, this takes a lot of talent.
The gamblers get to pick their spots, which I don't think requires as much talent as having to put numbers out on all types of games.


Scarlett

 

[ivanm]

There are no days off when you book. When you gamble you can take a day off anytime you like. Being a bettor is easy when you are betting 5-10 dimes a game. It gets to be a lot harder when you are betting 50-100 dimes a game, then its a whole new ballgame with a whole new set of obstacles. That being said the hardest would be a office that takes big numbers from sharp guys, and bets also.