Forget good old days

[CharlieMaxwell]

We keep hearing about the good old days of the 1980s and how terrible sports betting currently is. The truth is, many opportunities available today far exceed those that existed at any other time.

Get the entire story by reading Fezzik's latest article which can be found on the RX home page at www.theprescription.com

Charlie

 

[TheGeneral+]

I do not do BJ, Craps, or even slots unless just passing time. These games never appealed to me, so I can only comment on the sports wagering part.

MONEY MANAGEMENT cannot be stressed enough. Shopping and learning to evaluate the numbers is very important, but I am sold that once you learn to control your MONEY, then you will be a better gambler instantly. Even while not shopping or knowing the numbers, one can be successful with MONEY MANAGEMENT discipline.

When one can utilize all 3 concepts, the edge is definately better for the bettor and not the bookie.

Good read Sir.

Thanks

 

[RobFunk]

that was a very good read. . .

".......there isn’t one sports betting book out there that I’d rate highly. The best have some good information, but still often are chock full of questionable statements and outright errors. I’m constantly amazed at how the typical author can write 250 pages of text and seemingly not show the reader one unique idea on how to win........."

so true. so so true.

 

[bigbet1234]

Fezzik, i agree on there not being a *decent* sportsbetting book out there.

So......why don't you publish one!!

 

[Revere14]

"Winning at sports betting in the current environment is actually very easy. Consider the current offshore environment includes... a TV schedule that enables the bettor to watch numerous games... and finally, instantaneous score updates."

Can someone please explain how instantaneous score updates can help me win at sports betting? Thanks.

Revere14

 

[Fezzik]

With 2nd half betting available on every game, it is critical to be able to follow the score of each game during the first half:

1. To try to capture the momentum of the game
2. To know exactly when a game is going to half, and the score at that time.

 

[TheGeneral+]

Seems to be a bigger benefit to chasers, but instant scoring on CBS, ESPN, Yahoo, etc... allows one to know where he stands financially sooner going into the next round.

For example...

I wager Phily(NBA) to cover at 7PM and I am committed to that play only Unless it loses, then I have another play on Dallas I like at 9:30 PM if needed. I am happy and will stand if Philly covers, but want to fire again on a play I like later if I need. The instant scoring available is beneficial in that I can use that outcome or predicted outcome as close as possible to determine whether I stand or fire on the next game.

I sit and watch these game trackers like TV these days. All the stats and game info is right there in front of me.

In-game betting comes to mind as well. You have so much info available in statistical form in front of you.

Also, lets say you have 8 games on the board. Now, one can sit and see the scores all at the same time and by golly if all dogs are looking to cover then I will look seriously at betting the fav in the last game late. You have the benefit of instant access to all those other 7 scores even the later games are in progress maybe in the late stages where it is apparent the dog will bark again.

 

[TheMDKid]

Fantastic article. I, too, have always thought that you really must be clueless to not make money in this business. I am reminded of a thread from a couple of months ago asking who had made money and who had lost money lifetime thru gambling. I was absolutely amazed at the huge number of posters that said they had lost money since they started. I can understand the typical square losing longterm, but I thought that the RX was mainly frequented by the sharper ones among us.

Fezzik makes some outstanding points as to why this is true. First he explains "Many average bettors are willing to take great risks in their bets, but refuse to take any risks with the places they play. They don’t understand that many lower rated sports books are like junk bonds. They carry high rates of return, but with greater risk." Outstanding point. I can't believe the number of posters who have said they will never play at another book that isn't rated AAAA. This brings to mind the endless debate about Sports Interaction. Some posters swear by this book, while others continuously swear AT it. I can only say that I would love to have a dime for everytime I heard someone say this place is going under. Been hearing it for 4 solid years now. Could it still happen? Sure. But even if they took off into the night tomorrow, the profits I made there over the years would pay for the loss of my SMALL remaining balance 20 TIMES OVER!!

Fezzik's second brilliant point is recognizing the complete lack of mathematical sense shared by SO MANY gamblers. Notice he did not say knowledge. Many posters have made it a lifetime pursuit to acquire vast knowledge (the accumulation of information, facts, or data) of historical statistical trends, ATS records, etc. Yet, when pressed to make sense of this information, many can't seem to separate the relevant stuff from the trash. And even the ones that do, very often use the info in questionable ways. Question - How many posters here can calculate the expected return on a $100 wager that has a 55% chance of winning if the vig is 10%. This is basic stuff, but I am amazed at how many have no clue. Yet if you don't know this, then how will you ever be able to determine if this is a better wager than say a $100 wager that has a 52% chance at 8% vig?

I am not nearly the handicapper as some of the top guys here, yet I CAN say that I have profitted handsomely over the years, mostly by using many of the points that Fezzik mentions. And in the end, isn't that the whole point? Good stuff, Fezzik.

 

[CharlieMaxwell]

Thanks for the good post MD Kid!

Charlie

 

[TheGeneral+]

The MD Kid,

Good points. No pain no gain. Live, learn, obtain the discipline as mentioned above, then take your shots. Just do not invest over your head, cause just like you said, We hear stories and rumors often that do not seem likely, although they could become reality in a minute.

 

[Fezzik]

A quick note on money management.

While I agree that poor money management is the downfall of some good bettors, it is also the crutch that many, many bad bettors use.

When asked "Why are you still broke and betting only $10 on your plays after 10 years of 55% capping?" people LOVE to use the age old excuse "Money Management".

The truth is that the VAST majority of people cash less than 52% of their bets, and THAT is the reason they lose.

 

[wilheim]

As far a blackjack goes, I know that anyone interested in improving their game without moving into the very tricky world of card counting, will find "Basic Blackjack" by Stanford Wong is a good place to start.

Available at the usual gambling book outlets.


wil.

 

[Fezzik]

Re: Books. You cannot go "Wrong" with "Wong".

His 21 books are excellent. However, there are many other excellent 21 books out there. Personally, I'd recommend the Revere book "Playing 21 as a business" but that's just because it has some nice color charts that are the easiest on the eyes.

Wong separates himself by having written a darn good book on sports betting "Sharp Sports Betting" that is easily one of the best books ever written due to its unique ideas, treatment of proposition bets, and other such topics. The handicappers will be disappointed in it, but not the winning bettors.

 

[LEYKIS101]

MD Kid,

Sounds like youve won a good chunk from SIA. I hear they boot winners, are you still playing there?

 

[TheMDKid]

Leykis,

Yes, I am. I'm amazed they haven't booted me yet. I've read where many posters have gotten booted after winning far less than me. I attribute this to 3 factors.
1. I have been successful staying under their radar by never betting the maximum.
2. I left their book for about a year (because of some of the endless rumors about no/slow pays) and then came back after re-examining the risk/reward ratio and deciding that the reward outweighed the risk (man was I ever right). Because of this my winnings, although substantial, have accrued over a long period and thus may not have raised a red flag with them (yet!).
3. I occasionally play some of their ridiculous fav lines just to keep from getting pegged as a sharpie.
Whatever it is, I'm thankful for not getting booted, but I suspect my luck is due to run out soon. If and when it happens, my venture into offshore will very likely end soon afterwards. Without SIA and with clone lines everywhere else, achieving profitability will be substantially more difficult and, IMO, not worth the enormous investment in time for the amount of profit expected.

 

[DarrylParsons]

I agree with the article's main points but I have to disagree in part with the junk bond analogy, or at least I have to add an important element to the equation that was not considered. There is of course the pure financial EV, but there is also the hassles and headaches involved in chasing your money and when you finally do get stiffed, you have not just lost an investment, you have been stolen from. The two are not the same.

Some of us place a large negative value on having to subortinate ourselves to some ape-like moron who, in between Martinis, lap dances and blow jobs is deciding what he wants to do with our money. Shall I pay it to my players or shall I run off with it!? Come here baby, let's see which is the bigger stiff, my customer or that thing between my legs, heh.

To me, having to think about such scenarios plus the time, energy, and loss of pride from allowing some lowlife goofball to exercise power over me puts such a huge negative utility and an intangible negative EV to that scenario that if the probability of a stiffing is more than about 0.5% there are no bonuses, soft lines etc. that could overcome it.

But overall the article is a good read and makes a lot of great points.

 

[TheMDKid]

DP,

I agree, the aggravation and time spent chasing your money in these books definitely should be part of the equation. After all, as they say, time IS money. However, we've also neglected something on the plus side of the equation. That would be the percentage of customers of stiff books that eventually get bailed out by another. When you get right down to it, how many times have you actually gotten stiffed and never saw a dime from it. In my four and a half years offshore I have only been stiffed of a substantial amount of money ONE time. Interestingly that was my very first book (Cyberbookie), and before I knew about watchdog sites like RX and others. Even Aces Gold's infamous disappearance a couple years ago was followed by several books offering bailouts. All World offered me a 100% cash bonus on every penny I lost there with a 10x rollover. I took the deal, scalped my way out, and in less than 2 months had my money back. Now some would say that is not the same as getting your money back, which is true, but it is clearly better than losing it completely.