Get bloody real. 55%. 55% bloody percent.
Standard line.
(45 * 90) - (55 * 100) = -1 450 * 2 = 2900/450(profit per season on 55%) = 6.45 or something... seasons money
So, in two years, the guy lost pretty much everything he's won in the last 7. And you call this guy a good capper? Well, probably, cause most of them couldn't pick their ass out of a pair of shorts.
Again, get real. You can make enough profit to be able to afford a loss on 55% only with very good bank management. Most cappers can't do that. That's why they're touts, and not gamblers.
Standard line.
(45 * 90) - (55 * 100) = -1 450 * 2 = 2900/450(profit per season on 55%) = 6.45 or something... seasons money
So, in two years, the guy lost pretty much everything he's won in the last 7. And you call this guy a good capper? Well, probably, cause most of them couldn't pick their ass out of a pair of shorts.
Again, get real. You can make enough profit to be able to afford a loss on 55% only with very good bank management. Most cappers can't do that. That's why they're touts, and not gamblers.
zee said:
Wagering 100 games a season and wagering 1100 to win 1000 (-110 vig) would give one these results.
2005.......45-55.........-15,500
2004.......45-55.........-15,500
2003.......55-45..........+5,500
2002.......55-45..........+5,500
2001.......55-45..........+5,500
2000.......55-45..........+5,500
1999.......55-45..........+5,500
1998.......55-45..........+5,500
1997.......55-45..........+5,500
1996.......55-45..........+5,500
1995.......55-45..........+5,500
1994.......55-45..........+5,500
1993.......55-45..........+5,500
1992.......55-45..........+5,500
1991.......55-45..........+5,500
1990.......55-45..........+5,500
TOTAL....860-740........+46,000
In your words you would qualify an individual with this type of record as being "awful"???
THIS IS PRECISELY WHY OVER AND OVER AND OVER again you here me proclaim this as a LIFETIME profession.............not one that is daily, monthly, or even yearly!!
I absolutely agree with your post, it's an obvious profitable situation over a lifetime.
Again, my point is, most of the time, no gambler can afford a loss for 2 consecutive years where each one is roughly 3 years profits.(I'd like to hear from anyone on here who's suffered a similar loss over an year when gambling was his only source of income and is still in the business).
When you win money, you invest it, you spend it, you live with it. When you lose money you still need an income flow.
I'm not arguing the situation is mathematically profitable, I'm arguing it's not a real life profitable unless you use some very good bank management in the 45% years and you've been very smart in the pre-losing years.
Edit: And no, I wouldn't qualify anobody with the above record as awful pick wise, but, if it's a recreational gambler - he's a star, if he's a pro-gambler, he better have a solid financial back or he's out of business or at least back @ step 1.
Again, my point is, most of the time, no gambler can afford a loss for 2 consecutive years where each one is roughly 3 years profits.(I'd like to hear from anyone on here who's suffered a similar loss over an year when gambling was his only source of income and is still in the business).
When you win money, you invest it, you spend it, you live with it. When you lose money you still need an income flow.
I'm not arguing the situation is mathematically profitable, I'm arguing it's not a real life profitable unless you use some very good bank management in the 45% years and you've been very smart in the pre-losing years.
Edit: And no, I wouldn't qualify anobody with the above record as awful pick wise, but, if it's a recreational gambler - he's a star, if he's a pro-gambler, he better have a solid financial back or he's out of business or at least back @ step 1.
