Alot of guys would disagree with me.But my father was a bookie for 30 years and he always said,"Give me a player that bets a $100 or $200 a game and plays five games a day..He will bury himself,but the guy that bets one game a week for 2 to 5ks.Thats the guy that will hurt you".He had a player like that ..He would give another book his bets and add a dime for himself.To bad the guy died.
JerseyMike you are right, I too am from a family of BMs and Pros, and my father(a pro) always told me as a lil' kid, "Son, BMs don't sweat action, they sweat the one big bomb!"
Action junkies are to sportsbetting, what slot players are to casinos, the backbone of the profits, big game hunters on the other hand are dangerous..they can make you or break you.
A few of my uncles & cousins that put pen-to-pad during their lives, would off some of their sharper action at times, but more than not, just sweat them until their greed grabbed them..they usually came out with Donut and Bagel in the end!
Less games/Larger Wager is definitely a better approach, but you still must put in the hours of homework each day, just to make the decision of "passing the slate", and can't lock yourself into such stiff mental parameters of thinking a set number for plays, as you may have 3 legit plays in a day, a week, a month,etc..depending on quality of schedule(Bowls, Madness, Weekends in the Fall,etc..)
Spades & JM, I must agree with you(fewer is better), especially if picking one's own plays..as in contrast to the best pros, that besides being the elite of the industry, have "smart marks" bookoo out to the side margin of the team's name on their sheets to all the games, and besides being able to carry their own weight..they are "in the know" & well-connected.
[This message was edited by Horseshoe on April 09, 2004 at 02:46 AM.]
Action junkies are to sportsbetting, what slot players are to casinos, the backbone of the profits, big game hunters on the other hand are dangerous..they can make you or break you.
A few of my uncles & cousins that put pen-to-pad during their lives, would off some of their sharper action at times, but more than not, just sweat them until their greed grabbed them..they usually came out with Donut and Bagel in the end!
Less games/Larger Wager is definitely a better approach, but you still must put in the hours of homework each day, just to make the decision of "passing the slate", and can't lock yourself into such stiff mental parameters of thinking a set number for plays, as you may have 3 legit plays in a day, a week, a month,etc..depending on quality of schedule(Bowls, Madness, Weekends in the Fall,etc..)
Spades & JM, I must agree with you(fewer is better), especially if picking one's own plays..as in contrast to the best pros, that besides being the elite of the industry, have "smart marks" bookoo out to the side margin of the team's name on their sheets to all the games, and besides being able to carry their own weight..they are "in the know" & well-connected.
[This message was edited by Horseshoe on April 09, 2004 at 02:46 AM.]
Interesting concept. The flaw I see is a losing streak will really hurt. Even if these are 60 % plays, you leave money on the table by not playing games that are over 52.4 %.
I say play them all if you are confident they are + EV, but you can weight them. At minimum you achieve less variance, and you can pick up nice coin by rolling thru bonus money.
I don't think you're going to achieve better than 60 % long-term with this method, but you give up other things in the process. Eliminating marginal plays certainly can't hurt, but volume works for me ! The hard part for me is determining an expected win percentage on each bet.
Doug
I say play them all if you are confident they are + EV, but you can weight them. At minimum you achieve less variance, and you can pick up nice coin by rolling thru bonus money.
I don't think you're going to achieve better than 60 % long-term with this method, but you give up other things in the process. Eliminating marginal plays certainly can't hurt, but volume works for me ! The hard part for me is determining an expected win percentage on each bet.
Doug
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jerseymike111:
Alot of guys would disagree with me.But my father was a bookie for 30 years and he always said,"Give me a player that bets a $100 or $200 a game and plays five games a day..He will bury himself,but the guy that bets one game a week for 2 to 5ks.Thats the guy that will hurt you".He had a player like that ..He would give another book his bets and add a dime for himself.To bad the guy died.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
good post..no need to bet every single day mutil games IMO either
Alot of guys would disagree with me.But my father was a bookie for 30 years and he always said,"Give me a player that bets a $100 or $200 a game and plays five games a day..He will bury himself,but the guy that bets one game a week for 2 to 5ks.Thats the guy that will hurt you".He had a player like that ..He would give another book his bets and add a dime for himself.To bad the guy died.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
good post..no need to bet every single day mutil games IMO either
I agree Fishhead, but as yourself being a vet of the pen-to-pad art, FH are you speaking generally of sharper/larger players being "very successful" in both cases, or certain players from all strata?
DougJ, I seem to find your dilemma of "The hard part for me is determining an expected win percentage on each bet", in my case(and most people that I've seen), it's more a case of ranking one's play volume & play size most proportionate to areas of personal strengths(best sports, totals, playoffs), as the best way to achieve better results.
And generally have found that volume/board play is only mastered by BMS, Middlers, Movers, and Pros with plenty of help(smart marks/connections)..as there is just so much ground to cover, from capping to chasing quality numbers(early capper or lottery regular?) to watching DB ad nauseum, in order to be extremely successful long term.
I prefer college football & college hoops, NFL, then MLB in order(it used to be the king money making sport..now game's changed..still of quality..just not as Kosher!), with NBA and NHL reduced of late years to playoffs only, and horses mainly just a Derby & Breeder's Cup pursuit..best left to touts & movers!
If one had BW's wallet & college capping network, BB's NFL/NBA plays & halftime skills, HH's foots & hoops & boxing plays, PokerChip's punch plays, Orlando Larry's NFL, Lunatic's 25 college football plays each week,etc..then "MAYBE" board action & Vig wouldn't maim?
Unlike the whale or a pro, the average player's play size can generally always be accomodated playing their better plays tiered without a cap, where as the high-roller has daily battles to get down or fill up proportionate to their play size at desired numbers, and get shut out daily when shopping after the move..thus play at bad number or pass.
Less & Larger is better, if you can rank and file 'em well!
DougJ, I seem to find your dilemma of "The hard part for me is determining an expected win percentage on each bet", in my case(and most people that I've seen), it's more a case of ranking one's play volume & play size most proportionate to areas of personal strengths(best sports, totals, playoffs), as the best way to achieve better results.
And generally have found that volume/board play is only mastered by BMS, Middlers, Movers, and Pros with plenty of help(smart marks/connections)..as there is just so much ground to cover, from capping to chasing quality numbers(early capper or lottery regular?) to watching DB ad nauseum, in order to be extremely successful long term.
I prefer college football & college hoops, NFL, then MLB in order(it used to be the king money making sport..now game's changed..still of quality..just not as Kosher!), with NBA and NHL reduced of late years to playoffs only, and horses mainly just a Derby & Breeder's Cup pursuit..best left to touts & movers!
If one had BW's wallet & college capping network, BB's NFL/NBA plays & halftime skills, HH's foots & hoops & boxing plays, PokerChip's punch plays, Orlando Larry's NFL, Lunatic's 25 college football plays each week,etc..then "MAYBE" board action & Vig wouldn't maim?
Unlike the whale or a pro, the average player's play size can generally always be accomodated playing their better plays tiered without a cap, where as the high-roller has daily battles to get down or fill up proportionate to their play size at desired numbers, and get shut out daily when shopping after the move..thus play at bad number or pass.
Less & Larger is better, if you can rank and file 'em well!
the less and more strategy maybe better for less experienced or less sharp players but no way is it optimal for any experienced or fairly sharp player. i have had some of the above mentioned experience and that strategy of less and more is in not employed by what i saw from sharper players. they pay any game where they have an expected edge. whether it be 2 games or 20.
"Less and more" is better for your average square or someone who can't consistently cap.
Betting more games is better for someone who can cap consistently and can put the time in.
jersey, your father feared the "less and more" because most of his clients were probably squares and you want squares to bet as often as possible. A 50% capper has almost a 100% chance to lose of 1000 plays but has a much lower chance of losing over only a few plays.
Betting more games is better for someone who can cap consistently and can put the time in.
jersey, your father feared the "less and more" because most of his clients were probably squares and you want squares to bet as often as possible. A 50% capper has almost a 100% chance to lose of 1000 plays but has a much lower chance of losing over only a few plays.
good point d2bets. i was thinking the same thing. many local bm's especially older ones have no concept of sharp or square players. they tend to judge business very much on a week to week basis. if they have a player that makes a couple big plays and wins over a couple weeks right away they believe they have a "sharp" player when in fact its just normal fluctuation and this player will lose over the long run also. one sure way to judge a sharp from a square is to look at the numbers a player is bettting into. if a quy is laying 6.5 when 6 is widely available i don't care how much he plays or what kind of streak he is on-this customer is not sharp and will lose.
D2, I agree, but "time" is tough to come by for many busy dads, husbands, white collar players,etc..
And do agree, it sounds like Jersey's father had one guy that could throw his daily page outta balance..thus offed the action.
Jimmy, I agree and should have disclaimed as much by saying my point was for the average guy here @ Rx or offshore player, as I grew up in offices that moved the board hand over fist, but I still say that the average guy out there, whether he be sharp or not, will struggle playing the board without help in the long haul..just my two cents.
Jimmy, I totally agree about the average pro, pros hit the streets or have early cappers out on Sunday night for foots, play overnights in hoops, play the clock(and the board) 24/7/365..no doubt.
Wiseguys do crash and burn also..sometimes even really good ones!
And do agree, it sounds like Jersey's father had one guy that could throw his daily page outta balance..thus offed the action.
Jimmy, I agree and should have disclaimed as much by saying my point was for the average guy here @ Rx or offshore player, as I grew up in offices that moved the board hand over fist, but I still say that the average guy out there, whether he be sharp or not, will struggle playing the board without help in the long haul..just my two cents.
Jimmy, I totally agree about the average pro, pros hit the streets or have early cappers out on Sunday night for foots, play overnights in hoops, play the clock(and the board) 24/7/365..no doubt.
Wiseguys do crash and burn also..sometimes even really good ones!
horseshoe, for the most i part i agree with what you are saying. the average player or beginner would be much better off limiting number of plays but originally i think someone suggested that sharp players played this way. didn't want something that is not true to be taken as fact because some one's father booked a bunch of squares and had one customer who hit a couple big plays thus my statement about some of the older locals.
