Sportsbetting is more profitable than stocks?

**Sam Odom** · 01-18-17, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by Ballerholic

Anybody else agree with this?

no...

**Easy-Rider 66** · 01-18-17, 12:18 PM

Not usually

**Philmill** · 01-18-17, 12:23 PM

Great thread.......with the right system it can.....

Start with a 1000 bucks...double your bankroll every 6 months.. and you have a million in 5 years

Better than the stock market

**shadymcgrady** · 01-18-17, 12:25 PM

Let's all do it. I can't believe no one has thought of this before

**Sam Odom** · 01-18-17, 12:28 PM

Martingale at CRIS/Bookmaker

100, 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200 (figure in the vig)

NO One loses 6 in a row

Better than Equities

**PorkChop** · 01-18-17, 12:37 PM

Yes, if comparing full time vs full time.

Just so damn hard to stay properly money managed in Vegas. Different ball game when your paychecks are daily untaxed cash.

**jjgold** · 01-18-17, 12:39 PM

Both lose if you do daily

Stock Market 100k..put in a mutual fund 20 years and you blow away sports bettor with 100k 20 years

**GunShard** · 01-18-17, 12:45 PM

Spot betting (do not bet everyday, bet less than once a week) is profitable for sports betting.

**Waterstpub87** · 01-18-17, 12:46 PM

Risk much higher with sportsbetting, you are more likely to go broke. Hard to go broke with stock market, never has gone to zero yet.

**Philmill** · 01-18-17, 12:46 PM

...

**Buckandadime** · 01-18-17, 01:23 PM

If a person could get a 1.5% return daily (avg) sports betting, wouldn't that outperform the market? Anybody know the simple formula for this? Compounded weekly?

**Ballerholic** · 01-18-17, 01:26 PM

Obviously the losing gamblers are going to say no, my question is for the winning gamblers and what they think...

**kidcudi92** · 01-18-17, 01:29 PM

Not at all
Not even close

**YoungGambler** · 01-18-17, 02:07 PM

theres MORE rigging in stocks than sports

**sweethook** · 01-18-17, 02:17 PM

yes it is , i agree sir.

**Waterstpub87** · 01-18-17, 03:49 PM

Originally posted by Buckandadime

If a person could get a 1.5% return daily (avg) sports betting, wouldn't that outperform the market? Anybody know the simple formula for this? Compounded weekly?

Of course it would.

1.015^365

1.1098^52 weekly

**Ralphie Halves** · 01-18-17, 06:19 PM

With most of your guys' money management skills, it's only a matter of which one will get you to zero sooner.

**Rich Boy** · 01-18-17, 06:43 PM

Need an edge regardless if its sports or stocks

If you are smarter than the market you can profit no matter what.

**jjgold** · 01-18-17, 06:44 PM

Sports is micro little league compared to stock market

**RetiredinPunta** · 01-18-17, 07:11 PM

Originally posted by Ballerholic

Anybody else agree with this? Obviously you have to be a winning player or know a winning player. But let's say you bet 2% of your BR which is what you should do, then it can be insanely profitable. If you have a 50k BR and bet 1k a game and you make 2 units a month, that's 50% return right there on the year. It's similar to traders who have a special field or area of expertise, ours just happens to be sports. Does this make sense?
I'm up 10% on the year so far betting. How are you guys doing?

post daily picks guy. start a picks thread.

**Albert Pujols** · 01-18-17, 07:32 PM

Sportsbetting you can make a living if you know what you're doing. But you cannot get rich because the margins are just too small. Professional options and futures traders make 7-8 figures a year, vs 100-200k for the sharpest sportsbettors.

So no, sports is not a better market.

**xKMACKx** · 01-18-17, 07:40 PM

99% of sports bettors lose over a lifetime. While there are people who lose in stocks, it's significantly less than 99%.

I've hit 65% across a single year, but that is only one year. Variance will catch up to you.

**DrunkHorseplayer** · 01-18-17, 07:42 PM

Sportsbetting is a negative sum game, the stock market is a positive sum game.

**Albert Pujols** · 01-18-17, 07:47 PM

Originally posted by xKMACKx

99% of sports bettors lose over a lifetime. While there are people who lose in stocks, it's significantly less than 99%.

I've hit 65% across a single year, but that is only one year. Variance will catch up to you.

Would have to disagree there. Speculation is speculation no matter the market, and humans are not built for it. It's a learned behavior. A beginner in the market has zero chance and 99% still lose.

Discipline is very hard to learn and winning is all about learning how to take small losses and move on to the next trade.

**Albert Pujols** · 01-18-17, 07:49 PM

Originally posted by DrunkHorseplayer

Sportsbetting is a negative sum game, the stock market is a positive sum game.

The market is a zero sum game. It's called trading for a reason. Money trades hands. It flows from amateurs to pros.

**Albert Pujols** · 01-18-17, 07:52 PM

Originally posted by xKMACKx

99% of sports bettors lose over a lifetime. While there are people who lose in stocks, it's significantly less than 99%.

I've hit 65% across a single year, but that is only one year. Variance will catch up to you.

If you're talking about mutual fund investors, then yes they will do far better than sportsbettors over a lifetime. But the OP is saying that sportsbetting provides a better opportunity for speculators. And he is wrong, it does not.

**jjgold** · 01-18-17, 08:42 PM

Thread over

M

Originally posted by DrunkHorseplayer

Sportsbetting is a negative sum game, the stock market is a positive sum game.

**Sam Losco** · 01-18-17, 08:52 PM

Originally posted by Sam Odom

Martingale at CRIS/Bookmaker

100, 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200 (figure in the vig)

NO One loses 6 in a row

Better than Equities

**Philmill** · 01-18-17, 09:14 PM

If a guy has millions he has to park it somewhere... stock market good plan

If a guy has a few hundred thousand ... sports wagering is a good plan with a plan