Originally <a href='/showthread.php?p=16948280'>posted</a> on 11/29/2012:

Quote Originally Posted by tto827 View Post
Who exactly gets fukked over by a book limiting its risk? Don't say the players, because if you are that successful of a gambler, continuing to do so is being greedy and doing exactly what you say is bad.
Patently false.

In this business, no one works harder than the originator who successfully extracts value out of the market. They work harder than the book, because the book has the benefit of opening with low limits, seeing who's betting what and when and using that information to manage risk. They also work harder than SBR, who sucks an unconscionable amount of money off the top of most balance sheets in the industry in the name of customer acquisition. When you're willing to outwork and outsmart your way to success in a zero-sum game like sports betting, operating from the players' side of the counter and thus having to overcome the vig, there is no one who is more entitled to the rewards. If you're an advocate of pure capitalism, there should be nothing that makes you happier.

John and Tto should remember this concept from our recent political discourses, except back then you were calling it 'work ethic,' and not greed. Apparently they have a very subjective view of the matter, it's work ethic when the money is heading for their pocket, and greed when someone else is trying to lay claim to those same dollars.

Without a doubt it's the sharp player who gets bent over in these situations. There should be a big pile of money in the room everyday, the sum total of everything bet on losing wagers that day. In theory, the book should simply be taking its hold (the juice) and using all the rest of the dollars to pay out the day's winners. The problem arises when SBR stops by every night in their armored truck to collect their 30% of player losses, leaving not enough money to cover the winners. If the book had the same limits for them as they did for squares, they'd go bankrupt.

The math is simple, you can't pay two people (the winner and SBR) with the money from only one loser, unless you force the winners to accommodate SBR's cut by limiting them.