'Hustling' a book?

[brettd]

I've just copped my first bookie restriction. There's three of us that run an operation, so we can utilise three identities to make accounts.

I'm thinking of making a new account that intentionally makes -EV bets for a few weeks (online), and then go into 'gorilla mode' by phoning up to call in bigger +EV bets later on.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

[username474]

-EV

[Rio DiNero]

You can't hustle a hustler.

[JayTrotter]

i know someone who did this. it didn't work. If you are intentionally losing to try and get them to raise your limits. it might work once.

and might is a very appropriate word choice. It takes a lot of balls to try this. since the sports books are very reluctant to reward winners, and track behavior like you would not believe. A true loser who stumbled on to a BIG game is usually limited, even though it was just a case of probability. If you are that good at picking +EV bets why play with the scamming? just continually change identities and books. Unless you are on games no one else is on, very unlikely, the books will limit your action, especially if you go from being the biggest loser, to being MR. +EV.

They cut limits all the time, for their own reasons. Usually you can get away with a few winning streaks before they do. disguising yourself as a loser, and then suddenly making winning bets, is a poor strategy, because they are tracking your behavior, and if it appears to them that you are now getting "information" they will limit or discontinue your action. People try this all the time, and lose money.

[ForgetWallStreet]

You really shouldn't admit to syndicate-ish behavior at the place you'll have to turn to for help if one of the books catches on and confiscates funds. Unless of course you are Justin7.

[brettd]

Thanks for the input guys. It gives me a bit to ponder.

[That Foreign Guy]

What's wrong with syndicates? I mean I know books hate them because they tend to be winners but do they have any justification other than "We like money and you're trying to take it from us?"

[Sfritts8]

Who are these syndicates and do they have weekly meetings in underground tunnels where they drink from goblets.

[mathdotcom]

You really shouldn't admit to syndicate-ish behavior at the place you'll have to turn to for help if one of the books catches on and confiscates funds. Unless of course you are Justin7.

Zing!

[sharpcat]

What's wrong with syndicates? I mean I know books hate them because they tend to be winners but do they have any justification other than "We like money and you're trying to take it from us?"

Many syndicates are not profitable.

Books dislike syndicates because they get down large amounts of money on 1 side of a game and cause lopsided action.

[pedro803]

Unless you are on games no one else is on, very unlikely, the books will limit your action

can anyone elaborate on this a little more? does this mean it will take them longer to identify a better as a sharp if that better is winnig games that other sharps are not? this question is theoretical for now I'm not actually a sharp yet, but I am aspiring to be

[Toples]

if you are good, open 20-30 accounts at books that allow biggest limits, and you should be able to bet over 100k on single game.

I got limited by 2 bookies (they allow me to bet silly little amounts up to 10$), but you still have other 20 to bet at.

Also you got Matchbook where you can, in theory, bet infinite amounts.

Btw, if you have big money-invest it, dont gamble it.

[MadTiger]

What's wrong with syndicates? I mean I know books hate them because they tend to be winners but do they have any justification other than "We like money and you're trying to take it from us?"

A syndicate is the equivalent of a ringer on the corporate softball team or in your golf scramble. They (99.99% of books) only want to deal with "amateurs."

[brxbmbers42]

How do you calculate a game to see if it is +ev. what is the formula?

[ncat12]

just put that much effort into winning at all times

[natasselur]

just walk around vegas books all day if you want to find places to lay the bets
they take all action, syndicates, amateurs, pros, whatever, you got the dough, they lay the game

[Pokerjoe]

A syndicate is the equivalent of a ringer on the corporate softball team or in your golf scramble. They (99.99% of books) only want to deal with "amateurs."

That's not true. Syndicates are formed to circumvent bet limits. They are, therefore, cheating, and books absolutely have the right and duty to protect themselves from them.

[Justin7]

That's not true. Syndicates are formed to circumvent bet limits. They are, therefore, cheating, and books absolutely have the right and duty to protect themselves from them.

Huh?

[durito]

Huh?

Arhimed, I have a confession to make. I used to be a dirty player. I've used every trick in the book - I've bonus whored, had multiple accounts, double-popped books, and circumvented limits. I've done it, and I can tell when others are doing it. The circumstantial evidence Tony offered is very persuasive to me. Go back and read what he offered. This doesn't mean they are in the right, but it *does* mean I agree with Tony's conclusion that alias accounts were used to help circumvent limits.

I've used quite a few disguises in Vegas. I have a hell of a story about Caesar's that will be in my book

I have never multi-accounted. Nor will I. I use camouflage occasionally (make weird bets that look like crap, but are 0 or small +EV to throw off player profiling), but I have never defrauded a book.

[tat1980]

I had to bump this. Want to start off by saying Justin7 love your comments you seem very sharp. I also intend to buy your book. But why lie as durito has some of your posts from above that do not match each other can you please explain.