Behind the scenes of the gambling industry

[Swaggy P]

[Pacific Square]

He's probably referring to typical casino games like slots, blackjack, roulette, craps, etc..

[bjb7223]

A William Hill snitch

[d2bets]

He's probably referring to typical casino games like slots, blackjack, roulette, craps, etc..

No, this is about sports.

[d2bets]

A William Hill snitch

I was wondering what company.

I believe him, but this is the perspective from one company, clearly overseas.

It is absolutely possible to beat up some of the US books, at least for now.

[agendaman]

billy walters beat bookies up for 36 years

[Swaggy P]

He's probably referring to typical casino games like slots, blackjack, roulette, craps, etc..

It's about sports betting as well. Europeans call it punting.

[Swaggy P]

I was wondering what company.

I believe him, but this is the perspective from one company, clearly overseas.

It is absolutely possible to beat up some of the US books, at least for now.

US books are even more sleazy

[Swaggy P]

billy walters beat bookies up for 36 years

Billy walters was a scam artist

[d2bets]

US books are even more sleazy

Some much more than others. Some you can win and then move on. But the blanket statement not to to start because nobody wins is bullocks.

[Swaggy P]

Some much more than others. Some you can win and then move on. But the blanket statement not to to start because nobody wins is bullocks.

99.99 % lose in sports betting as well. If you are one of the 0.01% who makes a consistent profit and is up overall then you are a rare unicorn my friend.

[stevenash]

IMO
Spot play underdogs is the recipe for success.

Volume bettors and chalk layers are bankroll killers.
Like I said, just my opinion.

I've been spot playing MLB dogs for years, I'm not a millionaire with a mansion and a yacht (as the great philosopher Elmer J. Fudd once said) but I ain't in the poor house either.

[d2bets]

99.99 % lose in sports betting as well. If you are one of the 0.01% who makes a consistent profit and is up overall then you are a rare unicorn my friend.

I guess, but I know it's not that hard. Doesn't take a genius, just a process.

[d2bets]

IMO
Spot play underdogs is the recipe for success.

Volume bettors and chalk layers are bankroll killers.
Like I said, just my opinion.

I've been spot playing MLB dogs for years, I'm not a millionaire with a mansion and a yacht (as the great philosopher Elmer J. Fudd once said) but I ain't in the poor house either.

Wrong. If you can't win volume betting, then you can't really win long-run. You're just hoping to get lucky.

[Swaggy P]

IMO
Spot play underdogs is the recipe for success.

Volume bettors and chalk layers are bankroll killers.
Like I said, just my opinion.

I've been spot playing MLB dogs for years, I'm not a millionaire with a mansion and a yacht (as the great philosopher Elmer J. Fudd once said) but I ain't in the poor house either.

It's still a foolish way to spend money as opposed to say investing in solid blue chip companies that pay out dividends.

[veriableodds]

IMO
Spot play underdogs is the recipe for success.

Volume bettors and chalk layers are bankroll killers.
Like I said, just my opinion.

I've been spot playing MLB dogs for years, I'm not a millionaire with a mansion and a yacht (as the great philosopher Elmer J. Fudd once said) but I ain't in the poor house either.

disagree with the volume betting. so many factors for volume + reduced wager size when volume betting. Multiple angles/systems/theories at one time ect ect. I tend to also agree with underdogs albiet just not the spot plays, more like value, bias ect ect.
Anyone that has had success talking overall knows almost 1/3 of all bets should be underdogs regardless

[stevenash]

It's still a foolish way to spend money as opposed to say investing in solid blue chip companies that pay out dividends.

Well of course.
I'm in REIT's, NRZ has been paying me off consistently for years, baseball betting is a hobby.

[Swaggy P]

I guess, but I know it's not that hard. Doesn't take a genius, just a process.

A lot of gamblers tend to decieve themselves into thinking that are are actually making money when the reality is that they are not. Not saying that's what your doing but it's common.

[veriableodds]

Well of course.
I'm in REIT's, NRZ has been paying me off consistently for years, baseball betting is a hobby.

me2 love
o, awp, rwo, xlre and about 8 others which avg over 6% div/yield for the REIT sector. Reit sector is obviously just a portion of overall portfolio

[KVB]

Wrong. If you can't win volume betting, then you can't really win long-run. You're just hoping to get lucky.

disagree with the volume betting. so many factors for volume + reduced wager size when volume betting. Multiple angles/systems/theories at one time ect ect. I tend to also agree with underdogs albiet just not the spot plays, more like value, bias ect ect.
Anyone that has had success talking overall knows almost 1/3 of all bets should be underdogs regardless

Nobody in this thread understands what you guys are trying to say.

They don't want to understand because they are lazy and would rather do no work and just "bet underdogs" or "invest in a blue chip".

It's a common theme in this industry and is why the lazy lose their money in sports betting to those who put the work in, while the book just facilitates the transaction.

[stevenash]

Nobody in this thread understands what you guys are trying to say.

They don't want to understand because they are lazy and would rather do no work and just "bet underdogs" or "invest in a blue chip".

It's a common theme in this industry and is why the lazy lose their money in sports betting to those who put the work in, while the book just facilitates the transaction.

You talking at me?

[stevenash]

Wrong. If you can't win volume betting, then you can't really win long-run. You're just hoping to get lucky.

I think you're missing my point.
At -108 reduced juice you need to win 52 percent of your coin flips just to break even.
How many are good enough to win 52 or more out of 100?

That's my point about volume betting.

[d2bets]

A lot of gamblers tend to decieve themselves into thinking that are are actually making money when the reality is that they are not. Not saying that's what your doing but it's common.

Huh? Pretty easy to see if you've or not.

[d2bets]

I think you're missing my point.
At -108 reduced juice you need to win 52 percent of your coin flips just to break even.
How many are good enough to win 52 or more out of 100?

That's my point about volume betting.

That's why you don't bet coin flips.

Number one, you have to bet with an edge. And then if you do bet with an edge, you need as much volume as possible to reduce variance. Bet with an edge over 100 plays you might lose. Bet with an edge over 1,000 plays and you will not lose.

So that's when I shake my head when someone says just bet your two best plays per week, or some nonsense like that.

[stevenash]

That's why you don't bet coin flips.

Number one, you have to bet with an edge. And then if you do bet with an edge, you need as much volume as possible to reduce variance. Bet with an edge over 100 plays you might lose. Bet with an edge over 1,000 plays and you will not lose.

So that's when I shake my head when someone says just bet your two best plays per week, or some nonsense like that.

Maybe I'm not expressing myself correctly.
I'm seeking out MLB dogs what should be slight favorites in my opinion.
I'm not betting flips per se, but I'll bet what I believe should be an even money prop if I can get, say, +135 or so.

Clearer?

[hehfest]

99.99 % lose in sports betting as well. If you are one of the 0.01% who makes a consistent profit and is up overall then you are a rare unicorn my friend.

And I like that line from the movie Rounders which fits me to some extent like I'm Joey Knish:

Yeah I did, and you don't listen, I tell you to play within your means, you risk your whole bank roll, I tell you not to over extend yourself, to rebuild, so you don't have to hock for more, I was giving you a living, showing you the playbook I put together off my beats and that wasn't enough for you.

Stones? you little punk, I'm not playing for the thrill of penetrating victory here, I owe rent, alimony, child support, I play for money, my kids eat, I got stones enough not to chase card actions of penetrating pipe dreams of winning the world series on ESPN, but about the money I've gotto turn my back, I've got to say no.


--- I've lived for 5 years starting with about a 5k bankroll to my name. Mortgage back to normal, pay all my bills, and I eat. Don't have to pay child support right now thankfully since I have a deal with the X. But, the margins are tight. I don't have another income. That's why when I get punks saying to me "Why don't you bet more?" Listen little punks, because I have to play it tight to survive.

[Swaggy P]

And I like that line from the movie Rounders which fits me to some extent like I'm Joey Knish:

Yeah I did, and you don't listen, I tell you to play within your means, you risk your whole bank roll, I tell you not to over extend yourself, to rebuild, so you don't have to hock for more, I was giving you a living, showing you the playbook I put together off my beats and that wasn't enough for you.

Stones? you little punk, I'm not playing for the thrill of penetrating victory here, I owe rent, alimony, child support, I play for money, my kids eat, I got stones enough not to chase card actions of penetrating pipe dreams of winning the world series on ESPN, but about the money I've gotto turn my back, I've got to say no.


--- I've lived for 5 years starting with about a 5k bankroll to my name. Mortgage back to normal, pay all my bills, and I eat. Don't have to pay child support right now thankfully since I have a deal with the X. But, the margins are tight. I don't have another income. That's why when I get punks saying to me "Why don't you bet more?" Listen little punks, because I have to play it tight to survive.

I couldn't imagine the stress involved relying only on betting income to pay for food and bills. A few losing streaks and you are fuked.

[veriableodds]

Nobody in this thread understands what you guys are trying to say.

They don't want to understand because they are lazy and would rather do no work and just "bet underdogs" or "invest in a blue chip".

It's a common theme in this industry and is why the lazy lose their money in sports betting to those who put the work in, while the book just facilitates the transaction.

Its quite unfortunate to see a lack of motivation, drive, rebellion, inspiration, freedom ect ect which has become today's society light of industry...lol Genuinely you would think SBR is the place to come together for knowledge and thought sharing for the thinking out-side the box to for improvement, but I could be wrong.

[d2bets]

I couldn't imagine the stress involved relying only on betting income to pay for food and bills. A few losing streaks and you are fuked.

Not really. Every professional has losing streaks. It's inevitable. I think the hard thing might be "getting started" and trusting the process. If it's from scratch and you start on a losing streak, it's easy to see how one could lose faith. But if you don't have multiple losing streaks per year, you aren't a professional. If those losing streaks fukk you though, you're doing something wrong.

Let's say, for example, you grinded daily for $1 million profit over the past 3 years on $25 million volume, averaging over $25,000 profit per month. Within that, you are going to find 5-8 losing streaks of $20-30k, or something along those lines. If you have a consistent process and see results over time, it's not as stressful. Not going to say it's not stressful at all, because even when you've won a lot, falling back a bit is annoying at best.

[stevenash]

^
If I were to hang a number on this I would say 98 percent of gamblers when on a heater expect to remain on a heater that's not sustainable.

It's human nature.

I take exception to the passive/aggressive types with their vague posts here that assume I'm lazy and don't do the work, yadda, yadda, yadda, where nothing could be further than the truth.

[Optional]

US books are even more sleazy

I don't agree with this at all.

UK regulated books are much much less "fair" minded than I have seen from any US state regulator so far.

In fact I would say the UK is the gold standard of a corrupted licensing and regulation system. They are a little better in 2023 than they were from 2000-2020, but still the worst model of all "respected" jurisdictions imho.

[Fishhead]

That's why you don't bet coin flips.

Number one, you have to bet with an edge. And then if you do bet with an edge, you need as much volume as possible to reduce variance. Bet with an edge over 100 plays you might lose. Bet with an edge over 1,000 plays and you will not lose.

So that's when I shake my head when someone says just bet your two best plays per week, or some nonsense like that.

It's really not a hard concept to grasp, but some will never get it.

It appears Circa will be in ILLINOIS come AUGUST 1st, enjoy.

[Nate rasta]

Only way to win are futures and spot parlays.get in and get out

[Fishhead]

Only way to win are futures and spot parlays.get in and get out

Lots of sarcastic posts in this thread, add this one to the list.

[BuckyOne]

Billy walters was a scam artist

I wouldn't go that far Definitely, was a line manipulator!!! Nobody ever knew if he was playing a side or had a total middle.