How is anyone smart enough to make 150K in expendable income,and be dumb enough to tr

[BrentCrude]

It seems like everyone is owed money by all the sportsbooks these days and are worried they won't get paid.Then it seems like all the posters here are owed enormous sums of money.Now who in the last few months who can afford risking over 100K to shakey online sportsbooks can say it was a wise decision to trust them with that amount of money?

It almost sounds like we have a whole lot of idiot savants out there that are geniuses in a chosen field that provides them with a large income where they have large amounts of money that's expendable to gamble with at risky sportsbooks.An idiot savant is someone who can be the best at math,writing music,playing a piano or knowing about history etc.but once they are asked a question out of their field of expertise are stumbling bumbling idiots that would do something like trust an illegal sportsbook with 100K.

My guess is that most people who risk depositing 100K or more with a risky sportsbook inherited the money,won a frivalous lawsuit or got some award settlement from government dissability etc.or work at a Soprano no show public works project like the big dig in Boston.It has to have been found money that the person didn't actually earn because who would be dumb enough to toil endless hours producing something just to risk it depositing at illegal sportsbooks that have no regulations.

[colt29]

Great thread. bunch of bullshitters on here. If you have big money, you don.t risk it offshore. Best post I've seen.

[RickySteve]

Who says you need to deposit a large amount to have a large balance?

[MonkeyF0cker]

Hmm. What makes you think anyone with a $100k+ balance actually deposited nearly that amount of money? Also who are the people depositing into "illegal sportbooks that have no regulations"? Any sportsbook that I would make a deposit with is definitely going to be a reputable business that adheres to the operating license that they've been issued in their respective country. They are not unregulated.

[Tevez]

i don´t know what you people mean saying 100k, what is k ?

[ion]

It seems like everyone is owed money by all the sportsbooks these days and are worried they won't get paid.Then it seems like all the posters here are owed enormous sums of money.Now who in the last few months who can afford risking over 100K to shakey online sportsbooks can say it was a wise decision to trust them with that amount of money?

It almost sounds like we have a whole lot of idiot savants out there that are geniuses in a chosen field that provides them with a large income where they have large amounts of money that's expendable to gamble with at risky sportsbooks.An idiot savant is someone who can be the best at math,writing music,playing a piano or knowing about history etc.but once they are asked a question out of their field of expertise are stumbling bumbling idiots that would do something like trust an illegal sportsbook with 100K.

My guess is that most people who risk depositing 100K or more with a risky sportsbook inherited the money,won a frivalous lawsuit or got some award settlement from government dissability etc.or work at a Soprano no show public works project like the big dig in Boston.It has to have been found money that the person didn't actually earn because who would be dumb enough to toil endless hours producing something just to risk it depositing at illegal sportsbooks that have no regulations.

Forget "everyone." Give just one example of a poster that meets your description accurately. Then we'll take it from there.

[DrunkenLullaby]

It almost sounds like we have a whole lot of idiot savants out there that are geniuses in a chosen field that provides them with a large income where they have large amounts of money that's expendable to gamble with at risky sportsbooks.An idiot savant is someone who can be the best at math,writing music,playing a piano or knowing about history etc.but once they are asked a question out of their field of expertise are stumbling bumbling idiots that would do something like trust an illegal sportsbook with 100K.

I'd like to take the time to respond but I have to go and watch Wapner.....yeah, definitely Wapner time!

[austintx05]

the intelligence in this thread is overwhelming

[Ganchrow]

i don´t know what you people mean saying 100k, what is k ?

k = 1,000 (as in kilo)

So $100K = $100,000

[BrentCrude]

OK,a bit of a retraction to clarify my point of view

As soon as I thought about the 100 K deposit observation after I made the initial post I should have edited it to touch on what posters said here about just because you have 100K in the account doesn't mean you deposited it all.

I know there are allot of whales that do deposit that much here but it's not the majority of people who have 100K-300K to withdraw.Even depositing 10-25K is beyond comprehension in my opinion.Then if you do build that deposit size into the 100-200K allot of people are talking about here that they withdrew all at once in small divided amounts it's also still crazy.I would have been withdrawing that money so fast it would have made ccustomer services head spin.I personally would have flew down to Costa Rica to pick it up myself even though that wouldn't help.

The bottom line is that people have and had too much confidence in being exposed to being ripped off that shouldn't or didn't have to be put in that position.

I'm to the point now where if I know people going to Las Vegas I'll just give them money and phone my bet into them.

The real idiotic bets that always baffled me were the ones where people didn't divide the bets into smaller increments making them immune from having to pay taxes on them.Instead of $100 bet on the St.Louis Rams at 200-1 to win the super bowl in 1999 they should have been making 20-$5 bets.Same for horse racing where people used to use the $50 window on long shots and exotics that paid off mega bucks when they should have been placing 10-$5 bets to avoid paying taxes.

Then people when they do win big never gather losing sports betting and horse race tickets off the betting area floor to say these were their losing bets to offset the profits they made for deducting their big winners to the IRS.

[Justin7]

There are a lot of people who bet sports for a living. These guys are sharp, and are a favorite to win at any book they play.

when they are deciding where to send their money, they have to look at both the odds they'll get paid, as well as how easy that book is to beat.

Assume you are betting $500 a game, with a 50k bankroll. You might keep 70% of your money at the best "A" shops. You'll quietly beat them for small amounts playing props and overnight lines. Say your average edge there is 5%, but with no fear of getting stiffed.

The other 30%, you divvy up and beat a book's weaknesses. BetOnSports' 50% bonuses? Wack! (I wanted to use at least one example of a great bonus that ultimately cost the players). SIA's lines that are routinely a full point of market (or when they allowed correlated parlays) wack! Even money 2-team NFL teasers? Wack...

Your average return on these smaller books might be 5-10 times as high, but for smaller amounts. Pro players cannot afford to pass on these opportunities, as long as the odds of a book ripping you off in a given year is less than 10%. The problem arises when players don't rebalance their risk. Instead of 30% of your capital at risky books (with 10% at one), you keep winning and don't withdraw. Suddenly you have 50% of your money there. The book stiffs you or goes under, and now you're hurting.

There's nothing terrible about playing at D rated books. Just keep your balances low, and be aware of the risk of getting ripped off.

[Mark Shark]

There are a lot of people who bet sports for a living. These guys are sharp, and are a favorite to win at any book they play.

when they are deciding where to send their money, they have to look at both the odds they'll get paid, as well as how easy that book is to beat.

Assume you are betting $500 a game, with a 50k bankroll. You might keep 70% of your money at the best "A" shops. You'll quietly beat them for small amounts playing props and overnight lines. Say your average edge there is 5%, but with no fear of getting stiffed.

The other 30%, you divvy up and beat a book's weaknesses. BetOnSports' 50% bonuses? Wack! (I wanted to use at least one example of a great bonus that ultimately cost the players). SIA's lines that are routinely a full point of market (or when they allowed correlated parlays) wack! Even money 2-team NFL teasers? Wack...

Your average return on these smaller books might be 5-10 times as high, but for smaller amounts. Pro players cannot afford to pass on these opportunities, as long as the odds of a book ripping you off in a given year is less than 10%. The problem arises when players don't rebalance their risk. Instead of 30% of your capital at risky books (with 10% at one), you keep winning and don't withdraw. Suddenly you have 50% of your money there. The book stiffs you or goes under, and now you're hurting.

There's nothing terrible about playing at D rated books. Just keep your balances low, and be aware of the risk of getting ripped off.

That was well put Justin. I can totally relate to the situation you stated above. Hence my problems with Linesmaker.

[LargeMouthBass]

I sense jealousy... Brent, it seems as though you have all this knowledge about good books but no funds to fund them. Maybe, you need to contact some of these savants and charge them a percentage for your wealth of knowledge. Good luck

[LargeMouthBass]

Great thread. bunch of bullshitters on here. If you have big money, you don.t risk it offshore. Best post I've seen.

[vanzack]

It seems like everyone is owed money by all the sportsbooks these days and are worried they won't get paid.Then it seems like all the posters here are owed enormous sums of money.Now who in the last few months who can afford risking over 100K to shakey online sportsbooks can say it was a wise decision to trust them with that amount of money?

It almost sounds like we have a whole lot of idiot savants out there that are geniuses in a chosen field that provides them with a large income where they have large amounts of money that's expendable to gamble with at risky sportsbooks.An idiot savant is someone who can be the best at math,writing music,playing a piano or knowing about history etc.but once they are asked a question out of their field of expertise are stumbling bumbling idiots that would do something like trust an illegal sportsbook with 100K.

My guess is that most people who risk depositing 100K or more with a risky sportsbook inherited the money,won a frivalous lawsuit or got some award settlement from government dissability etc.or work at a Soprano no show public works project like the big dig in Boston.It has to have been found money that the person didn't actually earn because who would be dumb enough to toil endless hours producing something just to risk it depositing at illegal sportsbooks that have no regulations.

Spoken like a guy who will never have 100k, will never win 100k, and will never understand how other people do it consistently.

This is the classic "I am a loser, so you must be a loser too - I dont have 100K, so nobody on earth must have 100K at a book or they must be a loser" post.

That last paragraph is a doozy.

[vanzack]

The real idiotic bets that always baffled me were the ones where people didn't divide the bets into smaller increments making them immune from having to pay taxes on them.Instead of $100 bet on the St.Louis Rams at 200-1 to win the super bowl in 1999 they should have been making 20-$5 bets.Same for horse racing where people used to use the $50 window on long shots and exotics that paid off mega bucks when they should have been placing 10-$5 bets to avoid paying taxes.

Then people when they do win big never gather losing sports betting and horse race tickets off the betting area floor to say these were their losing bets to offset the profits they made for deducting their big winners to the IRS.

The real idotic posts are ones like this one.

I cannot even believe the stupidity of this. Immune to paying taxes? Huh? Lets get a few things straight:
1. They dont withold taxes on sports bets for any amount in vegas.
2. It doesnt matter if you win 200 bucks or 200K, they dont withold taxes.
3. It doesnt matter if you win 200 bucks or 200K, you still are responsible to pay your taxes at the end of the year. There is no "exemption" by amount.
4. Splitting your tickets up in to smaller tickets only saves you from filling out a FINCEN report, which is pretty much meaningless with regards to the IRS.
5. There is absolutely NO ADVANTAGE (except the fincen report), and could be disadvantages (line could move) to what you are proposing.

No wonder you made the original post. This whole thread is like a homeless guy speculating on how Bill Gates got rich.

[The HG]

There's nothing terrible about playing at D rated books. Just keep your balances low, and be aware of the risk of getting ripped off.

Nowadays it's different I guess, but pre-October '06, to me, any real threat of getting "stiffed" was an automatic no-play book for me, even if they might have had unsharp lines or whatever. That was always the first thing I considered when thinking about where to play. If a book had a low rating for any reason connected to players getting stiffed, or even the threat of getting stiffed, it was more than just a "terrible" thing to me, it was an unqualified deal-breaker.

I even at one point had money in BOS, but cashed way the hell out when I saw signs that things might not be solid there.

[Dark Horse]

The problem arises when players don't rebalance their risk. Instead of 30% of your capital at risky books (with 10% at one), you keep winning and don't withdraw. Suddenly you have 50% of your money there. The book stiffs you or goes under, and now you're hurting.

Added risk is that balances with high risk books (with soft lines) can run up pretty fast for scalpers.

[Tevez]

k = 1,000 (as in kilo)

So $100K = $100,000

Thanks Ganchrow for that very clear answer.

A fool and his money are lucky enough to get together in the first place.

[degenerate#1]

Spoken like a guy who will never have 100k, will never win 100k, and will never understand how other people do it consistently.

This is the classic "I am a loser, so you must be a loser too - I dont have 100K, so nobody on earth must have 100K at a book or they must be a loser" post.

I'd have to agree with this.

[ShamsWoof10]

It appears that what Vanzack is saying is you are obligated to on your own free will to fill out the tax forums correctly at the end of the tax season... Money from anywhere and where it came from... BC is talking about ways purposely set to give you a good chance at avoiding being noticed not reporting everything completely... IMO you are both right but it's up to the person.... I guess this title is quite fitting then... If you are "honest" and report "everything" because they trust you to do it on your won free will...

[Scooter]

vanzack - "No wonder you made the original post. This whole thread is like a homeless guy speculating on how Bill Gates got rich."

Perfectly put.

[MonkeyF0cker]

The guy is talking about $5 bets. Imagine a 5k wager split into $5 bets. They'd be printing tickets for hours. LOL.

[degenerate#1]

He's probably one of those guys that thinks a nickel is five dollah.