After spending a lot of years in this business, we haven’t a clue why anyone over 21, make that 18. buys into those wild advertising claims boasting results that don’t exist and never did.
Yes, we’re familiar with P.T. Barnum’s belief, “there is a sucker born every minute.” But the promises, guarantees and winning percentages advertised are just too incredulous. They are actually insulting. Many years ago, one noted publication had a standing proposition paying 100-1 to anyone who could pick 70% winners over a 100-game period. The few who took up the challenge were eliminated after just a handful of weeks. There has never been a single instance that we personally know of, where 70% has been achieved in the NFL over a 100-game span. Further evidence is shown by the long history of handicapping contests in Nevada, where not a single winner has accomplished the 70% mark!
Meanwhile, the pitchmen become more outrageous every season. Sadly, publications like the USA Today and most local newspapers are willing to give them exposure, lending credibility but at the same time leaving gullible readers at the mercy of these unscrupulous characters. Particularly amusing are those “50,000 Star Lock” releases. We don’t even know exactly what a “50,000 Star Lock” indicates, but in our experience, we’ve never seen a single football game worth more than twice your average bet. Anyone that follows football, even just moderately, knows there are probably between 10 and 20 plays per game that can potentially change both the game and pointspread outcome. These plays can rarely be projected beforehand.
Let this not be perceived as negativity on our part. The challenge of handicapping pits the handicapper against the linemaker. The latter is far from infallible. Notwithstanding the luck factor and the basic nature of sport, where performances constantly vary, there are spots where an astute handicapper can have an advantage. If he does this with some consistency, he can become more than a match for his adversary, the linemaker. There is a real difference between the ‘educated guess’ and ‘pure luck’ approach, however. The ‘educated guess’ requires intelligence, hard work and dedication, not a bunch of BS.
Remember this…
These games are not scripted. Those who claim to be in possession of some exclusive classified information that will absolutely and positively decide the outcome of a game are simply looking to scam you. Also, no matter what label is given to any one game, i.e. ‘Lock of the Year’, ‘Game of the Month’, ‘Million Dollar Star’—the unpredictable factors of sports—are inherent in every game. The people that claim differently are not legitimate. They are unconscionable charlatans, parasites and predators. Plain and simple!
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Gambling and The World Cup Soccer Event
Starting June 11th, all eyes will be on one of the colossal sporting events on this planet as the 2010 World Cup kicks off from South Africa. With the enormity of such an event, gambling dollars will be abundant and likely will set a record high in volume. In the 2006 World Cup, it was estimated that 40 billion was wagered on soccer in Europe, North America and Asia. That is a staggering number and when money like that is involved you can’t help but think that corruption is not far behind. When the gambling charlatan’s got wind of such figures, one can only imagine the “planning” that took place leading up to this year’s event. Take a poor country like Nigeria, with players that don’t earn even remotely close to what players in England and France do for instance. One must wonder just how easy it would be for game-fixers to sway a few key players into throwing a game. It almost seems too obvious. It used to be that gambling on sporting events was geographically limited. North American gamblers wagered on the NFL, NHL, MLB and NBA while European gamblers wagered on soccer. However, with the globalization of sports betting that has all changed and now it’s open season on all sports, in all markets. Even the Asian market is being flagged as a major expansion prospect and online books are cashing in big time. Because of player salaries in the millions, fixing one of the four majors in North America would be a difficult thing to do but in this soccer environment it would not. With 32 teams competing in the World Cup and many of them representing financially poor countries, filled with rosters of poor players, how hard would it be to persuade a goalkeeper from one of these countries to let in a softie, when you consider the reward that could be offered. There are billions of wagering dollars at stake and a thrown game could set up one or several players for life. It is unlikely to happen with the likes of England, France, Portugal, Brazil and numerous others because player incomes are off the charts. For instance, Portugal’s Cristiano Ronaldo will earn 30M (U.S.) this year alone and he’s joined by dozens of other countries that pay their soccer stars in that range. By contrast, top-flight players for Cameroon are fortunate to earn more than $1600 per month. Players will be approached and the temptation will be great because in most cases, money trumps pride when you are short on the latter.
Friday, April 30, 2010
Money Line Dogs are a must play.
The old adage that you must hit 57% winners to show a profit in sports betting is a myth and a thing of the past. It used to be that way before the onset of online wagering and money lines in all sports but that is no longer the case.
In fact, when wagering on sports, laying juice will be a big detrimental to your bankroll and sooner rather than later, you’ll go broke. It’s simply impossible to overcome the vigor over an extended period of time and anyone that tells you anything different is incorrect. So let’s have a look at betting on money-line dogs as oppose to laying a price.
We’ll use a money line favorite of –1.40 as an example with a take-back of +1.30. If you’re constantly laying juice, you will lose, that I can guarantee you and here’s why:
Let’s assume you’re wagering on three baseball games a day at an average of -1.40 per game for $100 each game and let’s assume you do that for an entire season. For six months or 180 days that would be 540 bets per season at an average of –1.40 per game. Of course, that’s a generalization but most bettors agree that laying –1.40 isn’t so bad when they believe they have a great chance of winning the wager. Some games you’ll lay –1.20 or even –1.60 but for argument sake we’ll assume the average lay will be –1.40.
Ok, now let’s assume that you hit 60% of those, an unlikely scenario when you consider that the best teams in baseball play about .600 ball. But let’s assume that you have a great year and hit 60% winners.
Therefore we have 540 ball games with 60% winners would see you go 324-216.
Now we’ll multiply 324 x 100 = 32,400.00 worth of winners.
Then we’ll multiply 216 x –1.40 = 30,240.00 worth of losers.
32,400 (winners)–30,240 (losers)= +2,160.00 and that would be your net profit if you had an incredible year. A more likely scenario is you go somewhere between 45%-55% and when you add those numbers up when laying juice the results are staggering and they’re not in your favor.
Let’s assume now you have a decent year and hit 52% winners with the exact same wagers.
560 games x 52 % winners = 288 winners and 272 losers.
288 x 100 = 28,800.00 in wins
272 x –1.40 = 38,080.00 in losses, which is an eye opening –10,080.00 for the season.
In other words, if you lay an average of –1.40 per game and hit 52% winners, you’ll lose more than 10,000.00 for the season.
Now, let’s say you wager strictly on dogs at an average of +1.30 and you hit that same 52%.
288 losses at –100 = 28,800.00 in losses
272 wins @ +1.30 = 35,360 in wins for a total profit of 6,560.00 for the season, which is a staggering difference of close to 17,000.00 for the year.
The more juice you lay the more difficult this equation becomes to show a profit and these numbers are not unreasonable at all.
Money line underdogs win every day, especially in baseball and hockey and it’s for the above shown samples that you should never lay juice consistently or you’re guaranteed to lose.
Consider that every team in the majors will win 60 games and lose 60 games and there’s rarely an exception to that. What they do in the other games will ultimately decide whether they have a good or bad record at the end of the year but the point is that it’s more proof that dogs win daily.
So, if you’ve been laying juice it’s time to break that habit. When you play underdogs, you don’t need to hit a high percentage to show a profit and even if you have a bad year, the losses will be limited. A bad year laying juice will destroy your bankroll and until you change that will not. A good year taking back a tag will carry you for a long time and you’ll show a profit at the end of the season way more times than if you laid a price every game.
In fact, when wagering on sports, laying juice will be a big detrimental to your bankroll and sooner rather than later, you’ll go broke. It’s simply impossible to overcome the vigor over an extended period of time and anyone that tells you anything different is incorrect. So let’s have a look at betting on money-line dogs as oppose to laying a price.
We’ll use a money line favorite of –1.40 as an example with a take-back of +1.30. If you’re constantly laying juice, you will lose, that I can guarantee you and here’s why:
Let’s assume you’re wagering on three baseball games a day at an average of -1.40 per game for $100 each game and let’s assume you do that for an entire season. For six months or 180 days that would be 540 bets per season at an average of –1.40 per game. Of course, that’s a generalization but most bettors agree that laying –1.40 isn’t so bad when they believe they have a great chance of winning the wager. Some games you’ll lay –1.20 or even –1.60 but for argument sake we’ll assume the average lay will be –1.40.
Ok, now let’s assume that you hit 60% of those, an unlikely scenario when you consider that the best teams in baseball play about .600 ball. But let’s assume that you have a great year and hit 60% winners.
Therefore we have 540 ball games with 60% winners would see you go 324-216.
Now we’ll multiply 324 x 100 = 32,400.00 worth of winners.
Then we’ll multiply 216 x –1.40 = 30,240.00 worth of losers.
32,400 (winners)–30,240 (losers)= +2,160.00 and that would be your net profit if you had an incredible year. A more likely scenario is you go somewhere between 45%-55% and when you add those numbers up when laying juice the results are staggering and they’re not in your favor.
Let’s assume now you have a decent year and hit 52% winners with the exact same wagers.
560 games x 52 % winners = 288 winners and 272 losers.
288 x 100 = 28,800.00 in wins
272 x –1.40 = 38,080.00 in losses, which is an eye opening –10,080.00 for the season.
In other words, if you lay an average of –1.40 per game and hit 52% winners, you’ll lose more than 10,000.00 for the season.
Now, let’s say you wager strictly on dogs at an average of +1.30 and you hit that same 52%.
288 losses at –100 = 28,800.00 in losses
272 wins @ +1.30 = 35,360 in wins for a total profit of 6,560.00 for the season, which is a staggering difference of close to 17,000.00 for the year.
The more juice you lay the more difficult this equation becomes to show a profit and these numbers are not unreasonable at all.
Money line underdogs win every day, especially in baseball and hockey and it’s for the above shown samples that you should never lay juice consistently or you’re guaranteed to lose.
Consider that every team in the majors will win 60 games and lose 60 games and there’s rarely an exception to that. What they do in the other games will ultimately decide whether they have a good or bad record at the end of the year but the point is that it’s more proof that dogs win daily.
So, if you’ve been laying juice it’s time to break that habit. When you play underdogs, you don’t need to hit a high percentage to show a profit and even if you have a bad year, the losses will be limited. A bad year laying juice will destroy your bankroll and until you change that will not. A good year taking back a tag will carry you for a long time and you’ll show a profit at the end of the season way more times than if you laid a price every game.
Friday, April 23, 2010
THE NBA…Fixed or Not?
Tim Donaghy, the referee who said that he could pick 75-80% of games versus the spread, claims he had insider info based on knowledge from the workplace. Now that the NBA playoffs are upon us and well into the first round, one must wonder if Donaghy isn’t alone.
Think about that for a second. Think about your own workplace. Think about all the secrets, off-the-record and under-the-radar information you know about everyone around you. Now transfer that to the NBA, and if you were a league employee of any sort (coach, player, trainer, ref, etc), you'd know all kinds of details that the average gambling fan would never know, ranging from personal problems with the players and coaches to ref biases to health issues unreported. It's the very definition of "insider training."
I’ve always maintained that you can’t take the human element out of sports and refs are human too. If they're getting barked at constantly by the same player and perhaps in an inappropriate manner, the refs will inevitably - even if it's just subconscious - screw the player with bad calls. They also get into it as much as the player when the house is packed and the fans are going crazy. Look at the way they make a call with such emphasis when the crowd is roaring, it’s almost as if they’re waiting to make a call on the visiting team in an attempt to win the crowd over.
When the Oklahoma City Thunder recently hosted its first playoff game, the crowd was in a frenzy like never before and Kobe Bryant did not get to the line the whole game. If that exact same game was played in Hollywood, er, I mean L.A., there’s no way that happens. No way, no how, period.
Big market teams and big market players is what sells the NBA and there’s no way the refs aren’t influenced by either choice or command. Who could ever forget the 2000 Western Conference Finals between the Trail Blazers and Lakers? That game was a blatant example of the NBA aiding and abetting the Lakers to victory. The free throw disparity was Lakers 37, Blazers 16, an atrocity that the NBA should forever be embarrassed about.
The NBA claims that it keeps detailed records to review their refs. If this is true, where are these records and why aren't they online for everyone to see? Moreover, I suspect many NBA teams keep their own internal "ref stats" so they can make the necessary adjustments when facing a Salvatore vs. a Bavetta vs. a Javie, etc. Make the stats public already!
Listen, I’m not saying the games are fixed but I’m no fool either and there’s no way the NBA (refs) allow the same thing to happen in Oklahoma City this Saturday night when the Lakers play there again for game three. The Lakers and specifically Kobe will get every call because the Lakers and Cav’s (Kobe and LeBron) are destined by the NBA to reach the finals for the most anticipated NBA Final ever. You don’t think so? Watch Saturday’s game and then tell me what you think. Or better yet, lay the two points with the Lakers.
Tim Donaghy, the referee who said that he could pick 75-80% of games versus the spread, claims he had insider info based on knowledge from the workplace. Now that the NBA playoffs are upon us and well into the first round, one must wonder if Donaghy isn’t alone.
Think about that for a second. Think about your own workplace. Think about all the secrets, off-the-record and under-the-radar information you know about everyone around you. Now transfer that to the NBA, and if you were a league employee of any sort (coach, player, trainer, ref, etc), you'd know all kinds of details that the average gambling fan would never know, ranging from personal problems with the players and coaches to ref biases to health issues unreported. It's the very definition of "insider training."
I’ve always maintained that you can’t take the human element out of sports and refs are human too. If they're getting barked at constantly by the same player and perhaps in an inappropriate manner, the refs will inevitably - even if it's just subconscious - screw the player with bad calls. They also get into it as much as the player when the house is packed and the fans are going crazy. Look at the way they make a call with such emphasis when the crowd is roaring, it’s almost as if they’re waiting to make a call on the visiting team in an attempt to win the crowd over.
When the Oklahoma City Thunder recently hosted its first playoff game, the crowd was in a frenzy like never before and Kobe Bryant did not get to the line the whole game. If that exact same game was played in Hollywood, er, I mean L.A., there’s no way that happens. No way, no how, period.
Big market teams and big market players is what sells the NBA and there’s no way the refs aren’t influenced by either choice or command. Who could ever forget the 2000 Western Conference Finals between the Trail Blazers and Lakers? That game was a blatant example of the NBA aiding and abetting the Lakers to victory. The free throw disparity was Lakers 37, Blazers 16, an atrocity that the NBA should forever be embarrassed about.
The NBA claims that it keeps detailed records to review their refs. If this is true, where are these records and why aren't they online for everyone to see? Moreover, I suspect many NBA teams keep their own internal "ref stats" so they can make the necessary adjustments when facing a Salvatore vs. a Bavetta vs. a Javie, etc. Make the stats public already!
Listen, I’m not saying the games are fixed but I’m no fool either and there’s no way the NBA (refs) allow the same thing to happen in Oklahoma City this Saturday night when the Lakers play there again for game three. The Lakers and specifically Kobe will get every call because the Lakers and Cav’s (Kobe and LeBron) are destined by the NBA to reach the finals for the most anticipated NBA Final ever. You don’t think so? Watch Saturday’s game and then tell me what you think. Or better yet, lay the two points with the Lakers.
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Mark McGwire and the Cardinals
It was a very nice gesture on the part of the Cardinals and specifically lyin’ Tony LaRussa to hire Mark McGwire as the team’s hitting coach for the upcoming year. So, what is McGwire going to teach these guys? Well I suppose he can teach them how to use steroids, how to cheat and get away with it, how deceit is rewarded and how to hide for months should they get caught.
How nice of McGuire to own up to his bad deeds and come out with a highly orchestrated, insincere apology regarding steroid use during the majority of his playing career. Does he really think we’re all idiots? He deceived us for years and now he believes that confession clears him? Are you kidding me?
McGwire isn’t sorry one bit and the only reason he apologized was because he knew he was going to have to face the media in every city once the season began. Had the Cards not hired him, he’d still be hiding. The timing of his announcement at the start of the new baseball season has allowed him to hide behind the frenzy of a new Cardinal season and that’s all there is to it. Has anything ever been so transparent?
What credentials does McGwire bring to his new job? How about a career .263 batting average and that’s for a guy that cheated his whole career. Had he played fair he might have a .243 career batting average. In 1989, with 490 AB’s McGwire hit .239. In 1990, with 523 AB’s he hit .235 and in 1991, with 483 AB’s he hit a puny .201. He then was injured and missed most of ’93 and ’94 and then came back in ’95 and that’s when his career took off.
This guy is the biggest imposter to ever coach or wear a major-league uniform. He was a terrible contact hitter and again, without roids, he was probably going to be a career .230 hitter. This is the guy the St. Louis Cardinals and that drunk, Tony LaRussa hired. Mark McGwire coaching Albert Pujols is equivalent to Tiger Woods teaching Dr. Phil about marriage.
The club hoped McGwire’s hastily arranged six-minute interview with reporters in a remote hotel hallway at the Winter-Warm-Up would serve as McGwire's last such public exposure before going to spring training. Yeah, ok Mark. You’ve fooled us for the last time.
I’ve never liked Tony LaRussa and now he just makes me sick. All the experts are calling for the Cardinals to easily win this division and if we listened to the experts we'd all be broke.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
MVP
This time of year in the NBA and the NHL, we're always hearing the play-by-plays discussing who they think should be this years league MVP.
It's pretty sickening to listen to because nobody really gives a damn but it bothers me for other reasons. In the NHL, the candidates are Sidney Crosby, Alex Ovechkin and perhaps Henrik Sedin but that my friends is all wrong for an MVP award. Now, if they were handing out an award for the NHL's best player, that aforementioned trio are all very deserving but MVP, are you kidding? Doesn't MVP stand for "Most Valuable Player"? Where would the Caps be without AO? Well, they'd probably be in the exact same spot they're in right now, that being in first place in the East and heading for the playoffs. How about the Pens without Sid or the Canucks without Henrik? Well, perhaps not with as many points but certainly heading for the playoffs and in that respect, one would have to believe that the Pens would be a lot worse off without Sid than the Caps would be without Ovechkin. For MVP between those two, it would not be close.
Without doubt, however, the league's MVP this year should be none other than the Montreal Canadiens goaltender, Jaroslav Halak. The Habs are likely going to the playoffs and they're going to make it for one reason and one reason only. Credit the Canadiens season to Halak. He's been brilliant almost every night when the team has not. In fact, Montreal would likely be near the bottom of the league in the standings if it weren't for Halak, Rarely were the Canadiens the better team on the ice than anyone they played. Halak has single handily won at least 20 games for Montreal and maybe more.
The MVP this year is Halak, period. Without Halak the Habs had no chance of making the playoffs and that's all there is to it. Is he the best player in the league? No? But he's more valuable to his team than any player in the NHL and frankly, it's not even close.
It's pretty sickening to listen to because nobody really gives a damn but it bothers me for other reasons. In the NHL, the candidates are Sidney Crosby, Alex Ovechkin and perhaps Henrik Sedin but that my friends is all wrong for an MVP award. Now, if they were handing out an award for the NHL's best player, that aforementioned trio are all very deserving but MVP, are you kidding? Doesn't MVP stand for "Most Valuable Player"? Where would the Caps be without AO? Well, they'd probably be in the exact same spot they're in right now, that being in first place in the East and heading for the playoffs. How about the Pens without Sid or the Canucks without Henrik? Well, perhaps not with as many points but certainly heading for the playoffs and in that respect, one would have to believe that the Pens would be a lot worse off without Sid than the Caps would be without Ovechkin. For MVP between those two, it would not be close.
Without doubt, however, the league's MVP this year should be none other than the Montreal Canadiens goaltender, Jaroslav Halak. The Habs are likely going to the playoffs and they're going to make it for one reason and one reason only. Credit the Canadiens season to Halak. He's been brilliant almost every night when the team has not. In fact, Montreal would likely be near the bottom of the league in the standings if it weren't for Halak, Rarely were the Canadiens the better team on the ice than anyone they played. Halak has single handily won at least 20 games for Montreal and maybe more.
The MVP this year is Halak, period. Without Halak the Habs had no chance of making the playoffs and that's all there is to it. Is he the best player in the league? No? But he's more valuable to his team than any player in the NHL and frankly, it's not even close.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
