goemaw.com
TITLETOWN - A Decade Long Celebration Of The Greatest Achievement In College Athletics History => Kansas State Football => Topic started by: slimz on October 05, 2010, 01:52:27 PM
-
Seeing the spread at 12 and O/U at 52. Can one break this down to an expected score of 32-20? Because this would surprise me. When I saw the spread at 12, I figured they must expect Nebraska to win something like a 18-6 ballgame, where we just don't do anything at all on offense.
With 2 running teams, and Snyder's penchant for milking the clock, that just seems to be a big O/U.
-
Vegas lines do not come from predicted scores. I'd say it's a tad high on the o/u, but far from a sure bet.
-
We are averaging a little over 30 pts per game. Nebraska is averaging 40 pts. So the line actually is lower than you'd expect. 52 pts is only 7.5 TDs. I personally wouldn't be surprised if both teams made it into the 20s or higher in this game.
-
OK, thanks for the info. Just wondering if the two were related or not.
-
Actually slimz you are right. Right now the team totals are sitting at 31 and 20
-
Seeing the spread at 12 and O/U at 52. Can one break this down to an expected score of 32-20? Because this would surprise me. When I saw the spread at 12, I figured they must expect Nebraska to win something like a 18-6 ballgame, where we just don't do anything at all on offense.
With 2 running teams, and Snyder's penchant for milking the clock, that just seems to be a big O/U.
No expert but the total seems high. I think this could easily be a 28-13 or 35-17 type game though.
-
Vegas lines do not come from predicted scores. I'd say it's a tad high on the o/u, but far from a sure bet.
You could've deleted this, and saved yourself quite a bit of embarrassment. But, I quoted it to make it easier to respond to this idiocy...
While I suppose you're "technically" right in that they don't "predict a score" and then throw a line out there based on that prediction. However, anybody that has passed Jr. High algebra can pretty quickly figure out what their computer model has predicted as a final score.
The "total" or "over/under" was determined DAYS before it was offered for wagering. In this instance, 52... So, with an opening line of NU -10, simple math says that the LVSC computer model sees this as a 31-21 game.
HTH.
:users:
-
Oct 07 07:45 PM EST - Football NCAA - 306 Kansas State Wildcats +19½ for Game
Oct 09 03:30 PM EST - Football NCAA - 373 Texas A&M Aggies +13½ for Game
Football 6 pt Teaser 90.00 81.82
-
Vegas lines do not come from predicted scores. I'd say it's a tad high on the o/u, but far from a sure bet.
You could've deleted this, and saved yourself quite a bit of embarrassment. But, I quoted it to make it easier to respond to this idiocy...
While I suppose you're "technically" right in that they don't "predict a score" and then throw a line out there based on that prediction. However, anybody that has passed Jr. High algebra can pretty quickly figure out what their computer model has predicted as a final score.
The "total" or "over/under" was determined DAYS before it was offered for wagering. In this instance, 52... So, with an opening line of NU -10, simple math says that the LVSC computer model sees this as a 31-21 game.
HTH.
:users:
:facepalm:
-
Vegas lines do not come from predicted scores. I'd say it's a tad high on the o/u, but far from a sure bet.
You could've deleted this, and saved yourself quite a bit of embarrassment. But, I quoted it to make it easier to respond to this idiocy...
While I suppose you're "technically" right in that they don't "predict a score" and then throw a line out there based on that prediction. However, anybody that has passed Jr. High algebra can pretty quickly figure out what their computer model has predicted as a final score.
The "total" or "over/under" was determined DAYS before it was offered for wagering. In this instance, 52... So, with an opening line of NU -10, simple math says that the LVSC computer model sees this as a 31-21 game.
HTH.
:users:
I picture you as the Fitz of Atlantic City. I'd be much more embarrassed if I made post like yours. Good Lord.
-
Vegas lines do not come from predicted scores. I'd say it's a tad high on the o/u, but far from a sure bet.
You could've deleted this, and saved yourself quite a bit of embarrassment. But, I quoted it to make it easier to respond to this idiocy...
While I suppose you're "technically" right in that they don't "predict a score" and then throw a line out there based on that prediction. However, anybody that has passed Jr. High algebra can pretty quickly figure out what their computer model has predicted as a final score.
The "total" or "over/under" was determined DAYS before it was offered for wagering. In this instance, 52... So, with an opening line of NU -10, simple math says that the LVSC computer model sees this as a 31-21 game.
HTH.
:users:
I picture you as the Fitz of Atlantic City. I'd be much more embarrassed if I made post like yours. Good Lord.
but, but, but he's a bookie pimp.... :lol: :lol: (ftp://:lol: :lol:) Seriously though, all of you guys feel free to post your thoughts on my weekly gambling thread. tia
-
Seeing as I how I made a living for about 6 years in the sports wagering industry, why don't all you geniuses clear things up for all of us...
This should be fun.
:popcorn:
-
Oct 07 07:45 PM EST - Football NCAA - 306 Kansas State Wildcats +19½ for Game
Oct 09 03:30 PM EST - Football NCAA - 373 Texas A&M Aggies +13½ for Game
Football 6 pt Teaser 90.00 81.82
Not generally a fan of CFB teasers, but this looks pretty solid to me. GL2U
-
Seeing as I how I made a living for about 6 years in the sports wagering industry, why don't all you geniuses clear things up for all of us...
This should be fun.
:popcorn:
For starters, nobody sets a line days in advance of releasing it to the public.
-
Seeing as I how I made a living for about 6 years in the sports wagering industry, why don't all you geniuses clear things up for all of us...
This should be fun.
:popcorn:
For starters, nobody sets a line days in advance of releasing it to the public.
Are you rough ridin' kidding me?!?!? LVSC (Las Vegas Sports Consultants) sets "opening lines", but doesn't take wagers. What in the hell makes you think for a second that their computers didn't have the opening line determined for this contest within HOURS of when the KSU & NU games ended on Setp. 27??
At that point, they had all the statistical information thaey needed to set not only the point spread, but also the TOTAL. Just because they didn't realease them, doesn't mean they weren't calculated.
Same with all the casinos, offshore books, etc. that don't use LVSC as their starting point.
Traditionally, sides come out on Sunday eve about 5pm CST or so, give or take a half hour and Totals come out on Tuesday mornings around 10am. All this info is processed by computer within minutes of both teams games ending for the subsequent contest. When both teams have a bye the weekend before lines are released, I GUARANTEE that the line was set but not released LAST Sunday, Sept 28 pending any unannounced practice injuries, suspensions, etc. throughout the open week that would have caused the line to go off the board.
-
OT: Bookie Pimp, why did you stop making your living off sports betting?
-
OT: Bookie Pimp, why did you stop making your living off sports betting?
check your pm's...
-
Bookie, please give your explanation of how and why spreads and totals are set. Bonus points for more bullshit "simple math" equations for a total that also predicts the line. Double bonus points for explaining why a line would move.
-
OT: Bookie Pimp, why did you stop making your living off sports betting?
check your pm's...
I'd also like to request a pm.
-
Bookie, please give your explanation of how and why spreads and totals are set. Bonus points for more bullcrap "simple math" equations for a total that also predicts the line. Double bonus points for explaining why a line would move.
a) to get balanced action.
b) never said the "total could predict the line". simply stated that the predicted score the books' computers have come up with can be figured through "simple math"once the total is hung on Tues am...
c) to reduce "exposure" by the books as excessive money comes in on one side or the other as the book attempts to keep balanced action so that they are guaranteed a profit by holding the vig.
Do you really need the answers to all these questions, or just being a smart ass? Trust me when I tell you that I've probably forgotten more about this crap over the years than you will likely ever know and I'm NOT impressed by your sophmoric questioning although I appeased you to shut you the eff up.
Run along junior...
:users:
-
Bookie, please give your explanation of how and why spreads and totals are set. Bonus points for more bullcrap "simple math" equations for a total that also predicts the line. Double bonus points for explaining why a line would move.
a) to get balanced action.
b) never said the "total could predict the line". simply stated that the predicted score the books' computers have come up with can be figured through "simple math"once the total is hung on Tues am...
c) to reduce "exposure" by the books as excessive money comes in on one side or the other as the book attempts to keep balanced action so that they are guaranteed a profit by holding the vig.
Do you really need the answers to all these questions, or just being a smart ass? Trust me when I tell you that I've probably forgotten more about this crap over the years than you will likely ever know and I'm NOT impressed by your sophmoric questioning although I appeased you to shut you the eff up.
Run along junior...
:users:
I guess I'm stuck on why you would try to determine the computer score from two independent variables. The computer could have just as easily spit out 3-0 KSU with the oddsmaker realizing that:
A: Everyone is picking NU
B: Everyone is taking the over.
Obviously in this scenario the oddsmaker would take over and manually underwrite the spread and total, which is apparently the case with the game since about every other public predictor out there has it at single digits.
-
I guess I don't really see your point. Why are you so certain that the LVSC computer model mirrors the "public predictors"?
Your whole argument seems to be that you are certain that the line was manually adjusted by some guy with gigantic kahunas that is likely better at figuring spreads in his head than a wagering driven computer formula that's been proven over literally thousands of games.
amirite?
:dunno:
-
Seeing as I how I made a living for about 6 years in the sports wagering industry, why don't all you geniuses clear things up for all of us...
This should be fun.
:popcorn:
For starters, nobody sets a line days in advance of releasing it to the public.
Are you foooocking kidding me?!?!? LVSC (Las Vegas Sports Consultants) sets "opening lines", but doesn't take wagers. What in the hell makes you think for a second that their computers didn't have the opening line determined for this contest within HOURS of when the KSU & NU games ended on Setp. 27??
At that point, they had all the statistical information thaey needed to set not only the point spread, but also the TOTAL. Just because they didn't realease them, doesn't mean they weren't calculated.
Same with all the casinos, offshore books, etc. that don't use LVSC as their starting point.
Traditionally, sides come out on Sunday eve about 5pm CST or so, give or take a half hour and Totals come out on Tuesday mornings around 10am. All this info is processed by computer within minutes of both teams games ending for the subsequent contest. When both teams have a bye the weekend before lines are released, I GUARANTEE that the line was set but not released LAST Sunday, Sept 28 pending any unannounced practice injuries, suspensions, etc. throughout the open week that would have caused the line to go off the board.
...and I'll tell YOU what a vagina feels like.
-
06 and ew's attempted PI here is pretty funny. they ended up with a self-PI.
-
I guess I don't really see your point. Why are you so certain that the LVSC computer model mirrors the "public predictors"?
Your whole argument seems to be that you are certain that the line was manually adjusted by some guy with gigantic kahunas that is likely better at figuring spreads in his head than a wagering driven computer formula that's been proven over literally thousands of games.
amirite?
:dunno:
Because you're linking two independent wagers together and saying you can devise what the computer does with simple math. The computer sets the spread with the goal of betting parity. It sets the total with the goal of betting parity. The computer has no need to predict a spread or a total.
And my argument isn't that the line was arbitrarily set by one guy, it's that the computer, guy or chicken picking games isn't concerned with predicting a final score to provide the spread and total so trying to use "simple math" is rough ridin' Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).
-
06 and ew's attempted PI here is pretty funny. they ended up with a self-PI.
Wasn't attempting. This guy takes crap too seriously. Like he might snap and stab someone because they said something slightly incorrect. He's like the skinnybenny of anal retentive bettors.
-
I have heard from a few "experts" that the lines aren't always set to ensure total parity (picks on both sides so house always wins its vig at least) but sometimes they take "public teams" like the Pats for example and try and set the line where they think the public team will get tons of action but won't cover (or something like that).
In other words, are the lines sometimes set to draw the dumb money in more heavily on one side? Obviously, that is much riskier than getting dollar for dollar on each side but much more rewarding as well.
-
I guess I don't really see your point. Why are you so certain that the LVSC computer model mirrors the "public predictors"?
Your whole argument seems to be that you are certain that the line was manually adjusted by some guy with gigantic kahunas that is likely better at figuring spreads in his head than a wagering driven computer formula that's been proven over literally thousands of games.
amirite?
:dunno:
Because you're linking two independent wagers together and saying you can devise what the computer does with simple math. The computer sets the spread with the goal of betting parity. It sets the total with the goal of betting parity. The computer has no need to predict a spread or a total.
And my argument isn't that the line was arbitrarily set by one guy, it's that the computer, guy or chicken picking games isn't concerned with predicting a final score to provide the spread and total so trying to use "simple math" is foooocking Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).
The point is NOT whether or not the books are trying to "predict a final score". They're not. It's pretty common knowledge that the goal is to limit overall exposure.
However, for all practical purposes, one can easily deduct an approximation of what they model sees as a final score if everything goes exactly as the model forecasts. Although separate, it's foolish to think that these wagers are totally "independant" as BOTH are on the SAME contest.
Therefore, an opening total of 52 with an opening line of 10 simply implies that the model used would be approximating the score at about 31-21. My point is not that they are trying to predict the score, but that one can easily come up with that approximate score from the two factors provided from said model.
It's even more rough ridin' Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) not to recognize and realize this inherent relationship in the two numbers.
-
I have heard from a few "experts" that the lines aren't always set to ensure total parity (picks on both sides so house always wins its vig at least) but sometimes they take "public teams" like the Pats for example and try and set the line where they think the public team will get tons of action but won't cover (or something like that).
In other words, are the lines sometimes set to draw the dumb money in more heavily on one side? Obviously, that is much riskier than getting dollar for dollar on each side but much more rewarding as well.
Some folks believe this theory, but I personally don't. The book is a business, ie - broker, not a "gambler". While there is always a certain amount of exposure (more money on one side than the other), the book managers job is to eliminate that so that they make as close to 5% of total net handle on the whole of every weekend's total games, both sides and totals.
Even small time street books will find places to lay off excess exposure they have on certain games if need be. I suppose it's "possible" that this happens, it just doesn't seem very "probable" to me. Big money sharps, syndicates, etc. will always do their best take advantage of bad lines anyway which will naturally balance a "bad line".
:dunno:
-
06 and ew's attempted PI here is pretty funny. they ended up with a self-PI.
Wasn't attempting. This guy takes crap too seriously. Like he might snap and stab someone because they said something slightly incorrect. He's like the skinnybenny of anal retentive bettors.
I can agree with this, he is a very intense individual.
-
I have heard from a few "experts" that the lines aren't always set to ensure total parity (picks on both sides so house always wins its vig at least) but sometimes they take "public teams" like the Pats for example and try and set the line where they think the public team will get tons of action but won't cover (or something like that).
In other words, are the lines sometimes set to draw the dumb money in more heavily on one side? Obviously, that is much riskier than getting dollar for dollar on each side but much more rewarding as well.
Some folks believe this theory, but I personally don't. The book is a business, ie - broker, not a "gambler". While there is always a certain amount of exposure (more money on one side than the other), the book managers job is to eliminate that so that they make as close to 5% of total net handle on the whole of every weekend's total games, both sides and totals.
Even small time street books will find places to lay off excess exposure they have on certain games if need be. I suppose it's "possible" that this happens, it just doesn't seem very "probable" to me. Big money sharps, syndicates, etc. will always do their best take advantage of bad lines anyway which will naturally balance a "bad line".
:dunno:
On a somewhat related note, don't they treat the Thurs and especially Monday night football games a little differently due to the amount of action these stand alone get?
-
Spread and total are independent.
The goal of the spread is even action on each side. The goal of the total is the same. Some people bet on both, some just one. The only thing your "simple math" does is ascribe the score YOU think the computer has predicted.
The computer doesn't see a 52 total with a line of 10 being a score of 31-21, it sees 52 as the point where bettors will be split down the middle with each half seeing value on opposing wagers. Same with the spread being 10.
Simply put the actual outcome of the game is irrelevant to the computer. The computer's only goal is to estimate the public's perception of the actual outcome.
-
Spread and total are independent.
The goal of the spread is even action on each side. The goal of the total is the same. Some people bet on both, some just one. The only thing your "simple math" does is ascribe the score YOU think the computer has predicted.
The computer doesn't see a 52 total with a line of 10 being a score of 31-21, it sees 52 as the point where bettors will be split down the middle with each half seeing value on opposing wagers. Same with the spread being 10.
Simply put the actual outcome of the game is irrelevant to the computer. The computer's only goal is to estimate the public's perception of the actual outcome.
You just don't know when to give it a rest, huh? You've basically re-iterated everything I've said, except for you just can't get it through your thick skull that one can ascertain an approximation of the vegas bookmaker's estimated scoring based on the two given variables... side and total.
I agree with about 95% of what you just wrote, however there's nothing you can say to convince me that if we had an employee of LVSC to consult that they would say otherwise about the predictive models used in regards to approximate scoring.
-
Spread and total are independent.
The goal of the spread is even action on each side. The goal of the total is the same. Some people bet on both, some just one. The only thing your "simple math" does is ascribe the score YOU think the computer has predicted.
The computer doesn't see a 52 total with a line of 10 being a score of 31-21, it sees 52 as the point where bettors will be split down the middle with each half seeing value on opposing wagers. Same with the spread being 10.
Simply put the actual outcome of the game is irrelevant to the computer. The computer's only goal is to estimate the public's perception of the actual outcome.
You just don't know when to give it a rest, huh? You've basically re-iterated everything I've said, except for you just can't get it through your thick skull that one can ascertain an approximation of the vegas bookmaker's estimated scoring based on the two given variables... side and total.
I agree with about 95% of what you just wrote, however there's nothing you can say to convince me that if we had an employee of LVSC to consult that they would say otherwise about the predictive models used in regards to approximate scoring.
You realize you're being a dick about something you agree "95%" with and is pretty meaningless to begin with? Pick your battles, man.
And to say you can deduct that the score should be 31-21, you just performed simple algebra. woo hoo. You didn't talk about Vegas's motivation to come up with the numbers and their compatibility. When you chose to, you basically repeated what has been said. Congrats. You raised your heart rate for absolutely nothing.
-
Spread and total are independent.
The goal of the spread is even action on each side. The goal of the total is the same. Some people bet on both, some just one. The only thing your "simple math" does is ascribe the score YOU think the computer has predicted.
The computer doesn't see a 52 total with a line of 10 being a score of 31-21, it sees 52 as the point where bettors will be split down the middle with each half seeing value on opposing wagers. Same with the spread being 10.
Simply put the actual outcome of the game is irrelevant to the computer. The computer's only goal is to estimate the public's perception of the actual outcome.
You just don't know when to give it a rest, huh? You've basically re-iterated everything I've said, except for you just can't get it through your thick skull that one can ascertain an approximation of the vegas bookmaker's estimated scoring based on the two given variables... side and total.
I agree with about 95% of what you just wrote, however there's nothing you can say to convince me that if we had an employee of LVSC to consult that they would say otherwise about the predictive models used in regards to approximate scoring.
You realize you're being a dick about something you agree "95%" with and is pretty meaningless to begin with? Pick your battles, man.
And to say you can deduct that the score should be 31-21, you just performed simple algebra. woo hoo. You didn't talk about Vegas's motivation to come up with the numbers and their compatibility. When you chose to, you basically repeated what has been said. Congrats. You raised your heart rate for absolutely nothing.
I don't know why you and your little buddy are getting so worked up, but my heartate = stable.
And, you may wish to re-read the thread unless your reading comprehension is really that poor. Do you and 06 always give each other reach-a-round's here or is this a one off for you two?
-
Spread and total are independent.
The goal of the spread is even action on each side. The goal of the total is the same. Some people bet on both, some just one. The only thing your "simple math" does is ascribe the score YOU think the computer has predicted.
The computer doesn't see a 52 total with a line of 10 being a score of 31-21, it sees 52 as the point where bettors will be split down the middle with each half seeing value on opposing wagers. Same with the spread being 10.
Simply put the actual outcome of the game is irrelevant to the computer. The computer's only goal is to estimate the public's perception of the actual outcome.
You just don't know when to give it a rest, huh? You've basically re-iterated everything I've said, except for you just can't get it through your thick skull that one can ascertain an approximation of the vegas bookmaker's estimated scoring based on the two given variables... side and total.
I agree with about 95% of what you just wrote, however there's nothing you can say to convince me that if we had an employee of LVSC to consult that they would say otherwise about the predictive models used in regards to approximate scoring.
You realize you're being a dick about something you agree "95%" with and is pretty meaningless to begin with? Pick your battles, man.
And to say you can deduct that the score should be 31-21, you just performed simple algebra. woo hoo. You didn't talk about Vegas's motivation to come up with the numbers and their compatibility. When you chose to, you basically repeated what has been said. Congrats. You raised your heart rate for absolutely nothing.
I don't know why you and your little buddy are getting so worked up, but my heartate = stable.
And, you may wish to re-read the thread unless your reading comprehension is really that poor. Do you and 06 always give each other reach-a-round's here or is this a one off for you two?
How do you translate my last post as "worked up" yet this is your first post- "You could've deleted this, and saved yourself quite a bit of embarrassment. But, I quoted it to make it easier to respond to this idiocy...". Yeah. You aren't getting worked up or anything.
As for 06, I don't even know who he is. Is he new here? Nice way to avoid your moronic behavior by implicating homosexual relations though. Classy touch.
-
Spread and total are independent.
The goal of the spread is even action on each side. The goal of the total is the same. Some people bet on both, some just one. The only thing your "simple math" does is ascribe the score YOU think the computer has predicted.
The computer doesn't see a 52 total with a line of 10 being a score of 31-21, it sees 52 as the point where bettors will be split down the middle with each half seeing value on opposing wagers. Same with the spread being 10.
Simply put the actual outcome of the game is irrelevant to the computer. The computer's only goal is to estimate the public's perception of the actual outcome.
You just don't know when to give it a rest, huh? You've basically re-iterated everything I've said, except for you just can't get it through your thick skull that one can ascertain an approximation of the vegas bookmaker's estimated scoring based on the two given variables... side and total.
I agree with about 95% of what you just wrote, however there's nothing you can say to convince me that if we had an employee of LVSC to consult that they would say otherwise about the predictive models used in regards to approximate scoring.
You realize you're being a dick about something you agree "95%" with and is pretty meaningless to begin with? Pick your battles, man.
And to say you can deduct that the score should be 31-21, you just performed simple algebra. woo hoo. You didn't talk about Vegas's motivation to come up with the numbers and their compatibility. When you chose to, you basically repeated what has been said. Congrats. You raised your heart rate for absolutely nothing.
I don't know why you and your little buddy are getting so worked up, but my heartate = stable.
And, you may wish to re-read the thread unless your reading comprehension is really that poor. Do you and 06 always give each other reach-a-round's here or is this a one off for you two?
How do you translate my last post as "worked up" yet this is your first post- "You could've deleted this, and saved yourself quite a bit of embarrassment. But, I quoted it to make it easier to respond to this idiocy...". Yeah. You aren't getting worked up or anything.
As for 06, I don't even know who he is. Is he new here? Nice way to avoid your moronic behavior by implicating homosexual relations though. Classy touch.
You really should leave the bbs'ing to the veterans... Or, sit back and take some notes.
Point is, I was rough ridin' with you on the first post, and ended up reeling in BOTH you and 06 to a pissing match over nothing really. I never "raised my heart rate", but got few laughs out of the two of you trying to act like you're the re-incarnate of Tony Sinisi in regards to how to interpret sides and totals and how they are inter-related.
Good luck with your wagers.
:thumbsup:
-
After repeating the people he's arguing with, he retreats to gay insults, and now he's retreated to the "I was just rough ridin' with you guys" line. :facepalm:
-
My money is on Bookie Pimp.
-
My money is on Bookie Pimp.
How so? That he is basically saying the same thing everyone else, but has to do it in a shitty Husker/BMW BBS'ing way? Not even the good BMW, the shitty late 2009 BMW who tries way too hard to be significant, but comes off as needy and whiney.
-
My money is on Bookie Pimp.
How so? That he is basically saying the same thing everyone else, but has to do it in a crapty Husker/BMW BBS'ing way? Not even the good BMW, the crapty late 2009 BMW who tries way too hard to be significant, but comes off as needy and whiney.
I'll take that bet and go with ew. He said he was in the business of booking for 6 years for christ sakes. Who brags about that? You want to also bet what he does now? I'll go with schlepping drinks at a tit joint, golf pro or he sells insurance.. But seriously Bookie, who will you bet on tomorrow?? :rolleyes: (ftp://:rolleyes:)
-
EMAWgeddon is less than 24 hours away and you turkeys are fighting with each other.
-
My money is on Bookie Pimp.
How so? That he is basically saying the same thing everyone else, but has to do it in a crapty Husker/BMW BBS'ing way? Not even the good BMW, the crapty late 2009 BMW who tries way too hard to be significant, but comes off as needy and whiney.
I'll take that bet and go with ew. He said he was in the business of booking for 6 years for christ sakes. Who brags about that? You want to also bet what he does now? I'll go with schlepping drinks at a tit joint, golf pro or he sells insurance.. But seriously Bookie, who will you bet on tomorrow?? :rolleyes: (ftp://:rolleyes:)
Never "booked" games, but worked in the industry... Was a simple statemet, not a "brag".
And, wrong, wrong, and wrong again on the career guesses.
You kids that have no idea what the eff you're talking about and make rash generalizations never cease to amaze me.
:blah:
-
line creeping towards -11 :party: