Ok this betting system is a lock. Seriously.
Quote: MathExtremistAny time you're "wagering" on unknown but non-random events, there's a potential opportunity for a +EV play. In your case, if the price you're getting for the long shots more than covers your estimation of the chances that the writing team changes the ending, then yes, you have a good play. The question you need to ask is whether the sports books are setting the line based just on the money or based on having a phone call with the writing team.
It would be based only on the money. If anyone on staff had any foreknowledge of what was going to happen then it is considered rigging a public contest. They'd just set it up with equal money on both sides like they always do for sports.
Quote: MathExtremistAny time you're "wagering" on unknown but non-random events, there's a potential opportunity for a +EV play. In your case, if the price you're getting for the long shots more than covers your estimation of the chances that the writing team changes the ending, then yes, you have a good play. The question you need to ask is whether the sports books are setting the line based just on the money or based on having a phone call with the writing team.
From what I have been told, the line swings wildly. The Undertaker line went from -5000 to -1200 at one point. The theory is the writing team makes the change and then bets on it. Massive bets to make things swing that much.
Quote: geoffIt would be based only on the money. If anyone on staff had any foreknowledge of what was going to happen then it is considered rigging a public contest. They'd just set it up with equal money on both sides like they always do for sports.
Yeah but they can tell friends to bet. Give them the money to do it.
Quote: MathExtremistYou want to throw your money into a gaffed contest where you're in the dark and others aren't?
Oh, Jai Alai?
Quote: Lemieux66I know at one point Undertaker was -5000 to beat Brock Lesnar at WM30 and we saw how that went.
just b/c undertaker was -5000 doesn't mean lesnar was +5000
Quote: iamthepushjust b/c undertaker was -5000 doesn't mean lesnar was +5000
Well obviously but it's still something comparable and worth betting.
Quote: Lemieux66Well obviously but it's still something comparable and worth betting.
not necessarily, could have been +1400
If i had to guess I bet there was a max bet of $500 or less
Quote: iamthepushnot necessarily, could have been +1400
If i had to guess I bet there was a max bet of $500 or less
Ill do the research. Hopefully I can get a line history.
At it's peak, Brock was +4000 with a hundred dollar max bet. That's pretty damn good.
Quote: JimRockfordVegas actually takes action on WWE? That's amazing. How much would I have to lay to bet on the Globe Trotters to beat the Generals?
Vegas doesn't, but certain online sites do. Bovada has in the past and still may.
Quote: Lemieux66As some of you may know, certain sites now allow gambling on WWE PPV matches. So considering that it's fixed, isn't it just best to just bet on the rediculous long shot odds and hope the writing team changes it's finish? I know at one point Undertaker was -5000 to beat Brock Lesnar at WM30 and we saw how that went.
I believe it is fixed too, and a friend of mine claims to bet it with inside information on who is predestined to win. However, I would fear a Pulp Fiction kind of situation where a fighter, who is supposed to take a dive, bets big on himself, through confederates of course, and then wins easily.
Quote: JimRockfordVegas actually takes action on WWE? That's amazing. How much would I have to lay to bet on the Globe Trotters to beat the Generals?
My thoughts exactly. Will they take bets on the next character to be killed in Game of Thrones, too?
Quote: WizardI believe it is fixed too, and a friend of mine claims to bet it with inside information on who is predestined to win. However, I would fear a Pulp Fiction kind of situation where a fighter, who is supposed to take a dive, bets big on himself, through confederates of course, and then wins easily.
Unless it's Triple H or Undertaker, wrestlers for the most part have no veto power on wins and losses.
Have I literally found the only profitable betting system?
Quote: Lemieux66Have I literally found the only profitable betting system?
If you have some idea what is going on, you stand a good chance of making a profit, but that Undertaker-Lesnar match shows that nothing is guaranteed (and even if UT had been scripted to win, that could have changed if he would have gotten seriously injured during the match). For example, Daniel Bryan beating Kane at Extreme Rules was pretty much certain.
Then again, with title matches, there's the added problem that they can change the result without having to change who's going to win the title. (For example, they could have written it so that somebody beats Kane up during the match, getting Bryan disqualified, but, of course, in professional wrestling, a title usually doesn't change hands except by pinfall or submission.)
Quote: Lemieux66Unless it's Triple H or Undertaker, wrestlers for the most part have no veto power on wins and losses.
Have I literally found the only profitable betting system?
Card counting is a pretty profitable betting system. Or so I hear.
Quote: ThatDonGuyIf you have some idea what is going on, you stand a good chance of making a profit, but that Undertaker-Lesnar match shows that nothing is guaranteed (and even if UT had been scripted to win, that could have changed if he would have gotten seriously injured during the match). For example, Daniel Bryan beating Kane at Extreme Rules was pretty much certain.
Then again, with title matches, there's the added problem that they can change the result without having to change who's going to win the title. (For example, they could have written it so that somebody beats Kane up during the match, getting Bryan disqualified, but, of course, in professional wrestling, a title usually doesn't change hands except by pinfall or submission.)
I was actually about to talk about the alternate possibilities but I reneged because I wasn't sure anyone would know what I was talking about lol. I can see how you can get screwed by other possibilities, however you know certain matches won't have screwy finishes(pretty much WM main events and who will win Royal Rumble). The only way to get killed is if they start breaking it up into how a guy wins instead of just winning.
Quote: geoffCard counting is a pretty profitable betting system. Or so I hear.
I don't think that's an actual betting system. More of a method.
Quote: ThatDonGuyThen again, with title matches, there's the added problem that they can change the result without having to change who's going to win the title. (For example, they could have written it so that somebody beats Kane up during the match, getting Bryan disqualified, but, of course, in professional wrestling, a title usually doesn't change hands except by pinfall or submission.)
Isn't there often some kind of dispute on really big matches? Like there was an impersonator referee. Is there some standard by which you can trust who won?
Quote: WizardIsn't there often some kind of dispute on really big matches? Like there was an impersonator referee. Is there some standard by which you can trust who won?
Wiz is showing his age with the 1980s Earl/Dave Hebner referee switch lol.
Sometimes outside interference helps a guy win, but it's still counted as a win. It's very rare that the final match on a PPV has a non-finish. To be honest though, now that these PPVs are on the $10 a month WWE Network I can see more non-finishes happening.
Quote: Lemieux66I was actually about to talk about the alternate possibilities but I reneged because I wasn't sure anyone would know what I was talking about lol. I can see how you can get screwed by other possibilities, however you know certain matches won't have screwy finishes(pretty much WM main events and who will win Royal Rumble).
Who saw Vince McMahon winning the Royal Rumble in 1999? The vast majority of people probably felt that Vince had all but telegraphed a Steve Austin win when he told him he would never get another WWE title shot (which, of course, meant that Austin would get the title shot the Rumble winner gets). The mysterious WWE "rule" about what happened when Vince gave the spot to Mankind didn't exist before then.
Quote: Lemieux66Sometimes outside interference helps a guy win, but it's still counted as a win. It's very rare that the final match on a PPV has a non-finish.
Then again, there's something like the main event at WrestleMania IX; I doubt many people figured Yokozuna would win, since Vince knows that sending the fans home happy is much better for business, and I seriously doubt anybody thought the show would end with Hulk Hogan as the champion.
Quote: ThatDonGuyWho saw Vince McMahon winning the Royal Rumble in 1999? The vast majority of people probably felt that Vince had all but telegraphed a Steve Austin win when he told him he would never get another WWE title shot (which, of course, meant that Austin would get the title shot the Rumble winner gets). The mysterious WWE "rule" about what happened when Vince gave the spot to Mankind didn't exist before then.
Then again, there's something like the main event at WrestleMania IX; I doubt many people figured Yokozuna would win, since Vince knows that sending the fans home happy is much better for business, and I seriously doubt anybody thought the show would end with Hulk Hogan as the champion.
This is true, however if none of these things are listed as a wager would you get your money back? I seriously don't know.
Quote: Lemieux66This is true, however if none of these things are listed as a wager would you get your money back? I seriously don't know.
The bets would have been "Who will win the 1999 Royal Rumble?" (if you bet Steve Austin, you lost - the result was not overturned; it was the title shot that normally goes with it that changed hands), and "Who will win the Bret Hart vs. Yokozuna title match at WrestleMania IX?" (and if you bet on Hart, you lost - the fact that Yokozuna then lost a separate, unannounced title match against Hulk Hogan is irrelevant). No refunds would have been warranted.
The only time the books might have had a problem was when the Royal Rumble had two winners. The books would have had a choice; either pay off everybody who bet on either one, or claim, "You bet that only one person would win, and two did, so you lose your bet." (IIRC, something like this happened in the fourth Harry Potter book.)
Quote: Lemieux66Wiz is showing his age with the 1980s Earl/Dave Hebner referee switch lol.
Ouch!
Good example of a personal insult that is allowed.
Quote: ThatDonGuyThe bets would have been "Who will win the 1999 Royal Rumble?" (if you bet Steve Austin, you lost - the result was not overturned; it was the title shot that normally goes with it that changed hands), and "Who will win the Bret Hart vs. Yokozuna title match at WrestleMania IX?" (and if you bet on Hart, you lost - the fact that Yokozuna then lost a separate, unannounced title match against Hulk Hogan is irrelevant). No refunds would have been warranted.
The only time the books might have had a problem was when the Royal Rumble had two winners. The books would have had a choice; either pay off everybody who bet on either one, or claim, "You bet that only one person would win, and two did, so you lose your bet." (IIRC, something like this happened in the fourth Harry Potter book.)
That's troubling. Maybe the betting system is a failure IF Vince Russo is employed lol.
Actually there have been bets like this. I have heard of some Harry potter bets. will we prove aliens exist by x date. You have to look around online and you can find all kinds of interesting bets. Even being able to bet on BIG BROTHER. One problem is the betting limits usually $500 max. I have heard of some bigger limits in the thousands. You could probably make some good money betting crazy things like this with enough research and detective work.Quote: TerribleTomMy thoughts exactly. Will they take bets on the next character to be killed in Game of Thrones, too?
EASTENDERS OUTRIGHTS
Who Killed Lucy Beale
Les Coker
7/4
View all odds
Abi Branning
7
View all odds
Danny Pennant
8
View all odds
Jake Stone
8
Antonino "Argentina" Rocca, Gorgeous George, the Mighty Atlas, the Swedish Angel, the Zebra Kid, characters like "Hatpin Mary," who took delight in jabbing wrestlers she deemed deserving with her lethal-looking hatpin.
I wonder what one of Gorgeous George's gold plated bobby pins would go for on Ebay now. LOL
Quote: AxelWolfActually there have been bets like this. I have heard of some Harry potter bets. will we prove aliens exist by x date. You have to look around online and you can find all kinds of interesting bets. Even being able to bet on BIG BROTHER. One problem is the betting limits usually $500 max. I have heard of some bigger limits in the thousands. You could probably make some good money betting crazy things like this with enough research and detective work.
EASTENDERS OUTRIGHTS
Who Killed Lucy Beale
Les Coker
7/4
View all odds
Abi Branning
7
View all odds
Danny Pennant
8
View all odds
Jake Stone
8
I've tried to get on Big Brother and will try again. Remember to bet on Lemieux66!
