[00:00] Disclaimer. The content presented in

[00:02] this show is intended for entertainment

[00:03] purposes only. All opinions expressed

[00:05] are those of the hosts and do not

[00:07] necessarily reflect the views or

[00:08] opinions of any individuals or

[00:10] organizations mentioned. Statements made

[00:12] about public figures or entities are

[00:14] based on publicly available information

[00:16] and are not intended to harm or defame

[00:18] any person or business. This show relies

[00:21] on fair use of social media posts which

[00:23] are presented in good faith for the

[00:24] purpose of commentary and criticism.

[00:26] Viewers and listeners are advised to

[00:28] form their own opinions,

[00:37] the right strategies to actually prime

[00:39] your account, whether you should be

[00:41] cashing out of things like Charlotte

[00:43] Hornets, playoff futures, and much more

[00:44] here on Circle Back here on the Circles

[00:47] of channel, which is part of the Herbing

[00:48] Network and presented by Kshi. This is

[00:51] the show, you know it, where we cover

[00:53] the latest and greatest news that comes

[00:54] from gambling Twitter. We're doing it

[00:56] today with myself, your host here on

[00:58] Circle Back, Jacob Gmena. I am a creator

[01:00] and producer here at the Hammer Bag

[01:02] Network. Joined as always in the bottom

[01:03] left corner by Pro Sports Better and

[01:06] Cali Donator Mike at Mr. Peanut Better

[01:08] on Twitter. Down in the bottom right

[01:10] corner, we have co-host of the Hit the

[01:12] Books YouTube channel, The Hammers

[01:13] College Football Content Division. It is

[01:16] Joey Kenish. In the top right corner of

[01:18] the screen, we have Isaac at

[01:20] roundroin42,

[01:22] who is a better and responsible gambling

[01:25] advocate. Isaac, are you able to be both

[01:28] of these two things at the same time?

[01:31] >> Some some people would say no. So, I

[01:33] guess we'll get into it. Yeah, some

[01:35] people will say I mean I guess he didn't

[01:37] outright say no, but he but he certainly

[01:39] questioned the validity of being able to

[01:41] perform both of these because I you were

[01:43] on a show on NBC uh NBC News where you

[01:46] were discussing the harmfulness of

[01:49] sports betting. I think this this was

[01:51] particularly geared towards parents and

[01:54] just provided more information to them

[01:56] about if their children are getting

[01:57] involved involved in sports betting. He

[01:59] said, "It was a pleasure talking about

[02:00] the expansion of online gambling and its

[02:02] effect on young men today." Jeff Nadu,

[02:05] the former fourth seat on this show,

[02:08] quote, tweeted it and said, "Wait,

[02:09] you're a quote unquote progambler who

[02:13] talks to people about not gambling? I

[02:16] don't get it." So, he he didn't outright

[02:18] say you can't tell them they do. None of

[02:19] us do. But I I I really love and and

[02:23] maybe I'm missing maybe like um I'm

[02:25] missing a force of truth, but I really

[02:27] love how he puts in quotations

[02:29] progambler. Really, you know, tries to

[02:32] call you out there. It feels like uh

[02:34] quite a thread here where you responded

[02:36] by saying, "Not saying not to gamble,

[02:37] just t talking about some of the risks,

[02:40] especially for kids." So he said, "Why

[02:42] do people need to hear you tell them to

[02:43] not gamble? 18 plus are all adults and

[02:46] can make decisions for themselves." No.

[02:48] and you said, "No one needs to hear me

[02:49] tell them anything. If you don't like

[02:51] what I have to say, you cannot watch it.

[02:53] It is a free country." They invited me

[02:55] on to talk about the harms of gambling

[02:57] for an audience mainly consisting of

[02:59] parents concerned about their children.

[03:01] And I did. So Ferris, very prominent

[03:03] gaming Twitter said, "Isaac, let me get

[03:05] this straight. You can be a pro better

[03:07] and make a living off the practice, but

[03:09] still care about responsible gambling

[03:11] and the general welfare of

[03:12] impressionable use." And you said, "One

[03:15] can try." There was people that did

[03:16] agree with you uh who said who some

[03:19] people likened it to, you know, you can

[03:21] be a pros surgeon who doesn't advocate

[03:23] for other people to perform surgery. And

[03:26] there was somebody here who's a

[03:27] professional trader who advocates for

[03:29] others not to be a trader. So Isaac,

[03:32] we'll give you the first word on this

[03:33] because obviously you're involved uh

[03:36] talk to us how you feel about it.

[03:38] >> I mean, I think if anybody watched uh

[03:40] the clip or has ever heard me talk, I

[03:42] don't think I've ever told told anybody

[03:43] not to gamble. I'm a pretty big gambler

[03:45] myself. Uh, and yeah, as I said, they

[03:48] invited me on to talk about the harms of

[03:50] gambling for underage kids. And the

[03:53] audience was mostly parents. So, the

[03:55] whole clip is me telling like, "Here's

[03:56] what to do if your kids are gambling.

[03:58] You know, here's what they should know."

[04:00] So, I thought it was pretty innocuous. I

[04:01] was I was sad that Jeff took issue with

[04:03] it. Um, but uh yeah, you know, I'm

[04:06] pretty confident in my in my stance that

[04:09] that underage kids shouldn't gamble. Uh,

[04:12] and that gambling, while it can it can

[04:14] be fun and enjoyable, can also be

[04:15] harmful. So sad sad that he had to take

[04:18] issue with it, but I'm I'm not too upset

[04:19] with my stance here.

[04:20] >> All right. Uh, let's go over to Mike.

[04:23] Whose side are you on here?

[04:26] >> Okay. How dumb do you have to be to

[04:28] think that this is some kind of conflict

[04:30] of interest or some kind of double talk?

[04:32] If Steve Irwin is [ __ ] with an

[04:34] alligator, then he doesn't say, "Hey

[04:37] everybody, you also have to wrestle

[04:38] alligators for it to work." The idea

[04:40] that you could say, "Hey, children

[04:41] shouldn't gamble, but I like to gamble."

[04:44] To think that is contradictory is so

[04:46] dumb. This is going to sound really

[04:47] harsh, but I don't understand like what

[04:50] Nadoo does here. Like I He doesn't He's

[04:53] not a sharp in the space. He comes on,

[04:55] he gets offended by everything, gets mad

[04:57] at everyone, kind of double speaks

[04:58] everything. to not understand this is so

[05:02] like I don't even the most basic person

[05:04] I think who doesn't understand gambling

[05:06] at all could see that you should uh

[05:08] advocate for responsible gaming but that

[05:11] doesn't mean that you yourself do not

[05:12] have to partake in it sometimes like I

[05:14] don't know this is crazy to me I hate to

[05:16] take Isaac's side on anything but I just

[05:19] don't know what we're doing here we're

[05:20] going to do

[05:20] >> rest in peace to your mentions uh I

[05:23] Isaac and me were messaging about this I

[05:24] kind of likened it to pro wrestling

[05:26] where it is a disclaimer before the

[05:28] wrestling takes place to not do this at

[05:30] home. But

[05:33] anyways, let's go to Kesh. What are you

[05:35] What are your thoughts on this?

[05:36] >> #ND do crew. Long live forever. Uh

[05:40] couldn't couldn't agree more here. Uh

[05:42] don't don't know what Isaac's spot on

[05:44] about on you know he's on the next he's

[05:47] doing a spot on the view talking to you

[05:49] know uh you know soccer moms about how

[05:52] you know their kid their kid can't. I

[05:54] will say this though in all seriousness,

[05:56] the difference I think and that tweet

[05:59] where your average person doesn't think

[06:02] they could be a surgeon. Your average

[06:04] person doesn't think they could be an AI

[06:06] engineer or a professional athlete or a

[06:08] wrestler. I would equate gambling to

[06:12] like playbyplay or head coaching

[06:15] decisions where your average [ __ ]

[06:18] thinks they can do it. So there needs to

[06:21] be advoc. It's like you don't need

[06:23] advocacy out there. Also, it has an

[06:26] element of, you know, addictive dopamine

[06:28] to it that like you don't need advocacy

[06:31] out there to tell people to they can't

[06:33] do complex jobs or jobs that you

[06:35] wouldn't think of when it comes to

[06:37] gambling. Also, because there's a lot of

[06:40] popular sphere like, you know, content

[06:42] out there about, oh, I'm doing so great,

[06:43] you know, like this and that. Uh, I

[06:45] think the message actually does need to,

[06:47] especially now that the, you know,

[06:50] younger and younger ages are getting

[06:52] into it and it's become bigger where I

[06:54] do think, you know, Isaac has, uh, you

[06:57] know, a real message out there that that

[07:00] needs to be heard. Um, and the fact that

[07:03] he's a pro gambler, does that really

[07:05] throw it off any? No. I think if

[07:07] anything

[07:08] I would rather have someone who's done

[07:11] it give that message than like I I don't

[07:14] know like Drew Brees or some celebrity

[07:16] come on there and tell you not to b any

[07:18] of that. So, um yeah, I thought uh I

[07:21] thought he was a a good Well, I mean I I

[07:23] didn't watch the whole segment. The clip

[07:25] I saw good stuff.

[07:27] >> I will also say uh you know like Joey, I

[07:29] do actually have a day job. I do

[07:31] research. I work for a think tank on

[07:33] gambling. So my bio when I was on NBC

[07:36] was not progambler. It was uh researcher

[07:39] on gambling, you know. So I'm not going

[07:41] there telling them how I made a bunch of

[07:43] money and then not to gamble. I think

[07:45] you know people on Twitter might know

[07:47] that. But for the audience of soccer

[07:48] moms that I'm mostly there as just a a

[07:50] researcher,

[07:52] >> but also who do you want to be debating

[07:54] the issues of gambling other than like

[07:57] pro gamblers? I don't want somebody

[07:58] who's never placed a parlay in their

[08:00] life to tell people who like have

[08:01] betting addictions like, "No, it's

[08:03] better to have somebody who's in the

[08:04] space." Again, I I don't understand if

[08:06] somebody came on there and they had

[08:07] never placed a bet. Do you think Nadu

[08:09] would be like, "Well, you know, good

[08:11] good for you. You're not a pro gambler.

[08:13] Like, you're the right person to talk on

[08:14] this issue?" I don't know. He just had

[08:16] was going to have a problem with it. I

[08:17] understand why uh you know, you don't

[08:19] want people to perhaps bow out of

[08:22] gambling. Instead, they should buy your

[08:24] shitty pick package. I just don't

[08:25] understand here like what the gripe is.

[08:27] I responsibility gaming is not something

[08:30] that like I you know am going to talk

[08:32] about but like to have other people talk

[08:34] about it and get offended by that

[08:35] somehow is insane.

[08:37] >> Sometimes I feel like the these sorts of

[08:39] tweets are very like this is this this

[08:41] feel like engagement baked like he he

[08:44] wanted he wanted people to bite and they

[08:46] did it. It got a lot of engagement. It

[08:48] kind of felt like that's what was going

[08:50] on here. I maybe like there was some

[08:53] belief in saying this, but I think for

[08:55] the most part it was this is going to

[08:58] get people upset and it's going to get a

[09:00] bunch of engagement.

[09:03] >> I agree with you there. Yeah, I I think

[09:05] that there's a lot of bark, not a lot of

[09:06] bite.

[09:07] >> Okay.

[09:08] >> He's he's an artist in rage bait.

[09:11] >> He is. He He He definitely is. Uh he's

[09:14] an artist with engagement. He knows how

[09:16] to drive up engagement for sure. We'll

[09:18] move on with the show. If you're

[09:19] enjoying so far, make sure you've hit

[09:20] the like button. Also, please make sure

[09:22] you are subscribed to the channel. Keep

[09:24] up to date we have with everything we

[09:26] have coming your way. Important note,

[09:27] there's going to be no show next week on

[09:30] Friday because we are going to be in a

[09:32] little bit of a content lockdown for a

[09:35] week. We have some time off. Rob's on

[09:37] vacation. He's given us a time off after

[09:38] the football season. Yep.

[09:41] >> These these

[09:43] word out so bad. I was waiting for like,

[09:46] oh, it's uh it's Canadian, you know,

[09:48] mar.

[09:49] >> Well, Monday Monday's family day. Monday

[09:53] is is a stat holiday. Yeah, it's a stat.

[09:55] >> That's made up. That's like

[09:56] >> family day is always made up. Yeah,

[09:58] definitely made up, but like you get a

[10:00] holiday every month because there's no

[10:02] other holiday in February. We've made

[10:04] one up for this Monday. It's family day,

[10:07] so you're supposed to go spend time with

[10:08] your family. The rest of the week I will

[10:11] be working on helping get new stuff for

[10:14] this channel. So, I'm not going to be

[10:15] sitting at home doing nothing. I'm still

[10:16] going to be working just focusing on

[10:19] things beyond uh we're not going to be

[10:21] doing this show or the Monday circle

[10:24] back. What we did do is pre-record two

[10:26] videos this week that will launch at on

[10:29] Monday and Friday. So, you still have

[10:31] content to watch. So, I'm still going to

[10:32] be working on those as well. Um, still

[10:35] working. Still working hard. Um, unlike

[10:38] conditions at the office recording this

[10:40] right now. They probably they probably

[10:41] think you're on a meeting.

[10:43] >> I'm on a business call

[10:45] and here you are talking.

[10:47] >> I want to talk to my my uh guy who had

[10:50] friends.

[10:51] >> Yeah. Anyways, on to the next topic of

[10:55] the show. Uh, we have this big one from

[10:58] GRP wins. An old friend old friend of

[11:01] Circleback and he's back and he had he

[11:03] had a banger. We we got to give him some

[11:05] credit. He was in early on Charlotte

[11:08] Hornets futures to make the playoffs to

[11:10] make the playin specific seeds NBA

[11:13] championship like ton of ton of

[11:14] Charlotte Hornets futures and they have

[11:16] been on an absolute heater. They've been

[11:18] one of the best teams in the NBA over

[11:19] the last month or so month or two and

[11:21] are driving up the standings. They are

[11:23] now slightly favored to make the

[11:25] playoffs at this point. And with all

[11:27] these futures that I took all cash outs

[11:29] offered earlier today, put 10K in my

[11:31] account and just now I put 27K in my

[11:34] account. I'm down to four open Charlotte

[11:37] positions, which I guess which I guess

[11:38] did not have cash outs and showcase

[11:41] screenshots. You got to give him credit.

[11:42] He he always does

[11:44] actually bet his stuff and shows whether

[11:46] he won or lost. You got to you got to

[11:48] give a little bit of credit there. There

[11:49] may not be long-term tracking on how

[11:51] much money he's made or lost, but at

[11:52] least he is willing to showcase that.

[11:55] Uh, and people were upset that he cashed

[11:58] out these bets because it wasn't the

[12:00] plus EV move. He could have gone in

[12:01] other directions like hedging. He could

[12:03] have gone and he's got like he knows

[12:05] people. He could have gone other

[12:06] directions like selling off these

[12:08] positions, but instead he decided to

[12:09] cash out. People were upset, but not

[12:12] necessarily Jeff Benson who said for

[12:14] where GRP is in his life and who he is

[12:16] as a gambler, this wasn't as bad of a

[12:19] choice as everyone is making it seem.

[12:21] And I kind of showcased here with some

[12:23] call odds. You do have the capability

[12:25] like you could even use Calic to head.

[12:27] We talked about it on a show recently

[12:29] where you can get a zero EV hedge like

[12:32] so it's not negative it's neutral EV

[12:34] hedge on these sorts of wages. He could

[12:36] have played something like Charlotte to

[12:37] not make the playoffs. They're currently

[12:39] 57% on Koshi. Uh let's go over to Mike

[12:42] first of all on this one.

[12:46] What do you think on the strategy here?

[12:48] Should he be optimiz especially at wages

[12:50] of this magnitude? Should he be

[12:51] optimizing his EV at all times?

[12:54] I was told by a very sharp sports

[12:56] better. I mean, I'm talking top 1

[12:57] percentile,

[12:59] GRP got 37K on those those positions

[13:02] were worth 27K fair in my opinion. So,

[13:05] they think that he got 10K of EV through

[13:08] those cash outs and that maybe GRP here

[13:10] is the sharpest of us all. I I didn't do

[13:13] the work, but I've been told that these

[13:15] are sharp positions and George actually

[13:18] got the best of it in this situation.

[13:19] Now, maybe you could hedge out in other

[13:21] ways. I don't know if George has those

[13:23] options necessarily to tie up liquidity

[13:25] at that level. So, from what I was told,

[13:28] uh GRP actually has not only picked the

[13:31] great winner, he also got out at the

[13:33] right time. Basically, GRP all around

[13:35] wins.

[13:36] >> You're you're right. Part of being able

[13:37] to hedge is having the liquidity to make

[13:40] the opposing wager. And on on such a

[13:42] long shot like this, that that can be

[13:44] quite difficult to do. Isaac, we've

[13:47] heard that this was the plus EV move,

[13:49] but let's say E, let's let's do this.

[13:51] Even if it was negative EV, could you

[13:53] see why this is still a good move by

[13:56] George?

[13:57] >> Oh, completely. I mean, he was the bet

[13:58] he showed it was that a 100 cashed out

[14:01] for 10K. You know, maybe in an average

[14:04] world, the EV, he's losing a couple

[14:06] thousand there. Um, but yeah, you know,

[14:08] that's that's a lot of money. Um, and I

[14:12] respect I respect the cash out. know

[14:14] sometimes the the hedging options aren't

[14:16] available to you. So, it's yeah,

[14:17] probably the responsible thing. And like

[14:19] he said, he he kept some of he kept a

[14:21] couple positions. So, I like the move

[14:23] you you place, you know, like a $100 bet

[14:25] and a $50 bet. He cashed out the $100

[14:27] bet, kept the $50 one. Fair enough. I

[14:29] will say I have some FOMO. I was told to

[14:31] bet uh these similar ones actually a

[14:34] while ago and they were more than 300 to

[14:36] one. Uh and which which means that uh in

[14:39] the US they they trigger a bunch of tax

[14:41] stuff. So, I didn't bet them. And then

[14:43] uh it was right before they went on this

[14:45] hot streak. So he got in at the exact

[14:46] right time. Good for George.

[14:48] >> Not really FOMO cuz if you were really

[14:50] really FOMO, you would have bet it. You

[14:52] have just ammo. You missed out. Exactly.

[14:55] >> I have to jump in. This is my first time

[14:57] seeing that. One,

[14:58] >> did you see the bets he made underneath?

[15:00] >> He didn't crop those out. Yep. That's

[15:02] the first thing I was going to. He

[15:03] didn't crop those out. Two, the fact

[15:06] that he has this bet a cash out leaves

[15:08] the exact time in the two following

[15:10] bets. like nobody at FanDuel like I'm

[15:13] glad he's got the bed ID blacked out

[15:15] like they're going to immediately see it

[15:17] first of all I guess they would know his

[15:18] name there so maybe uh there's other

[15:20] reasons but yeah I I think

[15:21] >> also the the placed at 2009 a.m. is kind

[15:24] of great

[15:26] >> so he was he was on like a heater it's

[15:29] like 2 a.m. is like, "Fuck it. We're

[15:31] ripping Hornets to win the division at a

[15:33] thousand to Is that a thousand to one or

[15:34] 100 to one?" Holy [ __ ] Wow. What a bet.

[15:37] >> Yeah. Very, very, very good. Very, very

[15:41] good bet. Uh, and look, like Jeff Benjin

[15:43] said it best like the position like this

[15:46] is huge. Like that amount of money that

[15:48] that's huge to most people. So, I can

[15:51] completely understand why he decided to

[15:52] cash out. Kesh, anything to add on from

[15:54] you on this one?

[15:55] >> Okay, I went down the rabbit hole on

[15:56] this one a little bit. one like I agree

[16:00] like if you're going to do if it was me

[16:02] like and Cali's offering a no like a

[16:05] minus EV head no do we think George has

[16:07] you know $20,000 to load do we even

[16:09] think George knows how to load it into

[16:11] Cali to be able to add no he like

[16:14] there's a risk there he'd buy the wrong

[16:15] contracts and and be out of the money

[16:17] either way number two if I'm looking at

[16:20] the NBA standings which I did it and I

[16:23] had these bets you would want to get to

[16:27] at least the six. So, you didn't have

[16:29] the playin sweat of having to because

[16:32] I'm getting make the playoffs I believe

[16:35] means like you would have to then win

[16:37] the playin games to be in, not just be

[16:40] in the playin.

[16:40] >> Correct. Correct. So I think in this

[16:43] instance where the liquidity to hedge is

[16:48] may be questionable, the ability to

[16:50] hedge is maybe questionable and the fact

[16:52] that the Hornets right now are like

[16:55] fiveish games back of the six seed. Do

[16:58] we really see them overtaking Philly or

[17:01] Toronto that are, you know, five, six

[17:03] games ahead to get there and take out

[17:06] the playiname equation? I don't think

[17:09] so. Also, as kind of like PB alluded to,

[17:13] you're cashing this out where the

[17:14] Hornets have been on an absolute heater.

[17:18] Now, is that the team you're going to

[17:19] see for the rest of the season? Maybe

[17:22] that, you know, water finds its level,

[17:23] but I actually think the timing here

[17:26] isn't too bad. And the fact that they

[17:28] were going to have to do a playin sweat

[17:30] anyway because I don't think they get to

[17:31] the six, I don't think this is a bad

[17:34] move all in all. And you know what, for

[17:37] George,

[17:38] >> big amount of money.

[17:40] >> Hopefully he can uh, you know, take his

[17:42] mom out to Costco or a steak dinner,

[17:44] something like that,

[17:45] >> or or actually enter one of the circuit

[17:48] contests after he stiff Ben Fson last

[17:49] year. But uh, you know what?

[17:52] >> I don't hate this move. This was a good

[17:54] Yeah, good bet. Good move. Good cash out

[17:57] all around. So, I'm not I'm not on the

[17:59] whole like don't especially, you know

[18:02] what? like are the Hornets some of that

[18:05] stuff in there like

[18:08] is I mean I know he didn't cash out NBA

[18:10] champs but he's still got a little bit

[18:12] of risk in play. Um

[18:17] >> overall

[18:18] >> good good stuff Georgie. I'm proud of

[18:20] him.

[18:20] >> He would have cashed out I I guess the

[18:22] way he worded it would seem that he

[18:24] didn't have cash out options on these

[18:25] ones but you're right like that maybe

[18:27] that factored in. He knows he can he

[18:28] still has a little bit of that in play.

[18:31] uh he still has them to make the playin

[18:33] tournament at plus. thing though is

[18:36] since he has some play in I don't know

[18:41] if I you would have to again you'd have

[18:43] to talk somebody smart but like he

[18:45] cashed out the playoffs and the division

[18:48] but almost if you would have kept the

[18:51] play in I guess you you would have kind

[18:53] of hedged your risk there in terms of

[18:56] the only way that like you could have

[18:58] lost money is if they completely fell

[19:00] out like if they fell back to and it

[19:03] look the teams below M are you know I

[19:06] mean the Bulls are trying to lose and

[19:07] that's so I don't you know I I there's

[19:09] so much

[19:10] >> there's only one team that could knock

[19:11] them out of the top 10 essentially like

[19:14] the Bulls the Bucks are you would think

[19:17] are going to tank the Bulls could um it

[19:21] doesn't seem like there's a lot of

[19:22] competition trying to catch them we got

[19:23] to go back so he took Charlotte NBA

[19:26] champs at 2000 to1 he has 1,000 to1 as

[19:29] to win the Southeast division that's a

[19:31] man who's been in teams not numbers

[19:33] because there's no way that the odds are

[19:35] only twice as good that the Charlotte

[19:37] Hornets win the NBA Finals as when the

[19:39] shitty Southeast

[19:41] >> Well, he he always says you bet teams

[19:43] that

[19:44] >> Wait, but Mike Mike, but maybe like

[19:46] there's a decent chance if they're like

[19:47] second in the division, they get into

[19:48] the playoffs, then they get hot. I don't

[19:50] know.

[19:51] >> Yeah. Yeah. And if as long as, you know,

[19:54] >> 14 of the other teams get in terrible

[19:56] terrible plane crashes, then yeah,

[19:57] there's a chance. I will say this

[19:59] reminds me some some sports books I

[20:01] forget which ones offer like the partial

[20:04] cash out. I feel like that's a good

[20:05] feature, you know, where you can cash

[20:06] out like 40 bucks but you keep the $10

[20:09] or keep the cash out 90 keep $10 of

[20:11] sweat for George. I don't know. Yeah.

[20:14] Well, anyways, I think you made the

[20:16] right call. Big payday for him. Congrats

[20:18] on the big hit, George. Looks like

[20:19] you're pretty in line to get a couple

[20:21] more with the playin bets you have down

[20:23] here. Uh there's three playin bets still

[20:25] on the board. So, if they're in the

[20:27] playing tournament, I think the only way

[20:29] they wouldn't do that is if they go too

[20:30] high up the standings, which I also

[20:32] agree is a bit unlikely. So,

[20:35] >> good payday.

[20:37] >> I just think I think Mike and Mike and

[20:39] Joey are just jealous. They've never hit

[20:40] a bet this long before. I mean, there's

[20:42] no way Kenish has ever hit a,000 to1 bet

[20:44] in his life. No way.

[20:46] >> You don't want to hit a,000 to1. Anybody

[20:48] who knows about gambling and isn't, you

[20:50] know, fake advocacy guy, they would tell

[20:52] you you want to hit 299 TO1. THAT'S WHY

[20:54] THAT'S WHY I DIDN'T PLACE THIS BET.

[20:56] THAT'S WHY I DIDN'T PLACE THIS.

[20:58] >> George is too smart.

[20:59] >> You knew. Well, if you're in a position

[21:01] where you have the liquidity to hedge,

[21:03] you can do so with a product like Koshi,

[21:05] which I mentioned previously. You can

[21:07] get oftent times a a neutral EV hedge

[21:10] and it just uh it simplifies things. You

[21:14] don't have to go through the risk. It

[21:16] ensures you lock in some profit and you

[21:19] can keep yourself on an upward

[21:21] trajectory. that and so much more

[21:22] available to you on a prediction market

[21:24] like Kosh. You can sign up with the QR

[21:26] code that is on screen right now or by

[21:28] going to the link in the description.

[21:29] Thank you so much to Koshi for being our

[21:32] presenting sponsors. That takes us into

[21:34] another conversation surrounding KHI.

[21:36] This was brought up by Noah Zingler

[21:39] Sternig who says new filing from Khi for

[21:41] orders exceeding 300,000 total contracts

[21:44] traded for the hedging purpose described

[21:47] in the program. Koshi will rebate all

[21:50] quote taker and quote fees. This is

[21:53] meant to provide friendly terms for

[21:54] sports books looking to hedge hedge

[21:57] their exposure. So essentially what

[21:59] we're seeing here koshi are allowing

[22:01] sports books to use their platform to

[22:04] hedge when they feel like they are

[22:06] overexposed on a certain market. So

[22:08] perhaps this could be I don't know one

[22:11] like like Anthony Josh with Jake Paul

[22:12] where maybe there's way too much

[22:13] exposure on a certain side. Maybe

[22:15] there's better examples than that. But

[22:16] again, just that's what they're looking

[22:19] to do here for sports books, just to

[22:20] bring in some more liquidity, I suppose,

[22:22] to the platform. Um, I think we should

[22:25] start with Mike on this one. You have a

[22:27] lot of experience working with

[22:28] prediction markets. How do you feel

[22:30] about this? Do you think this is good

[22:31] for the prediction market ecosystem?

[22:34] Give us any thought you have.

[22:35] >> Uh, it's a big win for Delta Hedging and

[22:38] a small loss for Yanuk Center being my

[22:39] peer. Um, I think that like I don't

[22:43] know. I'm of two minds on this. one, the

[22:46] peer-to-peer thing kind of ceases to

[22:48] exist if different peers have different

[22:50] rules than one another and if being a

[22:52] certain entity gets you one rule versus

[22:55] being a different kind of person or you

[22:57] know corporation gets you a different I

[22:59] don't love that aspect of it but I mean

[23:02] like that's the theoretical thought of

[23:04] it uh in practice it's probably going to

[23:05] put more square money into the ecosystem

[23:08] if it is used uh which is good for the

[23:09] better so you know I think it's

[23:11] something in theory that is kind of

[23:13] tough to look at in practice At

[23:15] least for now, it looks like it probably

[23:17] will be good for the betters. So, uh,

[23:19] you know, I'm mixed minds on that.

[23:21] >> Okay. Interesting. Kesh, anything from

[23:24] you on something like this? So, back in

[23:26] the day, and I'm dating myself a little

[23:28] here, there was always rumors that the

[23:32] trading department at bookmaker or the

[23:35] Greek, which has been gone for a while,

[23:37] or five dimes, had outs, whether it be

[23:42] in Vegas or at different places where

[23:45] they would or Pinnacle Access where they

[23:48] would hedge their own positions. Now,

[23:51] can I go back? It would have any of that

[23:52] stand up in a court of law? No. But

[23:54] there is a longstanding history of

[23:59] books hedging some positions that they

[24:02] didn't want to be on through other

[24:04] means. Um, and especially in some of

[24:07] the, you know, the PPH world as well.

[24:09] You'd hear about some of the massive,

[24:11] which is mostly gone now, but some of

[24:12] the massive PPH networks if they were

[24:14] overloaded, then they would go somewhere

[24:16] and and hedge it off. I don't know. We

[24:19] we talked about this a little bit, you

[24:21] know, pre-show, like the legality of

[24:24] this, how this would work for a a legal

[24:27] book um to be able to utilize something

[24:30] like this. I don't know. I'm fascinated

[24:33] to see it. Uh I know like, you know,

[24:35] when DraftKings and FanDuel came out

[24:36] with their own version of the prediction

[24:38] markets that like I know there was a

[24:40] DraftKings trading and like could they

[24:42] use it? I'm not 100% sure what this

[24:45] looks like. Um but it' be fascinating to

[24:48] see. And regardless, I don't know if

[24:51] that you'd have to be in the trading

[24:53] room, right? It's like why

[24:56] would I want to be utilizing this in the

[25:01] long in the long term where if I'm not

[25:04] running like an arbing

[25:06] like a low vig book or something like

[25:08] why I I I don't and it's like it's not

[25:11] going to allow me like some of the

[25:12] biggest hits that FanDuel and DraftKings

[25:14] have taken are usually on like SGP like

[25:17] like I think of like the Draymond SGP

[25:20] something like that. It's usually never

[25:22] on something that would be h like you

[25:26] would want to hedge out of like you know

[25:28] Raiders minus six with you know the

[25:30] other side where I'm going to do it low

[25:31] big on Kelshi. So I don't know I would

[25:34] be interested to see like who's actually

[25:35] going to utilize this.

[25:37] >> Okay interesting thoughts there. Go

[25:39] ahead Mike.

[25:40] >> I think I so here would be my

[25:42] understanding of it. If you're

[25:43] DraftKings and you can charge one price

[25:47] and instead of, you know, back in the

[25:49] old days, you would just move the line

[25:50] entice betterers on the other side and

[25:52] take it. If you're DraftKings now,

[25:54] you've made your, you know, your pool so

[25:56] square that you can basically charge the

[25:58] price and it doesn't matter to the

[26:00] people betting. So, you charge as much

[26:01] as possible and then when your risk

[26:03] profile gets a little bit too high, you

[26:05] can kind of lay it off at a better

[26:07] price. So essentially now DraftKings

[26:10] becomes the arbor who is creating a

[26:11] market where they're taking one price

[26:13] selling it off at a cheaper price to

[26:15] someone who's still getting a good

[26:16] number. So they're happy to take the

[26:17] number. DraftKings is happy to take the

[26:20] action and just kind of essentially get

[26:21] a cut along the way as as they pass this

[26:24] off. So it makes sense. I, you know, may

[26:26] have heard of a trading firm that would,

[26:29] you know, if one book got a little bit

[26:31] over at skis would, you know, take a bet

[26:33] from said book and like be like the

[26:36] person maybe they knew each other very

[26:38] well and they would be like, "Hey, this

[26:40] isn't a great like bet for me. I'm not

[26:42] getting one over on you. I just want to

[26:43] lay it off." And you, you know, it's

[26:45] kind of a win-win scenario. So, if

[26:46] you're DraftKings, you've built this

[26:48] square customer pool. Why not charge

[26:50] them a ton and then lay off the risk

[26:53] that you're uncomfortable taking back at

[26:56] a, you know, a better price for you to

[26:58] another user,

[27:00] >> right? Interesting stuff there. Isaac,

[27:02] go ahead.

[27:03] >> I think a couple things. First is that I

[27:05] can't imagine they'd be using this for

[27:06] kind of even odds bets that often. As

[27:09] Joey said, like a lot of it is SGP. I'm

[27:12] thinking of maybe it was last year, the

[27:13] year before where it was like the

[27:15] Simpsons from 20 years ago had predicted

[27:17] an exact Super Bowl score and you had

[27:20] all of these people betting on an exact

[27:22] Super Bowl exact, right? And so the

[27:24] price is like super it's it's a minus EV

[27:26] bet, but I remember, you know, some

[27:28] sports books had something like, you

[27:30] know, $50 million liabilities on like

[27:32] one exacto or something like that. And

[27:35] in an instance like that, it's like,

[27:36] okay, yeah, you can just hedge that off

[27:38] super cleanly. My other thought to

[27:40] Joey's question about legality, I'd be

[27:41] curious how this factors into taxes for

[27:44] the sports books given that in so many

[27:46] states they're paying such high taxes

[27:48] that like how this factors in. And then

[27:50] the last thing is like how do you know

[27:53] that they're using this to hedge, right?

[27:55] Like okay, sure, maybe they get a great

[27:56] they have like an overloaded position.

[27:58] and they want to hedge out, but like

[28:00] maybe you know you're DraftKings or

[28:01] FanDuel and you have some insider info

[28:04] or you get some sharp early action and

[28:06] you know a bet is really good and you're

[28:08] just like, "Oh, we can just if we're if

[28:10] we're getting this great deal on Kali,

[28:11] not that they would do this, but it's

[28:13] like maybe they could just try to, you

[28:14] know, post a giant amount of liquidity

[28:16] to get a really good price." I don't

[28:18] know. It I I think that kind of thinks

[28:20] of it as like an old trading firm

[28:23] essentially though. like these DK and

[28:24] FanDuel like they're not trying to

[28:26] trade. They're trying to create a

[28:27] software product that gets people to

[28:29] play a game. So, I think it's like it's

[28:31] different in a way that people are like,

[28:32] you know, what if they're going to take

[28:33] these positions and it's like if you're

[28:35] DraftKings and FanDuel, you don't find

[28:37] your edge in, you know, essentially

[28:39] being able to price things well. You

[28:41] find your edge in being able to offer a

[28:42] market that gets people, you know,

[28:44] dopamine rushes at a certain time. So I

[28:46] think that like before if they did

[28:48] something like this like Penny would eat

[28:50] them up but now that it's kind of moved

[28:51] into more wck books I don't think that

[28:53] they're necessarily you know this is

[28:55] kind of a safer angle for them and Kow's

[28:58] saying hey we'll we'll you know price it

[29:00] better effectively. I mean also yeah to

[29:02] also you know like we have seen sports

[29:04] books DraftKings in particular talk

[29:06] about customerfriendly outcomes right

[29:08] like you could you could imagine

[29:09] DraftKings being like okay can we get

[29:11] basically a no big price on like every

[29:14] Sunday whatever a 10 leg parlay of all

[29:17] of the favorites covering because if

[29:18] that happens we're going to get just

[29:20] destroyed and you pay whatever like I

[29:22] don't know $100,000 and you just have

[29:24] that parlay on on Kshi at a low I could

[29:27] imagine that being a very sort of

[29:28] long-term plus EV for a sports

[29:31] Hey, a lot of interesting perspectives

[29:33] there. We'd love to hear your

[29:34] perspective on something like this in

[29:35] the comments section down below. I know

[29:37] I always ask, but we did generally do

[29:38] enjoy the feedback and we'll get some

[29:40] comments a little bit later on in

[29:41] today's show. Not before we talk about

[29:44] priming strategies, potentially actual

[29:46] priming strategies. We talked earlier

[29:48] about engagement bait. I think this is a

[29:50] great example of it. Fantastic

[29:51] engagement bait here from ROI guy 123

[29:54] says 98% of account priming strategies

[29:56] are [ __ ] Some people have it

[29:58] figured out, but you probably aren't one

[30:01] of them. With no followup, uh, somebody

[30:03] asked, "Okay, tell us the 2% that

[30:05] works." He says, "Wish I knew." So,

[30:08] putting up this big proclamation with

[30:10] nothing to back it up just so people

[30:12] reply, asking you to back it up and then

[30:15] refusing to do so. Excellent, excellent

[30:17] work in the vague posting era we live

[30:19] in. Mike, you wanted to go first in this

[30:21] one, so give us your take on this. I

[30:23] don't know if you have good ones to

[30:24] share, but go ahead. I have gotten a

[30:28] message, this happened, you know, maybe

[30:29] a couple weeks ago. I got message from

[30:31] both these people, very, very good

[30:33] bettors. One person was like, you know,

[30:35] oh, that's great news. You can leave

[30:36] your account open. You'll get great

[30:38] screen time. You know, make it look like

[30:40] you're doing all these things. And then

[30:42] the other person messaged me and said,

[30:44] nah, none of that [ __ ] matters. Just go

[30:46] ahead and try to beat the computer algo

[30:47] that has you plugged in at X ROI. So, I

[30:50] think there's really kind of differing

[30:52] minds on how important all the stuff is.

[30:55] The number one rule is you have to beat

[30:57] the comp. If you can't beat the

[30:58] computer, you can't beat the algo, um,

[31:00] you know, then you have no chance. Uh,

[31:02] beating the person is much harder when

[31:04] they're looking at your profile. But

[31:06] yeah, I think that people probably get

[31:09] too specific and too in the details of

[31:11] these bets. If you have to think if

[31:12] you're someone who's looking at someone

[31:15] if they're sharp or not, you're going in

[31:17] with the mindset that they're not

[31:18] because 98% of people aren't sharp. So,

[31:21] I think sometimes people are like, "Oh,

[31:22] I'll create this like strategy in my

[31:24] head of all these things when it's

[31:26] someone kind of glancing it over and

[31:28] looking at a bunch of numbers like

[31:29] expected ROI, things like that." So, I

[31:31] think people probably over complicate

[31:33] it. Uh, I'd probably, you know, keep it

[31:35] simple, stupid is the best strategy for

[31:37] this. Make bets that look like they

[31:39] don't make bets that look like they're

[31:41] clearly good and, you know, try to beat

[31:43] the expected numbers.

[31:46] >> Okay, interesting take there, Kadesh. A

[31:49] lot of what you've done is is avoiding

[31:51] limits and being able to continue to get

[31:52] down. So, do you have any take on this

[31:55] account priming stuff?

[31:56] >> Yeah. I mean, I think a lot of the

[31:57] information that's out there is probably

[31:59] dated. Like, if you pull up like, you

[32:02] know, like a Captain Jack video from a

[32:03] few years ago or something like that, I

[32:05] don't think a lot of that's going to be

[32:06] applicable because it's not it's not

[32:08] static, right? Like books get better at

[32:11] identifying action and kind of like as

[32:14] PB saying, some of like the the

[32:15] algorithm stuff that's out there now to

[32:17] auto limit. doesn't take somebody to go

[32:19] in there and manually limit like it used

[32:21] to. Um, so I think a lot of the old

[32:24] stuff is probably

[32:27] I the biggest one is just lose and lose

[32:31] on not on stuff that doesn't get CLV,

[32:35] right? like lose on bet someum square

[32:37] market stuff and lose early which is now

[32:40] I know people want to a lot of the

[32:42] priming stuff is people want to find a

[32:45] way to prime but not actually like lose

[32:47] the money like they want to like I want

[32:49] to prime and look square but not

[32:51] actually lose so in today's day I think

[32:54] a lot of the risk management is good

[32:55] enough where you probably got to dump a

[32:58] bit upfront and you got to do it in a

[33:01] way that you're not getting closing line

[33:03] value you're not beating any markets,

[33:05] you're not like, you know, looking like

[33:07] uh you have a clue. Um, and that may,

[33:12] you know, set you up in a decent spot.

[33:14] I'm kind of the inverse opinion of just

[33:16] like I don't do a ton of, uh, account

[33:19] priming anymore. Either someone comes to

[33:21] me with an account that's already

[33:23] primed, then I might say,

[33:26] uh, I'm Joey Kesh. I don't participate

[33:28] in those activities. Have a good day,

[33:30] sir. You know, that that might be

[33:31] different. that uh like actually doing

[33:35] the priming now because you don't know

[33:39] right like you don't as kind of PB

[33:40] alluded to you don't know the secret

[33:43] sauce exactly of what you need to do so

[33:45] a lot of times you can try and prime or

[33:48] the efforts that go into priming might

[33:50] be futile now

[33:51] >> okay Isaac

[33:53] >> yeah I completely on completely agree

[33:55] with Joey I think it just never it never

[33:57] stays the same like I've had instances

[34:00] first of all going back to what Mike

[34:01] said I've had People tell me the most

[34:02] crazy things. I literally knew a guy who

[34:05] set up a bot to like log into all of his

[34:07] accounts at 2 a.m. and just keep

[34:09] scrolling. All of these things. I think

[34:11] as as Joey said, like once they catch

[34:14] on, the strategy no longer works. So for

[34:15] example, I had something that I was

[34:18] doing and with some I know others were

[34:19] doing as well and it was working really

[34:21] great and then you know one of those

[34:23] accounts I was very primed ended up

[34:24] winning a bunch of money and then

[34:26] clearly some trader looked at that sort

[34:28] of tracked the strategy going backwards

[34:29] and then going forward we tried the same

[34:31] priming strategy and the account just

[34:33] got cut very quickly. Uh, I actually

[34:36] think now the the best answer, as Joey

[34:39] said, is if you have a bunch of

[34:41] accounts, naturally some of them are

[34:44] going to lose, right? So, let's say

[34:45] theoretically, not that I would ever do

[34:46] this, but let's say someone had like 20

[34:48] accounts, right? And your first 50 bets

[34:52] on all of them on maybe a few of these

[34:54] accounts, you're just going to get

[34:55] absolutely buried very quickly. Uh, and

[34:58] so once you've gotten buried on those

[35:00] accounts based purely on variance,

[35:02] assuming you're not betting some really

[35:04] sort of sharplooking stuff, then on

[35:05] those accounts, you basically say,

[35:07] "Okay, I'm going to care more about what

[35:09] I put into this and priming because it's

[35:11] already down so much to extend the

[35:12] lifeline." But that only works if you're

[35:14] dealing with, you know, a lot of

[35:15] accounts for the start. So it's it's not

[35:17] like you just have one account and you

[35:18] go in. It's Yeah. I mean, the classic

[35:20] things of of you just have to lose,

[35:21] right? That's that's the thing. And no

[35:22] one wants to do that. I also I think

[35:25] being okay kind of maybe losing one

[35:29] account or two is a big advantage and

[35:31] being okay like Joy said nobody wants to

[35:33] everybody's like the okay let me prime

[35:35] this in the most efficient way possible

[35:37] bet into zero hold markets and stuff

[35:38] it's like okay like that's only going to

[35:40] get you so far you have to dump some

[35:42] money if you want it to get labeled that

[35:44] way and like you should always be

[35:46] keeping an eye on how much am I you know

[35:48] am I about to go into positive territory

[35:50] where am I at now you know how sharp

[35:52] have I lately. I think that people just

[35:55] want to like a little bit of priming can

[35:58] go a long way in terms of actually being

[36:01] willing to lose the money and being

[36:02] like, "Okay, you know, I lost this one."

[36:04] Like, it's not going to do anything.

[36:05] And, you know, always always increase

[36:07] the variance. The difference between

[36:09] when I was profiling people, the

[36:11] difference between someone who has no

[36:13] [ __ ] idea and is super wreck and

[36:15] someone who's super sharp when you're

[36:16] looking at them, sometimes it actually

[36:18] is like, "Oh, they're betting huge

[36:20] amounts right at tip." like that's

[36:22] either a very good better or a very bad

[36:23] better, you know, things like that. I

[36:25] think that sometimes people think that,

[36:27] oh, you know, sharp beds and wreck

[36:29] betterers look so different. They

[36:31] actually when you're just seeing the bet

[36:32] coming through, they actually look kind

[36:34] of similar in ways.

[36:35] >> Okay. Interesting. I want to ask a few.

[36:38] Okay. I'm I'm going to bring up a few so

[36:41] supposed priming strategies and I want

[36:42] you guys to quickly Yes or no. Do you

[36:46] think this is effective? So, scrolling

[36:48] through markets for like 10 plus

[36:51] minutes, just scrolling through markets.

[36:53] >> No,

[36:53] >> no,

[36:54] >> probably not. Okay. Um,

[36:58] taking what would be like a normal good

[37:01] play and disguising it in an SGP with

[37:04] maybe like let's say two plus EV plays

[37:07] and a minus EV play in an SGP to try and

[37:09] wear off the scent.

[37:11] >> Yes.

[37:12] >> Generally, yes. I mean, they do track

[37:14] like legs of your SGP now, but still

[37:16] better than not doing it. Yes.

[37:18] >> Yeah.

[37:18] >> Okay. Uh, betting props right at post.

[37:22] Even like plus EV props, but getting

[37:24] them right at post.

[37:25] >> If they're unders, no. If they're overs,

[37:27] maybe

[37:28] >> if they're straight, still not a ton. I

[37:30] think you have to parlay everything now.

[37:32] >> Yep.

[37:32] >> Okay. Interesting. All right. Maybe

[37:34] we'll get

[37:35] >> one one more thing on that. Like to go

[37:37] back to Mike's point, you can kind of

[37:39] manufacture losses. So like the overall

[37:41] net of the account is very big. So let's

[37:43] say you have an account that maybe was

[37:44] down a bunch and you like crawled back

[37:46] and now you're at about even and you've

[37:48] been betting sharp stuff. You're

[37:49] worried. If you find like a no hold

[37:51] market, you know, just bet like the

[37:54] entire balance on one side, you can

[37:55] hedge it out on the other side. Maybe

[37:57] you lose like 1% or whatever, but then

[37:59] all they're going to see is that one

[38:00] bet. If it wins, it looks square. If it

[38:02] loses, you're huge in the red on that

[38:04] account. So it's big. And and that's

[38:05] what I've done a bunch if I've been up

[38:06] on a lot of accounts. just find a

[38:08] roughly zero bet and just like dump the

[38:10] whole balance or something and hedge it

[38:11] out hopefully.

[38:12] >> Yeah, I've seen you, you know, dump a

[38:14] lot of balances even when the account

[38:15] wasn't looking good.

[38:19] >> No comment. All right. I I'd love to

[38:21] hear any strategies you have in mind

[38:23] perhaps in the comment section down

[38:24] below. Uh we're going to get to some of

[38:26] your comments in just a moment here, but

[38:27] I need to tell you about the hammer

[38:29] drop, the newsletter we have here at the

[38:31] hammer bag because if unless you've been

[38:33] living under a rock, you would know

[38:35] about it. here. We have a fantastic

[38:37] newsletter here and it's been going all

[38:38] throughout the football season. It's

[38:40] going to continue into the off

[38:41] seasonason as well. But

[38:43] that means we've got other stuff coming

[38:45] at you. Alex is going to continue with

[38:47] his hockey thoughts on Wednesdays and

[38:49] Mondays will be packed with NFL news,

[38:51] free agent rankings, draft stuff, and

[38:53] much more. Go to the hammer.bet to

[38:55] subscribe, and there's a link in the

[38:56] description as well to get involved

[38:58] again with the hammer drop. Now, we get

[39:00] into the comments from the previous

[39:02] week's episode. We talked a lot about

[39:04] the coin flip and we have Mark mar

[39:07] marketkedly angry who said flip was

[39:10] joking about the coin toss thing but a

[39:12] group of researchers did 350,757

[39:17] coin toss and found that a coin is

[39:19] slightly more likely to land on the same

[39:21] side it started pre flip. I actually

[39:24] have seen studies that said uh the other

[39:27] side of the flip. Um, we did talk about

[39:30] how the head side of a of a standard

[39:32] American quarter is a little bit heavier

[39:34] than the tail side. So, uh, technically

[39:37] tails is a bit more likely because the

[39:39] head side is heavier. But I don't I like

[39:42] how he included such a specific 350, 757

[39:46] coin to, but didn't showcase how much

[39:48] more likely it is to land on this side

[39:50] because is it actually something worth

[39:53] looking into? But uh for a coin toss, if

[39:56] it's uh plus 100 each side, are we

[39:58] getting it, guys? You think we're

[39:59] getting an edge on

[40:00] >> the study? This was helpful because it's

[40:02] easy to look up this study. It was 51%.

[40:06] >> I've seen Yeah. seen studies saying

[40:08] opposite things. I will say I remember

[40:10] when I was maybe like six or seven,

[40:12] there was a year I probably spent months

[40:14] just flipping coins trying to figure out

[40:16] if you could beat it. Uh I didn't have

[40:18] anything better to do, but uh pretty

[40:20] sure it's about 50/50. The rest of you

[40:22] guys were talking with your friends and

[40:24] things. Isaac was in a room by himself

[40:26] flipping a coin. You got to 5050 by the

[40:28] end of it. Finally,

[40:30] >> 350. You do it 350,000 times.

[40:32] >> I did it a lot. I tried all sorts of

[40:35] techniques. It was tough.

[40:36] >> I mean, in a we're in an industry here

[40:38] where we're we're so fixated on these

[40:40] tiny percentages, these tiny margins.

[40:43] Shouldn't in theory we be betting on

[40:45] tails every time if it was a coin flip?

[40:47] >> Hold on. I got a great, you know, coin

[40:50] flip, rock, paper, scissors, priming

[40:52] strategy for you guys, merging the two

[40:53] fields together.

[40:54] >> Well, rock paper scissors is not random.

[40:56] >> Well, it's you can't win or lose it on

[40:58] purpose. Um, so what I have been doing

[41:02] and have done, you know, maybe the past

[41:04] decade or so, whenever I face my brother

[41:06] and rock, paper, scissors, I've been

[41:07] priming with rock, I go rock every

[41:09] single time. And then when I when it's

[41:11] stuff I don't care about, and then when

[41:13] I really need the win, I switch it all

[41:15] of a sudden and get him. So he always

[41:18] goes paper because he thinks I'm going

[41:19] rock because I don't have this bias.

[41:21] Boom. Hit scissors when I need it. Get

[41:22] the dub.

[41:23] >> So that's a, you know, a little trick

[41:25] for you guys there.

[41:26] >> That that's that's actually quite smart.

[41:27] It's a good plus EV move.

[41:28] >> I remember there's there's like a

[41:30] classic there's a very viral clip of

[41:32] Greg Maddox saying he did that where he

[41:34] was like in the regular season and he

[41:36] was playing he was pitching against

[41:38] someone and he threw him like some

[41:40] crappy change up. So then the guy hit a

[41:41] homer off of it and then when they they

[41:43] they faced each other again in the

[41:44] playoffs, he threw like the same pitch

[41:45] but it cut differently. Yeah, you got to

[41:47] got to always be thinking thinking long

[41:49] term.

[41:50] >> Okay, great insight there. You're always

[41:53] always looking for an edge. Uh getting

[41:55] to the next comment here, we have multi-

[41:59] menu

[42:00] who says if you want to originate a data

[42:02] data heavy sport like MLB or NFL that AI

[42:05] is a must. There was so much data to

[42:07] synthesize, but like you said, it's how

[42:10] you use it. Not every data point is

[42:12] important and some are false flags. Um,

[42:15] Mike, you bet neither of these things.

[42:17] Uh, I don't think anyone here does a lot

[42:19] of MLB or NFL betting, but you do

[42:21] college football betting and there's

[42:23] perhaps even more to look into in

[42:24] something like that. So, you spoke last

[42:26] week about the importance of AI for for

[42:28] some of the processes.

[42:29] >> I use AI all the time. I think it's like

[42:32] very I'm not like an AI doubter at all.

[42:35] The idea that you have to use AI to

[42:37] originate NFL or MLB to get an edge is

[42:39] wrong. Like you can there's very simp

[42:41] there's many simple methods that are

[42:43] beating you know Sunday you know highest

[42:47] limits no but like the idea that you

[42:49] can't beat it with you know there's

[42:51] somebody out there who is beating Sunday

[42:52] openers using an Excel model for sure.

[42:54] So I don't think that you need AI and I

[42:56] think a lot of times people

[42:58] overexaggerate the complexity of their

[43:00] model because they think it makes them

[43:01] you know sound more sophisticated.

[43:04] Isaac, uh, you you dabble with AI in any

[43:06] of your processes?

[43:08] >> Yeah, all the time. I mean, I will say

[43:09] there's something really beautiful about

[43:11] like having to plug it all in in Excel

[43:13] and and figure it all out. Um, but but

[43:16] yeah, it's incredibly useful. There's so

[43:18] much data out there, especially uh, you

[43:20] know, trends get a lot of hate, but if

[43:22] you want to back test trends, it's

[43:24] really easy now with all sorts of data

[43:27] sets and you can just put it in AI. You

[43:29] know, Mike's a huge fan. I heard he was

[43:30] actually dating an AI, actually. Yeah.

[43:33] got dumped recently by it. So

[43:35] devastating. Devastating. Uh last

[43:37] comment. Sport freak 2414 says, "How do

[43:39] sports books balance the liability of

[43:41] increased wreck flow for the Super Bowl?

[43:44] For example, heavy wreck flow on over

[43:46] versus sharps on the under. Any anybody

[43:50] I don't know who to go to best for this

[43:52] one. Anybody have an opinion on this

[43:53] one?" There's no that's one of the most

[43:56] like this kind of falls into the uh the

[43:58] the sports book wants action on, you

[44:01] know, 50-50 action on both sides

[44:02] category where it all b when you're

[44:06] taking when you're the bet taker and

[44:09] you're getting plus 110,

[44:11] it all balances out in the end. And so

[44:14] when all of these bets you're getting

[44:16] plus 110 or plus 115 or plus 107

[44:18] whatever you're charging on the vig

[44:20] there typically as for most books is not

[44:25] going to be any need to balance

[44:27] liability. You're you will naturally

[44:30] balance liability through your other

[44:32] offerings. So rarely you might take you

[44:36] might hear of a story of a book takes

[44:38] they have a casino whale they'll take

[44:40] Sports Circuit does this a little bit

[44:42] sometimes they'll take two million on

[44:43] the money line and then offer the best

[44:45] price on the opposite side money line to

[44:48] balance some of that action but that's

[44:50] rare for the most part it just all comes

[44:52] out in the wash.

[44:53] >> Yeah I mean Jake Paul fight was like an

[44:55] example where clearly the books were

[44:56] like really levered up and you know what

[44:58] they did they ate the risk and just said

[44:59] give us more give us more. Uh now events

[45:02] before there were only so many events,

[45:04] only so many bets like and before books

[45:07] really didn't have the ability to

[45:08] profile like they do now. So you were

[45:10] taking a ton of money. You didn't know

[45:12] who it was coming from. Sharp, not

[45:13] sharp. So you just kind of move the line

[45:15] where the money took you. Now that you

[45:17] profiled everybody, you're confident

[45:18] you're not getting a bunch of sharps

[45:20] hammering you. You just eat the risk and

[45:22] eventually all play out and now they can

[45:24] hedge it on couch. So

[45:26] >> there you go. Um, and also for like

[45:29] stuff like the Super Bowl, I feel like

[45:30] the amount of horribly priced things

[45:33] they could put up, like will a running

[45:36] back break the rushing record for the

[45:38] Super Bowl? Will there be two kicks that

[45:40] hit an upright during the game? These

[45:43] can be these can get like high enough

[45:45] odds that Wreck Better will look at

[45:47] like, oo, look at that number, but some

[45:50] some of the stuff is horrifically priced

[45:51] as well where like it's super minus EV,

[45:53] but it's not recognizable. So, I feel

[45:55] like you're able to clean up on some of

[45:56] those markets as well. Uh, I don't know

[45:58] if there's a lot of liquidity in those,

[46:00] but with so much volume, I I think

[46:03] there's enough to be able to ensure your

[46:05] your Super Bowl will be profitable.

[46:07] Anyways, we can continue on with the

[46:09] show in just a second here, but let's

[46:11] take another pause here because we want

[46:12] to talk about Bedstamp's prediction

[46:14] market tool.

[46:15] >> If you're a better building your own

[46:16] models and you're not watching Khi and

[46:18] the rest of the market in one unified

[46:20] feed, you're probably missing edges.

[46:22] Prediction data aggregates and

[46:23] normalizes data from Khi, major

[46:26] prediction markets, and sports books

[46:28] into a single API built for back testing

[46:30] and live trading. You get live prices

[46:32] and historical data in one clean schema

[46:35] with no data engineering headache. If

[46:37] you want a trial key, you'll need to

[46:39] book a quick demo. Click the link in the

[46:41] description or scan the QR code to get

[46:43] your trial key. Next up, we have a tweet

[46:45] from Calvin and Hobo, who was

[46:47] interviewed not too long ago on this

[46:48] channel. a great interview that I think

[46:49] you should go check out by heading to

[46:51] the channel page. Of course, wait until

[46:53] you're done this episode of Circle Back

[46:54] to do that. But he says, "I have no idea

[46:56] how these polls are equal." And he had

[46:58] two polls recently. One of them he says,

[47:01] "Would you bet against a very drunk

[47:04] stranger for what they consider to be a

[47:06] lot of money would and would adversely

[47:09] affect their life if they lost if you

[47:10] had a 50% edge? Bet would be on an

[47:13] exchange. No stiff risk. Twitter poll

[47:15] answers are anonymous to get people to

[47:17] vote." And he asked another question

[47:19] that had pretty much the exact same

[47:21] results here. He says, "Would you bet on

[47:23] a dog fight if you had a 50% edge, you

[47:26] could get down as much as you wanted, it

[47:27] was legal, and no one would ever know

[47:30] unless you told someone." So, it's just

[47:32] over 50% 53% yes for both. Low30s, 31

[47:38] and 33% for no, and 15% or so on show

[47:42] results. So the majority would yes bet

[47:46] against a very drunk stranger even it

[47:48] would adversely affect their life and

[47:50] over 50% said yes

[47:53] I would bet on a dog fight if I had a

[47:55] 50% edge. So he says completely baffled.

[47:57] I thought the dog fight one would be

[47:59] like 20% yes and the drunk one 80%. I've

[48:02] done the drunk one before. I've played

[48:04] poker but I can't even imagine betting a

[48:06] dog fight. That's horrifying. Yet here

[48:08] they are equal. Um, let's go to Isaac

[48:11] first on this one. Uh, you know, I guess

[48:15] you can share if you feel like it which

[48:16] sides you would have voted on or if you

[48:18] did vote in these polls, but it just

[48:20] feels like sports betterers, it's a

[48:23] ruthless industry where anyone wants an

[48:24] edge.

[48:25] >> Yeah. I mean, there's a he Calvin

[48:27] mentioned poker. A lot of the comments

[48:29] were about poker. I've had sort of

[48:31] similar experiences playing poker.

[48:33] Although I'll say if you're playing for

[48:35] decent stakes and someone's really drunk

[48:38] and they're really whailing around, the

[48:39] vast majority of the time that person is

[48:41] very wealthy and can afford it and once

[48:44] or twice I've been in instances where

[48:46] the person was clearly playing above

[48:47] their head and you know, not to pat

[48:49] myself on the own on my own back, but

[48:51] like I' I've basically been like, you

[48:53] know, you got to got to go home. Um, and

[48:55] like actually, you know, cost myself

[48:56] some of you there because I actually

[48:58] think it's it's it's just rare. Most of

[49:00] the time the person whailing for giant

[49:01] amounts in poker games is is pretty

[49:03] wealthy and can afford it. On the dog

[49:05] fight it's it's tough. Like I'm I'm an

[49:07] animal lover. I would never want to be

[49:09] at a dog fight. But I I think it was

[49:11] Kirk who mentioned this in the comments.

[49:12] He's like look in in the dog fight like

[49:14] it's happening regardless, right? It's

[49:15] not like me not betting on it is is

[49:18] going to change the outcome or stop the

[49:20] dog fight. Uh you know maybe you can

[49:22] give a percentage of your profits to an

[49:23] animal charity or something like that.

[49:25] But I think I'd be a no for the poker

[49:27] and as an animal lover, I'd be 5050 on

[49:30] the dog fight.

[49:31] >> All right. Uh Kenishh, are you ruthless?

[49:34] Are you are you taking the plus CV

[49:36] position on both of these?

[49:38] >> Yeah. I mean, obviously, this is a

[49:39] double yes for me. I mean, who who you

[49:41] talking to here? But I mean, this is

[49:43] like this is the same thing as like

[49:45] talking about uh like you can bet on

[49:47] bombing Iran or the Ukraine Russia war.

[49:50] What the how is that any different? Like

[49:52] I if I had some inside info or a huge

[49:54] edge that you know uh we're going to

[49:57] bomb Iran. Yes, people are going to die.

[50:00] Am I still going to bet it? Yeah. What

[50:01] am I g What am I going to do about that?

[50:03] Like there's nothing I'm I totally agree

[50:05] with Kirk here. The dog fight's going to

[50:08] happen whether I win or not. And hey,

[50:11] maybe I can win enough money to donate,

[50:13] you know, some to to the local dog

[50:14] shelter or something. You know, that

[50:15] type of thing.

[50:16] >> We know we know you're not donating

[50:17] [ __ ]

[50:19] >> I mean, I'm not really not. But if I'm

[50:20] saying you could like if you wanted to

[50:22] be like a uh you know good Samaritan

[50:24] there there you could do something like

[50:25] that. But uh yeah it the only scenarios

[50:29] would be if you can actually have like a

[50:32] tangible impact. Um but for the most

[50:35] part you just yeah you take the edge.

[50:38] >> So uh Kirk by just Joey referenced that

[50:41] Kirk Evans in the comment said that the

[50:43] fight's happening anyways. You may as

[50:45] well bet it if you've got if you've got

[50:47] such an edge. Mike over to you. any of

[50:49] your thoughts on this?

[50:51] >> So, I guess it depends kind of

[50:52] theoretically how you take the question.

[50:54] If you are betting this in a vacuum and

[50:57] yeah, it has no effect on anything. I

[51:00] think that's fine. But like in reality,

[51:02] if you're betting on a dog fight, like

[51:04] people who are fighting dogs aren't

[51:06] doing it for the love of X's and O's of

[51:07] dog fighting. Like they're doing it

[51:09] because of the gambling. So, in a way,

[51:10] you're supporting, you know, dog

[51:12] fighting rings by doing it. Like in

[51:15] theory, if we say, "Hey, like it's just

[51:18] uh happening and the your bet won't

[51:21] affect future outcomes." Yeah, you're

[51:23] not actually causing harm in this

[51:24] situation. You're taking advantage of a

[51:26] harmful situation. So, I understand it.

[51:28] So, I think there's like a little nuance

[51:30] in that because I took it as if I'm

[51:32] betting on this, then this makes the

[51:33] next dog fight more likely. Um,

[51:35] >> yeah. So, I kind of agree with you

[51:37] there. Uh, like if there's no

[51:39] preventative measures, then I I'd be yes

[51:41] on both. Uh but right, you're promoting

[51:43] it in the future. Something like this

[51:45] happening. Um I it's a supply and demand

[51:49] thing. Like if there's no demand to bet,

[51:51] there's not going to be the supply to be

[51:52] able to bet it. So, uh I I'm with you on

[51:54] that one. But again, it is a good

[51:56] showcase. People are ruthless in this

[51:58] industry. They they will do whatever

[52:00] they can to get an edge, and it seems

[52:02] like they will bet on anything to get an

[52:04] edge. Um,

[52:05] >> yeah. And with the Iran thing, I think

[52:07] it's different. Like, if you have no

[52:10] impact on the outcome or future bad

[52:12] things happening, you're not causing

[52:13] harm. I think that's one thing versus

[52:15] the other one, you're clearly causing a

[52:16] harm. So, like, I guess you could take

[52:18] the poll either way depending on how you

[52:20] want to, you know, interpret the

[52:22] question. Uh, the drunk one I think is

[52:24] interesting in that I don't know if I'm

[52:26] just drawing a line in the sand, but I

[52:27] feel like if somebody got really drunk

[52:30] and cost himself a non significant

[52:33] amount of money to themsel, I'm kind of

[52:35] like, hey, you know, you were gambling.

[52:36] Like that's a tax you pay for not like,

[52:38] you know, taking care of yourself. But

[52:41] once it gets to significant, then I

[52:43] start to have a problem with it. But at

[52:44] the same time, I don't have like if

[52:46] one's bad, it should be if one's bad,

[52:48] the other's worse. There isn't like

[52:51] they're just grades of the same thing,

[52:52] but yet I feel okay with one and not

[52:55] okay with the other.

[52:56] >> No, I don't I think I think there's a

[52:57] pretty clear difference like between

[52:59] someone losing an amount of money that

[53:01] doesn't matter to them and someone

[53:02] losing an amount of money that like

[53:03] really matters cuz you I mean in the

[53:05] same argument that you're encouraging

[53:07] more dog fights if you're in an example,

[53:10] poker is different if you're playing in

[53:12] person because you know if you say no,

[53:14] that person might not lose that money.

[53:15] if it's on an exchange, you know, you'll

[53:17] just have Mike gobbling up that

[53:18] liquidity. But I think that like to that

[53:20] point, if someone like loses a

[53:22] non-insignificant amount of money to

[53:24] them, there's a decent chance, you know,

[53:25] they spiral, they start chasing, and in

[53:27] the same way like you're potentially

[53:29] causing a huge amount of harm.

[53:32] >> Okay, another great one for the comment

[53:34] section where what would you do in these

[53:37] situations? Uh, second last topic on the

[53:40] show today. This one was brought up by

[53:42] Ted Frank at Ted Frank who said the re

[53:45] so the reason this polyarket prediction

[53:47] market which is on will Jesus Christ

[53:49] return before 2027 at the time of the

[53:52] screenshot it had a 5% chance. He said

[53:54] the reason it performing so insanely

[53:56] high is because there's a second market

[53:59] asking if this market will go above 5%.

[54:02] So I've called this marketion. people in

[54:05] the derivative market are manipulating

[54:08] this market which defeats the public

[54:10] policy case for prediction markets. I

[54:13] mean

[54:15] if you have this market and you want

[54:17] liquidity in this market I

[54:21] on the surface I haven't dug into it at

[54:23] all. I'd like you know I'd like an

[54:24] explanation. It feels like kind of smart

[54:27] to get liquidity into these markets does

[54:29] it not? Uh what do you guys think? Let's

[54:32] let's start with Kesh on this one. Uh,

[54:35] how do you feel about this?

[54:38] >> I mean, I just I loved uh like what I

[54:40] when I originally saw this bet, I was

[54:41] like, "Oh, what a completely stupid."

[54:43] But the fact that it's like uh, you

[54:45] know, like finding the next thing, like

[54:46] the next level grift. I love that some

[54:48] people like, you know, we're doing a

[54:49] little uh like, oh, we're going to

[54:50] manipulate this to get it. So, I don't

[54:53] know. Maybe I'm in the full uh, you

[54:55] know, every everything is just bettable

[54:58] now. Uh, maybe maybe I've been

[55:00] corrupted, but I don't. I like the fact

[55:02] that like there was like a little bit of

[55:03] an edge case here that uh people were

[55:06] able to go in and like oh we're going to

[55:07] manipulate this market to cash it on a

[55:08] different market.

[55:10] >> Uh Mike, how about yourself? Uh is this

[55:12] is this a bad thing that I'm not seeing?

[55:15] >> Yeah, it's terrible. You know, it's like

[55:17] the old line when a measure becomes a

[55:19] target, it ceases to be a good measure.

[55:20] When a market becomes a different

[55:22] market, it no longer is a reliable

[55:24] market. I mean, Hayek would be rolling

[55:26] over in his grave right now. I think

[55:28] that it's honestly like what are we

[55:30] doing? Like I don't understand the

[55:32] purpose of setting up that second

[55:34] market. How you can be like this is

[55:37] something that makes sense other than

[55:39] you're just creating something to be

[55:41] manipulated. And it's like then it's

[55:43] just becoming a game of slot machines.

[55:44] Like I know it sounds stupid, but I

[55:46] really think there is a difference

[55:47] between betting on something that is

[55:49] tangible in real life versus like

[55:52] madeup. Who can win this game of dumping

[55:55] crypto assets,

[55:56] >> right? Okay. How about you uh Isaac?

[55:59] There was so not in this market but

[56:01] there was some funny stuff happened that

[56:03] happened recently with like crypto

[56:05] markets on poly market as well where

[56:08] people were manipulating the underlying

[56:10] in a market where it was like is the is

[56:12] the price of crypto going to go up in

[56:14] the next hour or something like that.

[56:15] And basically what they did is they were

[56:17] able to manipulate the underlying for

[56:18] cheap enough and because there were so

[56:21] many bots trading the other market they

[56:24] were basically able to just manipulate

[56:27] all of those bots and just wipe them

[56:28] out. I think it was for like a few

[56:30] hundred thousand if I remember

[56:31] correctly. And like yeah, do I have a

[56:33] lot of sympathy for the people like

[56:34] running bots on Poly Market that got

[56:36] faked out and lost a bunch? Not really.

[56:39] At the same time, like if we're talking

[56:40] about these being legitimate financial

[56:42] instruments, uh, you know, is the the

[56:45] market is already absurd on its face.

[56:47] The fact that there's a derivative

[56:48] market just kind of I mean, it's pretty

[56:49] hilarious in my opinion, but yeah, it's

[56:51] not not a great case. I do respect like

[56:53] the game theory of it somewhat and I get

[56:55] why like I don't it's not that I'm like

[56:58] want to be oh like you know just hating

[57:00] I do think it's interesting but like it

[57:02] just kind of becomes a total mockery of

[57:05] some kind of product that you're selling

[57:06] if you're selling derivatives of a

[57:08] different derivative that grades and

[57:09] whatever and like now if we're using

[57:12] these as a predictor of truth I have no

[57:13] idea if Jesus Christ is coming back this

[57:15] year market

[57:16] >> I mean I will say like there similar

[57:18] things have happened and do happen in

[57:20] sports books right like especially

[57:22] especially if you're talking about

[57:22] instances where you have accounts that

[57:26] can get down differing amounts and you

[57:28] can spend a little bit to move one

[57:29] market and then you sort of smash it

[57:31] back with the other market or if it's

[57:33] like a derivative I remember I believe

[57:35] it was a risk of ruin where he talked

[57:36] about like betting $100 on like an MVP

[57:40] market they move the whole market to

[57:41] increase his cash out value on that like

[57:43] all sorts of sort of things you can do

[57:44] with derivative markets here but yeah

[57:46] it's tricky you got to be careful

[57:48] >> yeah I I have certainly moved uh you

[57:51] know I had a place where you could bet

[57:52] one side of a bet and it would auto move

[57:55] it a ton and then you could parlay. So

[57:57] you could like move all three lines with

[57:59] single bets and then parlay the other

[58:00] way and essentially create like this

[58:02] weird hedge thing um because our auto

[58:04] move was broke. So like yeah I guess you

[58:06] take advantage of it but it seems like

[58:08] that was like a side quest of the main

[58:11] thing. Now it's becoming the main thing

[58:13] which I think is kind of fundamentally

[58:14] different.

[58:15] >> You know just like Joey we're all here

[58:16] just trying to get an edge. So you know

[58:18] whatever whatever floats your boat. If

[58:19] you can get an edge go for it I guess.

[58:20] >> Yeah. Yeah, that

[58:23] this is like such a silly mark. Like who

[58:25] who's going to [ __ ] bet the yes on

[58:27] this? Like genuinely like

[58:30] >> the word of God who want to know if we

[58:32] can't call it a truth prediction market.

[58:34] If I can't learn whether Jesus is coming

[58:37] back uh in 2027.

[58:40] So he has all of next year to do it. Oh,

[58:41] before 2027. Thank God. Okay.

[58:44] >> Time's ticking. Jesus. Um,

[58:48] but I I think like markets like bet

[58:50] online posts markets like this and it's

[58:52] usually like a promotional tactic. This

[58:55] is likely being employed in a similar

[58:57] fashion here. But in order for like to

[58:59] use this as a promo, there needs to be

[59:00] liquidity in it. And now they can take

[59:03] this market and go, "Oh my goodness,

[59:04] there's a five." They say there's a 5%

[59:06] chance traders are saying there's a 5%

[59:08] chance this is like such like I

[59:11] understand where you're coming from

[59:13] where like this is this this probably

[59:15] shouldn't be a thing. But I can

[59:16] completely understand why the prediction

[59:19] market itself is posting something like

[59:20] this. This is fantastic promotion for

[59:22] them to have a market up like this. And

[59:25] >> it just it makes it look like you're a

[59:27] joke of a thing. Like it's just the

[59:29] snake is eating itself here so badly

[59:31] that like nobody like when people when

[59:33] you go out to regulators and you say,

[59:35] "Hey, this has financial utility and the

[59:37] person says, "Hey, can you please

[59:39] explain to me why your Jesus market

[59:41] that's been manipulated to [ __ ] has

[59:42] financial utility?" It's going to be a

[59:44] tough sell.

[59:45] >> Sure, I'm sure that's been part of the

[59:48] thought process, but if you're using a

[59:50] prediction market, you're not going to

[59:52] see this and go, "That's it for me. I'm

[59:54] I'm tapped out on this one." If you're

[59:56] not using prediction market, you might

[59:58] now use one because you see something

[59:59] like this.

[60:00] >> I mean, I think it's important to

[60:01] recognize show sponsor Khi, CFTC

[60:04] regulated, does not offer markets like

[60:05] this. So, let's uh let's give them some

[60:07] uh credit where credit is due.

[60:09] >> All right.

[60:11] Uh we'll move on with the show. We got

[60:12] one more topic to go, but before we get

[60:15] there, word about the Discord we have at

[60:17] the Hammer Betting Network because if

[60:18] you're not in it already, you are

[60:20] missing out. There's over 1,800 members.

[60:22] It's absolutely cooking. It's a place to

[60:23] chat during games. Our creators are

[60:25] giving out banger bets and so are the

[60:27] Hammer audience. Join us at

[60:29] discord.gg/hammer

[60:30] and see what you've been missing out on.

[60:33] Link is in the description to get

[60:35] involved with the Discord today. Final

[60:36] topic though comes from you Isaac. Um

[60:40] Chris Grove said, "How did sports books

[60:42] do on the Super Bowl?" Channel suggest

[60:44] uh channel check suggests the outcomes

[60:45] were overwhelmingly positive for the

[60:47] major sports books with double-digit

[60:49] hold supported by a lowcoring game and

[60:51] most popular parlays failing to hit. Uh

[60:54] Isaac, you mentioned that DraftKings had

[60:56] 12 promoted SGPs before the game with

[60:59] odds ranging from plus 465 to plus400

[61:02] and they went 0 of 12. You shared a

[61:04] screenshot of all 12 of those bets and

[61:07] you said the math isn't perfect because

[61:09] they were quite correlated. Six included

[61:11] Jackson Smith and Jigba touchdown, but

[61:13] assuming they were all about minus 25

[61:16] EV, the odds of them going 0 of 12 was

[61:18] about 1 in3. So this is an estimate

[61:20] here. Um, I was a bit surprised to learn

[61:23] that it was that likely they would go

[61:25] 012, even though I know that these are

[61:27] incredibly negative EV bets, but

[61:31] what do you want to add on to this from

[61:33] the conversation, Isaac?

[61:34] >> Yeah, I mean, I think uh a lot of the

[61:36] comments were like, why why do you have

[61:38] all these? You know, you were betting

[61:39] all of them. Uh, the reason I had this

[61:41] was because I did a little fun prop bet

[61:43] with some friends where we each took

[61:45] three of them and we basically uh

[61:47] whoever whoever won uh got won the won

[61:50] the pool. Um, but yeah, I mean I think

[61:53] you get some crazy people in the

[61:54] comments when you talk about odds boosts

[61:56] losing and promoted parlays losing.

[61:58] People are like, "Yeah, of course

[62:00] they're all rigged." Uh, you know,

[62:02] people sort of missed the the boat with

[62:04] the, you know, this happens like

[62:05] onethird of the time even if they're not

[62:06] corot

[62:09] bets. They're all super minus EV. But

[62:11] yeah, just to the point, you know, to

[62:12] the earlier comment about sports books

[62:14] carrying about balancing the liability

[62:16] on the over, so much of the volume now

[62:18] is on these crazy SGPs that are just so

[62:21] good for the book. Um, that when they're

[62:24] just they're just printing. So, they

[62:25] don't really care about anything else.

[62:27] >> Uh, how about you, Kenish? How do you

[62:30] feel about these ones?

[62:31] >> This I feel like the graphics department

[62:34] at DK hit it out of the park with these.

[62:36] I mean the names they look like the

[62:38] seeing ghost one emerald city route

[62:41] alert like this is a beautiful design

[62:44] like the I don't know about I mean funny

[62:46] that they all lost um but I got to tell

[62:50] you if I would if I didn't know better

[62:53] these would have enticed me the premier

[62:55] pros the 12's time like this is there's

[62:58] some good work went into this we could

[63:00] use some of these people at the hammer

[63:02] >> I will say back to the earlier

[63:03] conversation on priming one thing that I

[63:05] don't think is true, but I have had

[63:07] people tell me is that if if you bet the

[63:09] promoted SGPs, it is way better for your

[63:12] account than your own SGPs because that

[63:14] is like the squarest possible thing you

[63:15] can do to just slam LeBron's promoted

[63:17] SGP.

[63:18] >> You're saying this is better for

[63:20] priming.

[63:21] >> I that's what I've been told. I haven't

[63:23] AB tested it so can't say, but I know

[63:24] people who believe that.

[63:26] >> I believe this um as well. Mike, uh any

[63:30] thoughts on this conversation here? I

[63:32] think it's selective programming by

[63:34] Isaac to pick out the one day they go 0

[63:36] for 12. You know, we got a sample size

[63:37] of 12 and all of a sudden we are sure

[63:39] these aren't plus EV bets. I don't know.

[63:41] I've seen a lot of bets that he sent me

[63:42] go O of 12. So, let's say that right now

[63:45] I I would say maybe we're not sure. Um,

[63:48] I will say these bets, I don't know a

[63:51] single individual. I know a lot of

[63:53] people who bet casually who aren't good

[63:54] bettors. I don't know a single person

[63:56] who is logging on is like, "Oh, the

[63:57] Carissa Thompson parlay. Thank god we

[63:59] have the Carissa Thompson parlay here."

[64:01] I want to know who bets these things.

[64:03] >> Well, at the time of the screenshots,

[64:05] 184 people did.

[64:07] >> And the other LeBron has 10K 10K on his

[64:12] >> Stephen A like who who are the 2,000

[64:14] people that are tailing Stephen A.

[64:15] Smith's parlay of the day. Like LeBron,

[64:17] I get that. But Stephen A. Smith,

[64:19] >> Stephen A. Smith, who is tailing Hank

[64:22] Lockwood and Carissa Thompson? These

[64:23] people are like, you know, Ctier sports

[64:26] book casters. Like I at least Stephen A.

[64:28] Smith people have heard of. I mean, what

[64:30] are we I don't know. I think that uh we

[64:32] learned on ESPN that Aaron Dolan's

[64:35] record, if you had been following her

[64:37] picks, you would have been very

[64:38] profitable. So, it makes sense that, you

[64:40] know, all of these are winning at a

[64:41] pretty high rate here. So, I don't know.

[64:43] I think Isaac was pretty selective in

[64:45] his O of 12. That's not a sample size

[64:46] big enough. And I think he's probably

[64:48] been uh you know, he's telling people

[64:50] not to gamble while being a pro sports

[64:51] better.

[64:53] >> Yep. Uh I wonder how many people bet on

[64:55] the hit the books specials that we that

[64:57] we got. We could see we could see it

[64:58] every week.

[64:59] >> Oh, really? Did we Are you in line with

[65:01] Cararissa Thompson or more in line with

[65:03] LeBron James?

[65:04] >> Uh, it was actually in between not in

[65:07] between, but more than Carissa, less

[65:08] than LeBron. It was usually between 500

[65:10] and a,000.

[65:11] >> Okay. Okay. I will say a couple times

[65:13] I've gotten an SGP on the promoted page

[65:15] just cuz like I've sent it to a few

[65:17] people and there's so few people betting

[65:19] tennis SGPs that if you get like 30 or

[65:21] 40, you can get up there and it feels

[65:23] pretty sweet, got to say.

[65:25] All right, that is a great way to end

[65:26] off the show today. If you did enjoy,

[65:28] please do us a favor, hit the like

[65:30] button, make sure you're subscribed to

[65:32] the channel, keep the notification bell

[65:33] on so you know when content is coming

[65:34] out. Like I said, uh there's no content

[65:37] in the form of circle back next week.

[65:38] There are still videos coming out on

[65:40] this channel. And uh contrary to the

[65:42] belief of Kesh, I will still be working

[65:44] a bit next week, but uh we're taking a

[65:46] bit of a content break here at the

[65:48] Hammer as we get set to ramp things up

[65:50] for next well next year for us is after

[65:53] the Super Bowl pretty much. So plenty of

[65:55] great content coming your way. You're

[65:56] not going to want to miss out. You can

[65:57] go to the link in the description to

[65:58] check out the other channels we have in

[65:59] the Hammer Bank Network. But of course,

[66:01] whenever it will be, we will see you

[66:03] again next time.