00:07 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
welcome to circles off episode number 58. 5, 8. Rob pazola here, joined by johnny from betstaff. What's up hey? 

00:18 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
rob solo episode. This week we got just rob and I, no guest, but we got a jam-packed list of topics. I've been waiting for this episode for four days now, to record since sunday after the formula one race. Do you guys date back to approximately a year ago when? 

00:38 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I tried to find the episode. I don't remember the episode number, but whoever's listened to the entire suite of circles off would probably vividly remember this argument. 

00:46 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
We had an argument that rob was saying that whoever was pole position at monaco grand prix would always win the race, because you can't pass at that. And last year he wanted to bet. He wanted to do a max dgen bet on charles leclerc and I vetoed him saying verstappen was going to win the race. We did a gentleman's bet, me versus rob. We staked something forget what it was. And then the morning of the race last year, leclerc, who's the ferrari driver, had pole position, meaning he starts in first and in the practice of like leading up to the race, not the actual formation like in the in like the actual. 

01:24
Just lead up to the race, he realized that he had a mechanical issue with his engine. Um which, what is his team doing? So I could build that car, no problem, but he, he had a. He had a mechanical issue with his engine and he was forced to withdraw from the race, thus giving verstappen, who was supposed to start in second pole position. He went on to win the race landslide, no questions asked. No one passed him. I said I was right because I bet verstappen rob free, rolled me and then vito, and then pulled my wager, canceled my wager, like the scumbag he is, and hit the drop, please. We got to hear that one. 

01:59 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
We still have that on the on the board big of a scumbag guy how big of a scumbag is. 

02:03 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
He canceled my wager after he free rolled me. Verstappen ended up winning the race. He voided the bets and then proceeded to say he was still right because verstappen started in pole and won the race. Flash forward one year roughly to the date and we have another one, charles leclerc, starting in pole position, again in the same track and what happened. 

02:27 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Okay, so everything Johnny has said so far is accurate. Now, the morning of the race last year, just to clear my name, you allowed me to avoid the I'm actually talking shit. 

02:38 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I allowed him to avoid the wager you. 

02:40 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
You in good faith said listen, I can't make this wager in good faith now. Leclerc had a gearbox problem. 

02:45 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
He was very devastated and whatever the bet was actually leclerc versus the field. I had correct, you had everyone else yeah, I woke up that morning. 

02:52 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I remember clearly we were in florida together and I woke up probably 15 minutes before the race and I was gonna jam leclerc at and I'm bringing up and I'm like this guy's off the board, why is this guy not listed everywhere? Well, and then I turned on the tv and figured out why. But okay, that race was great weather last year. Now it's very different to this year. I'm gonna pull up a quote I took. I took a picture of this yeah, to clear his name. I was golfing during the monaco grand prix and I was following the Sky Sports live blog. Here is a quote that came through on the Sky Sports live blog Max Verstappen starts fourth on the grid and he's keeping his fingers crossed for a spot of good fortune. 

03:36
His quote we need a bit of luck with the strategy or a safety car, because of course, you can't pass around here. Next line, sky Sports F1's Natalie Pinkham then says that surely there must be a place in the circuit where an overtake might be possible. Verstappen's quote they do not exist. With these cars, you literally cannot pass on the track in this race. You can't. There is not enough space anywhere to actually pass. Now, the reason Leclerc lost was because of team strategy, and I'll give you that that could have happened potentially last year as well, but because of the way that the race took place this year, where there were so many delays due to the rain at the beginning, teams were constantly going in and out of the pits to change tires, to put on slicks, intermediates, whatever. 

04:25 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Red bull overtook ferrari on a pit strategy this year, a few, a few people did pass on the course, granted it was not near the top of the this course is a parade. 

04:33 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Let's call it off for what it is. They drive around in the entire order for the most part, unless there's a wreck or some sort of you know passing in the pits. It very, very rarely happens, especially for a good driver out front. 

04:49 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
It is so, so rare well, all I recall is this last year, I believe, on the podcast, rob said it's just a shame because we'll never be able to have that again, where leclerc starts pole position at monaco and we could reenact his bet, and sure enough, only one year approximately to the date it happens again and sure enough, the kid comes out on top again. 

05:12
Max verstappen didn't win this year sergio perez, but perez won I meant the kid as in me came out on top of this. This bet, this fake wager, um, but yeah, crazy stuff. Obviously we're just, it's. It's like it's nice, it's nice to be right about these. 

05:28 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
There's a lesson to be learned here and this is for anyone, not just myself, and it's actually can apply to sports betting as well never speak in terms of absolutes. The minute you speak in terms of absolute, you open yourself up to disaster like never. Never say I'm saying never, now I'm trying to not use that vocabulary. Don't say like this could never happen, or this team is a lock, this team will win, so on and so forth, because sports are crazy. With that said, charles Leclerc last year was minus 110, I believe at the time, after qualifying, that should have been priced at minus 1,000. That was a bigger edge than floyd mayweather. 

06:07
No, this guy, here he goes again against conor mcgregor that that that I said was a once in a lifetime. But really, charlotte claire last year in good weather was truly a once in a lifetime? No, it was not it was, it was. 

06:20 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
He also didn't even have that good a car last year and he's an inferior driver still doesn't matter, but it doesn't matter. But the car doesn't matter, yeah, it does. 

06:27 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Look at how many years at Monaco that Lewis Hamilton just held on. He didn't even pit one year. There was one year where he just stayed out on the same crap tires Because it was the only way he could win the race and he was able to hold on. That's a good driver, hell of a driver. Well, I mean he's no, george Russell, this year. He's a hell of a driver, but it's yeah. Never speak in terms of absolutes and you know I will say last year have you ever made a 100% Kelly bet in your life? Because that's what I was going to do with Charles Leclerc last year. 100% Kelly, entire bankroll on Charles Leclerc. 

07:00 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Don't even joke about that. And he would have lost at minus 1,000. No, at minus 110. You would have played it up to minus 1,000. 

07:06 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I would have ran out of money to play it last year I would have been depositing all the at that time no legals in Ontario. I would have been depositing all the Bitcoin I had into Offshores to place those bets. But we go on. I still don't want to like. I won't give you credit for that. 

07:22 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
It's like when do I get the credit then? 

07:24 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Next year. 

07:25 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
When he starts to pull again. I got to get three of them. 

07:34 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
When a leader in a Monaco race gets passed on track in regular weather conditions. I'll give it to you. It'll probably happen once in our lifetime. I'll call you up when I'm 68 years old and I'll be. You know. It finally happened if they're still racing there. No one even likes racing there anymore it's a disaster zach. What else happened in sports this week? 

07:52 - Zack Phillips (Other)
well, uh, tuesday night, avalanche, oilers, game one, and uh, the nhl officiating has continued to stir up some controversy here. Kale mccarr offside no, offside pulled the office this morning to see what everybody thought, so it was pretty interesting. Everybody was on either side, but it's uh causing a bit of a storm right now yeah, I think it's. 

08:15 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Uh, I wasn't watching live. 

08:17 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
You don't watch a lot of live sports now I actually was watching that live, um like I believe. So I was watching it at like after hockey at the bar, nice, so it's not like I was watching the actual play live and I called it. But yeah, saw it on the tvs. 

08:30 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
No volume yeah, I was playing basketball. Two hours later I was got to my phone. My phone was blowing up about this whole offside thing. Here's the thing at first we this can be a broader discussion about replay in sports, which I have a lot of opinions on a lot of opinions honestly this was clear. This is clearly an offside, clearly according to the rules? 

08:48 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
are we? Are we discussing the play where he pulls the puck in but then does not touch it, correct? Yeah? 

08:54 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
yeah, it's allowed, it's. It is sorry, clearly on side. 

08:57
Yeah, clearly on clearly, not off, apologies. Apologies, clearly, according to the current rules on side, and you know, there's a lot of upset edmonton oilers fans who have one angle where it appears like macar's touching the puck in the zone he wasn't like. Look at all alternate angles and that's what the league is doing with. That said, the rules are so dumb. How dumb. It's not only the nhl, most sports. It's not hard to come up with rules. Wait, why is that dumb? You're saying Because the average fan can't understand it. It's so complex a rule for no reason. What are you saying? The offside rule? We played hockey when we were kids. 

09:36 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I also refereed hockey quite a bit. 

09:38 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
How simple was offside when we were younger, when we were playing or watching hockey when we were younger. 

09:48 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
It's the same. It's the same now, but it's not like it depends. If you're, if your skates up off the yacht, it's like a plane. Now it's honestly, it's always the same. 

09:52
Like those, you got to just make every rule quantifiable via like evidence. The only thing that's subjective and offsides 100 be removed is if you have possession of the puck, you're allowed to enter skates first, whereas if not, that should just be removed because possession is subjective. So it's like if you, oh, oh, this guy had it. But like, did he have control was, oh, only one hand was on his stick. Like how do you define possession of the puck? It's so, it's so unclear. So I think, other than that, though it's fine just outside of that whole, like if you have possession, you can enter skates first. But in this particular scenario, like he enters the zone, does not touch the puck, so he pushes it ahead, does not touch the puck, and then the zone clears his skate still on the line, other skates touching the line onside play, it's all. It's very black and white. It's the same as if you were coming the opposite direction. 

10:36 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I agree, but there your your point is is correct. There's like an interpretation of whether or not he has possession. 

10:43 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
It's the same thing as what happened a couple weeks I wasn't even in this play, though this play had nothing to do with, like, possession of the puck, because in for it to be offside you have your puck has to be touching either a skate or a stick or a any body part, so that has nothing, has nothing to do with like, yes, mccard did have possession in that, but also like that would be up for debate, but then didn't even matter. In this situation it's like is it touching a stick or a skate? You, you always in offside, need like one freeze frame where you can freeze it and then determine. 

11:13 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
It's really an easy play to call regardless the ones that like lap. A couple weeks ago we had edmonton calgary with the, the goal that got disallowed because of uh, distinct kicking motion. Yeah, that's just. These are just bananas. These are so subjective. Exactly like the guy was stopping going towards the net and it hit his skate and went in right. What's a distinct kicking motion? To me, a distinct kicking motion is you try to kick the puck like it's a soccer ball, but this is I, I hate rules. 

11:39 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
What about the goalie interference? It's like all of that is the guy like they have no actual clear. They put a little thing on a paper in the rule book that's like, okay, this is what goal interference and it's always up to interpretation. 

11:49 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Same with pass interference, exactly that's that stuff drives me crazy. But so so I always have problems with the rule itself. If the rule is open to interpretation, I think it's a shitty rule, plain and simple. But on top of that, then you get these periods where you have like 10 minutes of review, like watch the end of an nba game, the last two minutes of nba game. It's nauseating comment I touched it, oh, you know, and it's very clear like so so many of them are clearly out of bounds, off of one guy. But the refs got to walk over to review it themselves. Put on a. This can be solved in literally five seconds. There could be a ref with an earpiece where a guy's like you know it's hawks ball, it's heat ball, but they walk over, they put on, they watch every single possible angle of it. It's like what are we doing here? At some point I don't mind replay. I like I'm all for getting things right. I really am to a certain extent when it starts taking away from the game. 

12:46
How many nfl ones have we had where it's like okay, this guy is in the end zone, the ball is in the end zone. There's 48 people. You know there's a bunch of people on top of them. You can't see the exact. There was a dac prescott quarterback sneak this year where it was like he couldn't. He went. You know they snapped the ball from the one inch line or whatever. He went forward with the ball. He's laying in the end zone. There's no conclusive view. That's the another thing. Conclusive views in sports. Someone pick what was most like what most likely happened. 

13:18 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Yeah no, I agree. I agree, like the. The most, the most bananas thing within the replays is, first off, anything that can be solved with like technology. Just use it so like if you can put some sort of sensor in any of the ball puck, whatever that can actually determine that. Just an absolute no brainer Like you should have. You should never, ever, have an issue of like having to go to video review to be like did this break the plane or did this, did this puck cross the line? That should just be a simple, simple thing that could be done via technology by putting like any sort of chip device inside the puck that has like a certain radius. You have like those apple phone things. You could buy the senses that everything you walk by tossing your card like pinpoints a location directly. Like buy that thing for like 30 bucks. Put something in the in the tech, right, that's number one. But number two on the instant replays, here's my biggest beef to pick. Yeah, when they're like the call on the field stands, it should never be. 

14:16
The call on the field stands. The call on the field should only ever be if it's like literally it's a 50, 50, but if it, if it's 51, 49, you should just go with the 51, go with the thing that's more likely on the replay, not oh, we didn't get conclusive evidence, but obviously this guy recovered this fumble but it wasn't conclusive, so we'll go with the call in the field, which is not. The call in the field is nothing. That's just a guy's humans running around calling that. If you can get a better angle later, obviously just go with the. Whatever the angle that was best on the camera in the review. That should be the call moving forward. There should never be a thing of like the call on the field stands because there's not conclusive enough evidence to overturn the call. The call on the field is garbage, it's like it doesn't mean anything. 

15:02 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Yeah, it means nothing. You should go to a neutral party. Doesn't even know what the call on the field is garbage. It's like it doesn't mean anything. Yeah, it means nothing. You should go to a neutral party. He doesn't even know who the what the call on the field is exactly. Make a decision. Um, obviously a different sport, but I will say, like tennis's review system is amazing, and not only that, I don't know if you've ever been to any live tennis events or whatever how quick is it for them to get the thing? 

15:20 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
like? It takes about 10 seconds, but that's what I'm saying. Why do they even need a challenge in tennis, like if anything is close, the reality is that thing the bird's eye view goes down so quick, just like. Use that for every play. 

15:31 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
That's relatively close I maybe like I, we can debate that or not, but what I love is that it actually enhances the live event, like when you're at a tennis match and it goes to review, like the crowd is excited. They're literally like everyone's like feet tapping on the ground. There's like a buzz and then like it's some of the calls are so close that everybody's just going nuts when it happens. But it literally takes 10, 15 seconds. It enhances the event. It's not hard, that's just like pure easy technology. Why can we not do that on the scoreboard in any given arena that doesn't involve a referee? Uh, you know, like an official, is it just should be so easy. 

16:13 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
How good would this be the referee first off. Remove the the referee having to go do that. It should all be done from some sort of box in central, one centralized location. Third party team they're just the review team for every game that's going on at the time. Never have the actual official. Have them go over and do the review, because they're also biased to the call in the field, whether it's some sort of inherent bias, like they just made a call, you obviously would rather be right than wrong. So you're going to be less likely to overturn your own call if you're reviewing that tip out of bounds or something like that. So it should just be as soon as you need something. 

16:46
Challenge goes to a thing. You set a timer of 30 seconds to over to overturn it and the box it looks at all the angles, maybe it's a minute, whatever the camera in that room, in that studio room, there's going to be like two or three guys reviewing it, whatever camera angle they're looking at. You play that on the jumbotron, everyone's gonna be going nuts. You play that on the actual tv and then they submit their decision. It's like this is the call in the field. That would be so much better entertainment. Quick process no more than 30 seconds, maybe a minute if you have to extend. But like some of these reviews, like they go to commercial break, then you come back and they're still at the monitor I'm not even joking. 

17:25 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I've taken my dog for a walk before. In the time that it's taken them to review an nhl hockey play, I literally will be watching a game. They go to a review. I'm like, okay, pasquale, let's go for a walk. We go around the block. He's an older guy now, he doesn't like to do long walks. I get home, it's still under review. Like, imagine being at that game, like watching it's just it's so. It's crap. Like and we've had replay for so long. Now these are we're talking about, like in the NFL's case, like a billion dollar company. How did you know the stuff that goes on in the NFL? I love some of my favorites. We might have done this before, but I'm still gonna do it anyways. One of my absolute favorites is when the referee goes to check like whether it was a first down or not, comes back and he's like I'm gonna respot the ball and we're gonna remeasure, like this is some sort of exact science and then it'll be short, by like one chain link. 

18:20 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I know I forgot about that. 

18:21 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Like that is absurd to me that that still happens. And the one that makes me just die of laughter every single time and probably makes you die too, because I know special teams is a big part of the game for you the punts that go out of bounds, where the referee runs 20 yards up the sideline and he's like really being influenced by whoever's on that sideline as well, telling him went out of bounds. The fans are yelling and whatever and he just picks like an arbitrary point to stop, has literally no clue where it went out of, like zero clue, because he's so far away from that play. How how is there not a chip in the ball, at least on special teams and down the sidelines to say this is the like that's the easiest one to do by far, Cause they use a different ball too for special teams, right for kicking. I mean those two. I honestly cry of laughter. 

19:15 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
The chain link. You literally have to laugh at that, because they bring it in and they're like it's not accurate, Like they put it down and it's it's like done by two guys running and then they're like this is the chain. And, bro, sometimes they measure it and you're like, oh, that's short. And I'll be like first down like oh, I just saw it on the thing. 

19:33 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
It didn't even remember the year that it got the paper. The guy put the piece of paper between yes, what was that? 

19:38 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
oh man, I forgot about that thing. 

19:40 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I don't remember vivid, like I remember it enough that they were checking if a piece of paper could fit like that was the best. 

19:49 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
That, no, that was the best. Man just make a call at that point like, honestly, yeah, get these all out. 

19:54
Like everyone complains about the officials because it's like, oh, I could impact a team or could not? You get a good call, you get a bad call, but whatever you can automate via technology, just do it. And then, for sure, like the. The process for like, letting the human referee decide and then his call now gets preferential treatment is is just insane. Like that, that should never be the case. It's like. It's like, let's say, we're trying to make a business decision and we're like and then you're like, okay, I say we should do this. I'm like, okay, let's review it all, we review it all. We're like, probably 60 40 that we shouldn't do this. We're like, well, it's not 100, zero, so let's go with rob's previous call. 

20:33
It doesn't make sense in any other facet except for in this or anything. Like you're trying to buy a new car, you and your wife trying to buy a new car. Like our, let's get the, this one. You're gonna just do whatever is the best at the end. Whatever you decide at the end, okay, sure, you're not gonna to be like well, we initially wanted this, this car. So since we're not a hundred percent sold, we're going to go back to the initial decision that was made in a split second thing on the field. This makes no sense. It doesn't at all. 

21:03 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Um, one point you brought up which I found interesting because we also saw um a little bit of a backlash, let's say, in the sports world about this, is you brought up the point of referee bias. Referee might already have a bias based on their original call. Well, we had tim peel yesterday, nhl ref, who has basically come out on his twitter and has admitted in the past that he sits down at blackjack tables and plays blackjack with players okay, I also just want to say too. 

21:34 - Zack Phillips (Other)
So he tweeted this. I listened to another hockey show that he went on and he explained what happened and I just want to throw this out there as well, because you guys will find this funny. He tweeted at brandon dubinsky that hey, we played blackjack together. It was fun. I'll come for a beer with you. That's the interaction that happened on twitter. He told the story about them playing blackjack. He was out with brandon dubinsky a night before a game or something, or after a game playing blackjack. Evander kane comes over and asks brandon dubinsky for 5k because he needs a float to go and continue to play or whatever. Brandon dubinsky looks at him and says give me your watch, gives him like a 30k rolex that was on his wrist, wrist as collateral kane goes, comes back 30k, he's got his money, gives him his five, takes his watch back amazing walks away. That's the story tim peel told. So there was even further context of what happened, but I had heard that story. That's crazy, yeah I would say. 

22:37 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I would say if you're an official for a sport, you should probably refrain from gambling with players yeah, just for the optics. 

22:44 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Also, like, if you're an athlete in any league, just like, probably don't bet. You know, and definitely like you know, just don't don't open up betting accounts in your own name because it's going to get called in the question and people are gonna be like, oh, was I, was I? Was this guy betting on his own games? Was he betting on other games? Like, don't do it. Same same deal with like officiating. Just like, don't be buddies with any of the players that you're refereeing. There's gonna, even if you think, oh yeah, no, I'm not biased, I'm doing a good job, I care about this job. It just happens. Overall, you know, you like, you like certain players more than others. You're gonna potentially like certain teams more than others. Like you know, it's just like you. 

23:21
Just you just never want to be like be called into question, yeah if you grew up an ottawa senators fan in ottawa, like you shouldn't be reffing Senators games or any games where, like the Senators or like, if you have that bias, you can't do that. Like you're like, oh well, this guy's going to be professional, but what about you're reffing a playoff game where the Sens could win the cup? They never won a cup before all your friends and family back home, massive Senators fans like you can't do that. 

23:47 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
This is like it's too easy to just be biased, yeah, but like if you put, if I put myself in that position right like now, that now this is coming out years after the fact, right, but if that comes out in real time that you you were at, and nowadays, with social media as well, somebody else sees you at a casino, a player at a casino, they take a picture, maybe post it or whatever. If you're sitting at a blackjack table alongside an active player in the league, next time anything it could be just dumb chance that you end up reffing a game and you miss a call that's on that player or something like that. Then everything gets called into question like it's just dumb moves that you know. It reminds me don't bet 50 at fanduel when you're on injured reserve on the team that you play on, like it's just common sense stuff and people like are an opera. Oh what, when you know what did calvin really do wrong or whatever it's like you know in hindsight not. It's like not really, not really a ton. But you gotta have common sense sometimes yeah, it was that hard rock actually hard but, 

24:48 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
same thing. Yeah, you just can't do that, like you can't bet on the game, because then people are going to start swirling in question and then it. Then it becomes a line where it's no longer black and white, like if the rule is, if you bet on any an nfl game and you're in the nfl under contract, you're suspended for a year as soon as you'd be like he's like, dude, what did I do? I bet, literally bet 50 bucks, I bet 500. I don't care about some money and I bet on the falcons, not even against them. It's like okay then, and what's the rule? Are you allowed to bet on any team not involving yourself? Are you allowed to bet? What is it? 500 bucks, you're not to bet a thousand. What about 50 000? Because to to some of these players, like to my homes, you think a 50 000 bet is a lot. It's probably like that's like us betting 50 bucks, right, based on salary. So how can we then go ahead and make that distinction? 

25:36 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
It always like it also reminded me of the Josh Gordon stuff. Right, we have the Josh Gordon jersey in the back corner here, but I get it Like I don't think marijuana is a performance enhancing drug. I think you know players should probably be able to smoke marijuana or whatever they do, whatever they want, but if you're playing in a league that explicitly prohibits you from doing that drug and then you test positive for it, I don't have sympathy for you. It's tough. Should it be a banned substance? 

26:08 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
We can debate that it definitely shouldn't be a banned substance. But it's like this isn't even about the legal system of the world where you can start debating and it's like well, what do the people want? This is like a private organization, the NFL, where you have to just do things like I don't know. And definitely this comes back to the officiating, because when you can make rules that are black and white, where it's like did he do this or did he not do this at any time, if you want to change that rule down the road in the off season, be like okay, this year you're allowed this, these substances fine, but as long as it's banned for that year, do not do it, otherwise face the exact consequences and they literally should have the exact thing charted out. It's like we talk about sports books posting their own betting sheet. It should be this suspended for performance. 

26:55
Enhancing drugs, 50 games a ban for mlb. Second time one year ban. Third time lifetime ban. That's it like there's, you can't be like oh well, this one was a different case by case basis, because this guy needed this for whatever it's like. Was that a bad drug or not? You got to know what you're doing. It's on the player to follow the rules agreed in this scenario, I mean listen. 

27:16 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Maybe I'm more old school in this sense, but it always surprises me, whenever something like this happens, how just the general public is very quick to defend the player. It's like, oh, you're going to suspend them for that, you're going to give them a year for that and whatever, you're going to fine them that much for that. It's like, well, I mean, the players know what the rules are. It's very explicit, it's very clear-cut. It's not like leagues are making this stuff up as they go along. Bad substances very easy, you know, but you can't bet on on the sport that you play. 

27:43 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
It's very simple to follow these rules and, like you know, at the end, of the day nick diaz got couldn't fight for years because he because he smoked marijuana, which, like he's, he openly smoked weed and currently does every day. Yeah, but it's just like it's tough to actually go ahead and feel bad for him when, like that's just the rule. Should that rule be taken out? 100 absolutely, but until it is, you gotta like you gotta figure it out or face the consequence. 

28:10 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
It's especially difficult for me to feel bad for Nick Diaz, because I have met both him and Nate before. When I was working at the score back in the day, Hardcore Sports Radio, we used to have a lot of MMA fighters into town and in studio and they were together one time no word of a lie Very snowy day in Toronto and we used to be at the Hyatt At the time. It was actually I don't remember what the hotel was called, it's irrelevant, but it's right in downtown Toronto on the street and walked them out after the show. I think they were waiting for a cab or something like that and these guys are just picking up snowballs and firing them at people that are walking by. 

28:48 - Zack Phillips (Other)
I'm not joking, just like random people. 

28:56 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I firing them at people that are walking by I'm not joking just like random people like I don't think, I'm not even joking like a, a dad with, like his kid and they're firing snowballs. And he turns around. They're like what are you gonna do? What are you gonna? You want you're gonna do something about it and whatever. And these people are moving on. 

29:03
I was like completely taken back by that. Just the most hitting ran, just random people like oh, this is great, like not even at each other, at us who they like they knew. It's just like randoms on the street and I'm not talking like, just like, uh, you know, quick, underhand talk. They were rocketing snowballs at people walking by, whether they were dead on or the other way. They were having an absolute blast doing this and they might have indulged in some uh substances as well while they were at the studio as well, which maybe contributed to this a little bit more. But I will never forget that and, honestly, from that day forward, I didn't really like those guys. They saw this. They would want to beat the crap out of me, but they already did that day as well. I was not. I was not that guy that was always telling the ufc fighters like we got to. You know we can't do this here, we can't do that there, and I'll remember you know another story, just random, very random, off topic, but my host at the time that I was producing for Gabe Morenci used to tell the fighters when they came in that I bet against them in their last fight. He used to tell this to every single fighter. Some of them were hilarious reactions like he. He did it to heath hair. Heath herring got destroyed by brock lesnar, like absolutely just creamed for three rounds. Like lesnar killed him. And heath herring comes in and gabe's like oh, this guy won a lot of money betting on brock against you. Heath herring's like great bet, great, great bet. I you know. He's like, yeah, I was trying, but like I couldn't do anything. 

30:36
Josh cost check came in one time. Gabe's like, oh, this guy bet on gsp against you, won a lot of money, cost check. Like he absolutely lost it on me. He, he was so furious and I was like I didn't actually. I'm gonna try to tell this guy I didn't actually. He's like well, why would he say that then when I'm like he didn't actually. Um, uh, so that was great. And then dana white one time. First time I ever met dana white was just walking around the score studios the funniest thing with pictures of himself, autographing them for people and just handing them out. So I have a signed dana white picture first time I ever met dana white. He's like, oh, you know, you're a fan of ufc. I'm like, yeah, I'm a fan. Just like signed the picture of himself and and gave it to me. But I used to love those days, the ufc fighters, except for the ones that, um, they couldn't really take a joke. Like josh kostchek was like livid, livid, never, never seen stuff. 

31:33 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Like honestly, I thought he was gonna clock me he may not be able to take a joke, but that guy could take a punch, that's for sure he could. 

31:40 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
He was a great wrestler at the time. He was a great fighter. I actually like, really liked josh kostchek too, because I used to watch ultimate fighter a couple times. 

31:47 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I think fought twice, definitely, versus gsp, once, yeah, and then I think he fought once more. But that's, that's funny, funny stuff. All right, what else we got? Zach uh up. 

31:57 - Zack Phillips (Other)
Next we got tweets that trigger us. I don't know what we're yelling about. I've never seen you mad. I get peeved. Why are you in such a bad mood? What do you care? It's only game. Why you have to be mad. 

32:14 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I think we got four this week. I'm pretty sure we got four. There was I. I'm going to apologize. 

32:19
I know Johnny said last time we did this segment that we will air every single one of these that gets tweeted at us. A couple of them were really personal. They had nothing to do with anything. I got some dms from people who are like I need you to go after this guy, he's a scammer or whatever. I'm like this is not what this is about, like if you find a particular tweet. So there's a couple that we got this week that will not be aired because they were a little bit more personal. I'm not doing this just to take shots at people. Unless you're the sweat investor, then maybe I'll go after you, but aside from that, I'm gonna. We're just gonna try to keep it to some learning lessons, although there's one in here that is completely unrelated to gambling, which honestly, may be the most triggered I've ever been in my entire life before we get into the first one too, I also just want to shout out um, we had spreadopedia on jason weingarten last week, so if you haven't listened to that, go and listen to it. 

33:15 - Zack Phillips (Other)
But we talked about, and rob mentioned, how he was the king of international and specifically mexican baseball. He put out a tweet the other day and he said how much money do you have to bet on cuban baseball before you're betting more than the players playing in the game are making? And I thought that was like it's probably wait making per game. 

33:35 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
It's probably not that not that I actually have no idea. 

33:38 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Cuban baseball salaries can't be that much, no no there was tons of replies like obviously there's a lot of great players came out of cuba yeah, but okay, so one of the replies we go to cuba yeah, he's. Yeah, he's cuban. 

33:51
I'm pretty sure he's cuban man, when I bet I think jorge soler I think, was I told the story in the pot already man the most triggered I've been during a bezel and I bet him to win the home run, derby, and he got zero because he had no, because he had no coach throwing the game. He didn't even know that he had to bring someone to throw pitches to him. Did I tell it on the pod or no? 

34:09 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I haven't heard it. I just want to tell one story really quickly. You can tell this story for sure, but we do the DGEN fund in the office which, for those that don't know anyone in the office, can place a bet period. We have a combined bankroll, they can suggest a bet, suggest a bet. 

34:26
We just have to bet it at the best possible number period and we're trying to grow our bankroll from a few thousand up to 100K just by betting the best prices. That was the premise. We started this about a year ago. This D-Gen fund was absolutely flying. We caught some huge winners. One day Johnny's like I'm sending it on the home run derby Locked in all these bets I will say very good prices that day was made some back was the darkest day in dgen fund history. 

34:59 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
It was, it was. It was on the man, my derby record. I swear I go one year lights out, one year absolute bath. What next year lights out, next year bath. Luckily I got live pete alonzo last year to help save some, some of the dgen profits. But yeah, not a great day. I loaded up on otani and he just got absolutely he was. 

35:21 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
He was actually johnny was really depressed in our dgen fund telegram chat. He's like I'm so sorry boys, I'm really sorry, I'll make it up to everybody. I'm so, but it was just like half hour before the derby. He's like guys got some amazing numbers locking them in dgen fund and I'm just like refreshing like a kentucky derby home run derby live blog on my phone. I'm like this guy, these derby, if I if I told this already on the pod. 

35:46 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I apologize, but I bet yasiel puig to win the home run derby. I did a ton of research just like was like oh, this guy's going to be good, whatever he's hitting, mashing bombs, distance is good, comes out he doesn't have a guy to pitch to him for the derby. You need to bring your own coach, or some guys use their dad if they want to make it a cool thing, or a guy's brother might come out that he played ball with when he's growing up. Puig comes up, doesn't speak a lick of english and just doesn't know that he has to bring a guy. There's not many other guys that are speaking his language, so he finds a guy speaking his language. Like you need a guy to pitch for you, he goes up. He doesn't have any, he gets a substitute. They didn't even. This guy didn't even warm up. 

36:28
It was robinson. Cano's dad was pitching to him because he had no guy and he's the only guy that also spoke the same language. Cano's dad's pitching him. Zero chemistry, zero timing. Guy goes for the whole derby. Shut out, zero dingers. I was. I literally threw my hat. I was like so pissed off I can't believe I even bet this guy into that day forward. I will never bet another guy at the derby who doesn't have a, at least someone with chemistry or like a batting coach throwing to him, like a hitting coach throwing to him. 

37:02 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Otherwise you're just done the derby um bets like there's always like rules every year, right, never bet a guy whose dad throws to him and if his dad's like, because just look, his dad might literally be like 70 years old, don't bet that guy there's a derby rule where you're not supposed to be able to throw the next pitch until the other the the previous, you know hit has come down, and I think partly it's for the protection of the kids in the outfield who are getting these liners just smashed directly at like well, I can only imagine some kid looking up for a pop fly and then some guy lines a ball at him. 

37:37 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
right yeah, they never, they don't care about that. Now they move the rules again where it's like now it's just number of strikes where, like you, put the but they change. 

37:52 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Told before. But uh, let's go into the tweets that trigger us. All right, first one we got here. All right, matt landis, friend of the program. Very nice dude. Uh, props and hops. You should check it out. I highly recommend it. Uh, posted um one of the episodes that he did with fabian solmer, suma um, which was around closing line. Friend of the pod, friend of the pod friend. I'll call him a friend regards. Regards from canada. Fabian regards from canada. Anyways, we get a response from sean york at yorkie nhl tips. 

38:21
This is a response to closing line value. It is about covering the spread. Closing line value means shit. You got to be on the right side. Here's why this really triggers me, because the right side is the one that got closing line value almost every single time. 

38:39
Now he's implying that you need to win your bet in order for it to be valuable, and we've talked about this before as well. At the end of the day, I've seen this happen a million times before. We were actually out for lunch with some guys yesterday, fellow bettors of ours that we were talking about this happening to them before People get limited on accounts that they're losing on Happens very regularly right now you might ask yourself why would someone who's losing money on an account get limited? It's because they're getting good closing line value, and this is what the sports book has determined is a predictor of them winning in the long run, plain and simple. So when people say, oh, closing line value doesn't matter, you just need to have the right side or whatever, realize that sports books will limit you for good closing line value. 

39:31 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Yeah, in in big enough doses, like if you're betting right before a line moves or something like that, and you actually anticipate that move or are moving the market yourself, obviously they're going to limit you based on that. 

39:42 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
So that's the right side, agreed, there's like I, I hate, I hate these ones. I really hate them, like the whole notion of ah, you know, you know I've been beating, I've been beating the market on my last five bets and they all lost. It's like okay. 

39:56 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Yeah, 99% of the time. Obviously there's scenarios in which it doesn't, for, you know, manufacturer reasons, but 99% of the time the right side is going to be, if you got like the side that and, by the way, it's like it's all number dependent. So what number did you get? The right side is whatever the best number was relative to the close. 

40:15 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
This is coming from someone who consulted for sportsbooks for many years. You are way more likely to get limited if you are losing but getting closing line value than if you are winning and getting negative closing line value. So process that because now you have sports books with all access to a ton of information, they're more likely to give you a big bet if you are winning but not getting closing line value, and you can obviously use that to your advantage is better as well if that's something you're so inclined to do. But that's just, uh, a fact. So, period up next. Oh, this is the one. Oh, my god, okay, so this is a joke. This has to be a joke, though I need. So no no one for you watching on youtube or for you listening. I would suggest that you you fast forward to this part on youtube just so you can see the pictures if you haven't. 

41:11
If you haven't already, but this tweet went viral. It's from lamar jackson, who happens to be one of my favorite quarterbacks at lj underscore era eight. So the tweet first time golfing dress code check mark. I mean, he looks good, this is good golf attire. Big fan of the blue shirt, blue Nikes, everything else. You got a bunch of emojis, like the squirrely face. Laugh out loud, whatever. Basically he's saying everything else. Not as good as the golf dress code. Louis Domingue not the best, not the best At Tiger Woods. I need a couple of pointers. Seems like a very innocent tweet. It's just a few pictures of him out on the course, you know. The first picture is him betting down to put a tee in the ground. The third picture is him getting into his golf cart. This second picture is this guy lining up a four-foot putt, basically with a wedge and a tee in the green on the green, the left pick. 

42:08 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
If you watch, is him teeing up something on the green like this this has to be and joe it honestly. 

42:16 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
But I was going through the replies. I was seeing if he said anything about it being a joke or anything like that and I couldn't find it. If this is real, it is actually. My anger level is at a 100. Like he is holding a wedge right now. That's not a putter, it's a wedge. You can see the angle of the thing. There's a t in front of him and the ball is right next to the hole. Like he just chipped the ball, like he obviously didn't actually chip it. 

42:42 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
This is place manufactured for pictures is is t like it's teed up high for a wedge also, like it's just funny. Yeah, the t I, I. It's gotta be a joke if it's not a joke. And he actually just teed up high for a wedge also, like it's just funny. It's gotta be a joke If it's not a joke and he actually just teed up a thing on the green and then hit it into the hole. But it's a joke. 

42:58 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
But it says like here's the thing. Here's why I thought it might not be a joke, because he says it's first time in the tweet yeah, like he, he, he doesn't know anything about golf, right? Like he's saying my golfing dress code, check mark, dress, nice Looks, looks great out there. Everything else, tiger Woods. I need a couple of pointers. And then he's got a tee in the green with a wedge in his hand and this looks like. By the way, I don't know what course this is, this looks like pristine conditions. Imagine you were a member at this course and you saw lamar jackson teeing it up on the green. I would absolutely lose my mind. And I've, I've, I've struggled with this one for a long time because I don't know if it's really completely unrelated to betting. 

43:41
There's no less. Well, there is a lesson to be learned here don't tee it up on the green, don't you putt on the green? No tees are involved, your putter is there that's what you do. 

43:51 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
If you look at his card also, it appears he only has one bag in the cart, so take a solo card also. Maybe it's real. I hope it's real. I actually hope it's all right. 

44:01 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Next, all right. Raheem palmer at I am rostradamus. That's not actually a bad twitter handle. It's pretty, pretty good Clever. Uh feels like beating the closing line due to injuries is a death sentence in the NBA today. Miami was a consensus minus one and a half slash, minus two point. Favorite Horford and smart get announced. Out line goes to minus five. They get cooked. I've been on the wrong side of this so many times this year. This was on may 17th 2022 at 9 31 pm. Do you know what happened in this game, johnny? 

44:38 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I remember it just because we talked, but I'm I'm pretty sure they they won this is a premature tweet, I'll call it the heat won the game. Yeah, I'm pretty sure they came back in the third and and they covered. 

44:49 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
They covered the sprint. Now that's not why I bring this up, because whether they won or not is irrelevant. 

44:57 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Again, job done but wait, but did miami ever even close? Minus five, and I don't think they did. Let me pull up the history. You can pull up the betting history. What day is this? 

45:06 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
from it's uh, may 17th, by the way. That's my bet. That stamp coming out with line history very shortly. Check out the new update when it goes live. 

45:14
But these, the frustration tweets really get me of. I beat the line, or I consistently am beating the line and I'm losing. Okay, I mean, you do have the op. You have another option in this case and a lot of people do this for nfl, which is not uncommon here where you can actually wait, for if you think that there's some sort of market inefficiency and the number's always getting pushed too far, you end up losing the bet or for whatever reason. There's some sort of hidden factor here where maybe a team tries harder. I don't know what people might think, but you could wait. You have an option of waiting, like if you're just going to complain that you're losing a bunch of bets over and over when you're trying to get out ahead of it, then you have the option of waiting for the injury news to happen, for the market to steam, for even to steam even more, and then to bet the other side. 

46:02
That's why I hate the frustration type of tweets. That's one part of it. The second, though, is obviously I'm a sports better. I can't say that I've never done this before. I try not to do it anymore as well. But, like the first half tweets of like this game is over. Oh, this has no chance. How many times do we have to watch sporting events before people learn their lesson about calling the game over before it's over? For me, it was in the thousands of games that I had to watch before learning that lesson maybe the tens of thousands. 

46:34 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Okay, he's right on the line history, by the way. It did happen like that. So what happened was he? He bet miami at one and a half or minus two, which was an incredible number because they closed four and a half, so just looking at closing line and close, basically and it probably could have been five at four and a half five. 

46:50
Yeah, so let's call it even five. That's an incredible clv. Yep, look at at least like five to seven percent clv in in the minimum. Obviously depends how you grade uh, nba and basically they he tweeted this mid-game. What time was it then? That was 9 31, so 9 31, so that was probably around the halftime when the heat were down, and then they ended up pulling up an incredible third quarter in which they outscored Boston 39 to 14 and they win the game by 11. Yeah, so he, he literally won this bet and was on the right side and an incredible number Great CLV and won the bet. Yeah, call it, that's it, that's it. 

47:27 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
That's funny. 

47:27 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
That's it, final one. Rastradamus, rastradamus, raheem. 

47:31 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Palmer, the best one, the best one. Here's one for the circles off tweets that trigger me People who promote their Discord slash Telegram service by cherry picking the one sprinkle, bet that they actually hit. Meanwhile the rest of the chat could cover a three-tiered cake with all the sprinkles that get posted. This is from reverend justin at church of clv. Didn't notice that handle before? Also a great one, uh. But yes, okay this. There's some examples here for those who are watching live of the same game parlay. That hits really big. I hate when people say to sprinkle on a game. I'm victim, I'm sorry, I'm guilty of doing this everyone's tweet. 

48:10 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Search rob is all a sprinkle and see what comes up. 

48:12 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Well, here's the thing. You know a hundred percent you'll find some. I'm not even going to delete them. I don't delete tweet history. I own everything that came up in the past. Doesn't matter to me, and for sure you will find me saying it. But the reason that it bothers me so much is that when you tell someone a sprinkle on a game and it hits, when people do this, they're very quick to pat themselves on the back, but they never talk about the sprinkles that lose, because most of these are big underdogs. So you're losing the vast majority of these before you hit one. Now, this is a huge hit. Like, don't get me wrong, it's like a same game parlay, you know, plus 11,404. But I hate the notion of people giving out picks and telling people to sprinkle on something. Sprinkle is nothing. What is that? Is that a 10th of a unit? Is it a half unit? Like what is a sprinkle? And like yeah. 

49:03
I think this is a great tweet because it happens so much in the space that attention needs to be called out to it. 

49:09 - Zack Phillips (Other)
People are always promoting themselves by the sprinkles massive hey, I'm just gonna save some people some time here. No, no, april 9th 2015, 2015 okay, here we go. 

49:20 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
That was before I was a professional. 

49:23 - Zack Phillips (Other)
Better, by the way gonna make the sends a rare two unit play and sprinkle on sends minus one and a half plus plus 350 as well. Don't agree with this line whatsoever. There's more, there's I can tell that there's more. 

49:37 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
No, okay, that's fine that's in 2015 you're what's the most recent one. 

49:41 - Zack Phillips (Other)
Uh, I'm very curious. This is the most recent one I find right now. Uh, you replied to somebody about uh futures bets in the nhl columbus 14 to 1, best value on the board. You go through a couple others and then you go longer. Shots worth a sprinkle are edmonton 40 to 1, calgary 50 to 1 and montreal 50 to 1. Is that for this year? November 27 2017 oh, 2017. 

50:05 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
It's been a long time. 

50:06 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Well, I can confirm none of those teams won and they did not win, but you know what they were only a sprinkle, so you didn't lose much off of them. You won. They did not win, but you know what they were only a sprinkle. So you didn't lose much off of them. You didn't put in the check, but at the end. So if that's the last one, 2017,. 

50:18 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I'm practicing what I preach at this point I'm clear. 

50:20
But yeah, there's one more that we couldn't find the tweet for, but a couple of people had saw it. I really should have screenshot it and sent it in. But save it, we'll save it. We'll get in the next one. We're gonna get that one. Yeah, it's relevant. Now there's that jimmy butler one. Oh. So somebody, uh, like I forget who was, but someone with a pretty big following tweeted out and said like I'm gonna take a shot on this one, jimmy butler, to lead the series in points. This was after game five, so going into he had game six and seven. Butler was like 30 points back of of uh tatum and ends. He ends up cashing. It was massive. It was plus 15 000 um, or maybe it was 150 000 no, actually it was 15 000, 15 000, sorry. 

51:00
So butler has two massive games game six and seven. He'd obviously lose, but he ends up winning it, uh, by a couple points. And this guy and this guy was like fired up. Yes, he tweets out a screenshot like what a cash, amazing, amazing cash, great, great bet. Honestly, like he cashed it. That's not the trigger me part. The trigger me part is a guy responded under him saying like let's go, I rode this one with you and he posts a screenshot of his winner. But this guy and he only bet five dollars. That's not the point of the thing. Like, he bet it instead of at 15 000. So the initial guy posted a draft king screenshot 15 000. So he, his bet was, I think, like whatever, you want a couple thousand. Then this other guy posted, but he only got 7 500 plus 7 500. Got half. Well, not, it's not necessarily half, but yeah, he could have doubled his payout literally could have doubled. 

51:52
So he bet only five bucks, one 300 and the other guy literally like he, just if he just had draft kings, which, like pretty much everywhere fan duals available actually I'm pretty sure every single place jurisdiction that fan duals available, draft kings is also available so he could have had draft kings and double his profit, you would have made an extra 300 bucks from a five dollar bet. Point being, it's not about this initial guy's screenshot, it's not about posting screenshots, it's not about how much money you bet. It's like this guy's like I rode with you, I tailed you, but he literally got half his payout because he didn't get the best number Hilarious. And it's like don't be that guy, but don't be that guy. But also, how did he bet it, knowing that it's just crazy because people aren't price sensitive at all. 

52:35
But for five bucks, like you should have another screenshot. Like just have sorry, have another sports book. Like have a couple books, even if you don't want 20, like I get it. If you don't want 20, but have like five or six, at least have the main odd sets. That way, when a bet like this comes across and you're betting something as egregious as like a 75 plus 7 500, you can up that to a plus 15, 15 000 for for no additional fees, like, okay, I'll bet my five at drafting. It's like everyone should have enough money if you're betting to keep, and you know, even if you're betting five bucks, everyone should have enough money to keep, like 20, 30, 50 bucks in a couple sports books. And if you, if you can't, then you shouldn't be betting five a game. You're betting $1 a game and then keep $10 in each sports book, right? 

53:14 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Agreed 100%. Appreciate everyone out there listening. Please follow our Twitter account at Circles Off. You'll get alerts when our episodes go live. Subscribe on YouTube and if there's some suggestions you have for the show going forwards, hit us up in the comments as well. No-transcript.