00:00 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
On this week's episode of Circles Off presented by Pinnacle Sportsbook. Here on the Hammer Betting Network, we are joined by two-time Westgate Super Contest winner, steve Fezzik, extremely polarizing individual. We're going to get into it all His own personal story, his NFL betting and, believe me, we won't let him off the hook when it comes to touting. We're going to get why he touts, specifically if he thinks people are going to win with his packages. All that and more. A jam-packed, loaded circles off episode number 88. Welcome to circles off, episode number 88, presented by pinnacle sportsbook. 88. So many players here that johnny actually didn't even want to be in the studio with me to start because he thought we were going to go way too long with this segment. There's a lot Marvin Harrison, tony Gonzalez, michael Irvin my boy Cowboys fan Dez Bryant, greg Olson, demarius Thomas. Rest in peace. Nicholas Batum wore 88. Markeith Morris 88. In the NHL. Zach is like it's nuts. 

01:11 - Zack Phillips (Other)
The amount of players that wear 88. Really, yeah, Obviously off the top of my head, Nylander Patty Kane. I'm just trying to think. 

01:21 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Brent Burns. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Andre Vasilevsky. 

01:28 - Zack Phillips (Other)
Yeah right yeah, david Pasternak. Wow, brent burns. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, andre vasilevsky. Yeah right, yeah, david poster, knock. Wow, they're like high level. Yes, 88, wow, uh, back in the day. 

01:33 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Like for anyone who's old school, I'm not gonna leave them out. Eric lindross yeah yeah, eric lindross, without the concussions, would have gone down as one of the all-time greats If he played nowadays. So my dad grew up in. 

01:54 - Zack Phillips (Other)
Durham, which is where Lindros played his junior hockey, so he used to go and watch him all the time, so he's a huge, huge Lindros fan. Every year at Christmas we do the ceremonial hanging of Ericic lindros and he has an eric lindros christmas tree ornament that goes up on the tree. It's the only non-leafs thing that we have. It's eric lindros in a flyers uniform really a shame. 

02:15 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
There's a lot of lot of professional athletes that have been affected by concussions, cut a career short, but back in the day, just you know some of the hits these guys used to give scott stevens over the middle of the ice. You know, you run into that freight train. Uh, it's over for you. It is super bowl week. We're going to get to a guest here shortly, but, as a reminder, pinnacle is the world's sharpest sharpest sports book now available to bettors in ontario. If you're in ontario, I would 100 recommend signing up this week at Pinnacle. Great prices on pretty much everything. Great props offering as well. Find out what professional bettors have known for decades. Pinnacle is where the best bettors play. You must be 19 plus in Ontario, not available to US bettors. And again, please play responsibly. Cannot preach that enough. 

03:08
We now welcome in our guest here on episode number 88 of circles off. He has over 1 million dollars in lifetime contest winnings. He's a two-time back-to-back winner of the west gate super contest. He's a handicapper for pregamecom. If he's selling to you directly, it's not him. Be very careful for impersonators out there. At Fezzik Sports on Twitter, steve Fezzik now joins us on Circles Off. Steve, how's it going? 

03:34 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
well, thank you for having me on the pod. I'm humbled by it, and we should have some lively discussions about various topics, and what better time than right before the Super Bowl? 

03:43 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
absolutely we we've. I've been very interested in having you on for a long time. You are one of the most polarizing people in the gambling twitter space. There are some people out there that give you a really bad rap. I know that my opinion of you has changed over time. Uh, I'm a type of person who, I guess maybe, is quick to rush to judgment. We'll'll get over. We'll get through the tough questions as well here. This is not going to be just like a. You know, I have to do my due diligence in asking the tough questions. But for those who don't know you, Steve, give a little bit of a background on yourself and mainly how you got involved in the betting space. 

04:19 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Sure. So I'm a math geek, former corporate guy. Actuary, worked for Transamerica in Los Angeles, was an executive with them. This is in the early 1990s, throughout the 90s, and I started going to Vegas in pretty much 1994 on during the football season and discovered wow, this is really profitable, outstanding opportunities. By 1996, I was coming to either Vegas or Reno Every other weekend. I was rotating with another actuary partner of mine and he was going up the other weeks I couldn't make it. 

04:59
And we're betting sports and doing, frankly, better at that than we were in our executive jobs. And then, finally, by 2001, I made the move and I headed to Vegas to bet full time and to gamble full time. 

05:13 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Okay, so let's walk through that a little bit. Obviously, the actuary component helps. We have a mutual friend of ours who's been on circles off before it goes by, plus ev analytics on twitter, also an actuary in the space. Very, you know good depth of knowledge in terms of numbers. But there are a lot of people who struggle to transition from just like a regular job, even where they're involved in math or accounting, to the sports betting market. Talk us through like. What did that look like to you your first trips to Vegas? Were you betting mainly on sports? What was it to you that stood out as like this is a huge opportunity for me sure, and I was born in 63. 

05:55 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
So I started coming to Vegas in the late 80s and, to be honest, I played blackjack, blackjack speedable, read some books about it, took, took my shot at it. Never really had much success. With Blackjack, the house edge is tiny. There's talk about whether the games were legitimate the handheld pitch games in the late 80s. I can't really comment on that. I never really got. I never really progressed to a level to really take it all that seriously. But I started to look towards the sports betting and I guess I had an epiphany in the early 90s and remember I'm not living in Vegas, so I'm coming to Vegas three, four times a year having fun, and it was during football season. 

06:36
I noticed parlay cards. This is like 1992. And I'm like this is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen. They just print these lines out on Wednesday and they just stay there. You can stay lines, you can play. They don't move at all. They're on the card. You can just play as much as you want, no one's going to stop you and people would be like what happened. It shows what. 

07:00
Oftentimes there's a narrative out there and everyone just copies it like minor birds. Oftentimes there's a narrative out there and everyone just copies it like minor birds. They don't actually think about whether it's legitimate and maybe, like the movie the Big Short, showed how you know, in the financial markets, this could be the case and everyone said, oh, they're sucker parlays or sucker bets. You know you can't play parlays and that's largely generally correct, but it's nothing could be further than the truth. 

07:25
Nothing was better that I was ever that I've ever encountered than playing parley cards in the 1990s. You were laying less with if you played enough teams. You were basically laying under minus one 10 with three day old, stale lines on half point cards where you can get plus three and a half. On lines that were like two and a half, it was impossible to lose. You could not lose. If you had any acumen you would win, and yet no one all the so-called experts out there had no. Seemingly they'd look at and throw in the garbage can and go bet their straight bets and lose. And so we became very arrogant, egotistical towards the sharp community that was out there, you know, discussing how to win betting sports, because we felt like they have no clue. If they haven't discovered, if they can't see that this is phenomenal, then clearly they haven't evolved to even a basic level, so that you know that that was the 90s, and then things got harder so. 

08:20 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
So we're basically 30 years later now and there's a lot of people who are in the exact same boat still nowadays. Right, Like, whether it's stale lines, pools where the odd set for NFL's released on Tuesday or Wednesday in their league. They can't even really compare to a sports book like Pinnacle and figure this out for themselves, and the only reason I mentioned that is because there's gotta be. It was the knowledge of how the betting market works for you to uncover that. This is an edge, and what I'm trying to get at is how did you figure that out for yourself? Was it asking around? Was it some sort of understanding of like, how other markets work? Because for some people, they just cannot grasp this concept of like. This is an efficient market. Over time, the numbers are going to move. The closer we get to game time, the more efficient the number is going to be. Obviously, you were able to recognize that. What led to you being able to pick up on that? 

09:14 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
I think backgrounds and financial markets, just that. A stock price, the whole whole study economics in Northwestern, you know the market being either efficient or semi-efficient. If a stock's trading at a certain level, that's what it's worth. And I felt like you know it really was just a marketplace and we're getting to betting exchanges where it really is a marketplace, where if Kansas City is minus two in the global marketplace, maybe that's not a completely accurate number but it's pretty close and when Circa's taken $300,000 a pop or a million a pop and other books are taking really large wagers, it is beyond a leap of faith to say, well, the real number should be Kansas City minus five or the real number should be Philly minus three. It's possible but it's so unlikely. You know a great unbiased estimate of what the line should be in more cases than not especially if we're not talking openers but we're talking lines that have settled in is just the current marketplace number. 

10:16 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Yeah, I mean I I largely agree with what you said there, steve. Going back to the parlay cards, I think what most people you know, know, even in today's day, don't really realize is like the, the stuff that people say like, oh yeah, you're never going to get an edge betting the parlays, you can't bet the parlay cards. That's sometimes where you know one year, something might, something changes, something like that. And then now it's like, wow, this is actually the thing that does make the most amount of money. And it's crazy, you know, with with you saying you can get 3x, 4x parlays, laying less than minus 110 stale lines, two, three points off also the parlay and that factor is going to be a benefit. Right, because you're going to compound that edge and you're going to, you're going to want to bet more on those if, if they're winning. So, in theory, having a parlay card, there was also a net positive versus just even the stale numbers, right, yeah? 

11:02 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
so you were laying less than minus 110 and you were getting insane numbers. You're getting Northwestern plus 21 and a half when the market was 17 and a half against Illinois. Just numbers that you couldn't believe. Remember, the market was a lot less efficient. It's not like today where if there's a bad number put up there on Sunday night, brad Powers goes and whacks it immediately. I mean numbers would just stay out there for days and days and then you'd see these huge global moves happen. On Saturday morning you wake up and you see three point moves in college and the NFL. Now, if you wake up on a Sunday morning, it's not unusual, other than injury news, nothing moves. Guess what. The number's right. You've number's right. You've got situations where you got canadians releasing minus two and a half and up to three it goes. And now, um, if it hits three and a half, then you've got, um, honduras candy hat capper taken plus three and a half and back down to three. It goes. I mean, it's just, the numbers just are not off by much I agreed, agreed. 

12:02 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
so, um, you know if it's just an easier time to be actually a bookmaker on that side right, because you're able to set the market and shape the market at the lesser limits versus what you would have had to, you know, even a couple of years back. Okay, so, steve, you mentioned that you are a proponent of the top down method, as you just call it, which is, you know, make sure you're taking and factoring in the market, having respect for that last, that last number. But I've also heard you say multiple times that you do originate for a few sports, and I believe one of those is included is the NFL. So I want to give you a chance to kind of talk about that. How is the origination form for the NFL a lot different in your eyes? 

12:41 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Yeah. So as a content guy, I to originate in the nfl because to be able to talk as an expert I need to be able to do my own work. So I come up with my power ratings. Uh, I try to minimize the player personnel stuff because it's just not my, my expertise, so I'm aware of it. I've got what the backup quarterback's worth versus a starter. 

13:02
You know this is a good example. Like even people in our industry they don't know what you know Mahomes versus Henney is, and like it's not. I mean Mahomes is about five points better than an average starting quarterback. I'm not on an island there. He's the best and Henney is about two and a half points worse. So it's about a seven and a half point difference. What's the impact on the spread? Probably it would be eight, without going into the nuances of why it's not exactly seven and a half. It's all numbers, um. So I do need to be aware of that when I'm live wagering, when purdy, you know, goes down, I need to be able to know what the breakdown to josh johnson is. You know that's actually a very difficult thing because you know purdy's easy. He's a slightly below average starting quarterback minus one and a half. So where I I have him at base, I know because he performed so well this year. What does Josh Johnson, you guys, tell me? Is he a minus six? I don't know. 

13:52 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Right now. 

13:53 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I had a couple of good games last year. 

13:55 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I mean, based off watching Josh Johnson, you could argue he's a minus 20, but I mean that's obviously an exaggeration, but just because we brought this up. 

14:02 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I got to bring this up. It's a little bit off topic. Steve, you mentioned you're live betting. Okay, bam, Purdy went out. I've got to pick up Josh Johnson. You know what was crazy? As soon as Purdy went down, every single Josh Johnson sport card on eBay sold. It's crazy. It's just another form of beating a market. 

14:24
It's like if San Fran comes back and wins that game and Josh Johnson has to play in the Super Bowl and wins the Super Bowl, that card is 10, 20 X-ing in value and you just picked up a bunch for five bucks. 10 bucks. It's crazy. But when I saw that I was like, wow, the ultimate steam chase, josh. 

14:39 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Johnson should sign a deal with Johnny Cash. I've been everywhere, man, because that certainly would be popular. So ideally, in an ideal world, bottoms Up is fantastic. Do both, do top down and bottom up and do all these sports. This sounds great. You've become an expert. Think about how strong it is to be a strong bottom up handicapper. 

15:01
and do top downs of right angle sports is about to release their plays. You've got your numbers. They say set up Xavier over. You're like yep, I agree. I'm betting it because you know that you made the line two points higher already on the total and that that's likely to be a play instead of a cancel. And he says set up Dayton under. And you're like, no, no, that's a, that's a phony, no good. And so now you can make more money. But now here's the problem how many college basketball teams are there right now, 330?. 

15:34
So let's say we spend two minutes two minutes a day on Villanova, reno, unlv. Every one of them and a lot of candy cappers do this. Well, that's 11 hours a day. Spending a crappy Two minutes on the team, how are you Going to know All the nuances of the team? How are you? Going to know. 

15:53
Texas A&M's flight got Rerouted and their planes, trains and automobiles Today in their game in Arkansas. True story You're not, it's just impossible. So I'd make the case that all these guys that do nothing but but top down I'm sorry, bottom up, handicapping like this and do every team, they don't make anything, none of these guys I know. I mean they, they win, but they, they work 100 hours a week and they grind out a living because, let's say, it lands you on three bets and you're betting a thousand game and you somehow you're hitting 55. It's still nothing. You're making 150 a day. 

16:29
You know, go work at mcdonald's as a manager. You got to find ways to make a lot more money than that if you're going to do this for a living. Whereas, by contrast, my friend bill crackman, cracker, burger um, he can't name a player on texas a and m, but he might have 40 college basketball bets on a Saturday with this network of people and do and he'll do very, very well Just doing top down relying. I guess he's relying on some others doing the bottom up heavy lifting. 

16:57 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
So, steve, are you making a ton of cash then betting on sports? 

17:01 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Am I making a ton of cash? 

17:04 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Are you making cash bet on sports like how's the, how's the roi coming, how like what would you say your projected earn is compared to? Like the media stuff? 

17:12 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
I oh, that's it. That's great to compare. I make more betting than from the media stuff. Um, as far as but I mean that's, I live in las vegas. If I mean, like I hear this question, I, I get this question all the time. You know, do you win? And it's like I, I think it's a silly question. No, I'm a professional gambler and I lose. I have no idea what I'm doing. 

17:31
I mean, like a poker player, do you win? Everyone wins, everyone. That like is good, wins like. The challenge is winning a lot. Of course. If you're a poker player and you, for instance, and you can't beat a one, three, no limit game against Doraurus in Las Vegas, yeah, I mean, I don't believe you. All you have to do is read Ed Miller's books, work on your game for six months. 

17:50
My 11-year-old son can win playing 1-3. I think they'd probably kick him out, though. But the problem is how much are you winning? It's like, are you winning $6 an hour? Well, maybe you should probably find some place else to work. It's maximizing what you're doing, how you're earning, et cetera. 

18:08 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
So that's very interesting and I want to pick up on that because I think the top down bottom up conversation is very fascinating and me and Johnny are polar ends of the spectrum on this, although I'm closer to the middle than maybe I let on a lot of times. So I incorporate some top down. He's a left-wing activist. I've originated sports successfully for a long time Baseball for a while, that's where I started, eventually lost my edge there, but hockey and the NFL, NHL and NFL and there's an inherent advantage, I find, in that you're talking about scaling right and winning money and winning a lot of money, and there's something to me that's pretty nice about being able to just bet at a certain time of day, not even sometimes in the morning. You don't even have to obtain a ton of closing line value, depending on, like in the hockey market. I think it's just like very, very unique. 

19:05
But you don't really have to worry about being shut down in three, four, five bets and I think there's something to that. Like I know what you're saying about. You're going to get less bets, you're going to get less volume, but I don't have to worry about liquidity on the bets that I make for the most part, and if I do the top-down approach which I do do, I'm in Ontario. We have 35 regulated sports books in here that are just giving away money. Why would I not take this money right? But okay, I can place five bets on one book and then I'm limited to a hundred bucks. And then I place another five bets and I'm limited to $3. It becomes exponentially harder to scale. So I think that there's like a happy medium to be found there where people can still find it valuable to originate, make their own numbers on games, try to beat a market at scale. Maybe it's not at post, maybe it's not game day, could be overnights or whatever, but I still think that there's some inherent value in that. 

20:04 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Oh, of course there's inherent value and I I'll talk about Brad again. Like Brad powers, does you know the the bottom up approach, but he's smart, he's not like a dummy, like a lot of the bottom up people, a lot of the bottom up people, that the problem they have is they're there, it's too academic for them. 

20:23
They, they, they feel like the way to win at sports is oh, let me take all my notes and study all night long, go over everything, spend 12 hours and then at 3 pm I'll go take my final exam. All right, and all those people, I get it. You can talk all you want about. Hey now there's no logistics problems, there's no liquidity problems. I can bet 100,000 a game in the NFL. I've done all my work. I can make zillions of dollars. I get it. That all makes sense when the market's somewhat inefficient, which may well apply still to hockey and it may well apply to MMA, but I don't think it applies anymore to the NFL or to college basketball. And all those people that profess that maybe I'm just running in the wrong circles. They're not betting $100,000 a game, they're not betting $20,000 a game, they're not living in mansions, they're making a living and they're winning, but they're grinding, whereas the right way to do it is and I tweeted about this, and I'm using one guy because I have no affiliation whatsoever with Brad, other than you know we live in, you know we're, we both worked together previously and he's a real sharp guy and he evolved. 

21:31
And so here comes the Super Bowl line. It opens up at 51 in the total. This is a college football handicapper. He does 95 percent of his work in college football. There is no way that Brad Powers should ever get a sharp bet that Rob Pozzola doesn't get first or Steve Fezzik doesn't get first, or that 20 other NFL experts don't get first. But he got it. He got the 51 under and we didn't because as soon as he bet it had moved. We should be personally embarrassed by that. That is just. That's just an embarrassment that we let a college football guy grab our total from underneath our noses. 

22:07 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I'm embarrassed. I picked up a 51 and a half on there, but it is what it minus. Oh wait, but it's all good I was. 

22:12 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I was actually passed out like I was so drunk after watching the game. I had won a big bet on the eagles earlier in the day, so it's like celebratory for me. I wasn't jumping on that early line, but for more of Brad Powers. He is part of the Hammer Betting Network. You can check out the Hit the Books channel. Best college football stuff out there Honestly, would put him up there with the best college football creators. Must check out his stuff. But to get back to what you're saying, steve, you know I was. 

22:40
I originated baseball for a long time and I think many of your points are valid. So when I first started originating baseball it was probably 2015 or 2016. And if I woke up in the morning I'd probably have 15 edges on a full board. You know sides, totals, run line, whatever. And then three years later I'd wake up in the morning and there's two games that I can bet. And now I wake up two years later and there's no games to bet in the morning because they've been pounded into shape overnight. It kind of has become that way where it's more and more challenging, if you're the bottom up person, to sustain that living. It's basically a race to see who can get down the earliest at this point. 

23:24 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Exactly right. So I had a discussion years ago with Gil Alexander out in Vegas. He's on V-CIN, does a great job with the numbers game and he was a baseball handicapper. He would give out to his clients plays and I would like I'd literally be screaming at him and I'd be like you got to give them out overnight because Texas would be plus 140 overnight, and then he'd give out plus 118. And then he'd get closing line value because they closed plus 105. 

23:49
And he'd break even or lose a little or win a little, and I'd be like and I would tell him I don't care who you like at noon on game day, don't care, you've got your model right here. You don't know the team has the flu. You don't know that this pitcher has been out all night drinking before he's going to pitch. These other ancillary factors are not in your model and so your model is going to be flawed because it doesn't have the full information that the marketplace necessarily has. However, your model is certainly winning against the opening number that the sports books put up. Put up so you can beat the, the openers, no problem. But then once the market limits go higher, then there's there's still people that can win, but they become few and far between agreed. 

24:35 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I mean I, I do. I do a show every sunday morning in the nfl because there's a huge demand for it and I start every single show by saying that I'm a pro, better, but I don't even think I can win by placing bets at this time anymore. I'll give out my opinions on the game, but it's either something that I didn't think has moved far enough or where there's market resistance against something that I like and neither of those is great to bet into. And I think you know a lot of people will always ask me you know number moves against you. Do you put down more money on the game? And it's like no, I don't, I'm I, I know what my, you know what my blind spots are. Maybe somebody knows something about this game. Exactly what you've said, like players injured, flu, whatever, they didn't travel properly the night before. 

25:18
I think that there is everything nowadays in sports betting or even in society. I, I think, is one extreme or the other, and there's no one willing to settle in the middle and just say, hey, there's elements of both that we can incorporate here. I'm friends with Eric Woz, who you may or may not know, but last time I was in Vegas, sat down, had a dinner with him and he incorporates a lot of the new stuff, or even narrative-based stuff, into his handicapping and has success with doing that and people will just dismiss that. And for me, I think there's this inherent value in both the model number like the math and the subjectivity and new stuff, and if you can combine them together, you're better off than just taking one approach or the other, and I'm not sure whether or not you agree with that. 

26:10 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
I agree 100%, not just in sports betting, but in life. I'll use the far be for me to like further polarize the United States. But the biggest problem we have is that it's Everything or nothing, all right. You either don't want me to be able to go out and buy a rifle to go hunting, or you want me to be able to go out and buy the biggest bazooka available in the marketplace, can't we? Have like somewhere in the middle. 

26:42
I think is a really you can. You might personally disagree with that, that, but I think we have the compromise that that is where we should land and have, instead of just being so adamant that you're right and I'm wrong about everything. And so you hear all the time, the only way to win betting sports is blah, blah, blah. Now there are dozens and dozens and dozens of ways to win betting on sports. 

27:08 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I will say there are some ways that are better than others, because if you just calculate what the expected um edge is, if it isn't that high, you should find other methods the uh, the like left first, right and centrist idea is funny, but uh, at the end of the day I think the reason we don't get the center stuff is because then, like both people are just unhappy you might as well just like to like, then you're both mad. 

27:32
It's even worse and it's probably the same with the CLV debate and the truthers and stuff on Twitter as well. Personally, I do think like originating actually has a significantly harder work, more risk, less upside than top down approach. The top down approach and mainly the reason why is when you're originating it. Actually if you mess, if you are not as thorough and don't put as much time into it, your mistakes will be uh, amplified. If you're doing the top down approach and you fuck up a couple bets or you're not there, you miss a couple moves. Worst case, you got a rough market number and you're there. 

28:06
If you're an originator and you're just betting your opinion into open market every day at the same time and you win, you're going to win a good amount. If you lose, you're going to lose a lot of money. You're going to lose more than you would have won in the upside scenario. So I'm a big proponent of not originating the major market sport, like not originating NFL and stuff like that. Or, like Rob said and like you've been saying, originate in a way where you're also taking into account getting good numbers and making sure you're constantly there, because if you're just going to originate and say I put my plays in every Wednesday at 3 pm, you're getting smoked regardless. 

28:44 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Yeah, I think what's very interesting about this whole debate and again, I'm way more in the center of this than anyone else but one approach is reliant on the other, right, if there was nobody originating and no one betting bottom up, the top-down approach doesn't work because there's no one shaping that market. So I think that's where it's like. I would advise most bettors to take a top-down approach. I don't think a lot of them have it in them, have the skills, the math, the, you know, the, whether you need to be an Excel guru or have some programming knowledge, automation there's tons that goes into being able to originate a market that, frankly, people just don't know what. It takes years and years and years of back-testing models, some things like that, to get it to a certain level. But if, if I was to never encourage like if you're to discourage that and say, oh, you should never do this, then the other approach, the top down, doesn't doesn't work. There's no one in market to shape it for you. 

29:39 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
No, it's still it's still using using just building a model and doing in a sport. Even if you're not successful, we'll build betting acumen and make you better across the board. Even if you're not successful will build betting acumen and make you better across the board. I think in general I do get a kick out of some of the MIT guys of the world saying, oh, creating a betting model is just not that difficult. I'm like it's not that difficult for everyone with a 780 math SAT that has a degree in computer science. For the average human being that works for a concrete company, it's going to be a little but those guys still aren't aren't winning much money. 

30:13 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Like it's. It's very easy. It's very easy, Sure, To potentially build a model that can predict where the lines and move, but to actually get the money down, do it all Like you're not going to win much. Like, give me, give me a really, really good NFL model. I don't necessarily think that I would earn significantly more than maybe I do right now on nfl a really good nfl model. 

30:35 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
You probably like two percent roi, two to three percent roi on a ton of liquidity sure if it so. 

30:43 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
So like, give me the chances. Like if you're telling me, yeah, this model is going to earn two percent of whatever you get down, you have the info. Yes, okay, I'm going no-transcript, but what I'm saying is, what I'm saying is like, give me a good NFL model in a sense that, like this, could potentially beat the market this year. We don't know if it's going to beat the market this year, but it's high likelihood. Obviously, over time it's going to go ham on that one. I'm going even harder now. Guess what? Don't have an edge. Gave back all my profits from last year Plus double that Cause I went harder. Like that's the risk of getting a good model and stuff like that. 

31:16 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
And then, obviously, let me go ahead. Let me address this because like and I'm sorry if this comes across wrong, but like I'll talk to experts and they'll say well, I personally did have a losing year, you know, betting football this year. Like they have no idea how damning that statement is it's impossible to have a losing year. It's not like like Brad powers isn't going to have a losing year in a hundred zillion years because he's making too many bets where he's playing under 52 when the club that, when it closes 41, I mean you your your edges, you've got to find bigger edges. If you actually having a losing year or you're bet sizing, well, I do get it. I mean, if you've had great success and you're betting $50,000 a game and the like, then you certainly could. Billy Walters could have a losing year in the NFL because he's playing with smaller edges. 

32:06 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Yeah well, if you're not staking correctly, then obviously the variance will get you and you have a losing year. 

32:10 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Or if you're playing like super, super aggressive, definitely you can have a losing season per sport well, also to steve's point, like if you're betting the nfl and you might end up with 50 bets a year, if you're just betting sides and totals and you, you know what the variance is, even if you have just a two to three percent edge yeah, you could lose. 

32:26 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
You could lose on 50 bets, but to lose like on the full year, yeah, with the top down it's. It's like you're just not trying or you're not doing. 

32:34 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Well, I mean, I'm gonna have more than 50 bets that I make on sunday just in one week exactly. Yeah, yeah, I mean, that's it. And people be all that. Well, that's crazy. No one could win playing that, it's it I. I use an example with the opener in the super bowl, within 15 minutes I bet at one the same book, circa they don't care, they're, they're, they're, they're, tremendous book. I went ahead and bet plus one and a half. I missed the two and a half. I think crack man got it. So I took Eagles plus one half and then, literally 15 minutes later, I took Kansas city plus two and a half at the same book. Not even a different books the same book within 15 minutes not even the different books, the same book within 15 minutes. 

33:10 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
So there you go. You have a a little bit of a middle there, and then, as of right now, I mean depends on the juice you got there but both of those look to be decent prices, as of this exact moment at least and it doesn't even matter. 

33:18 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
It doesn't even matter if they're good prices. The eagles could close minus five. It's still a good middle. 

33:23 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Oh, fair enough, nothing wrong fair enough, I, I just more meant like, typically I'm not a proponent of middling or scalping or Arving games, if I'd rather just you know. But the one side that is going to give me the EV and leave the other side, you know, and and and this is a great discussion because I have people are critical of me. 

33:39 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
I haven't always played back philosophy. So if I'm using the uh, the top down approach, let's say I'm, I'm right, angle sports is about to release, okay. And down approach, let's say I'm right angle sports, it's about to release, okay, and they give out Michigan under 134 and I get it. 

33:52
I'm fortunate enough to get it, even though I'm not going to get much. It's going to move. And then it drops down to 131. And then there's a 130. I'm like I'm playing over and people are like, well, wait a minute, you've got this great CLV closing line value. Why would you possibly dilute that? And because I'm not a big fan of the please god, right angle sports, be right on this game, I mean. But they've won 56 doesn't mean they're going to win 56 going forward leap of faith. Um, there's plenty. There's plenty of handicappers out there that have long-term 30-year records that have hit, you know, 54, 55. What do I expect them to hit going forward? No way they're hitting 53 and a half percent on their releases on game day. 

34:33 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
No way. Well, the way I see that, Steve, is that if you do believe, if you don't believe that they're hitting 53%, then then you can play back, and then, if you're going to win playing back, then eventually the market will play back and then the closing line will be efficient anyways in the long run. So for me, I'm going to disagree. 

34:48 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
It doesn't matter, I'm going to disagree. There's too many followers. There's too many lemmings in the market. There's people. 

34:54 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
So if you don't agree, like if you're making millions of dollars, why don't you just slam back everywhere and then you get free money? So why would you like? Why are you not playing it back into range then, if you disagree? 

35:04 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
If you tell me we're going to flip the coin, okay, me, we're going to flip the coin, okay. And if it comes up heads, I'm getting plus 100.25. How much? 

35:14 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
should I be betting on that? Well, I mean I'm saying I've got, but but you're, what you're saying is it's moving back down four points and you're like, nah, now I'm just leaving it there. If you, if you don't think that the four point position is good, you probably have at least two points in college basketball right. So at a minimum you can play a two-point arb depending on the juice, and be profitable in that, depending on the game total. So if you're looking at a four-point move, if that doesn't move back at least two points and you know rass had the edge and again I have no affiliation with rass like we, we got to have ed on or something like that I'm not defending rass and saying they're going to win by any means. I'm just defending the concept here of eventually, in the long run, the closing line value is more efficient every single day and every single bet that goes into it. 

35:52
So if RAS, is using, then that'll reflect in the market. Otherwise you can make tons of money off that. 

35:58 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Eventually, if they, if they live, let me. Let me just break it down. So browse releases an under one 34. All right, and it closes, and like five minutes later it's sitting at one 31. Okay, well, under one 34 is going to win. What do we say? Call it 55%. Fine, I think that maybe you think 56%. We're going to all be in the same ballpark under the 134. So it goes to 132. Well, now it's right around 50% at that point in time, right around it, all right. And now it goes to 131. And so at this point maybe let's say it settles in at 132, by example. So we've got a fine bet under 134. 

36:43
Why didn't I bet a zillion? Because I couldn't get down. The line moved too fast. I was only able to get a book or two and then boom, westgate goes to 131. All right, I'm playing over 131. That looks like it's going to be 52.5%, 52.7% type bet, whatever it is, and that has positive EV. But you know what? There's not a lot of 131 in the market, because 132 is what the market is. But, similar to the financial markets, volatility is your friend. When everybody's dealing 132, it's hard to make money. When some books are still out there stale 133, and some books are overreacting saying we're not going to take one more bet on this Dayton under the heck with that and we're going to be the low man in the entire marketplace 15 minutes later after a thousand people have all copied off of each other playing the same thing. I think it's a little bit naive to think the market is efficient to that point and not being a little bit too low, based upon all of those followers. 

37:36 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
But in theory. So let's say it goes too low and now you bet it at a group of other people are like yeah, 131 pops, RAS, overcorrection, whatever. I got to bet that back. Now those 131s are gone. So the in theory, wherever it settles is the correct price at the end of the day. If they have over corrected and it goes down to 128 and nobody hits it, 128 is the correct price. There's no over correction if you hit it back up to 132. What I'm saying is like I will hit them if I, if I believe it, like I can take down an entire market. You can take down tire market pasola's got. We can take down entire market. So why are we saying like oh it, it's an edge or it's not an edge? Like wherever it closes, that is the correct line. It doesn't matter who gave it out or how far it moves. 

38:15 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
I agree I've got to beat the closing number and I'm what I'm saying is the model of wait 10 minutes after a RAS release and play anti-RAS with the best number on the screen. I am very confident would bet that that will. That will clobber closing line. Am very confident would bet that that will. That will clobber closing line. 

38:31 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
But clobber it will beat closing line by enough to be profitable, fair enough but in that scenario, then you think that isolated bet is good in its own. 

38:36 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
In which case, yeah, of course I I agree, but I can't bet 10 zillion dollars on it. I could bet 1 000 on it, exactly right yeah, so do you? 

38:44 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
do you play back on any other scenarios, or just that? 

38:47 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
I play back on good. I do this all the time in the NFL. I feel like when there is a good story example the Bengals O-line they got three guys out. They're not going to be able to block anyone against Buffalo. That's a good story. So what happens? It opens three and a half and everyone's going to bet Buffalo because it makes a lot of sense. And anyone who watched the playoffs last year knows the Bengals couldn't protect Burrow and he's God and all and he zips the ball out. But that's a real problem. So that line goes all the way to six and then now it doesn't go to six, you can get plus six reduced. That's an example of the. I think that the good story gets disseminated too much in the market where initially the minus three nabs and minus fours were good bets on buffalo but we didn't take the bangles. Plus six reduce. You got to do that I agree with you. 

39:33 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I think that there's often like a an over move on a lot of these situations where you know, at that plus six number, like people are still betting buffalo, saying like, oh, the bangles offensive line three injuries. It's like well, that's already accounted for in the price it was. That's why the move happened in the first place. And I think we see a lot of this in the NFL. Steve, with the downgrade to backup quarterbacks in the first game and where, like, immediately, everyone, okay, the news happens right, everyone bets it because it's a downgrade, starting quarterback to backup in most instances is a downgrade in a lot of cases significant. Of course you want to get on that, but it just keeps going and going and going and going. And I mean anyone who's been betting the backup quarterback at post in the NFL for the last several years has made a lot of money doing that. I mean, I think this is like one of those situations where people just like the number does it's a price sensitivity thing, right, and obviously like the average person is not moving the market. But the difference between betting a two and a half and a three, the difference between tailing a right angle sports play at under 134 versus under 132,. 

40:48
I think this concept is completely lost on a lot of people, especially with this saturation of these new bettors in the space because of regulation. Everyone just wants to be on the same side as someone else. I can't even tell you how many times people message me during the day what do you like in hockey tonight? Well, I liked things at minus 120. They're minus 145 now. I don't want to tell them, the team that I bet, cause they're just going to go bet it at a certain price. Do you think that that's ever going to change, steve? Because, like I, I I struggle to see it changing, just because the lack of education in the space and also just like so many people who are unable to grasp the concept for whatever reason. 

41:28 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
I don't think it ever will. And to use an example, like if, if all you did was like listen to every expert and podcast Monday and Tuesday, and that Buffalo Cincinnati game, when the line was four, everyone was going to prefer Buffalo. That had a brain. Because I mean, because the, the, the, the number hadn't moved. So you're like, literally you will like pull a little check marks color coded, like nine of my 10 experts all prefer Buffalo. That's got to be the right side. Well, that's if they've done all their podcasts. 

41:56
When the line was six, that wouldn't necessarily have been the case. I even make the joke when a line is like two point six, all right. On Saturday night in the NFL, oftentimes that line moves up to three right, because what's happening is that in the global marketplace, unfortunately in the business that I'm in, you know, there's a lot of handicappers. There's not one handicapper out there worth the salt that's going to give out a plus two and a half when the line's 2.65. It's just like I know you can give out plus two and a half, even money, but they're going to pass. Or if they like the other side, they're going to lay the two and a half, so that line is going to go to three and, conversely, if a line's plus three, lay a dollar 15 or minus a dollar 20, a lot of times that line goes down to two and a half, just because every expert is landing on that game and the public isn't sensitive enough to the fact, realizing you know what you can lay two three on this game understood fair enough. 

42:49 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
So, steve, one question for you, just in regards to the betting here is uh, you mentioned circa sportsbook, and obviously you're in las vegas, but so where is like the bulk of your, your action, your handle getting down on? Is it more like the vegas, the vegas scene? 

43:03 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
yeah, so circa it takes the biggest limit, so that's where I bet the most, and caesars has really um stepped up game. Caesars is the second best sports book in Vegas. 

43:12 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
William Hill in Nevada. 

43:15 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Yes, yes, I only speak to Nevada. I live in Nevada and so I'm betting in Nevada. And those two, two books I would say just because on the app every other book the limits are so low and it's not so easy. So, to use an example, I'll give a story. You know, the MGM lets me bet on the app and their limits are low. So I just happened to be at an MGM property. I went up to bet and they said they voided the bets. They said so you got it. You got to bet on the app, all right, fine. So I put in the bets on the app at lower limits, all right, and I put them in. Then I walk up and I ask for oh, can I get a drink ticket? It's easy to get drink tickets in Vegas, it's no big deal. And they look at me and the ticket writer says I'm sorry, sir, drink tickets are only for people who bet at the cash window. 

44:00
So the MGM is telling me they don't like me, they're happy, but they take my bets on the app even though they're reduced. So it's really hard to lose a lot of money gambling on these apps when you're sharp because it's so hard to like for them to take any volume. 

44:17 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Yes, at least that's a positive way to spin it right. It's hard to lose a lot when you can't bet a lot, that's for sure. Yes, who? 

44:21 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
are these guys on the internet. They're posting like fifty thousand dollar bets. 

44:26 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Well, and it's like it's that's the thing, steve, it's, it's out, they're outing themselves and they don't even know it. 

44:33 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
They're outing themselves in the movie the sting. 

44:36 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Um, he said it best. You know one of the one of the gamblers. They're playing a poker game. They're like they wouldn't let you play in this game if you weren't a sucker. 

44:43 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Yes, they wouldn't let you bet 50 000 if you weren't a chump the saddest thing, though, about that, the that entire situation is you'll have the person who posts the 50,000 bet, 100,000 bet, as if it's some sort of flex, because we know why they're getting like all the sharp bettors know why that person is getting those limits but then you have the following of people who don't know right, like all the rec bettors are like oh, this person must be. 

45:10
It's just like this self-fulfilling prophecy where now this person gains credibility in the eyes of 99% of the people that are out there because they don't have the you know. They're just not immersed in the space and don't understand that. This is embarrassing and that's the biggest thing in the space. I'm bothered by many things. That might be the single biggest one when people dunk on themselves and they don't realize it, but everyone else just eats it up. It's like, oh, you're the goat, you're this and you're that, and it's like, no, no, this person is not the goat of sports betting and sports betting in many ways it's like blackjack. 

45:47 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
No one's going come out and say I'm a big man, I can go ahead and shuffle track like a god in six decks and I tell you when the aces are coming up. Think about this. It's like why, if you were that good, would you try to bring it to everyone's attention that you're this great mastermind that can beat the casinos and then ultimately get your limits? Now I'm in a unique situation. A lot of casinos will let me play that don't let other people play, because then I say positive things about them. And you know why I say positive things? Because they let me play, and so I can see the positives of. Why should I rip on a casino that's treating me well? 

46:29 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
The old influencer partnership. 

46:31 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
It's a little bit unfair, like I get it, and the same thing happens to me, obviously for the same reasons. I have a social media presence where if I wanted to berate a sports book, it's going to affect their business in some way or another. If I have done that in the past, believe me, they reach out to me right away to right the wrong, and I have done that in the past, believe me, they reach out to me right away to right the wrong and they're hopeful that I will, you know, spin it positively. But it is kind of sad that we've gotten to that state, because it's like what about the poor person who, you know, doesn't have the, doesn't have your 60,000, 60,000 followers on Twitter, steve, who's in the same boat as you and gets restricted and can't do anything about it? I just hate how the industry has become. You know, every better can be treated in a different way rather than every better is treated like the same person. So in some ways. 

47:20 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
I respect the South Point. South Point doesn't take my action. All right, so I can't bet at the South Point Chris Andrews and he does a fine job and everyone loves Benny Maiello and Jimmy Vaccaro over there, but they won't take my action. The one thing I don't like is that the South Point does a lot of things and this is true not just South Point, but other books. They're a paper tiger. They beat their chest about all the really good things they do, like they did last week where they dealt the nickel line on the money line in the conference championships and they do take some big action but ultimately you're being asked not to play. 

47:53
If you're a shark, better and what. And the thing that I think is naive about all this you know what. I can get rob to go in there and bet for me. I can get like the hitman to go in and bet for me. There's a I I if I want to get down 24, 7 against your book, and if you want to get down 24, seven against your book and if you want to really make me angry, you know, by by by, by calling me out, I assure you I will hold no grudges and I will get 10 times the volume against you than I ever would have gotten just betting myself. 

48:21 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I like that out of spite. I'm like, I'm like that in the same, in the same way. Yeah, I mean, if you've had Kenny in the book. 

48:30 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
This is Kenny Houston million dollar blackjack. So the Westward Ho, which is a McDonald's now it's right where we're resorts world and Riviera were, and the old Stardust, so $200 max bet. And they barred Kenny Houston and he was furious and he called it. He's got his blackjack team betting two thousand a hand at all these different places. He's like tonight's the Westward Ho night. Go in there, get the coupon, get the don't lose on 22 coupon. Save it for when you double 11 and catch the ace. Then use it. Save 400 bucks instead of 200. It's time to pound the hoe. 

49:03 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
All right, steve, I'm going to pivot here. I would be doing a disservice to our audience if I didn't ask you the tough questions. There will be people that are very upset with me for having you on this Circles Off this week, because they will say oh, steve Fezzik is a scam tout. You know he's selling picks, so on and so forth. If he's such a winning better then why is he selling picks? I'll give you the floor here to explain your process in terms of the pick selling in specific because, generally speaking, I think it's something that people want to know about. 

49:38 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Sure, and I bet my bets and then I give them out to my clients. I'm not compromising the marketplace. My clients would do better if I gave them to my clients before I bet them. And I move the market sometimes, but I don't. I'm a first and foremost. I've always been a professional sports better. That's what I did before I worked for any tout service. And, yes, it's up to the consumer to decide. Is there value? Is there not value? 

50:04 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Also, I'm like the one honest guy in this business. Do you actually think there's value then? 

50:10 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Yeah, Do I think that's a great question? Do I think there's value? So I'm independently tracked by a guy named Computer Bob. He gets all my plays. He's tracked me over the years. I've won on eight of my 10 years at pregame against market widely available numbers, and I did have lost two years. I've had big years. Last year I won 100 units and I'm the first to tell everyone don't buy my picks. 

50:33
I know my picks are for sale. You can buy my best bet on a Monday night college basketball game. Twenty two dollars, All right. People are like I'm betting on two hundred a game. Should I buy it? No, don't buy my picks. I don't want you to buy my picks. The only way you're going to win is to buy my annual packages, get all my plays so that you're not paying $22 when you're betting $100 a game, and he's probably you know what. You probably still shouldn't buy my annual packages. However, let's say you're going to gamble anyways and you're going out there and you're going to hit 50%. With me, you're going to hit 53%. I think that's a realistic target. That's what I've hit historically over at pregame and people derive pleasure also from winning versus losing and being a winning bettor. But to think that you could win betting low amounts is naive and I lay it out to clients. I'm honest with them about that. 

51:20 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
So one of the biggest criticisms would be okay, you sell picks over at pregame. How much is the annual package? Sorry? 

51:27 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
So what happens is that typically it's $999 for like football for the year and then if you're savvy and you get coupons and you wait for like like, we'll have an early bird you can get it for like 699. I'm just making these numbers up. They're approximately correct. 

51:40 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Yes, so I guess I had a Superbowl package that I put that. 

51:44 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
I put up and I'm selling it for $39. You could buy it for $29 for 24 hours. You can get all my prop bets on the Superbowl. 

51:52 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
So I was what I was going to say. More is like okay, let's say it's a thousand bucks, obviously, average price, maybe 700 or whatever, chop that up. Let's say you're getting three, 50, a sub to your pocket. I don't know how many subs you have, but the the point and again, this is not my opinion, but what a lot of people do have a criticism with is like if you are going to win, hit 53 or more in nfl, you want a couple, uh, super contests. We know you have the money to actually bet and get down. It's not like you're under capitalized. Oh, I only have a thousand bucks to my name. We know that's's not the case. Why? What do you need the extra 10 grand for, five grand for from selling the picks, when you can play that on? If you're, if you're doing so well, you can just make that money anyways. 

52:32 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Well, I can't. I can't make that money because I am making it anyways. So I this is just extra revenue. So, Johnny, let me use an example. So Johnny Chan is a great poker player and people hire him as a consultant to help them with poker. Phil Helmuth does the same. Why does Phil Helmuth represent different poker? He's a great poker player. He could just play poker and make a living. Why do great fund managers work as fund managers when they could just invest themselves and make a good living? Because you know what they both. It's not. They're not mutually exclusive in any way, shape or form. The one exception to that is horse racing. I've been hyper critical of the horse racing industry because how the hell can I make money in a parimutuel pool if I'm telling all you guys to bet my horse and now I get paid four to one instead of six to one? 

53:19 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
but in theory sports betting is like is like that too, because it is a lower liquidity market right, obviously, with the stock market and, by the way, I also am against. I would be vehemently against using a hedge fund manager to manage your finances and paying a fee on that as well. But in general, like it just doesn't add up to some people Like, hey, I make so much money, I hit 56%, but also buy my picks for I'm going to take home 300 bucks off this and might get an extra 5,000. Yes, I get it. Make money where you can, but it's tough to believe that there's going to be value in those picks. And if there was, then there's no reason to give them out for 350 bucks. 

53:56
You know what I mean. Or why wouldn't you just go get on a free roll somewhere with someone if it's so good, and probably make a hundred times that amount? How do you know? I'm not doing that. All I'm saying is like, in general, if the picks are good, there's no way you would want that to be sold for $300. And it's very hard to believe that the people who are buying those picks are going to be able to make money off of off of them in the long run, like I? Might? Do you disagree, rob? I don't mean to call you out. I know I'm getting a little like a tacky. 

54:27 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I don't mean to do that. I do disagree, but I've also been involved in pick sales before. Right, I ran Prediction Machine for a year. I've been in there before. People are like, well, you don't need the money, you're betting on sports or whatever. It's like, well, I'm driven by money, and if I can still bet this myself and I still feel like I'm giving out valuable plays which I did I would never, by the way, like if I lost my edge or felt like it wasn't a value to anyone. Whatever I'm doing, whether it's content, pick sales product I would never promote that, but I've been there, so I feel it. 

55:05
And like there's this tout chart that circulates all the time by Sprager right, and then Rufus retweets it and this and that, and it's like this is not the be all and end all. Like there's so many different shoot-offs of that chart, in my opinion, that are not fair. Now I think it's a valid question, though, of if you are betting this yourself and you are selling it. I mean that could potentially impact your own livelihood there. So if you think that there's something of value here, what's stopping someone from going and beating up the market with the numbers that you're giving out the plays you're giving up. What's stopping someone from potentially reverse engineering what you're doing? You post public power ratings for nfl as well, like there's all that stuff that's out there there is. I think it's legitimate for someone to question whether or not there's value in that, if that makes sense yeah, this is a great point. 

55:54 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Because the second let's say I like an under in the game and I bet under 140. If I give out one under 140, I will never see 141. If I stay quiet about it it's possible I might get a better number and be able to bet it again. So pretty much when I released that, there goes my second kick at the can. If you will, that I potentially could do, but I don't think you should be discussing me. I'm just a minor cog in the greater picture. Use right angle sports. Why is right angle sports they? 

56:21 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
bet their stuff. They compromise right angle sports, wise right angle sports. They bet their stuff. They compromise the market explain I'll explain the difference, okay, so? So I'm glad you brought that up. So here's the and if you guys want to tell me after a, shut the fuck up no, no, you're entitled to your opinion, so so pretty much steve okay, and I'm gonna give the real limits here that we can get okay. So question would be what time does your pick package come out for nfl? Like, when do those plays get released? 

56:42 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
It all varies. 

56:43 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Okay, Roughly if you were to pick like do any go out early week? Do any go out on Sunday? 

56:47 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Typically I'll have one or two releases early in the week Sunday night, monday, one midweek, and then come Friday and Saturday I'll start putting up props and maybe one additional side or total. 

56:59 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
Got it Okay. So what I'm hearing from that is like majority will come before, the limits are super high and that's that is good for the actual customers in theory. But so here's what I'm saying you mentioned, here's the info we have you released. Earlier in the week you bet the play before it gets released, all right. So what that tells me is you're not even betting the max amount of money that you can bet on that play before it gets released because it's still a widely available market number that you're giving out the limits there. You're betting in Vegas. Take down every Vegas out. You might be able to get 10, maybe a re-bet on Circa it's 20, 30, 40. So you're not betting above 40 dimes a game right there Already, early week. That would be a shock if you're betting above 40 times a game. So what I'm saying is if there's so much value, in those plays and you've hit every year 56%. 

57:50 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Whatever tracked a hundred units last year, I don't hit 50. Who said I hit 56%? 

57:52 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I don't hit 53, 53, but but for example, like a hundred units last year, like big, big years stuff, like that. In what scenario are you just leaving those numbers on the board? You would just make more money by taking down all of the numbers instead of giving it to your consumers to play. So it's a great question. 

58:07 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
So it's a great question. So do I just throw Kelly Criterion out in the garbage, can? I'm a professional gambler. I have a million dollar bankroll. I think this play is a 54% bet. All right, which is really good on an NFL side. I have a three percent edge bang. That's a thirty thousand dollar full kelly bet with a full million dollar bankroll. If I'm betting half kelly, that's only fifteen thousand dollars. Fifteen thousand dollars is not going to compromise the nfl marketplace so even early in the week. 

58:34 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
So then how'd you win a hundred? If you won a hundred units last year, then there you go. There's your bankroll well above a hundred million. You've been doing this for years. You have millions in super contest winnings. It doesn't add up that early week. 

58:46 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
How am I going to bet $15,000 on a prop bet? That's not widely available. 

58:51 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
What I'm saying is if you're giving it out and it's available, but you bet them before, it's impossible. It doesn't add up Because if you were to have bet everything in the market to get the max amount, it wouldn't be available for your subscribers. Difference between you and rass not to defend rass again because now I'm like a rass truther is on the college basketball total. I vehemently believe right angle sports will get, will make more money from the pick selling service than they will from betting those picks. And ed has made that conscious decision that his sell service will make him more money to sell them than what he can get down. In your scenario it's impossible that the pick selling service can make you more money than getting down on the picks, given the time and the liquidity in the market in that time and also given the fact that you're mentioning that you bet the plays before you give them up. 

59:39 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
You know. It's a great point that when you you talk about props, I think I might. I might agree with you if I was capitalized throughout the country and I could bet in other states. You're right. I would be much better off whacking these bets at fanduel draft kings in colorado, arizona, pennsylvania, maine, and by the time I got done with them then the value would be gone and I couldn't give it out. But I'm not in those states to bet those plays. So they're sitting out there and I'm literally staring at a screen where I'm like, well, I can't bet these and they're fantastic. 

01:00:10
And it's true, If I have a subscriber in California or Nevada that doesn't have access to these books, he's not going to be able to benefit from those as well. So I mean it's it. It. It's an excellent point that with the legalization of sports betting, it has become way easier to win betting on sports If you're located in certain States, to the point that there are people that have actually they'll drive across Hoover dam to bet Arizona that live in Nevada. Think about that. It's better in Arizona than to bet in Nevada on sports. That's crazy. 

01:00:41 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
All right, but forget about the props. Early week when you release a play, is that number still available in Vegas? Yes, so then you're not betting the max you can on it. 

01:00:53 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
No, I am betting the max I can. I'm betting Kelly Criterion. What do you want me to do? Just go bankrupt? Are you advocating I overbet Kelly, such that I put my risk of ruin out there? You advocating I over bet kelly such that I put my my risk? 

01:01:04 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
of ruin out there, okay, but if you want me to bet more than kelly, I'm not saying bet more than kelly, what I'm saying is if you just did a proven winner for the past 30 seasons, including two super contest wins and 100 units last year. 

01:01:13
your kelly staking should be far greater than unless you're like just jam, spending money like you wouldn't believe, in vegas. You should have a lips, a bankroll at this time that enables you to bet more than 40 dimes a game, in which case you would have completely maxed out Vegas, and 40 dimes is an aggressive target for just Vegas right now, given that you can bet Will Hill Station, circa and then a couple others, like you know might be limited MGM. Here you go. 

01:01:37 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
So so, to summarize, to summarize, I think what you're saying is that I should have a $5 million bankroll and I'm financially incompetent not to have done so. And I largely agree yes, all right, fair enough. 

01:01:51 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I do want like again, I don't mean to attack and that is what I'm doing directly here. So I do want to apologize for that, because I am attacking here, but it's more for the discussion there and I'm happy to close it off there and let's rob. 

01:02:04 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Johnny, are you? Are you married with children? I am not Okay. So you don't have a like $7,000 mortgage payment per month. You don't have a $2,000 like tuition. 

01:02:18 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
It doesn't mean I don't have those Cause I'm not married with children, but but fair enough. You don't see where. 

01:02:21 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
I'm going is that you like, like the single guys, just that they're they never really think about, like it's almost like wow, if you're a doctor making, you know, 300,000 a year, you should be like a billionaire. No, no, no, no, and they don't really. They can't really. 

01:02:34 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I'm basically based on sports betting and and based on the numbers that you are saying has won. You just mentioned you had 10 out of the last like all right, whatever we can go back, go go. If you're listening at home, sizzle or someone like that tosses on a spreadsheet. It it should be pretty clear. 

01:02:48 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Based on the performance I know what you're saying, steve, because I've I've personally experienced the I I think, I think, personally, your lifestyle is conducive with risking whatever you possibly can. And like I'm not here, I'm not here to defend ste, I'm not here to defend Steve, I'm not here to argue with you. I think everybody's spoken on the situation. But, like I cannot bet as much as I want to bet on games, because my wife is so risk averse that it doesn't matter if she sees the results of money coming in every year, it's well what happens if we have a losing year. I mean, that's the boat I'm in. So I understand that point of view. 

01:03:26 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
I mean let's do, let's do the math, guys. I bet ten thousand dollars on four nfl games a week. Okay, I have, I hit 55 percent. Um, I have a five percent roi. I make five hundred dollars per play. That's only two thousand dollars a week. That's eight thousand dollars a month. 

01:03:40 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
It doesn't even pay my nut. After the first year you're up to 12,000. Then you're Kelly Stakey, and then you're roll that compounds. You were assuming that how is it? 

01:03:50 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
compounding. How is it compounding when I have a nut of 12,000 a month and I'm making eight? Where's the compoundation of my assets going up versus down. I'm saying it's not like you, just started sports betting last year. 

01:04:04 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I'm saying this is years and years and years. 

01:04:06 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
But all right, again I apologize that I don't have like a billion dollars to be betting or 100 million to be betting in the marketplace. And you're right, if I did, then I should not be selling it, because I would. If I was betting anywhere close to Kelly, it would compromise the marketplace, I agree. 

01:04:21 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
If you were betting to Kelly, it would compromise the marketplace. I agree. If you were betting full Kelly at a $2 million roll which if you're as good as you say you are, then you should have then there's this then that's my argument. If you're saying, hey, my bankroll is only one mil because I have put other stuff into other investments and whatever and I want to be risk averse, then in theory Steve is correct on that and then he should only be betting 10 a game, in which case he can get that full fill at Circa on an opener, does not need to actually move the rest of the market and in theory plays would have value and could still attract CLV. So that's my final. 

01:04:52 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
And I guess where I'm coming from with this, and I feel I'm being hyper-criticized. If you go talk to Circa and Caesars, they'd be like, oh, none of these guys bet anything but Fez does. So you're like you're picking on the one guy in the industry. That's the real deal. 

01:05:04 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
The reason I'm, the reason I am critical, by the way, is and I've said this to Rob multiple times I do think you win and I do think you are sharp. From everything you say, I know. I know for a fact that you win money. So that is why I'm extra critical on the pick sales, because if someone didn't win money betting sports, I know why they're selling picks and it's because that's their way of making money and they just want to and they know it's not valuable, but that's the means to make money for them. So if anything, Steve, the reason I'm actually criticizing you is because I know that you win money on your own personal betting, and that makes it a little more confusing to me as to why five grand a year or six grand a year in pick sales would make the difference if the numbers were good. But if you're Vegas Dave Vegas Dave's scamming he's not earning any more from that. 

01:05:50 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
I tell you what I'm feeling like. I like the way Rob has conducted all this. So if he's up for it, I'd be more than happy to put him on my VIP list and he can have my plays for football season this upcoming year, if that's okay with Rob. 

01:06:04 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Yeah, I mean, listen, here's what you tell him. I would tell Steve's place. Now listen, I, I, here's. Here's the thing. We I have a mute, we have a mutual contact right In hit man, for example, who I highly respect and I know who wins money, who basically tells me Steve gets a bad rap in the space because of things that he might say on Twitter or so on and so forth, but I, I would, I'd go to bat for this guy and I would bet that and, like to me, it's extremely important when my contacts in my community that I highly respect that I know that win would go to bat for someone else. So, yes, I would. Now would I advise other people do that. No, like, like one of my biggest criticism, steve, of the touting, which I honestly don't have an issue with touting in general I just would go to pregame and I would. 

01:06:50
There's no picks history anywhere. Right, I understand that there's marketing involved in pick sales and you have to promote short-term trends and so on and so forth, but I cannot find a Steve Fezzik picks history. And you mentioned Computer Bob documents it or whatever. That should be more public or brought to the forefront a little bit more, and that's kind of why I invested in Betstamp and why I believe in Betstamp. And what we've been trying to build is like a community of people that are tracked third-party independently. So I'd love to take you up on that offer. I'd love to track them in bet stamp privately so they're not exposed, but so at the end of the year we could just publicize them and say these are. This is a documented record for Steve Fezzik. 

01:07:31 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
And there is, there is a document record of pregame. You can get every pick that I make, the last 10 show, and you click on it and then you can scroll down and you can and you can see it. So that is available as well, along with a summary of how I've done for you know, during the past season, for every sport. 

01:07:45 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
So that is out there on the site. Okay, I didn't look hard enough, so I mean it's a criticism of the site. Whatever, that's fair. 

01:07:55 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
We're now getting into like semantics here, but this is like in the movie the Terminator. They're like why isn't it easier to find that, that that history? And they're like they asked the guy why didn't you bring like these, these, these ray guns, back with you, if you're from the future, so you could take out this guy and you have to just go back naked without any weapons? And he's like I didn't build the thing. I'm sorry, I don't know. 

01:08:15 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Fair enough. Fair enough, yeah, I mean, listen, this is. I get the arguments from both sides and I would honestly say that, just like a lot of my opinions in life, I'm somewhere in the middle of understanding where you're both coming from. But I mean, I'd be hypocritical if I was going to berate someone who sells picks because I've sold them before. I know what my life circumstances were when I was doing that. I was doing very well betting, but there was like a lot that goes into it and the hitman sells picks. 

01:08:51 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
The hitman's like the Terminator. You don't want to take the hitman's action and what I love about the hitman is like he'll actually make fun of me. He'll be like you only made this last week. You suck, and he's right. Of course, he does have the advantage of living in a state that's much better right now to make tons of money. 

01:09:09 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
It's very different. But yes, I agree, it's never been the pick sales aspect that's been the issue for me. It's doing pick sales in quote, unquote. The right way is what I'll say. 

01:09:26 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I do. I do think that Steve does win sports betting. Fyi for listeners. Sorry, I'm getting a little voice crack here, but the pick package thing is still a bit like frazzling in terms of that. However, everyone does have a right to earn and it earns extra money. So like I can't criticize it that much, I will say and I have. 

01:09:44 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
I want to emphasize, I have tons of long-term clients that have been with me for 10 years and they, they buy my annual package each and every year. That doesn't mean that that makes me like some God, that I'm like better than everybody else, but it does mean I've shown, you know, a strong acumen, and along with that, like you should, if there's one thing you should buy from me, it's my Superbowl package, because I'll discuss stuff that teach a man how to fish, that there's certain things in every Superbowl. I'll throw one out there. 

01:10:14
You used to be able to bet no overtime in the Superbowl and you only you could bet like minus 600, that there'd be no overtime and so, and there would be Super Bowls, you'd bet the dog at plus six and a half or higher. So think how good this is. Let's say you're betting 10,000 on the underdog in a game plus 11, all right, well, if it goes overtime, they're going to cover. So this is like the ultimate free roll where, oh, I clearly have to bet 11,000 on no overtime at minus 650, because if it goes overtime I'm going to win my bet here on Denver plus the points against Green Bay, et cetera. 

01:10:49 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
All right, steve. The reason I wanted to have you on specifically this week is, I think, that there's something that's extremely topical that came up prior to the championship games in the NFL Championship Sunday, which was Sharp Clark on Twitter tweeting out that he made San Fran a three-point favorite on the road at Philadelphia. He stands by that number and you quote, tweeted him verbatim here Mr Clark does some great, great work. Having said that, I have to say, those who have made a huge living betting 20 plus years, none of us would ever say an NFL lineup post was off by three plus points. Yet content providers, many who bet smaller zero, seemingly have this take often. So Sharp Clark then puts out a video the next day or so, kind of, with his process, which I thought was interesting, because it is a process, in my opinion, that no, I don't want to say nobody really takes in the space, but he's very um, you know he's a tape guy, let's put it that way where he's watching every snap of every game throughout the entirety of the season and he's making numbers based off of that. 

01:12:05
I would think that a lot of the NFL market is mostly numbers guys, news guys you don't get a ton of tape guys, so to speak and I'm bucketing people influencing the NFL market. I think that there is a possibility that maybe this is a hidden advantage or something that people aren't accounting for in market. That could be a value where someone could arrive at a very different number than the close and think that they have an edge in sports. It's possible. I'm not saying I necessarily agree with it. I'm just curious if you give any credence to the fact that somebody is arriving at this number with an extremely different process and whether or not maybe there is something there. 

01:12:57 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Yeah, it's a great question and certainly there could be value approaching things totally different. I'll use the Dr Bob thing. So Dr Bob came in and he had his models and they were better than Vegas's models and he identified games are up by three to four points and did great for years. And that's certainly possible that 20 years later fast forward 20 years someone could come in with a totally new approach and be able to win and be able to identify numbers that are off. But I think it's. It's beyond naive. In my opinion, and I can tell you everyone I know that's a professional gambler that's been doing this for 20 years I'm not gonna say everyone almost everyone would agree with me that it's just beyond naive to think, oh, all of a sudden we're going to take three point underdogs and they should become three-point favorites. But I see this all the time and I apologize to Mr Clark because he is a guy that is, by all accounts, fantastic guy, does really good work and his models are solid, and so it's not him. It's just that I'm so tired of turning on the TV and seeing, oh, oh, this five point underdog, they should be the favorite. And from the content providers that don't even wager, because they true. 

01:14:07
I go back to Johnny's Kelly Criterion. Where the hell is the Kelly Criterion now? You think all of a sudden? Oh Fezzik, throw him under the bus. He's. He's not betting full Kelly, he should be betting double Kelly and being a jillionaire. But? But? But anyone else can say a three-point dog should be a three-point favorite, which means he should be betting 20% of his bankroll. And he's betting hundreds, not thousands, not tens of thousands, not tens of millions. Where's the inconsistency? Oh, I truly believe it's a 64% bet, but I don't really believe it because I bet a couple of hundred on it. 

01:14:38 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I mean come on, fair enough. I mean listen to each their own and I don't like unit, shame people in general. Because I was at a point where I was extremely undercapitalized and had, at the point where I had the biggest edge in my life, I could not get down a lot of money just because of my previous history of being a horrible gambler and losing all my money. So it's unfortunate. So I or spending your money. 

01:15:01 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Money, remember you gotta have you gotta, you gotta make a lot of money and you gotta like live like a miser to save that money too. Not a miser, but live like a normal person and not a um a spending type of person. 

01:15:15 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Right. So I mean I get it If the source of frustration is more so with just the general content creators out there who are always throwing out these outlandish numbers. I too have a huge problem with that like but then. 

01:15:26 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
But then to be fair, it was a, it was a two-team parlay. But then, after the game was over, purdy, you know, gets his ucla, ucl, you know, a broken, dislocated, I don't know, I'm not a doctor and then he's like well, that shows why you should never bet four percent of your bankroll on anything. And now I'm just like losing my mind, you know, it's like so. So now I can't bet that the Indiana Pacers are going to miss the playoffs, even though we all know they're going to miss the playoffs, because we never know what might happen. Everyone might get healthy on the Indiana Pacers. You see where I'm going, because every pro, there's going to be a bet that we're like I'm just going to bet as much as humanly possible on this, up to like 10% of my bankroll, which we never can get down because it's just such a strong wager. 

01:16:13 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Gus, you're an opinionated guy. At least I get that through Twitter. I'm an opinionated guy, johnny's an opinionated guy. A lot of people in the betting space, especially the sharp betting space, very opinionated on what's right, what's wrong, and I often make the mistake of speaking in absolutes a lot of times, like never do this, always do that, and I've really, really tried to take a step back. And the reason I bring it up is because you tweeted something recently which was a great tell on whether a pro sports better is legit happens when they are in Vegas. If they post about how they are playing roulette, slots or craps massively downgrade their chance of being legitimate. By contrast, if they're gambling is sports betting, poker, upgrade them. So I play a ton of roulette, slots, craps yeah. 

01:17:03 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I agree with Fezzik here. 

01:17:05 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
And Johnny, he's like all the time, he's like, how do you do that? And again, I know what I'm getting into right. Like I know that I'm making minus EV bets, but at that point it's entertainment purposes. I enjoy the rush of it. 

01:17:17 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I at least I know that I have the disposable income which I, at least I know that I have the disposable income which I've earned. 

01:17:24 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
You're playing like lunch money on those and then betting real money on the game Sometimes not lunch money, but anyways, the point I'm making is that I think a lot of people can learn in general about just speaking in absolutes, and I think that there's a lot of scenarios where it's like it's the same as the tout chart, the tout flow chart, right. 

01:17:48 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
That's just like an absolute. It's like you must fall into this bucket or into this bucket. 

01:17:50 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
It's like, no, there's a hundred different buckets of people and I believe, on my quote, I said it's more likely, I didn't say it's guaranteed. And massively downgrade is what you said massive, okay, I'm gonna I'm gonna, I'm gonna recant and I'm gonna say just downgrade. 

01:17:59 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
And I know and I did say there are poker players. And back to your case, johnny, how you know if these poker players were so good and they really won, how come they don't have, like these multi-million dollar bankrolls? They need people to buy them into tournaments if they actually have the edge. 

01:18:13
But they do have they, do they? They do have the edge. They just don't have the edge in life because they're like going and playing poker, right exactly, and all these other games, and they're going out and buying ace of spades like liqueur for like three thousand dollars at clubs and tipping their cocktail waitress a thousand. And then they need backers. Stewie ungers stewie ungers the greatest example ever of a guy that was always broke and was one of the greatest investments. 

01:18:37 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
If you could have put it a dollar for dollar in a poker tournament, right you see that, with a ton of professional players who go broke several times in life, part of it is they. They finished their poker tournament. I've heard stories, I mean, of people finishing poker tournaments, winning a couple hundred K and then turning around and just blowing it in the casino on the way out the door. It happens. Some people just don't have. They just don't have it with it. Like bankroll management is is an inherent trait to be a successful. Better Part of the reason I don't go broke is because I know that the casino has an edge when I'm playing these games. But I mean, I still, I still enjoy that. 

01:19:10 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
But this you know the slippage is really difficult. Like well, why aren't you like, like, like so? Rich. It's like. I'll use an example. 

01:19:17
Your country took 200,000 from a group of of, from a group of mine, that was betting the Canadian barley card lottery and there was a rule that said, oh, you can only bet $100 per day. But there was no rule that was enforced while people were betting all these barley cards until they all wound up winning one week and then, all of a sudden, all the money got confiscated and they got threatened with litigation and they rolled over and that money was never to be seen again. And you know what that sounds like an isolated instance. That's one. I've got dozens, anyone that's like. 

01:19:46
Well, why don't you just work with more people? If you're so good, why don't you just work with all these other people? Because gamblers are not trustworthy and I know that I and I'm not alone here can speak to Billy Walters, can speak to many people, can speak to this. We have been like stiffed by so many books and so many people that just like have, have taken our money and have told us stories that it's like makes us extremely reluctant to want to work with anyone that we don't know. Well, because of those circumstances. 

01:20:13 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Fair enough. Um, out of curiosity, I don't know if you happened to catch the circles off episode I think it was number 61, the Circles Off episode I think it was number 61, where we react. 62, says producer Zach, where we reacted to Ross Tucker on the Even Money podcast interviewing Simon Hunter of the Action Network. You were not on the episode that day. I'm curious if you know what episode I'm talking about or if you saw the reaction video at all I heard about it and to summarize, correct me if I'm wrong. 

01:20:43 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
I believe Simon described a betting syndicate and it was clear that Simon had never been part of a betting syndicate. Am I correct? 

01:20:50 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
That would be the one that's correct. 

01:20:52 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
I think a good conclusion is that sometimes, when you're asked a question you're supposed to be an expert and you don't have the answer to it, it's better to say I have no real experience with that rather than to try to come up with what you believe the correct answer to be. Would be my response. 

01:21:06 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
So I'm just curious about this, because I always felt I watched that interview me and Johnny watched it. We reacted to it live. We had some people had been messaging me all kinds saying you got to watch this interview. I figured, okay, we'll turn it into a piece of content. In hindsight I felt a little bit bad. I mean, I don't like to attack, I do it. You love to attack, I don't like to. I seriously don't like to do it. I seriously don't. I don't like confrontation in general. But I couldn't help but thinking while I was watching that if Steve Fezzik was in part of this, he would have called him out on this. And I'm curious if, as to if you were a part of that interview, would you have actually called him out on that and pushed him on that? 

01:21:48 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
It would have depended upon the circumstances and the like. But you know I will say, like I'm part of a group, you're never going to agree with all these other handicappers, but I'm not going to if I'm under an umbrella, one of the handicappers gives out a total or buys points. 

01:22:05
It gives out a total on the Super Bowl or buys points on games. I'm going to say people say, what do you think about that, steve? I'm like it's wrong, don't do it. Don't do it. I mean I'm not going to like like go to bat for someone that's just doing something. That you take a hundred MIT grads that all bet sports for a living and you ask them all, should you tease the Superbowl? And all 100 are going to say of course not. You can just bet the alternative total and lay minus 240 on the same bet instead of laying minus 280. Why would you? 

01:22:33 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
do that. I know exactly how that feels. I did a piece of content a couple of weeks ago where someone teased the Eagles up to plus four and a half through zero against the 49ers and I vehemently suggested that the math you know, do not do that. And it won. The teaser won. 

01:22:51 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
It's not as terrible as it sounds Like. I know teasing through the zero and the like, but the line's essentially 2.9. Yes, if you get a two and a half and a seven point teaser at four and a half there let's put it this way it's not as good as a long teaser, but that teaser is better. It's better than than any other non-long teaser out there. 

01:23:10 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
There are worse teasers that you can make. For sure, and I'm sure unabated would agree as well. It is Superbowl week. This is the Thursday of the Superbowl. I do want to get your thoughts in, just some general advice for people. So what is one big piece of advice you could give to those that are betting the Super Bowl in the coming days? 

01:23:29 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
There's a thousand prop bets that you can wager on. I've run really well on prop bets but part of that is because prop bets are much more beatable. They say bet the same on the big game as you do any other game. That's terrible advice. I was shocked. I saw Spanky give that out and I agree with them about the side. Why would you bet the Super Bowl side? It's like the most bet into line ever and maybe if there was like one public team, the public will move a line. 

01:23:57
Famous Super Bowls. You know Elway was catching 11. Come on, that was a good bet. But for the but, that's because you know the narrative was that Denver can't play in Super Bowls and Elway's a choker and Green Bay is like a gauntlet team. But in general, why bet the side when you've got a thousand different things that you can wager on, including whether the first kickoff is going to be a touchback or not? There's a lot of advantage plays and I'll use an example, like when New Orleans was in the Super Bowl, you could bet who was going to get the ball first. Well, new Orleans was going to get the ball first. So there's some really, really good bets that can be made and if you rank them in order, I find it hard to believe that the side of the total is going to be one of your 20 best bets that you're going to make on Super Bowl week weeks and during the 14 day period. 

01:24:50 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Are there. So we did an episode on Super Bowl strategy last week and I talked about something that I strongly disagree with other people in the sharp community who you know. I'm the guy that almost always bets. It depends on the situation. I want to say always and again never speak in absolutes, but the super bowl, in my opinion, is a very different game than week 13 of the nfl, because it's the final game of the year. You have all these plays, trick plays that that teams haven't used over the course of the year. They pull out all the stops to win it. There's nothing else that's happening this season. 

01:25:28
I'm the guy who bets over two and a half players to throw a pass in the game and I always get this every year, which is like, oh, I mean like this is a horrible bet. Look at the data, sum up the data. Horrible bet. Look at the data, sum up the data. Only you know, 0.1% of the time is there going to be a third passer in the game and it's like. This is very different. I think people lose this with the Superbowl. I'm curious if there's any particular angles, stuff that you see that's specific to the Superbowl. That is very different than a traditional NFL week or game, and whether I guess you agree with me on that, like don't treat this game just like it's an ordinary game. There's a lot different. 

01:26:04 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Oh, I absolutely agree. I think even things like on kickoff returns. If I'm feeling a ball five yards deep in my end zone and it's the Super Bowl, I'm going to take it to the house. You know it's like it's a big game here, you know. So it's more likely you might get a return because of that. 

01:26:21
You know there's certain tried and true stuff and I do think don't look at the database for the year just alone for the teams. Look at the database for the Super Bowls. You know, one thing that we've seen and the market's gotten the memo, unfortunately is lower scoring early in the games. Now, how much of that was Brady and how much of it's just nerves, teams being too conservative. So you look at it, you look at a total and sitting at a 49, you should see a 10 in the first quarter and you should see a 24 and a half for the first half. And the market's dealing lower than that because the first quarters and the first halves have been lower scoring, and I think that there there has to be an adjustment based upon the historical. Um, uh, lower scoring starts to Super Bowls. 

01:27:07 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
Fair enough, totally agree. We'll leave you on this, steve. It's our closing question for every guest that we have here on Circles Off. If you could go back five years and talk to a previous version of yourself, what piece of advice would you give to your former self? 

01:27:18 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
Wow, can I go back further than five years? Sure, take it back as far as you want. I would go back to me twice. I'd go back in the late 90s and I'd go back to me after one, like all my contests. They won the five contests, like in 2008, 2009. And I would say, you know, there was a poker player that won player of the year and he's like I wish I knew how good I had run. 

01:27:44
You know, in order, when you're doing this and everyone else is doing this, probably it's not just you're the best in the world at it. You probably got very fortunate along the way as well, and I almost use, like the survivorship bias Almost everyone you see in the casino that gambles won when they first started gambling, because if they would have lost a lot of them to stop, you know, but but so usually you run well to start and they create gamblers for life. But I would come back to myself and say, look at, you got to reinvent yourself. You got to constantly be looking for new edges, new things that you could have that you could pick up on, instead of just continuing to do what you've always done. General motor style. We always make big gas guzzling cars in the 80s, everything will be fine. 

01:28:26 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
His name is steve fezik. He's a back-to-back winner of the westgate super contest. You can follow him on twitter at fezik sports. Make sure it's that account, because there's a lot of impersonator accounts out there for steve fezik. Uh, I, I got very hung up in this interview on you going to northwestern, because all I think think about is Darren Revell going to Northwestern and I just it's gotta be. I mean, I don't know that I could live with Revell going to the same college that I did. I don't know, steve, I don't know, Steve. 

01:28:53 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
thanks very much. You're a good sport about this. Appreciate you giving your time to come on. 

01:28:58 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
And and and Johnny I, I would welcome working with you directly on some stuff. I think that might change your view of me and maybe Rob will make that happen this coming football season. 

01:29:08 - Johnny Capo (Co-host)
I will say Fezzik 40-unit banger season incoming. 

01:29:17 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I will say and we did talk about this before, we went on air as well, and I'm speaking on your behalf now. But to Johnny's point, which he did make during the interview I think we both think that you win in the long run. I can never confirm that. I've me through mutual contacts, I think, johnny, through just the way that you tweet, I think it's very, but that means that. 

01:29:32 - Steve Fezzik (Guest)
But I appreciate that. But really I mean I got to tell you it means everybody wins everybody. I know guys, my buddy cutter, like can't play a lick, that poor guy, and he wins big. You know, he's like it's not hard, it's winning a lot, that's the hard part. But I will say and I want to give accolades to the hitman Like we're talking about reinventing yourself. Here's a young kid. He is not the smartest guy in the world, he didn't go to Northwestern or MIT or University of Chicago, but of Chicago. But you know what the guy gets it in terms of how to win and it's just a phenomenal contact and I'm blessed to have him as a friend and as a co-better, that we share information. 

01:30:13 - Rob Pizzola (Co-host)
I mean, listen, anyone can make it happen. I've known Joey Toons for years, from when he was based out in Vegas back in the day. I'm not scared to admit it Not the smartest guy on the planet, don't know what he would score on the Wonderlic, but he figured out sports betting and people can do it. I mean, it's there for the taking if you put the time in Again. Circles Off, episode number 88. If you liked our content, please smash the like button. Subscribe to the Circles Off channel. Thanks to Steve Fezzik for joining us. We'll be back next week for Circles Off, episode number 89.