00:00 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
coming up on today's episode of Circle Back.
00:03 - Joey Knish (Host)
Because it's always people that are doing like 10 leg same game parlays with all overs. When it's like, dude, just make the same one, but throw the fucking under in there, you got a free leg.
00:14 - Flup (Host)
I don't think it moves a needle that much, but it moves it at least some percentage.
00:19 - Mike (Host)
Two groups of people people who didn't like it and liars.
00:24 - Joey Knish (Host)
I have to say I respect a good grift. This to me was so like cringeworthy and over the top.
00:34 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
We have a big announcement to end off the show. We'll give the floor to you. Disclaimer the content presented in this show is intended for entertainment purposes only. All opinions expressed are those of the host and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of any individuals or organizations mentioned. Statements made about public figures or entities are based on publicly available information and are not intended to harm or defame any person or business. This show relies on fair use of social media posts, which are presented in good faith for the purpose of commentary and criticism. Viewers and listeners are advised to form their own opinions.
01:28
Circle back here on the Circles Off channel. It's part of the Hammerbed Network and presented by Calci. This is a show where we cover the latest and greatest news from gambling Twitter. That could be funny tweets, that could be educational topics, that could be online beefs so much to uncover on circle back. We bring you this show every friday at 8 am eastern and every monday live at 1 pm eastern time and on the channel we also sprinkle some wednesday content in between at 1 pm eastern. So make sure you guys are subscribed to the channel to keep up to date with all that content and make sure as well you do like this video. Help drive us up in the YouTube algorithm. Keep this thing growing. We're running it back with the same crew for this Friday's show.
02:07
I am your host here on Circle Back. My name is Jacob Germania. I am the host here, but I'm also a producer and creator for the Hammer Betting Network. In the bottom left corner of the screen we now have the head of trading at Novig one-time contest champion, Chris Dierkus. In the bottom right corner we have the co-host on the Hit the Books channel, which is the Hammers NCAA Content Division, Joey Knish, and in the top right we have the Deli Katzen denier in, Mr Peanut.
02:36
Better, mike, you seem to have rolled back a little bit on that.
02:38 - Mike (Host)
take about delis, is it Deli Katzen? Yeah, that's the real word, joey. I know it's more than two syllables, so you're going to have to really try to spell it out when you type this time but yeah, that's what deli is short for.
02:50 - Joey Knish (Host)
Around here we call it a sandwich shop. That's the difference Comics.
02:56 - Flup (Host)
Do not like our take, mike, most of yours did. Yeah, I was wrong.
03:06 - Joey Knish (Host)
I'll be honest, I kind of was thinking of a butcher halfway through and then, you know, you took my back, so I was just going to go down with the ship. Once you're in on the take there's no, there's no going back to internet and 2025 says you die with the date.
03:14 - Mike (Host)
Yeah, so now we'll just flip it and I'll blame flop. So flop is really the only one he had.
03:21 - Flup (Host)
He wasn't confused so he has no excuse. So I just wanted to back you, because in any argument between you and kanish I got it back your side.
03:26 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
That's definitely the sharpest feels like on this show, anytime you go against flip, you seem to be on on the right side of things. So I was happy to be on that side, happy to be on the right side of history when it comes to delis. But uh, enough on sandwiches. That may come up a little bit later, a little bit once again. But let's get into the sports gambling side.
03:43
I think with gambling, twitter and whenever a player goes down injured you are bound to see this sort of comment People complaining that they want their bets voided. And we had that example recently with Emeka Ogbuka of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, who made an early exit in Tampa Bay's win over the San Francisco 49ers, who Fluff was very happy to see for his guy Baker Mayfield, but most of the game they did it without Egbuka, who I believe he got taken out of the game in the second quarter and then it was revealed at the half or right after halftime that he was doubtful and not going to be returning in the end for the game. So naturally people were upset about this. We have Trevor Daigle here who says $886 is exactly how much I lost today because I live bet on Igbuka at halftime when his odds were still up after he got injured. I'm going to be contacting a lawyer today.
04:37
At FanDuel Sportsbook, meanmo says y'all kept Igbuka live products open while he was hurt. That's bullshit and y'all know it. Avoid them live bets at FanDuel Sportsbook. And the first reply says facts. I didn't bet till after he was hurt, which was the funniest tweet of them all, because, in my opinion, if he was hurt and lines were still up, you probably should have bet the under which anybody could have done Flop. You disagree?
05:05 - Flup (Host)
Well, no, no, no. So it depends what happened here. I've seen some instances where they take off the main lines and just leave the alts, which the alts only have overs. So if that's the case, then you can only bet over, which is extremely predatory. And I would agree completely with these commenters, even though they sound childish, like you should know that it's people don't keep up to date with injury news, and especially when it's happening live, they think, oh, the guy's doing pretty good, they're going to bet the over. So it's hard for me to blame. If, however, it was a main line up and you could bet the under, then I have no sympathy for them, because at that point, well, what is Fandles supposed to do? If you had bet the under, they could have gotten themselves screwed there. It could also be a situation where, like he was injured at halftime but it wasn't confirmed out until after halftime. I don't know how the injury reports worked there, but I think we need to know. Were you able to bet under or was it only all over?
06:06 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
so if it's only all overs, fando, scummy, all right, I'm glad you brought that up, because I didn't think about that side of it where it could have been the alt lines up, and as a you know person who works the hammer, I have no journalistic integrity, so I did not confirm this ahead of the show. Uh. But let's go to you. Knish on on this topic. Uh, how do you react when you see tweets like this?
06:26 - Joey Knish (Host)
I mean number one, I react. I went, uh, actually I saw the trevor guy's original tweet and just took a quick look at his timeline. My man, call the hotline, like call the number. It was a dark place, like I got it, it was making me uncomfortable. There were some tweets there and then it just kept going. So I gotta say, got to say, if you're this mad about it, you got to take a step back. The second thing was everyone looks at like everyone by. I say like every rec batter looks at it from this, like we want to end it, and I just I mean, I'm assuming the unders were up. I can't see them, you know. Just leaving the all overs up, I mean, what is this? No VIG, I mean.
07:07 - Flup (Host)
I would say Well, that is now what happens, and I have seen FanDuel do it. I will not accept this slander.
07:15 - Joey Knish (Host)
I would say that I agree with you, though. Like, honestly, seriously, like if the all overs were still up, they knew it was out. But in this instance I just nobody looks at it from the other side of like. When people because it's always people that are doing like 10 legs same game parlays with all overs. When it's like dude, just make the same one, literally have a free leg if you know what you're under, uh, I the book, the books did a disservice to society when they started these injury refunds a long time ago. People who are in the know that listen to this show or on the show knew it was a bad idea and it's become maybe the worst idea ever because this has now infiltrated gambling society go ahead.
08:04 - Mike (Host)
I thought I had a really clever take with, but it was basically just Fluff's entire point before I was thinking that when we first saw, when I saw the topic, I was like oh, I think I had this under no two way markets, like I have a read on it. But he's exactly right. Yeah, if you already have, if you only have a one way market, it is pretty scummy. I will say I get that the people complaining about the injury voids are annoying, but it's almost become the person who just constantly dunks on that person is almost as annoying. Like we get it. You don't think that they should avoid the injury things. Like everybody comes they now every sharp. Like make sure to quote to them. Be like, actually you shouldn't get refunded. Like we get it. Now We've gotten it. We don't need to shame them anymore. Let them go complain in the corner. Like I don't think that you know pointing out every single person that complains about these things. Moving forward is helpful.
08:53 - Joey Knish (Host)
These are the least appreciative people on the face of the earth, where it's not like oh.
09:02 - Flup (Host)
I've had a different take on this after you know, seeing things the past couple of months. It's kind of like in poker, like if a fish does something to you. If a fish, like slow rolls you or needles you, Knocks your shoes over, yeah, something like that.
09:18
You kind of just have to sit there and take it, because they're providing the game for everyone, like their money is, and these people that cry about and bitch about the injuries are their liquidity and make it so us, as sharp bettors, can earn and everyone can earn. So, honestly, I think we just got to accept it and start refunding these guys because, like the amount of EV loss that these books take and I think DraftKings and Fanatics have figured this out we're just like, okay, we'll take a little bit of loss here, but we gained so much support, you're just winning that money back from them in a later day anyways.
09:49 - Mike (Host)
Exactly, and I just mean in the fact that, like we don't have to dunk on every person that talks about the world being flat and being like actually the world's a circle At this point we've moved past that part of the conversation.
10:08 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
In of the conversation, injury voids if you complain about them they're dumb but, like I'm done hearing about the person who's so smart, they know that injury voids are dumb.
10:12
I also know we can move on, all right. Well, I actually don't think we need to move on just yet Because, for people here, because we're very much entrenched within this conversation right, because we've been dealing with it for over a year now and there are books who do void props and FanDuel actually has a Right, because we've been dealing with it for over a year now and there are books who do void props and Fandula actually the first quarter rule for this If a player goes out in the first quarter, they will void the bet. However, there are people potentially watching here the channel is growing, after all there are potentially people watching here who are very novice to this conversation. So I do want to go back to you, Mike, for those people. Can you discuss why people will constantly dunk on others when they want a refund? Because you might think, okay, like they're refunding someone's money and they're able to again make a bet at that platform. Why would that be such a problem?
10:56 - Mike (Host)
Sure, because for every person they refund, they're going to have to increase the hold a certain amount. So if you're going to be giving money back, you're effectively not winning as much as you otherwise would be. So if you're not winning that much, you're going to look for those winnings in other ways, which is increasing the hold and charging people more. So it's going to be factored into any line if they start refunding all these injuries. So it doesn't really provide an advantage and instead it just basically gives money back to people who don't deserve it and takes a tax on your fair winnings. I get that like in general, the point of these people like complaining. I just think the people that get so mad at the people who want the void like they almost get as mad as the people who want the void at the people who want the void. It's like a circle of just different people getting mad about a different person's like thing in this and it's like why don't we just keep the bets and just keep moving?
11:44 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
all right, I think that's a fair take. Uh, oh, for this conversation. Do you support? Would you support like, do you support this movement where more books are providing uh refunds, whether it be just straight up refunds or refunds and bonus bets? Do you guys support this in the industry? I don't.
12:02 - Mike (Host)
I think that it's a good business play for fanatics to do this. I think that it's a very I think it's like it's, especially if you're a lesser known book, it's a way for you to kind of get your claws in the wreckiest, dumbest, biggest whales, like I think that is it ideally. Should we not have it?
12:18 - Flup (Host)
I think, like I don't think that there should be any, but if I was a book, you for their individual advantage, I think it's good for them and another thing is like no one is going to remember the time that like you avoided and you barely like avoided and you get back like a couple dollars for a parlay but they are going to and like, like it never you lost and the void didn't matter. But they are going to remember the time that you would have won the parlay and they didn't void and even though the policy is universal, it doesn't matter. They're going to be so irritated by that moment. It just kind of blows up the entire thing.
12:53 - Joey Knish (Host)
Yeah, no I hate, I hate, I hate to admit this. Uh, because fanatics is like the absolute most clown show book out there. That derived from, uh, you know points bet where uh, we, you know we know some, uh, former friends of the show um, but he's coming up later, by the way.
13:12
Oh good, good for them as a business strategy. It's like we only want wrecks, we only want the wreckiest wrecks that are could possibly exist. Let's offer the most wreck friendly stuff we could possibly do and do bonuses, injury insurance, whatever. And that's why because we only know that, like anybody with the slightest, faintest pulse of price sensitivity or clb isn't betting here. So we'll just, we'll lose some ev that way and gain it back with, you know, the fish we have Just a constant pool of fish.
13:47 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
So I was looking at this tweet because I wanted to see the replies. I was looking for screenshots of bets to see if there were under bets in play and because the type of people that complain about this are typically SGP bettors, it's all alt overs on Igbuka so it was kind of difficult to make the determination whether or not unders were available at the time. But while going through the replies, a lot of the replies actually were saying to the people who were aggrieved by not getting their bets refunded to go bet on Fanatics, because they do void in situations like this, potentially, I kind of wanted to ask you guys how much does it move the needle for a sportsbook like Fanatics to be able to use this against a competitor like FanDuel? What do you think? Flop?
14:29 - Flup (Host)
I don't think it moves the needle that much, but it moves it at least some percentage and, like honestly, most customers are pretty addicted to their one sportsbook. People are pretty loyal to their one sportsbook. They have the money and it's hard to move money out and people that complain typically will go back to that same sportsbook. But even if it impacts 1%, 2% of people that are like so irritated that they deposit in the fanatics, it is just worthwhile Because those people that move money for that, just you know you're going to hold like 40% versus them and just print off of their deposit. So it makes complete sense that Fanatics do this. But I don't think it impacts like hordes of people and I wouldn't say that FanDuel is making a mistake by not doing it, but I just think, like Kanish said, fanatics need to do it because they need to compete.
15:19 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Alright, I agree with you. Anything to add from Mike or Kanish? No, on this one, alright, I agree with you. Anything to add from Mike or Kanish? No, I'm good. All right, we can move into our next topic then. Before we do, as a reminder to support the show, please make sure you've hit that like button. Help drive us up in the YouTube algorithm. Also, make sure that you are subscribed to the channel for all this great content we're bringing you on the Circles Live channel. This is the Hammer's Educational Entertainment Lifestyle Content Division.
15:49
Now, kish talked about clown show books in the previous segment. Well, let's move to maybe another one, because our man, chris dirkis, is now the head of trading at novig. I'm I'm just kidding, but uh, you've moved to the head of trading as novig. Uh, el mastro louis of novig, one of the traders there, said trading rooms are all about people and process. Good luck with competing. Good luck competing with ours. And it's a screenshot of you.
16:09
And having changed your Twitter bio to head of trading at Novig, jeff Benson of Circa gave us a hashtag Circa back. But I really like this reply here from Joe Leonard at Joseph Leonard 25. Another trader at Novig, by the way. Another trader at Novig, who posted a video clip of you on a podcast, and I will read off exactly what you said here. Don't take it that condescending, but I would argue that anyone working for any exchange or sportsbook by definition must be a bad trader, because you can make more betting on your own. So pretty ironic, uh. First of all, congratulations on your new position. I know I'm dunking on you a bit, but congratulations. Second of all, um, do you still believe what you said there? Because now you are involved in the, in a trading team?
16:54 - Flup (Host)
yes, I actually still still believe it, um, for most people. Um, I think that the king there was also might have been. I might have mentioned this in this podcast, or it would at least said to at least I said it to joe privately that there's some exceptions, like henry's a good exception. Henry obviously has a nice piece of nobody because he built, he started building the trading room up and if novig were to sell or go public for a large amount, he would have made far more than anyone else, whereas working for like a FanDuel or a DraftKings it's going to be hard to really get that earn. Additionally, can you bet on your own?
17:33
One of the other traders was like you know I have beef with. I had beef with what I said because you know I could bet on my own still, and that's a fair point as well. But I still believe in general it is, and I would be lying if I said I am not hurting my median earn over the next four years because I have to spend a lot more time working as Novig and not betting. I'll still be betting, so my operation will still run, but I just won't be a big part of it anymore, and the hope is the only reason I do this is I truly believe that Novig is going to explode with the prediction market space potentially 5, 10, 20x and if that happens it'll be worthwhile, but if it doesn't, I made a bad decision.
18:12 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Maybe you're afraid of the 2026 gambling laws, the 90% that's coming in.
18:16
I would be lying if that also did that Interesting, so I wanted to make this a broader topic on prediction markets, including show sponsor Kalshi, because you could say the same thing about some of the traders for them as well. And I wanted to ask Kanish and Mike, but I'll start with Kanish Do you feel like this is the case for a prediction market potentially like Kalshi, where if someone is part of the trading team there, it's because they could not earn as much betting and therefore are not as high quality of a trader as you may presume?
18:50 - Joey Knish (Host)
I might have not felt that way before this, but I'm sure, as I'll do now, but as Flop articulated though he's taking, I'll give you an example, like a personal example here. Before I did this the Hammer stuff I had a bunch of different companies that you probably reach out about content and I could have taken, you know like, contractor, smart time content roles at places. But there would never have been any. You know like, say, it would have been like taking a job at a trading room at FanDuel Now, like there was no equity, there was no nothing.
19:26
Part of the allure of joining the hammer was that startup people I like working with people, I know we'll see if this can take off, and then you know what it sells at some point.
19:46
And then you know you cash out and you make significantly more than you would have just doing like, you know, a standard content job. So I think anything in any not just fluff, but any job, whether it be Kelsey, whether it be profit, any if you're taking a risk in the prediction market space, taking a job there, I think it's like taking a you know like same thing as like why you would take a startup in San Francisco and like I'm going to go work for this you know AI company who might have, you know, 10 employees. I could go work at Apple and make more money now, but no, I'm going to take it here and hope that this takes off. And if you I mean if you just see the growth, the year over year growth of prediction markets from last year to this year I don't think it's a bad deal in terms of taking a shot. So I hope it works out. I hope it works out for Fluff, hope it works out for a lot of the others in the industry.
20:28 - Mike (Host)
Water always finds its level. And Fluff said that the best traders are working on their own. So I was at a trading gig and I left. Fluff goes to the trading gig. It kind of makes sense when you think about it. But I, with these exchanges, it's interesting that you know, trading on an exchange is kind of blurring the line between sportsbook and better right, like there used to be totally separate things. One place set lines, one place took lines. When you're an exchange, you're kind of you know providing liquidity, but you're also, you know you can take a stance a little bit more.
20:58
I think that it's kind of blurred between the two. And also I think the Silicon Valley one was kind of a good point where it's if you were an individual who went and founded your own company, you'd be like, oh, he's probably, you know, one of the sharper ones. If you're working at a large company in a low level role, it's like, oh, you know, he probably is just more doing this job regularly. If you go and join and you're the third or fourth member of a startup, it's a little bit different. It's kind of in between those two. So I think it's kind of you know one of those situations where, especially with exchanges, so much of it is so new that it's kind of in the balance of a lot of different things. So it's kind of interesting to see where it takes off from there.
21:33 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
All right, Interesting discussion there. We talked a lot about the way prediction markets are growing, including show sponsor here, calshi. You can sign up to CalSheet, get in early, get a part of it as it grows. You can sign up with a QR code that is on screen right now or at any point in the audio or video process, whether you're listening or whether you're watching. You can go to the link in the description Sign up to CalSheet today, get in while it's still I mean they've grown a lot but it's still relatively early in the space Get involved and you can support the show at the same time by using our link or using the QR code, as I mentioned there. Once again, thank you to CalSheets for sponsoring us here at Circles Off. I might be biased, but this is, without a doubt, the best college football show around.
22:14
Brad Powers and Joey Knish. Every Friday at 5 pm Eastern time on the Hit the Books YouTube channel. Come for Brad's insights and Knish's off-color remarks. They answer a ton of questions on all the games you're curious about, plus best bets will be given out once again tonight at 5 pm eastern time on the hit the books youtube channel. Head to the link in the description to make it even easier to go check it out.
22:34
Next topic comes from two people in the sports betting space, two people who featured on this channel very recently. We've done the life of a capper series and two of the people that we have had on are include corby craig and captain jack. It's professional sports bears talking about their things that they have done in this space, their experiences in the space, giving lessons. It's a great series that you can catch right here on the channel. But as for this conversation they talked about uh for, for captain jackie says there's a rush of new tools out there for bettors which use liquidity information from sites like Novig and PlayProfitX or CalSheet to steer you towards the sharp betting side. But he says these tools will lose you money. They will cost you money too, but they will lose.
23:16
Here's why Corby also said the sharp money wave is bad for plus EV bettors. And they kind of went on very long threads each, but essentially the gist I got from this is the big thing that they wanted to discuss was how sharp bettors can kind of manipulate these exchanges into getting line movement in a direction that they want. So maybe that's not the best way to summarize. Perhaps somebody a little bit more qualified can talk about this one out the gates. Perhaps somebody a little bit more qualified can talk about this one out the gates. But, philip, maybe you can kind of go over a little bit more what they're trying to say here.
23:50 - Flup (Host)
Yeah. So these exchanges kind of caught people off guard with how fast they've grown. And I started using Novig a year ago, betting on it, and it would be some easy things to do, where you would just basically post an arbitrage to the market for a lot of money. People come in and they think, wow, this news, you know, this new sports book, novig, is offering these terrible lines. I mean, if FanDuel and DraftKings and Pinnacle all for these player props have this price and you can take an arbitrage to it, you know, might as well take, you might as well take the Novig price. But what they quickly realized over the course of several months is that someone knew something on the other side. There's a reason why they can't get the liquidity on those other books, so they're using the exchange too. And that flow was very sharp and they proceeded to lose was very sharp and they proceeded to lose. But at this point it's now gone so far, so full circle. It's gone the other way, where you might have guys that are like well, I know, if I post an order on an exchange for a lot of money, then someone else is going to fill it at the other books, say like a Pinnacle, a Chris or you know. So even DraftKings, fanduel et cetera move those lines, then they can go over and manipulate the market and hit the other side.
25:08
So those posted orders were not actually sharp. They're pretending to be sharp and it's really hard to discern if it's a fake order or a real order. And while I think Jack and Corby are mostly correct, I disagree with Jack saying you're going to lose money. Honestly, it's going to be hard to just fake the market a lot off of these changes, because if you post an order you run the risk of someone taking it. So you want to be generally posting better orders but at the same time you have to have a balanced approach. In game theory world, if you are a sharp originator, you do want to be posting some fakes and some real orders. So that way no one can get a read off of your order flow or post smaller size, and that would also be another way to do it. So it's going to be really hard and I don't think that these tools are bad. I think they're just an extra resource you should use in your analysis as a top-down better.
26:06 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
All right, interesting take there from Flup Mike, do you have anything to add to this conversation? What did you make of these threads?
26:13 - Mike (Host)
I thought they were pretty interesting. The whole kind of faking on exchange sites isn't something that I've really done. I have wondered these sites get such huge liquidity at different points and they're based off of lines that are lower liquidity, and that's one thing when you're a sportsbook that's able to limit the guys who are winning. But it will be interesting to see how they react to kind of what they're able to do when the market matures a little bit and they're able to kind of people get set up and are able to manipulate these lines one way, take the exchange back the other.
26:47
I think that it's a situation where the more that something kind of exists, the more or the longer something exists, the easier it is to poke holes in it and slowly people will start to find you know different areas that work. The people, those arbors will find a way to arb out anything at any point. So, uh, it's just always a game of cat and mouse, right? Something will happen, someone else will react and then this will be the new trend. So it's interesting to see. You know, as the hold approach is zero, theoretically you should have where there aren't all these arbitrage opportunities and it's more just you know, what side, do you like, but we're a long way away from that.
27:23 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Still right now, I think, kanish you have a lot of experience moving sharp action. I'm sure part of that, part of that gig is holding the line where it is and that's part of kind of what you do. So what's your take on this conversation where you see people manipulating line movement to help their betting?
27:42 - Joey Knish (Host)
Yeah, it's interesting because I I haven't like PB, I haven't really dabbled in the market. I mean, there's been a lot of small markets over the years that had some great experience faking lines in, but this is kind of a new frontier that I guess one I haven't delved into yet. And two, probably it's going to take a little bit smarter man than me to like fully pull off in terms of like the scale and the automation you need. I would one thing I would ask, and I want to ask your guys opinion on this when do we think the point hits where, like right now, you know, you kind of have your leading indicator books that are on screen, indicator books that are on screen? Do you think there's a what I'll call like a flippening where they're?
28:28
At some point your leading indicator books could be in the prediction market space where if a calci or a novig moves to six, then you see the rest of the market react to six, because right now you would see, you know, uh, a circa, a chris, uh, whoever's got the high pinnacle, depending on the sport, whoever's got the high limit in that move, you know, from four and a half to six, and everyone follow. Do you think there's a space in the in the at some point in the future in the pm industry where they move to six and everyone else follows absolutely, I absolutely think that's possible.
29:05 - Flup (Host)
It's going to take, um, I think, well over a year potentially years for that to fully to happen, because a lot of these guys that are moving groups are like so entrenched in their ways they've been like they've been getting down six figures on like original plays that they have through, like dark pools and and you know, pph accounts and finally hitting the Chris's and the pennies of the world last.
29:30
So, like this they're still able to get like significant size down and but eventually, like you said, if you can like you know I will give some credit to here to Calci like when you used to look at the NFL, you can get like a million down on on like these money lines and and you can get a couple hundred thousand down on these spreads. So it's like if calci reduces their fees a little bit and makes it a little bit more competitive with like the chris's and pinnacles of the world, wow, I mean, why would I want to wait and hit the other books when I can just get like a million down on like steelers money line and if I want, that's the easiest way. And then, and if that eventually happens and more and more people shift over there and they start moving flow through exchanges, then we'll see it.
30:10 - Mike (Host)
But I think we're well over a year away just because, like you said, like even you, who moves all the time, have not really moved, used exchanges to that degree yeah, I think you know even longer term, like so the only reason that you have these different lines is essentially friction, right, it's friction between different sports book and money and kind of one place setting it as we get farther and farther down the road.
30:33
Theoretically, the friction should kind of dissipate as we get more exchanges, things like that, more liquidity. It will be interesting to see in a world where you can get like, maybe in in five years you're able to get whatever you want on Tuesday, whenever, and there's no one controlling the line. It will just be market makers and betters. I think that's going to be pretty interesting because essentially these lines are going to just as the whole decreases that friction that existed before doesn't? It will be, you know, basically just originators battling it out first one another, kind of from the get go, rather than this line manipulation you would think. I mean this is all theoretical, of course, you know, doesn't mean it's going to happen in practice. But I just think with all these softbooks, the exchanges kind of get rid of the screen watching to that extent.
31:20 - Joey Knish (Host)
The other thing is, as you know, flopka mentioned there when, if you're trying to get real size and not completely, you know, destroy the number, that usually has led to you know using some like PPA, where there's a lot more risk involved in terms of stiff risk, any of that With now the new PM, like you basically got like 100 percent. I'm not saying it's like FDIC insured here, but like you're dealing with companies that are full, like there's really no like what I'll call like not even just stiff risk, but like leakage in in terms of the operation for for filling bets or even even the like I have to pay a percent to get access to this account to somebody. So like the free rolls that. So I think, for getting big, massive positions down on some of the things it's. It's kind of like a new, almost like a new era, um, for people who are looking to get, you know, the attack markets for that kind of size the movers dying out slowly.
32:17 - Mike (Host)
Joey, good thing you're going to be gone that's why listen.
32:22 - Joey Knish (Host)
That's why fluff following joey k's shoes. That's what he said. He called me this week and said joey k, can you help me update the resume and look what happened?
32:31 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
we're in trouble here. The get a real job crowd is going to run out of people to talk about. Here they're gonna. I mean, unless you. Maybe you consider mine a real job, mike. I don't know if you've got a quote-unquote real job behind the scenes, maybe. Maybe you work at a deli counter behind the scenes, but I guess, if you did, you would know what it was, because some of the comments, in fact a lot of the comments, were driven by the conversation surrounding delis last week. I don't even remember how this conversation came up, but it was something like the American dream is like a deli shop.
33:03 - Mike (Host)
Fulfill the American dream, the deli not being the American dream part, I did have that part right. I got half of it Okay. I just didn't get the deli part.
33:12 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
You did say the American dream was like like cashing a check for your lawyer.
33:17 - Joey Knish (Host)
Yeah, yeah, yeah, doing yeah, then get it, which I don't disagree with.
33:22 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Maybe that's why people are going after FanDuel for the Igbuka props. That's the American dream. But some of the comments here John Reed, 91, says Peanut doesn't have many bad takes. The deli one tops the list. And Joshua Brodsky, 1857, says At least in Florida, publix's deli will give you a sandwich. What deli wouldn't make sandwiches for people? So a lot of the comments were about this, so I thought that was a lot of fun. But the next batch of comments I'm very happy that knish is here today with no mustache, because it only took a week for him to lose it. Jim in the country 3849 says love the knish. Stash here hashtag stud. Well, unfortunately it's gone. But simone hunter, too, said is knish having a terrible mustache competition with Moreto Knish? What happened to the mustache? You know what we?
34:08 - Joey Knish (Host)
took it for a little test drive. We might come back here in November, depending on you, know how things go. But a little test drive to get it out of the garage and then we'll have to see. I will say very polarizing takes.
34:29 - Mike (Host)
You got people that are like all in on the stash and you got people that like what the fuck is that on your face? So yeah, um well, we'll see if we get another.
34:34 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
We get round two, all right two groups of people people who didn't like it and liars. Uh, the last comment is actually a little bit more serious, thankfully. So we do have at least some sort of betting discussion for the comments. But it was from r Rake your Pockets who said you guys, this is why I'm randomly busting out laughing in the gym like a complete lunatic. Thank you Glad you enjoy the show. I seriously love the show. Keep it up.
34:53
How about giving some educational feedback on how to not get accounts nuked? I think that'd be a great topic. So we don't need to go all in on that topic necessarily right now, but I think it is a bit of a reminder here we did talk about last week. There was somebody who got limited betting props pretty much right at post and they were upset because, like I'm betting here, I'm not getting CLV. That this is how I'm trying to avoid getting limited and I make six bets on this fresh account and I'm getting limited Flop. You were top down better and I'm sure you employ some of these techniques and maybe you employ techniques such as betting it right at post. You don't get CLV. Maybe you could provide some educational feedback here on the topic to what this person could have done instead.
35:36 - Flup (Host)
Well, first things, the easiest way is just don't win, right right. My point when I'm saying that is you have to also think about, like what is your goal? Do you want to use a DraftKings account for like three years? If that's your goal, the solution is just lose, like you will never survive that long. So you have to ask yourself you can't just slowly melt this out and make like $10,000 a month for the rest of your life using perfect techniques, these accounts. If you get too big a pnl, they'll cut you that without being said.
36:09
The easiest thing that I've always done, and I've always employed, is simply look like a degenerate, look like a problem gambler. It's easy for me, considering I'm close to one. But, um, like in all seriousness, like how you deposit. If you deposit like double up, try to the Martingale strategy those things are all very useful and making you last a lot longer. And you've got to think about what markets you're betting. If you're betting a backup running back under, even at post, odds are not going to look good on your account. I would always ask yourself would a recreational better make this bet? If the answer is yes, you should probably be okay if you don't get CLV. If the answer is no, you probably shouldn't play it. And the hard part is obviously how do you win while looking like a recreational? I can't give you everything, but that's the best I can do.
37:03 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Look at this the head trader of Novig coming, but that's the best I can do. Look at this the head trader of Novig coming out and saying the best strategy is just to lose. Lose your bets.
37:09 - Flup (Host)
Trying to make your job easier already. Please lose to me or our sponsor of the show, of course.
37:16 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Yes, thank you. All right. Well, we can move into our next topic, but as a reminder, if you do want to have your voice heard in comments like this, make sure you comment something down below. We like to feature comments in the show to drive discussion. Get you guys involved. We always check all the comments. And while you're down there, you can like and subscribe. Like the video, subscribe to Circles Off. Also, to continue the conversation beyond the comment section, you can head over to our Discord Discordgg slash Hammer Great way to interact with all the people within the network, whether it be for Circles Off, forward Progress, hit the Books with Joey Kanish, the Hammer Daily, everything in regards to betting and the community.
37:54
Great place for that sort of discussion. Rob likes to drop his fair prices for anytime touchdown bets for NFL primetime games, so great place to get some bets and some information. Head over to Discord. You can even ask there how you could avoid getting limited when you're betting things like player props. Let's move into our next topic, though. This comes from the winnable meetup that we saw. If you don't know what winnable is, it is a pick selling platform where people go to sell picks, and we criticized them in the past on this channel for focusing more on getting their pick sellers to profit and find more customers rather than actually providing winning bets. And one person who went to this meetup as a winnable pick seller is Tyson at secured picks, who says here's how I made $150,000 in Miami under 48 hours as a sports betting millionaire $10,000 giveaway at the end and it was a short video talking about meeting all these people at winnable showcasing winning bets, dumping a lot of money out into the back of a Maybach, a really nice car, really nice Airbnb, just showing off the lifestyle that supposedly winnable has gotten him there.
38:59
Gamble to freedom, though, brought up this point in a quote tweet and said these type of guys prey on the vulnerable. If you're new to sports betting, here are five red flags that usually mean it's a scam. One no public tracker of bets or results. Two constant flexing like I'm on a yacht cash everywhere. Three giveaway bait or promises of easy money. Four only showing wins, never losses, and the person went supposedly 6-0 on their bets on this trip. Five selling pick courses instead of providing profitability. Betting is about math, not magic tricks. Kanisha, as somebody who is a veteran of this space, you've seen these sorts of quote-unquote magic tricks in the past. What was your reaction to the winnable meetup that took place this week or last?
39:37 - Joey Knish (Host)
week. This seems like this is what I would compare to almost like content houses on TikTok, where you used to see people get together and like, oh, we're going to make it, this is the new thing. But like Dub Club's doing it, winnable's doing it, I have to say I respect a good grift, like yeah, you know what I'm saying. Like, if you're going to, this to me was so like cringeworthy and over the top, where, if you're going to do this and get people like I don't know if that's the shtick they were going for was like way, way over the top, like annoying, like almost like who could believe this is even real? I actually don't think that's what they were going for, which is why I think it's so bad.
40:17
But there's ways to do this that I think can actually draw people in, where you're showing a little bit of the flash money but making it look, I don't know, and maybe they're probably targeting a younger demographic. So maybe you'll have some, like you know, gen Z's that are like, oh God, this is going to work. But I thought this was a rough one, a rough one to sit through. I did see the video and it was like you know, like oh, I don't know how this works, but again, I mean they've obviously done. Those companies are doing well just getting getting the new era of tout on. So maybe it works. But I thought this was just a brutal look.
40:58 - Mike (Host)
Anything to add from you, Mike? These are so bad that it's almost like if you fall for this, it's like you kind of we're going to lose your money. Either way, you were. Either it was either this or there was some Nigerian prince emailing you that you were going to fork over money to right away. If you fall for the like falling for trends or some of the you know, say you were a former actuary who was selling a pick service and it was really hard to get down on some line.
41:18
And then all of a sudden you're down 100 units because you're increasing your volume. I could see falling for that. It makes some sense. If you're down 100 units because you're increasing your volume, I could see falling for that. It makes some sense. If you're falling for this video and you're like, yep, that guy looks like he knows what he's doing. He can probably just pick winners, then good riddance to your money.
41:33 - Flup (Host)
I have to admit here, tyson Secured is one of my favorite guys. I love watching his YouTube. It's so obvious to me that he's just a grifter and a scammer. I'm not worried that people are falling for it and if they are, I just don't feel bad for you anymore and I think it's great entertainment I was watching he had a Dub Club video where it's like he's interviewing the Dub Club CEO and it's like, oh, how he built his own company, which is a pig-selling company. I love this stuff. It always gets a laugh out of me and I I just feel okay about it because, just like, who is falling for this, as, as connection mike said, who could possibly fall for this? I don't feel bad for you if you do fall for it, so why don't I get some entertainment out of it? It's very entertaining to me in the video.
42:20 - Mike (Host)
They all stood up and cheered for something. It didn't look like anyone I've ever seen that in a sporting event, like get an exciting win. They all stood up and cheered for something. It didn't look like anyone I've ever seen at a sporting event like get an exciting win. They all stood up and clapped like they were at a game. There was no fist pumping, it was just clapping, like that's not how people watch games. It was so obvious they didn't even know how to watch the sport right.
42:38 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Yeah, and I wondered. On that video as well, it felt, know, a sitcom, like people are pretending to watch a sports event and I'm wondering if they're actually on this stuff that they claim to be on for it. They they claim to have all been on the seahawks. I really questioned if that was the case. Yes, maybe they were on both sides. It was. Yeah, it was. You're right, it was a content house. They were looking for content. They're fishing for content. That's the way they could have done it. I I still don't quite buy into like. You're just a lost soul, you can't be saved. You're actually gonna fall for this. I think there are. There are people who have wildly skewed images of what sports betting is. This could be a bit of a factor. I still feel bad for them a little bit. But you're right, this is of. It seems to be a very clear drift.
43:20 - Flup (Host)
You guys knock entertainment out of this. I I crack up while watching.
43:24 - Mike (Host)
That's the canadian mindset you take after you're sick. We just let them die. Give the money to the four get the money to the talent survival of the fittest baby.
43:34 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
You tell us in the comments which. Which way is better. Let's start a discussion on that one. I I don't get entertainment out of stuff like this. I I watch this stuff and I'm like how much longer do I have to watch this? I'm watching it because for the sake of this show, but I'd rather not have to sit through even a minute 25 of this to be clear.
43:51 - Flup (Host)
Like the stuff, some of the stuff that, like rob has gone over, like I think he just did over a couple weeks ago analyzing some guys, um, that was selling a tout package. That guy I think rob is good to go after and it it's good to criticize them because they, I think, could actually fool some people. This one is so far gone that I think you have to get entertainment out of it.
44:12 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
This is just so ridiculous that you're saying it's more entertainment at this point yes, yes. Still bad, but yeah, yeah like Peter Popoff.
44:23 - Mike (Host)
What's that, Peter Popoff? The minister that go down to YouTube rabbit hole? There's a guy that you can buy some holy water for him for $10. I bought one for a buddy one time, that kind of thing. It's so ridiculous, it's hilarious, all right fair enough.
44:41 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
I can see that point of the conversation as well. One more full-scale topic to go through on the show for today. It comes from at Monarch, who made a very long thread about the fake betting epidemic and how it has gone too far. So it's talked about influencers who have been provided money by casinos to wager in live streams to showcase that they're winning major in live streams to showcase that they're winning. You could argue that sometimes these casinos will set these streams up and will give these people a very large win on like a slot machine or something, an online slot machine or something like that, just to showcase to the viewers how much money you could be making if you're actually betting here. But a lot of time that's not real money. It's not the person's not actually betting that.
45:23
Usually, when I think about this conversation, I think about Drake, who did a lot of these sorts of streams previously with an online casino company and he's betting like millions of dollars on marquee sporting events and things of that nature. I'm not I'm sure he can afford it, but I'm not really sure he's actually betting a million dollars on the Super Bowl. Anyways, on this conversation, do we feel like this has gone too far. Is this a bigger problem than it's kind of being made out to be you?
45:50 - Joey Knish (Host)
know it's funny. I don't think this really had caught a lot of like the gambling Twitter sphere for a while, but this has kind of been going on and like a thing that's that's pretty massive on YouTube of like the slot people that are like it has to have been like seven years.
46:05 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
46:06 - Joey Knish (Host)
Where, like you've seen, even people like Aiden Ross and stuff, accused of like getting a big marker and then just like going there and does, and even I mean you think like the barstool partnership with draft Kings, like a lot of their employees are getting like these massive free bets and stuff.
46:20
So I do think there's an element of like I don't want to call it like fake betting just to get people like into it. At the same time, I don't know, is this I'm going to take like a little bit of like. If you're a partner with this person because of their content and then you want to see them like making content gambling, and then you want to see them like making content gambling, isn't that kind of the whole deal? Like, well, I mean, either, right, you're going to pay them money or give them a marker to like, play for free, like, or otherwise the person's not going to do it. So I don't know if this is this like negative academic that I'm or epidemic that I'm just going to be like oh my God, how could these companies do this? I think this is kind of just how it is.
47:06 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
I think there has to be some sort of disclaimer. Legally, there should be some sort of disclaimer when you are getting provided funds to make these wagers. You would not make these wagers yourself. I feel like there should be some sort of disclaimer that exists there. Just the same company that I talked about with Drake oh, I'm not going to name because it's blacklisted by YouTube, I think but this company is now sponsoring a lot of soccer Twitter accounts that I follow who, every day I see, are posting bet slips on just various different soccer-related markets. I am highly confident they're not actually betting these things. I can't say for certain, but there's not even a disclosure that this is paid content. Not even even a disclosure. This is an ad, when it very clearly is and that's against twitter terms of service.
47:49 - Flup (Host)
But, uh, anything you want to add on this one, philip I mean to be fair, like the monarch guy also kind of targeted a lot of the younger. I mean I think he made his money from like the csgo, like crowd and targeting like the 18 year old committee. So I don't really feel bad for him and like complaining. It sounds like he's being very predatory with how he's advertising to and who he's targeting. So it is unfortunately throwback to the old great podcast. The business we have chosen. This is the business that we have chosen and there's a lot of predatory people in it and this is what, how, what it usually takes to to win. So you can't like complain about it. In my opinion, if you enter this business, you you have to just uh deal with it I don't know if, just because you entered the business, you can't complain about it.
48:35 - Mike (Host)
I think that you can certainly point out when things are doing scummy, but at the same time, I don't know how you would ever regulate this out. If I want flop to make 12 nfl picks and I'm paying him $100,000 for his, I can just, you know, increase his pay by $12,000 and say, hey, also make $1,000 picks, and you know you can put it in this contract that way. It's going to be something that's hard to legislate out, but it is. I certainly think it's scummy. I don't know what you'd do about it, though.
49:02 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
I just think. I mean, I don't know how you do it, but there should be a disclaimer, some sort of disclaimer that says that I'm not wagering my own money. This, this has been provided. How do you prove that? I guess, like you said, they're just going to top up your contract and say do whatever you want with it, but the idea is they use it for that.
49:18 - Mike (Host)
I guess there are ways around it, but at least it is a sad reality sponsored by this segment is sponsored by you. Can you know? At least that's, that's partially does it. But you're right, it should be its own thing.
49:29 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
I just don't know how you do it yeah, yeah, yeah, you're right, tough to tough to say on this one, but I I do agree that it it's been a problem for a long time. This has been a problem for a very long time, as kandish said. Last thing we do on the show, we actually have a bit of a bonus at the end. Stick around after the show for a announcement that we are going to be dropping after we do the chopping block. This is this part of the show where we go through topics didn't require full-scale segments, but we wanted to touch on nonetheless and the first one comes from, at the degen weekly, the degenerate who had a bet on uh yamamoto 97 miles per hour or faster, on a fastball in a game between the Dodgers and the Brewers. Yamamoto in the game threw a fastball of 96.9 miles per hour and he said please tell me they round up, mike, do you know? Are they going to round up to 97 for?
50:24 - Mike (Host)
him. I don't think when they put 97.0, that was their intention was to take 96.5 secretly when they did that, but I didn't know that you could make this bet. Uh, it looks like a true like really is living into the name there on his twitter name.
50:39 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
I just was laughing at the fact that he actually bet that a lot of the replies were uh, screenshots of the actual mlb broadcast which showed the fastball rounded up at 97 miles per hour. Say this is bullshit. It should have cashed because the degenerate is a. Is a recreational sports better does recreational sports betting. Content acknowledges that and therefore has a recreational base of followers. But really funny to put it up like that Fluff. What do you want to say on this?
51:06 - Flup (Host)
I just I cannot believe I had the same thoughts. I'm like did he actually bet that? I always love this account. I follow it.
51:16 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Yeah, he really really is a degenerate. Like well, you could. You could, in theory, like find an edge on this. Could you not like if?
51:22 - Flup (Host)
oh, I'm sure, I'm sure you can, but I think he would be the first to admit that he didn't have an edge and he's just hitting it for fun, which I respect. I mean, he's pretty open and honest about it, so hard for me to hate. I love the account.
51:34 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
I mean, Mike, as somebody who's always looking for unique angles. You said it yourself in the Life of a Capper video that dropped on Wednesday. You're looking for all these unique angles, Wouldn't?
51:53 - Mike (Host)
this provide a chance to look for a unique. If you're looking at their pitch distribution and how that could factor into the lineup that they're facing, would it not be more likely in some cases he's going to be throwing more fastballs, more likely to hit 97? This is exactly the type of I don't like baseball, but this is like the perfect kind of garbage market that I would love to dive into, and I love. Degenerate is betting so that he can hide my nerdy action with his degenerate action. So I actually am a big fan of this. I hope that more people start betting these stupid markets.
52:11 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Kanish, you've been on this channel talking about betting on Miss Universe, so I guess you're into these unique markets as well, but you ever seen anything like this? Would you dabble with something like this?
52:20 - Joey Knish (Host)
No, I was going to say I actually I didn't know. Do you know where he actually just say, where he I see it's in his picket where he actually bet this at.
52:27 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Yeah, it tracked on picket. I actually don't know where he bet it at though.
52:31 - Joey Knish (Host)
Okay, just food for thought there. But no, like with PB, I hadn't seen the market, but I totally agree with him that these especially if you're not worried about getting massive size, this is like the kind of great, great thing off the road to attack.
52:49 - Mike (Host)
Is it available in a kiosk anywhere? That's where I'm going to find out.
52:54 - Flup (Host)
I'm always shocked by, like I always think these niche markets, like how many people could really bet it? And then I see like there's actually a lot of people that like it. It's shocking to me.
53:03 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Well, especially if a big content creator like the Degenerate posts it, that's a lot of liquidity into the market to maybe take advantage of. So maybe look out for some of those screenshots in the future. At JFerry23 is the next one we brought up. It says live betting is just better because you don't have to wait around all day to lose your money. It takes us a couple of minutes and it's gone. Do we also feel this way about live betting Flop? Do you like this draft more?
53:28 - Flup (Host)
This is just so funny because I was just talking to another trader yesterday and they were what's the split between pregame and live? And I say, well, I think live is becoming more because people are degenerates and they want to get the action immediately. So I said that exact thing and I'm like, yeah, he's pretty spot on. I think live betting has been big, because who wants to make a bet on Monday for a Sunday game and wait six days to find out the result? That?
53:54 - Joey Knish (Host)
is me?
53:56 - Flup (Host)
No, obviously, if you're sharp and you want to do that and get the number. But people, they bet for the thrill and the rush, they want it immediately and that's why they have these quarter bets and halftime bets. You can bet a first quarter, then a second quarter, then a third quarter, etc.
54:11 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
You can bet first play of the game. You can bet first pitch of the game, first basket. I'm sure somewhere you can find who's going to win the jump ball. The quicker the better. Some sportsbooks even have quick market sections. If you go to an NBA game there will be a quick market section. So the markets that settle the quickest to start the game. They really are pushing it this way.
54:33 - Flup (Host)
I mean I think it's look at the Cal State NFL volume. They'll do like an average between like 3 and 7 million pregame on NFL and then it will end with like quadruple that, meaning they did like three times more live, because people just love live betting and that's I think it makes sense mike, do you dabble with live betting more or less than pre-game betting?
54:56 - Mike (Host)
uh, I less, but I do do some live betting. Uh, the other day I bet on something coming uh, out of commercial break. Next play, just 70 yard touchdown right against me. There's nothing more demoralizing than have a bet turn against you just like that. Uh, I one time in a group chat was messaged by a buddy. He's like hey, do you want you know, no vig for this game today? And I was like no, but I'll you know, I'll bet you on saturday, because saturday's games might as well be a future for me. Buddy, I'm not worrying that far in advance. So I think that a lot of people like to bet on game day that's how it always works with my friends.
55:26 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
I'm sitting there with them watching primetime nfl and right before the game, like I gotta get my bets in, and I keep saying, please just do this just a few days ago and you'll be better off.
55:37 - Joey Knish (Host)
And they don't like it or just do like you're way better off just waiting to bet live on sundays than betting right before the game on preview.
55:47 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Yeah, honestly, yeah, I should start telling them that instead, they are better off than betting into the most efficient market in existence. In all likelihood, you're right On your side of betting. You dabble with the live markets.
56:02 - Joey Knish (Host)
You know I used to do more. I will say it's just really labor intensive. Now and when you're corporate guys like Fluff and I, it just it takes. It takes a lot of time and usually especially on like the game, like Saturdays, I'm spending so much time trying to just get like pregame positions down and props and other stuff that you know by the time even maybe by the evening hits Do I want to? Then you know, get on the fucking you know set up and have my screen going to actually live trade. No, I'm already fucking fried. So I get it if that's your thing like massive, but to do that's it's just man, it takes a lot. So I got respect for people that do it like that's their thing, but it is very labor intensive.
56:46 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
And the second last piece of the chopping block comes from Dallas Wilson fan club president. And this is what at China Maniac, who sometimes is the fourth panelist in the show. This is what China Maniac would call not a bad beat and it's a showcase of East Texas A&M plus seven half is the worst beat of all time. It's the I would call it a classic example where it's kickoff with a few seconds to go and the team receiving the kick is down by four points in this example, but down by. They need a touchdown, so they try to lateral the ball off the kickoff. They end up turning it over and the opposition team scoops it up and runs it in for a touchdown for the cover on the spread. Now I unfortunately would have to agree with China in this one and say this is not a bad beat, because I think you have to kind of expect in this scenario they're going to try and lateral the ball here. That's the only logical play here you could easily see them recover the fumble.
57:40 - Flup (Host)
Give me a break. How often does this end in the end zone? And it covers, even knowing that it's lettered. What are you talking?
57:46 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
about. Well, I won't go as far as saying it happens every week in the NFL or in football as a whole.
57:52 - Flup (Host)
I bet this was like 5% max.
57:57 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
This happens a few times a year. This sort of thing.
57:59 - Flup (Host)
Okay, thank you for proving my point. A few times a year, it's not like every fucking week it happens.
58:04 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
No, I said I wouldn't say it happens every week, but I would say it happens a few times a year.
58:12 - Flup (Host)
How can you say this is a bad beat. Then this is a spot. Do you barely lose and you expect it to win?
58:15 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
this is the definition of a bad beat barely lose, like barely. What's the the threshold of barely? Is it 30? Is it 20? What would be your threshold?
58:22 - Flup (Host)
this is a bad beat that is plain and dry.
58:25 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Listen, I'd be fucking pissed if I lost this bet, but like in the terminology of bad beat, which is just a completely made-up term to make people feel a little bit better about, their bets.
58:36 - Flup (Host)
It's not made-up term, it's a real term and this is a bad beat.
58:39 - Mike (Host)
And clubs just barely lose when you expect it to win. So if you bet a minus 900 and it loses at the buzzers, that would be a quarter.
58:47 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
That's what I mean. That's what I mean. What's the threshold? What's the threshold of barely ever loses?
58:55 - Mike (Host)
I've had, I've won a bet before. I can't remember who it was, but I won on the like pitchy, pitchy, woo-woo at the end falling in the end zone. Guy scored a touchdown, it was just. I've only won that way, I've never lost. And you know I have to say that I really that's simmed out in the model I put in what are the probability that they end the game with a giant pitch lateral that ends in the touchdown? If you don't have that in your model, just get a better model.
59:19 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Well, I'm not saying it's enough to model it out, but I am saying, when this kickoff is on its way, this has to be in your head. This is something that could happen here.
59:28 - Flup (Host)
Look, it's very simple If you make the bet. When he made the bet at plus seven and a half, it was basically 50-50. He got probably 95% plus equity. Okay.
59:37 - Mike (Host)
I agree 99.9.
59:39 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
I wouldn't go that far.
59:43 - Mike (Host)
Oh yeah, the chance when they're getting that kickoff that they pitch that in the back of the end zone is under 0.1%.
59:47 - Flup (Host)
Okay, so thank you for proving my point, Mike. He bet it at 50. It's gone up to 99.9 and then down to zero. That is the definition.
59:56 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
I disagree.
59:58 - Mike (Host)
It's 99.9.
59:59 - Flup (Host)
I think 95 is the correct problem here?
01:00:00 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
We're just dead wrong here.
01:00:02 - Mike (Host)
It's 1 in 10,000 or whatever it would be so 1 in 1,000 is 99.9. So I think it's under one in 1,000.
01:00:11 - Flup (Host)
Pretty clearly to your point. If you bet a long shot to start because you're starting there, it's not a bad beat because, like you need to get to a point where you think you have a chance to win, or you, or it increases. The equity increases from when you initially bet it. So if you bet like a plus a thousand, it gets up to where you're minus 300 and then you lose. I could, you could argue that that's a bad beat. But if you bet it plus a thousand and you lose, obviously it's not a bad beat.
01:00:34 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Yeah, I assume this play 90,. As soon as play a hundred times, we'll get more than one touchdown like this. I don't think this is a one.
01:00:42 - Mike (Host)
Everybody. You know it's not like the classic uh ellie hugh. Everybody who's bet plus seven and a half has lost an overtime game, or you haven't bet enough overtime games, it's not quite one of those situations, but it's getting close.
01:00:54 - Flup (Host)
Uh, this is one of your worst. Takes that. This is not a bad beat. This is absolutely uh, are you?
01:00:59 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
are you on flub side, the what's typically the right side of an argument, or uh?
01:01:06 - Joey Knish (Host)
I actually like through. I actually lost some money on this, so I'm calling it a bad B. I didn't lose as much as some other members of the chat that I saw on this, so, yeah, I'm calling it a bad B.
01:01:22 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
All right, it's three against one. Maybe some defenders in the comments, maybe more people piling on you. Let us know Comment something down below whether you would consider this a bad beat. China, I'm calling out to you. I'm putting out the China beacon into the sky. I need your help on this one. Please give us your take on this.
01:01:39
One Final part of the chopping block is from originally at Be Better, b-e-e Better. Who says WNBA parentheses? Sorry for Americans, parentheses. War is over. How much money did I lose? 2025 has been a year of variance. I think variance is one of the biggest hurdles of being a winning sports better, but really talked about. I want to talk about it more. Friend of the show and I think one of the biggest fans, catches every single episode. So big shout outs to the shipper at ship, the justice, who says I don't understand this at all. From top down betters, you're just clicking the buttons. Your edge is more or less qualified in most markets. Why would you, why would your belief in that edge ever waver? Flop as a top down better yourself? How would you respond to what the ship is saying here?
01:02:25 - Flup (Host)
Look, it depends on what kind of markets you're top-downing. If you're top-downing pre-game NFL yes, I agree with Shipper here Because if you get CLV you know you're winning long-term. No one is faking the NFL mainlines markets CLV you win, end of discussion. But most markets that's not always the case. If you're top-downing props, for example, you can win without getting CLV and props. It's a low enough liquidity market.
01:02:56
If you're top-downing some niche sports like, say, wta tennis or something like that, I think you could be getting CLV and wondering, hey, am I getting faked over a long sample size of losing here? Same with live. I'm a top-down, live better. I question all the time when I have big downswings is my edge still here? Sometimes I say, wow, my edge maybe isn't here and I get a real job. Other times I stick with it. But I think Shipper is way off base here. I agree in a very small thing but like most examples, I think people do deserve to question when variance hits, because how can you ever be so certain? And it's definitely that for top down bettors and it's even worse for originators that don't get to win.
01:03:45 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Kanish anything to say to your friend the Shipper.
01:03:49 - Joey Knish (Host)
You know I got to tell you I like seeing Ship finally take, you know, an L's. He's usually pretty careful about what, so to have him, you know, on the show taking an L very enjoyable he also. There were some other tweets that I meant to get in here that someone tagged him in that maybe we'll have on the show next week as a teaser. But I agree with Fluff here.
01:04:11
When you're not the one and I'll just simplify it to this when you're not the one quantifying the edge, then you're always going to be questioning, I guess, even if you are, but you're always going to be questioning whether that edge still exists when you go through a downswing, because the person that you're, or the book, or the person that you're top down, top downing, they you know there's a lot of different things that could. I know that top I saw PB's face there on top downing. Maybe that could go to a dark place here, if you know, maybe we should clip that, but that, like they might have lost their edge edge or that book might have no longer be getting fake. So there's a lot of different elements that when you're the top downer you're not going to really have access to. You're just kind of be you're. You're kind of going in blind with the assumption that this is going to be good and not always the knowledge that it should be, or what's happening in the market.
01:05:10 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Go ahead. Mike Finish off this part of the show.
01:05:12 - Mike (Host)
We got to have a different phrase than top downer. I don't think that that's what we need to have moving forward on this one. But it just depends how obvious of a market you're top down betting and I think the greatest trick that steam chasers have ever pulled is convincing the world they're top-down bettors Like you. Chasing the screen and watching Penny move and then clicking on points bet is not the same as Spanky coming up with vast market manipulation and doing all these things. So if you're doing something basic where you're just picking off steel lines of course I don't know what B-betters does that one I totally agree with Shipper If you're actually doing some difficult version of top down betting, then obviously it's much different.
01:05:53 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
All right. Well, we talked a lot about top downing or steam chasing. Let's go to our steam chaser on site, which is me, but also Chris. Dirk has flopped because we have a big announcement to end off the show. We'll give the floor to you, Chris. What do you have to say?
01:06:10 - Flup (Host)
Well, obviously, with me taking a new role that directly competes with our sponsor, I felt it was inappropriate for myself to be a regular guest here on the show. So this will be my last episode where I'm a repeat guest. This obviously isn't. I love everyone on the show except Kanish. This obviously isn't. I love everyone on the show except Kanish, but I'm not. I don't. I'm not quitting for any ill will. I have no ill will to Rob or Jacob or Peanut or Kanish or anything like that. It's just simply like I had an opportunity, I had a ticket and directly compete with my sponsor. I'll probably be back for like every couple of months or so as a as a guest here. Just I think that we can make that work. But if I hope for the sake of the show, the sponsorship lives on forever, but if it ever passes, maybe I'll be back then Again, nothing to do with the show, I love it. This just obviously can't directly compete with the direct sponsor here and I wish the best to Kalshi and no Big.
01:07:04 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
I'm sure there's going to be people who think, uh that you got fired by, uh, by that's what I'll be, telling people.
01:07:11 - Flup (Host)
I knew damn well Knish was going to say that.
01:07:15 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
I will. I will say that that is not the case, as somebody who does is involved behind the scenes with the hammer. But uh, first, as I said earlier, congratulations on the new role and thank you for behaving yourself on the show today. Thank you, we're on your best behavior even though you have taken this new role. And thank you for behaving yourself on the show today. Thank you, we're on your best behavior even though you have taken this new role here. But again, we wish you all the best.
01:07:33
We hope to see you back on the channel very, very soon, but that will do it. That means new looks coming potentially to this show Circle back in the future for the Friday show that goes up every Friday at 8 am Eastern time. We also do a live show Mondays at 1 pm Eastern Time. We sprinkle in the bonus content, like the Life of a Capri series, which came out on Wednesday in our third edition of that series, wednesdays at 1 pm. So three great pieces of content a week. Make sure you subscribe to the channel. Helplessness wrote 30,000 subs. Smash that like button if you enjoyed this one. Comment something down below.
