ID case

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is considered by many law experts to be the poster child of judicial activism. Of all the Circuit Courts in the nation they certainly have the highest rate of overturned decisions. It remains to be seen as to whether or not Mr. Fayer will take this matter any further.
 
I guess I should have paid more attention. Auto Monk already started a thread on this in the more oppropriate "law" section. :o
 
kewljason said:
I know that many members here are GC members and even more are taking advantage of the free trial, but since there has been several threads in the last few months dealing with the topic of fake ID's I wanted to pass on this link to the article in the LV sun yesterday about the case.
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/may/05/las-vegas-advantage-gambler-loses-appeal-against-m/
Click to expand...
It was a good outcome for novelty-ID users. 'Fake ID' is an artful term that could apply to counterfeit or novelty ID.
Let us be clear that counterfeit ID has always been illegal and novelty ID has never been illegal. zg
 
I can't believe they would back someone off from sports betting. Just restrict the maximum bet. I can imagine a small bookie backing a sports betting pro off, but not a major casino. I don't doubt that there are people who study sports teams and can consistently pick the winner better than 52.5% of the time. For everyone who makes a living sports betting, there are a lot more that think they can. Depending on his winrate, he might have a higher advantage than a card counter or a poker professional.
 
Sportsbook backoffs

I can't believe they would back someone off from sports betting.

Many paranoid sportsbooks are becoming as nasty as blackjack pits. I have been backed off from several sportsbooks, and trespassed from two, including Wynn Las Vegas -- perhaps the nastiest and worst-run sportsbook of them all. Both trespassings were complete with the security guard "show of force," LOL.
 
LVBear584 said:
I can't believe they would back someone off from sports betting.

Many paranoid sportsbooks are becoming as nasty as blackjack pits. I have been backed off from several sportsbooks, and trespassed from two, including Wynn Las Vegas -- perhaps the nastiest and worst-run sportsbook of them all. Both trespassings were complete with the security guard "show of force," LOL.
Click to expand...
I'm trembling in my boots! :eek:
 
They shouldn't back winning sports or race bettors off just because they handicap better than the sportsbooks. The only reason for backoffs should be "insider trading", such as the coach betting on his own team. Many pro sports bettors bet online, and they weren't affected by the recent poker bust.

I guess the only way to consistently win with no heat in a casino is to be good at poker.
 
alwayssplitaces said:
They shouldn't back winning sports or race bettors off just because they handicap better than the sportsbooks. The only reason for backoffs should be "insider trading", such as the coach betting on his own team. Many pro sports bettors bet online, and they weren't affected by the recent poker bust.

I guess the only way to consistently win with no heat in a casino is to be good at poker.
Click to expand...
And even then, you're subject to getting cheated.
 
A good booky has no bet on the outcome. He offsets bets on one team with the other to have them balance using the line. He collects the vig on the bets and cannt lose. Only bets that are to large to offset or lay off on other books does a talented bettor hurt his bottom line.
 
I know people who have been told not to bet by some books. My dad went through a period he picked college basketball at close to 70%for several years. It took a lot of work. Several offshore books refused his action after a while. Two seemed to use his bets as reliable information for adjusting their line. Given the info in my last post it may have just been an effort to offset his bets.
 
LVBear584 said:
I can't believe they would back someone off from sports betting.

Many paranoid sportsbooks are becoming as nasty as blackjack pits. I have been backed off from several sportsbooks, and trespassed from two, including Wynn Las Vegas -- perhaps the nastiest and worst-run sportsbook of them all. Both trespassings were complete with the security guard "show of force," LOL.
Click to expand...

This has got to be the biggest joke ever. Casinos will back off anyone with an edge at anything! Good lord!
 
LVBear584 said:
I can't believe they would back someone off from sports betting.

Many paranoid sportsbooks are becoming as nasty as blackjack pits. I have been backed off from several sportsbooks, and trespassed from two, including Wynn Las Vegas -- perhaps the nastiest and worst-run sportsbook of them all. Both trespassings were complete with the security guard "show of force," LOL.
Click to expand...

The part I don't get about sports backoffs is the lines are the same for everyone and there are only two ways to play a line.

So if you bet on the Chargers to win and I bet on the Chargers to win it's the same thing. What are they going to do, throw out everybody who bets on the Chargers to win? If they are so sure it is a losing bet for the house why do they offer it at all?

Which leads to the question- they control the line and can change it any time they want, so if they think there's a problem with it why not just change it? They are already taking their dime or dime-and-a-half, they can't make money on that just by setting a line that is going to amount to a coin flip?
 
automatic monkey said:
the part i don't get about sports backoffs is the lines are the same for everyone and there are only two ways to play a line.

So if you bet on the chargers to win and i bet on the chargers to win it's the same thing. What are they going to do, throw out everybody who bets on the chargers to win? If they are so sure it is a losing bet for the house why do they offer it at all?

Which leads to the question- they control the line and can change it any time they want, so if they think there's a problem with it why not just change it? They are already taking their dime or dime-and-a-half, they can't make money on that just by setting a line that is going to amount to a coin flip?
Click to expand...

x10 :)
 
Automatic Monkey said:
The part I don't get about sports backoffs is the lines are the same for everyone and there are only two ways to play a line.

So if you bet on the Chargers to win and I bet on the Chargers to win it's the same thing. What are they going to do, throw out everybody who bets on the Chargers to win? If they are so sure it is a losing bet for the house why do they offer it at all?
Click to expand...

I have no experience with sports betting, so this is just speculation - but perhaps it's similar to counting in BJ: when the counter increases his bet or wongs in to a table, everyone at the table has an advantage (disregarding poor playing decisions), not just the counter. Despite that, the house will still limit or refuse his action while allowing others to play those same hands at an advantage, simply because he increases the overall proportion of money that is being wagered with a player advantage.

Of course, unlike in blackjack, in sports betting the house is supposed to have an advantage on every player wager, assuming a perfect bookmaker. So an AP can only be identified by a long history of winning play - whereas in BJ, a counter can be and often is identified based upon a single session. And even when a sports AP is positively identified, it is difficult to know whether he has an advantage on any single wager - again unlike BJ, where an analysis of deck composition by the eye will reveal that information precisely.
 
Automatic Monkey said:
The part I don't get about sports backoffs is the lines are the same for everyone and there are only two ways to play a line.

So if you bet on the Chargers to win and I bet on the Chargers to win it's the same thing. What are they going to do, throw out everybody who bets on the Chargers to win? If they are so sure it is a losing bet for the house why do they offer it at all?

Which leads to the question- they control the line and can change it any time they want, so if they think there's a problem with it why not just change it? They are already taking their dime or dime-and-a-half, they can't make money on that just by setting a line that is going to amount to a coin flip?
Click to expand...
They fear the professional sports bettor who studies long hours to find those anomalies on which to bet a small fortune. These guys can really hurt a sports book.
 
aslan said:
They fear the professional sports bettor who studies long hours to find those anomalies on which to bet a small fortune. These guys can really hurt a sports book.
Click to expand...

Hmm...I know that there are professional sports bettors, but are they really going to wager enough on one event to wipe out their bankrolls? Sounds like an amateurs move to me.

Barring a sports bettor seems way past paranoid. I can MAYBE see a very successful sports bettor getting some heat in a tiny book, but in a large one? If anyone bets enough to impact the balance, the book will just change the spread, which is exactly what happened during this past Super Bowl. Unfortunately for the sports books, there wasn't enough money on the Steeler's side for them to layoff the correct amount, so they got hammered.

Poor babies.....
 
aslan said:
They fear the professional sports bettor who studies long hours to find those anomalies on which to bet a small fortune. These guys can really hurt a sports book.
Click to expand...

The only thing they should need to fear is a mobster who has rigged the game and is betting a lot of money. Or perhaps an agent of one of the players- minor league pitcher gets called up to make a start, sends his mother to bet $100K on the other team and hangs curve balls for a couple of innings. He can double his minor league salary with one move like that.

Why don't sports books do parimutuel instead, and take a nickel with absolutely no worries whatsoever about getting beat by the players because they are betting against each other only? That nickel is the equivalent of a slot machine rake. They wouldn't even have to pay an analyst to set the lines. It would also transfer very nicely to an online format should they ever get approval for that.
 
LovinItAll said:
Hmm...I know that there are professional sports bettors, but are they really going to wager enough on one event to wipe out their bankrolls? Sounds like an amateurs move to me.

Barring a sports bettor seems way past paranoid. I can MAYBE see a very successful sports bettor getting some heat in a tiny book, but in a large one? If anyone bets enough to impact the balance, the book will just change the spread, which is exactly what happened during this past Super Bowl. Unfortunately for the sports books, there wasn't enough money on the Steeler's side for them to layoff the correct amount, so they got hammered.

Poor babies.....
Click to expand...

Automatic Monkey said:
The only thing they should need to fear is a mobster who has rigged the game and is betting a lot of money. Or perhaps an agent of one of the players- minor league pitcher gets called up to make a start, sends his mother to bet $100K on the other team and hangs curve balls for a couple of innings. He can double his minor league salary with one move like that.

Why don't sports books do parimutuel instead, and take a nickel with absolutely no worries whatsoever about getting beat by the players because they are betting against each other only? That nickel is the equivalent of a slot machine rake. They wouldn't even have to pay an analyst to set the lines. It would also transfer very nicely to an online format should they ever get approval for that.
Click to expand...

How about Billy Walters. Watch this 60-minutes report. He uses anonymous partners to get his bets down. In part of this youtube he is observed betting Sunday pro football, which he says he typically bets $2 million each Sunday. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6FAUQ6SFKM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top