LOL...NBA

aww.

well, that's okay -- i think the whole thing was staged, anyway.

 

That's the whole point of card counting. You bet big when you have the odds in your favor. And those odds are moved only slightly.

Having a ref in your pocket is probably about the same as being able to see what cards you will get dealt.

 

no. the whole point of card counting is to make money. you can't make money if you're thrown out of the casino. you absolutely vary your bet depending on the count, but if you swing too wildly you draw attention to yourself.

i doubt it's that beneficial. black jack is already pretty good odds. the house's whole advantage comes from you having to play (and potentially bust) first. if you never busted and always maximized your hand and the dealer always had to play, you'd have some pretty sick odds in your favor.

 

In sports gambling they don't know who the bets are coming from. Oh, and the bets DID draw attention - that's why the line moved.

Well, based on the only ref fixing case that I know about, they were apparently pretty damn good at it.

 

Helpful reminder on risk level:

If Nut gets caught counting cards alone, he can and will be escorted from the casino.

If Kshead goes on a monster run, the sportsbook can and will refuse his bets.

If a ref gets caught fixing games, he sits down and confesses his role in a criminal conspiracy that is considered to be one of the most taboo things in sports. He does this to get help from the Feds with the death threats he receives.

 

sure, but gamblers (and by extension professional handicappers) pay attention to all sorts of details. how long before a ref's o/u record gets noticed? if you have a guy out there who sticks out because he is always over, it's going to eventually draw attention to the ref and fuck up your golden goose.

if you know about it, they can't have been too good. i think it's a bit early to draw conclusions about which games he bet on and how he tried to fix them. it's way easy to look back and find a pattern that gives you huge winnings. you could probably do that with a number of other refs, in fact. but that doesn't prove anything about the games he was fixing.

this particular case looks to be shaping up as much less than a full-blown mafia fix with death threats and broken bones.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/b...-07-26_rogue_refs_bookies_old_hs_chums-3.html

 

not sure where you're going with this.

 

They stumbled upon this based on a wire tapped phone call in another case, right? Daghtry's performances didn't lead to him being noticed.

And are you really trying to say that if he won big on the games that he admits to fixing that it was all just a coincidence?

 

donaghy's performance wasn't the thing that got them noticed, no. i dunno if it was wiretap or what, but the investigation of organized crime is what discovered the donaghy deal. it was something going for two years. the 12 games that kshead pointed to were the ones that seemed to look the most impressive, but that's a pretty small sample. i would presume they were hoping to continue this venture, but maybe not.

um... no. what i'm saying is that it's not hard to find a series of games that fits a pattern and then declare that pattern was designed. we have absolutely no idea at this point in time which games donaghy tried to influence (if any).

 

Still at it?