Exposing The Worst Betting Advice We Found On Twitter | Presented by Kalshi

0:00Close your eyes, exhale, fill your body, relax, and let go of whatever you're carrying today. Well, I'm letting go of the worry that I wouldn't get my new contacts in time for this class. I got them delivered free from 1-800 contacts. Oh my gosh, they're so fast! And breathe. Oh, sorry. I almost couldn't breathe when I saw the discount they gave me on my first order. Oh, sorry. Namaste. Visit 1-800-contacts.com today to save on your first order. 1-800-contacts. Tell me if I'm missing something. This is very obviously take the cat. Would you rather 15k or a bet that if it wins, you get 20k. I can just bet another 10k on the thunder plus 135 and get $35,000 if it wins instead of 20k. 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. 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.

1:07This 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. For this week's show, we've found a lot of people giving out what they consider to be sports betting advice. We're going to analyze that with the first three sections of today's show. But a whole lot more also coming at you today on Circleback here on these Circles Off Channel. Which is part of the Harebedding Network and presented by CalSheet. It's the show we cover, the latest and greatest news that comes from gambling Twitter. If you're host here on Circleback, my name is Jacob Gravenia. I am a creator and producer here at the Hammer Bedding Network. Joining me for today, we have a little bit of a different cast for today. We have Joey Kanish as normal co-host on the Hit the Books YouTube channel. Which is the Hammer's College Football Content Division. But no mic today. Instead, we have two other guests joining us. Firstly, we have China at China Maniac joining us in the bottom left corner and then in the top right corner.

2:09We have Porter at BA Analytics underscore. Firstly, China. How are you doing? Nice to have you back on the show. Doing great, man. Can't wait to jump into all this great stuff today. And Porter, we got you again here. You feel like we got a good list of topics for today? Yeah, I do. First time I've been on the show back to back. Hopefully I can keep making stuff up to people like to hear. All right. Well, we're going to jump into things. There was a bit of excitement to cover this one before we started recording today. It's a tweet that comes from Jared Smith at Jared Smith Betts. It does a lot of sports betting content, especially on Twitter, which is where we're covering this tweet from. So he says, how can you make solid bets on random mid-major conference turni games without doing any research about the teams? One, let the sharps plant their flag on the side or total. Two, the line will steam in that direction. Three, bet the other side. These mid-major games typically have less liquidity, which means the line typically can move too much when professional groups give them out to their clients.

3:10Will you win every time? No. Will you likely be making plus TV bets? Yes. This approach requires zero knowledge about the teams, just a good odd screen and access to a lot of sports books. He provides an example for Jacksonville Beller-Mine, which is a game that was happening when he tweeted this. A professional gave it under 148. The total steam down four points. The game is flying over. Again, it's not always going to work out that way, over 144 was a great bet. So using a specific example there, let's start off with Porter. Do you think this is a sound advice that could actually lead to winning its sports betting? So I really like this topic because it reminds me of what I go through really often. This is like the classic example of having a little bit of knowledge in the industry can create a lot of damage. And he covers his ass a lot in this by like making a lot of happenstance comments about doesn't always win. Is it plus TV? Will you win every time? No. So I almost feel like he knows this kind of BS, but here's the problem with this one. If you don't have a model or you know where the number is going to move,

4:12who says that you shouldn't bet the number after moved one point after move two points after move three points? It doesn't know. What if you bet it after move two points, but then it moved to more. So now he's in the dead middle. So this is just kind of your classic. It creates content. It doesn't really know sports betting that well. He even writes that he's not a pro like somewhere else in here. He wrote that he's not a pro better. And this is your classic example of like he seen something that sounds good. He's seen it work a few times anecdotally. It feels right. He has a little bit of knowledge about the space, but doesn't understand all the intricacies and like why this isn't good. All right. Let's go to China next. There are other guests for today's show. Your thoughts on the advice we have here. Yeah, like there's spots and certain markets where you might be able to win with less information, but like NC double a hoops is probably not one of these markets. The bottom line is if you're not on the side of the origination, like border alluded to somebody that has a top plate model.

5:12I mean, you either going to be on that side or you're going to be going with the steam as it goes. And you know, with this angle, if somebody goes in and tries to shoot this angle, they may win for a year, they may win for two years, but the bottom line is over a large sample. This is just going to probably get destroyed at the end of the day, like like Porter said, the best syndicates in the world know how far that line should move. And if that line does move too far, they're going to bet it back. And when they do bet it back, you know, they're going to be getting value on both sides because it moved so far. So how do you know how how does somebody that's not a professional better, or somebody that has any idea where this line should be? How do they know how far that line is going to go? You know, some of the groups I work with, I know for a fact, the line moves a certain amount of points. They know they can bet it back. And like, I could probably hear the cheers from spanky's office when these middles hit. And he's three states away.

6:12And again, like not the average every day guy that just fades this is going to know where to fade it, like Porter said. And over to you, Kenish, your take on things. I almost can guarantee who we got this from and where it's coming from. Yeah. And this is he's a he's a fuzzy. I don't know if they're like, say, you know, distant relatives, but I guarantee this was Steve Fezick telling him this info, which might have worked circa 15 years ago, like a lot of the, you know, pass the philosophy here of a service likely in this case, you know, right angle sports releases a total. It moves way too far. And then you bet it back the simple it, it sounds good. But one last, the other other guys alluded to, you don't know where the bottom is. If you don't know, if you don't know, you don't know when that number should come back. And if you're just going right before post,

7:13like, okay, the numbers move four points, now I'm going to bet back because it like, there would be somebody else in the market, especially for like college basketball conference turning games, that if there was still value at the number, would likely bet the number back. So yes, it's moved four points, but if there was value on betting over 144, there would be people out there, especially before post when it's most liquid, that would then bet the over on 144 and it would move back up. So there's a lot of holes in this, I think at some, maybe at some point in the past, could this have worked theoretically in certain markets maybe, but no, just as like, oh, I'm just going to fade the steam and think it'll win. No, I don't think this is a good generic approach and good advice to take for somebody that doesn't really know what they're doing. Yeah, I mean, this is like the classic, like,

8:13he got the first 20% of the story kind of right and then missed all the like complicated things that he need to understand afterwards, which makes sense because he has just a little bit of knowledge. Yeah, so on on the the physics of that condition mentioned here, somebody asked him in the replies, have you back tested this? He said no, just, it's just anecdotal and confirmed by some pros I trust, as soon as I saw some pros, I trust I kind of had an idea of who the pro he trusted who told him to do this. They estimate they being the pros about 90% of the time, the line moves too much, especially total. So 90% of the time, apparently you're getting a plus DV position here, but if you actually were getting a plus DV position, you know, like the guys have covered here, this would get bet back towards, so let's say in this case 144, that would get back bet back towards the over. So unless you were finding this bet at the absolute bottom, like the absolute dip and it's going to get bet back up, but you're going to get good. So that's going to be a position where you're going to have a plus

9:14DV wage or in the circumstance, but your ability to find that it would the claim here being your ability to do this without doing any research. It's just there's just no way that's going to happen. How do you know when you're getting the best number there when you're getting it at the dip or even close to the dip there? I don't think this is a strategy that is viable towards winning at all. And cherry picking one example that fits into the idea that you gave out of your cherry picking one specific example is not at all doing anything to convince me otherwise. Yeah, I got something to add here. So syndicate bets it syndicate moves it. The syndicate's going to have better software than the average Joe. And they're going to know when to bet it back. So like, you're you're almost never really going to get to the right point to jump in. And if you do, you're just guessing. Yeah, yeah, agree. So I don't I don't see where this is coming from here. I do not recommend following advice just like this, but some advice I can give to the people

10:16watch the channel is to subscribe and we got a message coming at you here. I appreciate every one of you that watches our content every week, but there are also people who watch who aren't subscribed yet. Now listen, I will forgive you and call it an honest mistake. Do me a favor and subscribe right now as we push for 22,000 subscribers. The larger the channel grows, the more content we can provide to you. Now let's get back to the content. Next topic sticking with the theme we have some more advice that was brought to the fray on gambling Twitter this time from ash con bets, who says sports betting advice, stop trying to turn 5k into 100k, turn 5k into 8k with draw 5k, turn 3k into 8k slowly with draw 3k, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat until bankroll grows bigger. This way, if you ever make a mistake, which everyone does at some point, it won't kill your profit. So I'm a little bit confused by some of the terminology here, especially saying, you know, withdraw as your bankroll grows bigger, but perhaps you could go to condition this one. Do you have any reaction to this sort of advice? I mean, this is almost like

11:19mirrors the first topic of a little bit of like in essence, is there some like logic, a little bit maybe like that 20% that makes sense to where if you're trying to like, okay, in the essence of should you try and turn like, you know, you're 12, like, parlay into, you know, betting $5 to 1,000 and like that type of betting, I can see like, shying away from, but in that instance, a lot of people, it's not granular enough to be like, like if someone's going to then turn like 5 and if they're using the same type of betting strategy, like recreational betting strategy to go and since it's like go 5 to 8 or 3 to 8 or one of the, it's not going to make a difference. So there's an element of yes, you shouldn't just like go from like the lottery ticket stuff that said to go from like, oh, I want to make it all right now. However, it's missing the steps

12:19that actually get you to like win 5 to 8 and then be able to withdraw or go 3 day and then withdraw it. Like there's layers in there that again, it's only one tweet, but you're not going to be able, if you're losing better or your betting strategy is not winning, just saying like, okay, I'm going to try and like win slowly and then do it, not going to change anything. You have to be able to win to even like make this affect at all. Yeah, with you on that one, let's get Porter's thoughts on this set of advice. Yeah, I mean, that's pretty much spot on this kind of reminds me though a little bit of this guy's watched a lot of like old ladies at the slot machine where they'll like hit a hundred bucks, they'll take it out and then they'll be like, all right, now just play 20 and they're like, all right, I mean like $6, let me take the $6 out, but eventually this strategy almost always has you putting it all back in. Also like Nish said, like you first have to have like a winning strategy to like bankroll won't fix winning or losing,

13:23bankroll might keep you in the game, which might be worse by the way, longer to lose, you know, waste your time, but you can't like solve your problems by bankroll management. I think this guy just watched like some people on the slot machine taking out their winnings and thought you could somehow apply this to sports betting. It doesn't apply for slots either by the way. And China, how about your thoughts? Yeah, so like slowly winning like three to five K, that implies that you already know how to win, which not everybody does. So the bottom line is I think this guy's implying like you make mistakes dusting your bankroll. If you do that, I mean, you're just not cut out for this. So, you know, the key to moving your bankroll to like new heights is just taking calculated risks on plus EV bet. So like Porter said, with the lady putting the money in and out of the slot machine, I'm a friend that does this. He goes to the casino and he thinks he has an edge because he just hits and runs blackjack, but almost inevitably he's going to go on a bad run and he's just going to wind up feeding it all back. So the bottom line is you just want to be betting the max to where you won't bust yourself and just let the money pile up as you're betting on

14:28plus EV stuff. I just don't understand the message here, which is like build your bankroll, but like you're taking money out of like like you guys said, if you're turning five K into 8K, it's not just like one lucky win, for example, you know, you've established you can win. You should be increasing your unit size. That's how you actually properly build your bankroll. If you want to build your bankroll, you need to keep that money in those accounts. Now, you have to be honest with yourself and you have to establish like, yes, am I a winning better? If that's the case and you're able to do things like turn five K into eight K like we saw there over time, you should probably keep them there. That's the proper way to build your bankroll. I just see it very counterintuitive to take the money out of your account. If you actually like want to avoid, you know, making mistakes and going bust, like your unit size is a percentage of that bankroll. So if you start to lose money, well, the unit size decreases. That's how you avoid going bust. So I'm going to make a wild guess here. Yeah, I'm going to make a wild guess here that he has

15:29experienced something like this before where he thought he had an edge and he thought his error in ways was the bankroll management. They could fix it when it's probably not. And I'm just saying that because I've kind of heard this story before from other betters who win for a period of time and they don't really understand why they lost and then have to put a story together to themselves. I don't mean to the public of why things didn't work out. So they create, oh, I didn't have proper bankroll management or a little bit of a dream of like, man, I wish I put aside a little bit of money so I could use the money for something else. So it kind of reminds me of other stories that I've heard before. Well said. I didn't exactly look into this guy's profile. But would he happen to be selling anything? Let's let me have a look. I love how you do the research live. He had a picture with like $100, $200,000 sitting there and saying, you know, you just take out three, five K at a time. Yeah, he's selling it. It's a pick selling service. Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's

16:29jockey. Yeah. All right. There it is. We'll get back to more betting advice in just a second here. My advice to you, though, is to check out the other content we have at the Hammond betting network. Let's hear more on that now. Already missing out on the college football season, then look no further. The hit the books team of Joey condition Brad Powers are back giving you some more content on the channel. In the next week, we'll have four videos coming out to satisfy that appetite for NCAA football. To make sure you don't miss out on the videos, make sure you subscribe to our college football division. The hit the books channel. The link is in the description to go and check out that channel right now. Third set of advice. We're once again revisiting Raheem Palmer at I am rostradamus. My thoughts on CLV. It's simply the most sustainable way of getting an edge and winning a long term. There's a reason sportsbooks limit people who beat the closing line. That said, although I can beat the closing line consistently if I want to, I've personally been very successful betting right before game time because I'm a better handicap or you give me the maximum amount of time and information to process and make a decision. Sports betting is a multiplayer

17:34game. You're not playing against the bookmakers. You're playing against the entire market. Thus, I can capitalize on spots where I think sharp and the public are wrong or I have a different opinion. Here's two scenarios from this week alone. Sunday, sharp slash public, bet the spurs up to minus one on the road. My model makes the nicks minus 1.8. I take the nicks at almost even money right before tip off. Monday, sharps slash public, bet pistons up to minus two and a half as road favorites. I bet Kav plus two and a half right before the game time because I strongly disagree with the market. Ultimately, there are times when it's beneficial to bet early and there are times when it's beneficial to bet late. It's just about timing the market according to the game you're playing. If you follow my NFL best bets on the ringer Sunday NFL pregame show the last of years, I've consistently had a winning record, essentially betting into closing NFL lines every Sunday. So that should tell you there's more than one way to be successful doing this. Let's start with China on this topic here. Do you agree with what he's saying or do you have disagreements here? I mean, he said one thing that was pretty good, but like in the grand scheme of things like a

18:36three-year sample in the NFL isn't much. Like, I get that in one day betting. That's three-year sample in the NFL. I get that in a week. You get that sample just betting every single day. So that sample size is nothing. If you do get CLV, you will win over a large sample size. I think everybody agrees on that. Whether he wins or not at post, I have no idea. But I will say, beating the market at post is extremely difficult. And the people who do beat markets at post, they're not taking time to process and figure things out. They have the answers, and they're just hoping that that stuff hangs around long enough so they can bet big enough at post. So I don't know, it's just, I don't know, it seems like a lot of hoki-poki BS in here to me. How about you, Porter? What's your take on this? I feel like we're going through these slides, and maybe each one is getting a little bit more knowledgeable. He's going up the scale,

19:37but we're still only at like 50 percent other way there. So obviously, actually, I've always had a hard time explaining that's a pretty nice succinct way to write basic thoughts on CLV. Whether this guy wins at post, I have no idea. I would not recommend most people do that, and it kind of turned into an advertisement at the end of the message. But I do think there's like some decent thought process in here. I don't know if I wouldn't recommend the audience try to win, you know, post, especially NFL post. But in general, like the theme here is correct, is like the final answer, really, he wins, and this can work out, not for 99.9 percent of people. Okay, and how about you, Kiddish? Jacob, put the slide back on the screen here. Because here, I'm going to help redeem out. If you delete out the second paragraph, and the last paragraph, this is a great treat. Like, this is a great all-it-all he had to do was

20:41because acts that second paragraph, which I can beat the closing line if I want to, and Max and Montana, and then acts the promo where I beat that. And like, I could be like, oh yeah, good point, he nailed it. Did I need, you know, the 8,8 millions, you know, a CLV argument, you know, discussion here, and no, probably not. But he had it, if he just, the, I'm a better can-kepper if you give me the maximum of time and information. Like, there's no difference, assuming like, let's say you've got an NBA game, and you get the final reports at whatever time, like, there's no difference in, let's say at three o'clock, and then if the game's going to tip off at seven o'clock, and you know who's playing for both sides, that four hours of analysis, there's zero difference in what you knew between three and seven, or what your models going to show between three and seven, and who's going to play. The only difference is, like, final liquidity,

21:44and the people that are waiting until that 6.58 or 6.59 are at the absolute very, very, very top of the food chain. And those aren't people you want to bet against, for the most part, for for 99.99, 99% of people. So I think Ricky just, you got, you know, we probably don't keep typing the sentence. It seems like also that he put this into like a chat GPT or something the way it's laid out. So I think he was feeling himself, he got a little bit too high, his own supply, their high horse, and if he would have just taken out those two paragraphs, it would have been a nice run, but he dipped his toe a little bit too much into the, I can be, you know, NFL at post waters. Yeah, so in that second paragraph that you mentioned, he says, if you give me, I'm better handi-capper, if you give me the maximum amount of time and information to process and make a decision, guess who else is much better at pricing things when you give them the maximum amount of time and information to process and make a decision to sportsbook.

22:45The limits go up at these points. If he's genuinely confident, he's beating these major markets, NBA sides or NFL sides at post, there are massive limits to take advantage of there. So, yeah, I guess, you know, if you do trim that away, it does look a little bit better because, sure, CLV is a phenomenal indicator of success. That is the true way of determining successful better, as he mentioned a little bit in the first paragraph, but I don't think this is a viable strategy and going on China's point with a sample size over an extreme long term, I'd be a little surprised if there was a lot of success here. So, I think a lot of these posts are actually really interesting. They give you glimpses of what people who are kind of in the content space, a little bit in the betting space, kind of their mindsets and it kind of shows you almost how dangerous it is and almost probably why it's addictive to a lot of people to like stay in the game

23:49because they feel like they're on the cusp of understanding and someone who sharp even sees that there is some knowledge, they are expressing some knowledge of value, but then there's so much else in there that's kind of, let's just say for what it's wrong, that like it's almost, it's dangerous for the public to consume this because at face value, if you really know nothing, it doesn't sound that bad. The problem is when you're going 50% away of this industry and the way that difficulty that it is to win, especially in large markets, can't just have 50% of the knowledge and having 50% of this knowledge is probably more dangerous than not having any at all. I just think there's good seeds of information in here, but maybe like a bit of, like can I say, a bit of overconfidence in some other areas of it as well, but that'll get us into the next topic on the show, which comes from Joe Wyzenthal, who said, huh, big whiff here and it was a prediction market graph of the odds on the Texas Republican Senate primary first round winner. So right near

24:55the market close, John Corden was around 10%, then all the way vaulted up to 98% as the eventual winner ahead of, I believe it was Ken Paxton, who went from this very, very large favorite and ended up losing. So he says, big whiff here, one of the replies from at 80 high says Joe don't make me tap to sign and it says events with a 10% probability tend to happen 10% of the time. So how do we feel about this? Because large amount of the people in this market and there's not a ton of volume here, but a large percentage of people in this market felt like it was going to go towards Ken Paxton that it isn't so that it didn't, excuse me. So who's right here? Like do we need to acknowledge sometimes these unlikely things happened or was it a big whiff from the Better's Ridgely? Let's go to Porter first of all. Yeah, so actually super interesting that this market came up today because I follow some Twitter guys and they were commenting about this two days ago,

25:57why is Ken Paxton so high? So I feel like somebody must have made quite a bit of money. I mean, whatever the volume is here. Well, the volume is 62,000 here. Yeah, so there were a few people tweeting on Twitter about this topic that Ken Paxton shouldn't be so high. But yeah, I mean, I always use this, that statement I think is really spot on like a 90% event loses 10% in time. I think when you have a lot of skills that cross other gambling ventures like being an AP or playing poker, you have a better ability to understand what odds actually mean because it's super common in poker to come up with spots where you're like 80-20. And yeah, you lost 20% of the time. I think it's a lot of this like broken taillight syndrome where like, oh, I see the broken taillight all the time. It's broken. It's broken. When really, it's not, you're just focusing on that event when it happens. And it's the same thing here. When a 10% event happens, you know, when I had 10 times, like, it's not that common. So when it happens, you really lock in on it. And that's a perfect example of what's going on here. It's just very like, now I'm not saying that

26:59that, you know, Calche or wherever this was bet is 100% accurate at close. But they're still like indicatively pretty close, my guess, is in the right direction. Though, again, I did see some like smart people say that they felt this market was totally off. Yeah, you liken it to poker. Like, you even go to like a sports perspective where, yeah, sometimes a team is a 90% chance to win. It's not going to win. March madness is coming up soon. We may see examples of that there. So it's just in markets like this, I think it's tough for some people, maybe not as familiar in the prediction market. I think it's tough for them to understand it. When they see 90%, and I think even a lot of recreational better, super square recreational better, we'll see like a team is a 90% chance to win. They go, there's no possible way they lose. But of course, there is that chance of it happening. Can I go over to you next? Give us your take on this. Yeah, I mean, I was going to have your total slide again, because I don't have 62,000 in volume. To me, seems like, I mean, if I'm looking at a market and I only see 62K traded,

28:01I'm not going to have like the full phase of like, okay, we've got a lot of, you know, like sooner than this has been like absolutely traded, you know, through the ground where we have having a lot of confidence in that number. The other thing would be, and this is more of a macro point. And I don't know, I can't even like formulate it in my head. It feels like United States politics on a smaller level like this where we're talking like a primary runoff. He even going up a few levels. The unpredictability of the American voter right now, I think has just made these where like, it's almost like a distrust in polling in general, has kind of led to a fact where I think you get a little bit more, how can I put it in this way? I don't know if the American political climate, like, reads itself to like hyper efficiency

29:01in terms of like predicting markets, because you've seen, you just see in a lot of areas, like constant swings now between voter demographics, between like overall, I don't know, I would say it's a maybe just, and I haven't worn the South as very anecdotal like an opportunity out there for people that are grinding politics, that it is definitely not a solved market in a lot of cases around the country, especially when you get down to these lower levels where in both Texas races here, the longer term favorite lost in both the Republican and the Democratic, you know, barriers. So, and I think you get that across a lot of races where it now seems like as people just in demographics change, people's opinion change, it just flips on kind of a more of a notion than I don't know, I guess what I'm recalling. Again, not a lot of they get it back there, but it feels like something like opportunistic if you're really grinding the political realm.

30:05I think prediction markets are really good sources of information for news, and especially like in politics, but as you mentioned, the volume here, I wouldn't see that in big, oh, like this must be close to a lot, 90%, we're talking like, you know, hundreds of thousands getting towards a million, now I'm like, okay, I'm quite confident this is accurately priced, but maybe not quite there with that volume. Finally, over to China on this one, what do you think? Yeah, and these type of markets, if like any type of information gets out there that's bad, they're liable to run the wrong way as well. Something like this happened in the Super Bowl. I got a few DMs like, hey, Travis Scott's at the game, I talked to so that he's gonna, he's gonna perform, he's gonna perform this and that, and then I talked to somebody super sharp that comes back and says, hey, there's no way this guy is performing unless he's a headliner. So, like, I think the wrong information can get out there, a market can run, and yeah, like, you know, this happens in poker all the time, you could be a 98% favorite on the flop and lose to a runner runner straight flush, it's just what happens in gambling. And I think to echo what Porter said, it's the same thing,

31:10you see the broken taillight, you just remember the broken taillight, but, you know, the, you know, I want to add to some of my hot take to this. So, let's just pretend there was a ton of liquidity. When a market is live, I actually believe at every single moment, like, let's say the liquidity was really, was really high. I believe at every single moment, the market is pretty close or effectively correct. So, it didn't go from 9010 to 098. There was a moment where it went from 90 to 89, from 89 to 88. Now, sometimes those percentages move too fast for the human eye because there's a bots firing off, but I would argue that at every one of those moments, the odds were relatively correct. It's just sometimes those moments, you know, you could have a 40%, 40 cent drop in one second, but within that one second, as the odds change, they were correct for that moment. So, I don't know if that's a hot take, but my idea is like, every moment as the odds are changing,

32:10it is correct. It's just sometimes that moment is very condensed. Yeah, yeah, I mean, compared to like NBA team down by 20, as they're making the comeback, maybe it's a bit slower than in a case like this, but as the team is coming back, the odds are changing every basket, every point that they're making up on the opposition, the odds are slowly changing in that direction. So, I definitely see your point on that one there. We're about to get into our next topic, but if you want to get involved with markets just like that, would you get over to our presenting sponsor here on Circles Off, the channel? Go ahead or to Kalshi. We have the link in the description box below. You can get involved with Kalshi. Get involved with prediction markets and find unique markets like this that you won't find everywhere in the betting landscape. Now we're going to head into the comment from the previous week show to get your take on things, your perspective on things, and see if you can give us a new perspective at time. So, the lead off of the previous show we did was the minus 10,000 debacle that occurred at Draft Kings, where every golfer was priced at minus 10,000,

33:11and it was priced so that anyone who had a bet on the tournament could cash out on any of the futures or any of the outrates that they had. We learned a few things about this after we recorded the show. First of all, at the commission 1976, what it really happened was the odds provider Ford Raff King was doing price adjustments and made a change that they messed up on and it caused an error for all the participants to move a decimal price to a decimal price of 1.01. The trader should have suspended the market before doing that essentially on a non-playing tournament day. Someone had decaised of caught it quickly, but it seemed like it was up for a while, especially when someone has time to take a picture and tweet it. A lot of people were able to take advantage of this and get their cash out. So, it was up for a significant amount of time. But Jeff O'Reilly added here in the comments, DK locked the accounts for about 24 hours and then reopened them all with money intact. They only got hit with some limits, didn't get a full limit hammer. So, I said on the last week's show, anybody who got the money out, congratulations to you,

34:13but DraftKings, to my surprise, just let it be. Whoever took the cash out, they got their money, maybe some limits were involved, but the people who had the money in their account were able to allow it to see the light of day, a kinesh, first of all you. Any take on this with that surprising to you that DraftKings allowed the people to cash out? Yeah, my theory would be that they didn't get hit that hard because there was a DraftKings thing we talked about about a month ago where there was the player prop mistake on their pick-six thing, which I think they got absolutely hammered on. And then we're doing whatever they could to eliminate. The fact that they did it this way now, a month later makes me think because if you think about it, you would have already had to have a bat early, I think this happened on a Monday, right? So early, you would have already had to have your bat in for the week for the golf tournament that's coming up. And then you would have had to

35:14put two and two together and catch this that you could go in and cash it out. And especially, and it really is like, it's benefits for the guys that were batting the 5,000 ones, that type of thing. So my thought is that they didn't get absolutely crushed on this, so they just kind of let it go. And there was figuring like, okay, well, instead of trying to do what we didn't take the whole like the PR, I'm not going to call it a win, but instead of doing what happened with the pick-six thing, they just kind of let it fly. Okay, Porter, we had you on last we talked about this, so with this new information, any update to reaction on things. Yeah, it's weird to me because actually they didn't get that much publicity on this, so they didn't even, I don't really think they even capitalized on the PR. Maybe I don't have a great take on this, you know, we joke the DK does a lot of things wrong. Maybe it's something wrong that was good for the players one time. Yeah, good point. It's probably like two sides to it. On one hand, they could have been like,

36:19you know, we made a mistake, but every better who cashed out got their money and got paid, but also that would be acknowledging the very large mistake that they made with this, but like, I feel like acknowledging that is fine for betters to accept, like it's benefitted to the better, so I didn't think about it from a marketing perspective. They probably could have taken that angle there and turned this loss of money into basically marketing spend. China, we didn't have you on last week, but your take on the minus 10,000 thing that happened or any of the comments we saw here. I'm kind of with kinesh on this. I mean, they just probably didn't get hit that hard. No in draft kings, if they did get hit pretty hard, then they would have probably reversed everything, and you know, there'd be all kinds of chaos going on about this. So I don't really probably nuke some accounts, and you know, that's it. I'm happy for anyone that got the money out. Okay. Good stuff on that comment there. Those two comments, thank you for the additional information. Second comment, it comes from deli2313 says one hilarious point missed here. The guy who bet $5,000 to one to 25k just got just under 22k cash on something priced at

37:26over 99%. Win probably tell you something about the old cash out offers. I didn't consider this element too, but yes, we did showcase some screenshots where the better, sorry, the golfers were at minus 10,000, and in that case, extraordinary likely to win based on that price, even though we know, of course, it wasn't a mistake, but the cash out wasn't really that close to, you know, the full amount. So maybe an example of cash outs, the predatory nature of cash outs at times, China, we'll go first with you on this one. What do you think on that? Honestly, I got nothing to add to this one. Okay. Porter, how about yourself? It's a nice, it's a nice find by the guy, you know, this is kind of a slap in the face of all the touts that don't know what they're talking about and start mentioning stuff about caching out, betting two slips, caching one out, all this like nonsense. It basically ties that up very nicely into why that isn't a great idea. Can I show anything to Ab before we go to the final comment? Yeah, I mean, we've talked cash out, but that is not the way to, I mean, this was one of the rare

38:29scenarios where caching out was a great idea. Yeah, when your 5,001 goes to minus 1,000, yes, cash out, but usually, I mean, I've said the only time where I would use, it's information, it's either a mistake like this or information where, you know, if you got like a player future to an MVP and you see, you know, the shams, nobody pop up that he toured at ACL, and you could run in there and cash it out for whatever you can, but that's one of the rare scenarios that I think it works. But in most cases, yeah, cash out is not a great idea for the better. And final comment comes from Kyle Kerns. He had a couple of possible topics. I preferred the first one. So I featured it here. He says, if a tout sells on a pick selling platform, are they vouching for the legitimacy of everybody else on that platform? I will start with China on this one, probably the most anti-tout person on this panel, I'd say, not to say that the others are not anti-tout, but like, do you feel like this is the case? Like, what if somebody that you

39:33respected the sports better for one reason or another decides to start selling on dub club? Yeah, I mean, if somebody that I like a porter started to sell on a dub club and yeah, whatever, I mean, what is the actual question? Does does, so let's say in that example, a porter starts selling on dub club. Does he provide legitimacy to dub club as a platform? 100% no. But if he did, he would probably start backing all the other guys there, but yeah, they definitely would not provide legitimacy for it, no way. I don't often see dub club capers going like at each other. Maybe I'm not privy to it, maybe it does exist, but you're right. They typically try to big each other up, essentially. Can it go to you second on this one? What are your thoughts? Yes, funny, because the way you said that, like, the actual touts that I have in like, I thought they would win. I thought they would are almost always a solo, like a sole proprietorship,

40:40like a solo operation. I can't think of many scenarios where there's been someone who I would say, like, oh, that person wins. And they've been part of like a conglomerate, like a dub club or a whop. It's almost like this model, even going back to like a pregame or one of those. It was usually kind of like a way for the company to, if you got now, like, okay, you got 50 touts. Well, 40 of them might be losing, but 10 of them are probably on some type of actual short-term hot streak. So it's like I can always go to the next guy who's had a short-term winning record, which at the same time, like, with that, if you had one, I mean, I'll give it to like hitman who works for the network now, who I think is a very good better. He was part of, I think, was pregame for a while. So would I have expected him to then vouch for the legitimacy of like the other 30 people that work that no? Because most of them are losers. So like, no, I think it's a

41:45little unfair for the solo person to that. But at the same time, I've never, it's a very rare fine to find somebody that works for these. That's an actual legitimate person who I think could then like go out on the road and have success. And Port are finally over to you. Well, hearing the hitman story that Knisha said, I guess I could go sell there and still be invited on the show. So that's one good sign. I actually feel like it should kind of be the reverse. The companies that put on these houts technically should vouch for them or have liability for them. But obviously, we don't see it that ever occurring. So I think just for the viewers, it's just very important to note both from both ends, the owners of the platform and the sellers on the platform, they're looking to make a buck. They're not out there to protect you. So in general, at least for now, I'm not going to be on double. Yeah. So to answer my take on the question here,

42:47I don't think somebody going to that platform is vouching for the legitimacy of everybody else there. I think we oftentimes like lump people together on the platform. But perhaps maybe we should maybe we should dissect it more as individuals within the app. However, you know, you do question if somebody is selling on the platform, you have to question why are they not just betting these things themselves. So if it is somebody I respect, I'd have to find the reasonings why that is the case. But there are sort of outliers to the pick selling debate for sure. We're going to have more on pick selling a little bit later on in the show. But before we get into our next topic, comments are a great way to continue the conversation with us. So make sure you comment something down below. If you have a reaction, you have a take something that you want us to talk about, leave it in the comments section down below. We always check all the comments can give some great little tidbits for us to talk about on next week's show and it can help extend the conversation. But if you want to extend the conversation even further, you can head over to the discord we have

43:48with the hammer. Let's hear more about that. If you're not in the discord yet, you are missing out. We have nearly 1800 members and it is absolutely cooking. It's a great place to chat during games. Our creators are sharing banger bets and so is our hammer audience. Join us at discord.gg slash hammer and see what you've been missing out on. The link is in the description to join today. But let's get back to the show. Up next we have fanatics sportsbook posting a would you rather 15k cash or 15k bonus bet on the thunder to win the NBA finals at plus 135 China. Which one would you rather give me the 15,000 a hundred times out of a hundred like I would rather chew glass than have a piece of any future that's anywhere close to the price that they're going to give me. I don't care how much if I have to give up a little bit of EV. I give up the EV. Just give me the cash. Okay. Let's go to Kanishch. I have a strong

44:49take in this one. Let's see how it works. This is like this is to I fuck fanatics drives me insane like all around the company itself like every facet of it drives me insane. This would be an interesting question. If you made it like thunder plus 500 you know I'm saying or plus 800 or plus like a 10 one or something. Where you're getting like a nice hay out there but you have to hold again. You're not getting the cash in pocket at plus 135. This is not even it's not even a cool. What are you talking about? Like okay. If you're getting me some great odds that okay where we got we got like an actual debate. But no. This is like any rational person takes the cash here. Okay. Okay. Tell me about missing something. This is very obviously take the cash. Would rather 15 K or a bet that if it wins you get 20 K. That's the payout. You don't get the return on the stake. I can just bet another 15 fucking K on the thunder plus 135 and get 35,000 dollars if it wins instead of 20 K like like like what are they even asking here? Yeah if it's

45:54plus 500 now we're talking about a much larger a much larger a little bit larger payout but like still I'd rather have the cash and if I want to bet the plus larger I can with that cash and I can still have the cash and the winnings of the bet. Who thought of this question? You can just bet the cash on it. Would I rather have bonus bet or actual physical money? I'm going to take the money and bet with it. Porter give us your take on it. Right. So I'm going to assume that fanatics they don't really know how sportspinning works and they're they meant to write what you just said I think so that you would get the 15 K back otherwise this is literally absurd but a fun little thing on this this is a moment where you can and we talked about this last week where you can use AI chat GBT and type out a question and get the answer now assuming it's the way that you know I think they intended where you know you get 15 back not as a bonus bet you can literally just type

47:01this into chat GBT and I recommend people do this all the time you just put it in the free rate whatever the bond is two month three month and you can this is the way to use chat GBT where you're just writing things this is a great example of where you can just plug something in you don't need to use cloud you don't need to use formulas so I think it ties in beautifully with last week segment on that where you literally can just plug this into chat GBT write this question out and it tells you your exact rage now again this is totally insane question because I don't think I don't think they meant it like this but who knows what the interns know over there well like even if okay let's take it like the way you're saying like let's say it wasn't a bone thread you'd rather have a 15 K ticket on the thunder like you could just also have the cash and then decide to make that bet if you wanted to I can't see any trying to say that the plus 135 is like a good price and they're I think they're trying to say that it's a 15 K you could take the cash because otherwise yeah or maybe this is their customer I don't know this is close like the way it would have to be framed is would you

48:06rather have just 15 K or would you rather have the 20 K if the thunder win but it's not accounting I can just make this wager with the money that you're giving me I okay I can now based after you actually I can see what they were trying to say would you rather have the chance at 20 K or have 15 K right now but a lack of understanding of sports books and how they work from a sports books direct account is how we've led to this predict maybe maybe they really just know their customer really really well yeah you know I actually should have combed through the replies a little bit more to see if to see if there was a lot of people like oh I can I can definitely take the try and get the 20 K because I look through the a little bit of the comments and they're all kind of like on the same point be like this is really stupid but yeah there's some people like oh there's the freest freest money on the thunder so yeah okay maybe comments are worse than I thought I bet like 50% of their people that have an active fanatics account in their own name would take the plus

49:11135 yeah well there's a people are saying the 15 K but like because the thunder have been bad recently or like why risk it like yeah this is a sad this is a sad commentation unfortunately it's so obvious to take the cash in this scenario please if you disagree I'd love to hear your thoughts in the comment section down below two more to talk about on the show today before we get to those two it's sort of about a brand new tool that's hitting the market you can add to your betting arsenal if you're a better building your own models and you're not watching kalshi and the rest of the market in one unified feed you're probably missing edges prediction data aggregates and normalizes data from kalshi major prediction markets and sports books into a single API built for back testing and live trading you get live prices and historical data in one clean schema with no data engineering headache if you want a trial key you'll need to book a quick demo click the link in the description

50:13or scan the QR code to get your trial key so these last two topics are kind of going together a little bit here it's I said we're going to talk a little bit more about touts we have the first one here that comes from Eddie at walls underscore Edwards I'm so bored with anti-town sentiment from shows brought to you by kalshi dk and fendials so direct shot at us not direction in direct shot at us there it's been the same damn curriculum since 2006 either put the content out for free with no sponsors no referral packages no kickbacks or its pot slash meets kettle with no high horse I'm not against touts and yes I know most touts are awful but if you're trying to convince me that you're against profiting off of bettors you're doing already more damage by offering nothing actionable and just saying go gamble your brains out on today show today's sponsor of the show um obviously I'll have pushback on this but let's start with porter on this one yeah so I think we've continued our climb this episode of you know touts betters who know more and more and hit

51:18like for sure on this episode kind of towards the top end of people who kind of know who know what they're talking about I think sometimes we all kind of get trapped in our bubble of how we make money and I think I've heard heard spank you on episodes of his where you know you sort of I don't know if it's show respect but maybe you can learn something from hearing other legitimate people's perspective of how they earn that also feel like the providing value for their customers so like there are extreme levels of this where we started at the beginning with people who don't really know what they're talking about and got into and then where people do know what they're talking about and I feel like they do have a right to defend how they earn if how they earn in theory it's supposed to make customers money and next we will go to conish on this one how do you feel about what it's said what's said here I mean this is Eddie and I have had a little chirping

52:18over the years but like this is the old like I want to defend my business model which is touting so I can like I'm gonna like you know kind of mold and shift it and then be able to like you know throw it back at people who are doing something not like touting whatsoever but it can like I can make the argument that like oh it's just as bad um listen I don't think putting out content also like a lot of like educational and informative content just because it's sponsored by a book does not indicate like hey just go gamble your brains out on today's sponsor of the show um I had again I think this is very much a false equivalency between touting and content yep definitely agree on parts there uh China anything to add yeah pretty these guys hit the nail on the head I mean touting is just the worst 99.9% of these

53:19guys are just gonna take your money and drag you through the mud slowly and you're just gonna keep paying them and paying them and paying them and paying them so I don't know not much to add here just touts are bad yeah I find it we I just find this this conversation weird because there are a lot of shows like I think this one that there's never an application for go gamble your brains out of today's show sponsor a lot of the content that we do here is educational and the the anti tout sentiment that you get oftentimes from this show and you just got from China there is is on like these like if these people were successful sports bettors like you have to question why they would not just be betting these things themselves why they have to go to clients why they have to go to customers to to get profitability out of the industry um it's just educational content from our perspective and we feel strongly often to most of the time 99.9% of time against touts but the last topic on the show is staying oh sorry try do you have something

54:21off of there yeah I was gonna say without circles off or bet the process or spankies podcast like the amount of stuff that I've learned from listening to these podcasts and just listening to other people talk like quarter alluded to it's absolutely invaluable to where you can take your betting and what level you can take it to it's just it's it's night and day the two two things that he's talking about that's a great point like a legitimately great pie agree with you where not only and I'm not just gassing a bar by like podcasts I've listened to over the years that have taught you like methodologies different ways to win different like other is so much more than you would ever get from following a touts even a winning tout service um so yeah I'm I'm with you there 100% there there are episodes out there this podcast other podcasts where I've listened to before and I'm just literally sitting there like stop and it is amazing to me that not enough people

55:27are finding those resources where I've actually heard not too long ago an episode where I believe he gave out the entire formula of how to win at props it was crazy and the viewership was kind of low and I was just like this is crazy what's going on so for the users out there that are trying to learn there is great content circles back circles off there is great content out there to actually become a better sports better that has nothing to do with just hey get behind a computer model there are so many other components where you need to be thinking like loosely clearly creatively and putting it all together and these kind of shows help you do that well say one more thing the other thing is that in the reason why people aren't going to take the time or not not everybody but most people just want the answers fast and they just want the answers giving to them and they don't want to put in the work but if you put in the work you'll get the results go find the good stuff yeah last topic same kind of deal with uh touts and the predatory nature sometimes that we see with

56:31touts uh and a platform like dub club dub club is promoting at chili bets who might sound familiar from some of the coverage we've done on the show uh they were promoting him they were saying you know sign up to get his picks and Kirby points out something that we mentioned on the show previously dub club voting a known scammers all needs to know about their platform because and fosan replied and said this is the guy that got exposed for editing nine cent tickets by the way pretty sure issued an apology actually i don't know if it was the guy who did it said he didn't know i don't think it was this guy there was somebody who said they they they didn't edit their tickets then it was proven they did i don't think this was an example this was a person who who had very very very credible and solid evidence to suggest they were editing their bets slips to make themselves look better and promote their pick selling service so you know there are there exist people who sell picks and do so ethically and effectively towards

57:31their clients but there are so many that don't this is just another prime example of ways you can be deceived by somebody and coerced into buying their picks um let's start on this one with kinesh what's your reaction here i only have one thing to say on this topic and it's this belongs in the chopping block zilbo we're fighting the good fight for you bring back the chopping block uh if i got to go to the office and uh you know maybe make this up and Jacob do it we'll do that if i got to go to Toronto uh so hopefully the chop is back sooner than later uh anybody else anything to add i mean i i i wish i'd seen this before i made a comment the last time this is the best example of like you know the head drug dealer and his little minions underneath them dub club is like the you know the mothership that is allowing pin pin that's allowing all this flow of the poison into the community and these other people they're just the sellers and the pimps of this of dub club and walk and all

58:36these other poisons uh china anything to add before we sign off yeah i mean anybody that's editing their bet slips or anything like that is the ultimate scum and anyone that promotes that is the ultimate scum that's about all i got to say there all right good way to end off the show thank you so much everyone for tuning into this edition of circle back if you enjoyed hit the like button subscribe for more content like this on circles off we have tons of exciting content coming your way very very soon we do a lot of new things that you're going to want to check out so make sure you stay tuned on the channel we will as always see you again next time shot clocks big shots upsets aces tgl playoffs are here first Atlanta drive starts their repeat run against los angeles golf club then rory's boston common golf and tigers jupiter links face off in their playoff debuts who will advance keep up it's playoffs tune in Tuesday march 17th at 6.30 p.m. and 9 p.m. only on espn and espn app