00:16 - Storm Pig (Host)
coming up in today's episode of Circle Back lawmakers meddling in this, the worse the future outlook is going to be for things.
00:26 - Flup (Host)
It's actually funny. It's such a fish logic that most of the rec books have this priced in.
00:32 - Storm Pig (Host)
I love this conversation because you get this kind of catch 22 of, like sharp guys almost taking the side of the book sometimes, which you would think is kind of counterintuitive, the side of the book sometimes, which you would think is kind of counterintuitive.
00:46 - Joey Knish (Host)
I mean, you know what? We're already so deep in the waters now in this country Go for it.
00:57 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
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. 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.
01:42
You know what time it is? It is circle back here on the Circles Off channel. This is the Hammer's educational, entertainment and lifestyle content division and with Circle Back, we cover the latest and greatest stories that come from gambling Twitter. And we do it today with our Friday crew hosted by myself, jacob Germania. I am a host, creator and producer for the Hammer Bag Network. Underneath me, in the bottom left corner of the screen, is Chris Kiss at FluffNoLied on Twitter, notorious PM Bull, one-time contest winner, pro bettor. In the bottom right corner of the screen, it is Joey Knish, host of the Hit the Books channel. Here, as part of the Hammer Bag Network, we do our college football content, and in the top right corner of the screen we have Storm Pig back with us as the fourth. He is the owner of the dog that is the most still anybody has ever seen, because last time he was on the show it did not move a muscle and people thought it was just a stuffed animal. Now there's two dogs in the background, storm.
02:42 - Storm Pig (Host)
All right, we'll give signs of life here. Hang on, Joe. Oh there he dogs in the background.
02:47 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
storm, all right, we'll uh, we'll give signs of life here. Hang on, joe. Oh, there it is there. They are all right, so they are real. We do have, uh, the confirmation of that and uh, we've confirmation of kanisha's dog.
02:55
Yeah, I'm just saying my dog wants to get down on the actually jealous getting all the attention oh, we'll jump into things for today because we have a lot of great content for you guys to hopefully enjoy along the way. Reminder if you do enjoy, hit that like button and subscribe to the channel. We do shows like this every Friday, monday, plus bonus content on Wednesday. So big topic out the gates, first of all. This firstly comes from Sam McQuillan, who says New York Assemblyman Alex Boris has introduced a bill that would prevent sportsbooks from limiting or banning winning players.
03:28
Mr Limited, who has been interviewed on this channel before, talked about how he's kind of toying with whether or not this is good or bad for the industry and in the end he kind of settles right now that this is a good thing for the industry. End, he kind of settles right now this is a good thing for the industry. Porter of ba analytics we also have had on circle back says hello, ten dollar limits for all, at least can make money shorting the stocks to zero if this passes. So I wanted your thoughts on this. First of all, flop if there is a ban on limits in new york and maybe other places to follow, is that good thing or a bad thing for sports bettors and the industry?
04:07 - Flup (Host)
It depends what kind of bettor you are. It's a bad thing for me, I'm pretty sure, and a lot of these guys that are like complaining about it. It's like, think about what you win. Do you win in major markets? If you win in major markets, this is a good thing for you, a very good thing for you, I would say. If you don't win in major markets and you win in like the prop markets and like the alt markets and those kind of things, it's probably a bad thing for you.
04:31
Because why do you think you know Circa and Pinnacle? We talk about how they don't limit anyone. Well, try to bet props there, try to bet same-game parlays there. Why can't you and why can't you bet all these niche markets? Why can't you and why can't you bet all these niche markets? Well, because they can't afford it, because too many sharps would come in and kill them or they can offer it for very, very tiny limits. And is that really a good product service? Fanduel, draftkings, mgm Sears they can offer robust services, robust features, because they are allowed to limit players. It sounds good in theory, but in practice I just don't think this is going to work out.
05:08 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
And let's get the thoughts from you on this one Storm. Do you think this is good or bad for the industry?
05:13 - Storm Pig (Host)
I'm with Flop. I saw a really good tweet that said something along the lines of you know rec bettors who like beating up shark books or having a field day with this right now, like they'll be the happiest people in the world if this happens. I think it basically just rewards people that treat sports betting recreationally or like recreational plus, where you okay, you can have your 500 bucks right. But what happens to everybody else that wants to bet more than $500? Because a blanket limit across the board is just going to mean that the books are going to say, okay, you can bet this much. And once you start making laws or meddling with things like that, then what happens to VIP limits? What happens to VIP players? Who decides how much people can bet?
06:09
The way it stands right now is not great. Obviously Nobody likes getting limited, but you get rewarded for harder work, for finding good beards, for finding good accounts to play into. If you try to level the playing field completely and put laws behind it, you're removing that hard work for most of the people that are trying to treat this as a full time gig. So I like what Chris said. It really depends who you're asking. You're going to get different opinions across the board on this, but I think here Kanish will probably be with us too. If you're talking to a board of all pros, we're pretty much all going to say the same thing. We're going to be against this.
06:48 - Joey Knish (Host)
Yeah, I think the way I've always heard the breakdown of the math is basically your 80% or whatever 90% of your small, better rec players offsets any of your advantage recreational player, and then your VIP players are where you make the money.
07:03
Then your vip players are where you make the money, or your larger square players are where you make the money.
07:08
If you institute something like this, something's got to give right where you're either going to then be taking you know, like there's a couple ways you go about it. It's like, okay, then my prop limits are going to be ten dollars, or you swing the other way and you want to keep the VIP limits, and then you're like, okay, we're going to offer less markets and maybe, instead of you know a thousand props in this game, we'll offer, you know 50, but really try and trade them at a very sharp professional level, which is very difficult to do. And then that's also taken away from, like, the people that want to like well, I like the thousand options Cause I want to put together a 28 leg SGP for $2. It just kind of takes away. It's it's. It sounds. If you're a very surface level like that, that can sound like a really good idea or like something to get excited about, or like in a one liner, but the nuance of it is the business model really doesn't work if you institute something like this.
08:12 - Flup (Host)
I think what can? I said there is important. I think a lot of these people think, oh, it's going to be the same product, but I can bet more than what I can and make more money. This is good for me. That's not what's going to happen. They're either going to get rid of those markets entirely trade and sell they're better than you and now you're not winning off them or some combination in between and um, I would also disagree with what you said earlier, storm. I have a feeling that someone like rufus, like a pure originator kind of guy, is going to actually support this and enjoy this, whereas, like we come from, more of like a you know, a cow, coyote kind of like business model where yeah, but I would say most of those guys are employing the same strategies as us, right, sure I mean I would.
08:57
I would love to see your opinion on this, but because unfortunately, we are all relatively similar types of betters, unfortunately.
09:05 - Storm Pig (Host)
I, I just to. To reiterate again the more you have lawmakers meddling in this, the worse the future outlook is going to be for things.
09:16 - Flup (Host)
Yeah, oh yeah. Do we trust the government to answer this limit policy correctly Like hell? No, Is this limit policy correctly?
09:25 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Like hell. No, we'll keep it moving, because New York wasn't the only place that had some discussion surrounding limiting bettors, but not quite to the same extremity. We had stuff from Massachusetts where the Gaming Commission found a correlation between CLV and limiting. Surprise, surprise, and possible regulations were drawn up. Their findings were that 0.64% of all in-state accounts are limited and Spanky of spot odds had a lot to discuss surrounding this topic. I'll kind of summary. It was a lot, so I'll just kind of summarize what he said.
09:57
He thinks that the statistic on 0.64 is misleading because it hides how often sharp bettors are targeted. And having transparency on why you're being limited, which was also discussed, is useless because sharp bettors know why they're being limited, it's not a mystery. Discusses the chances of you getting limited and then unlimited at a later date. But Spanky thinks that once you're limited it's done and there won't be any of that happening where you're actually getting those limits back. His proposed fix is to cap the ratio of max bets If one player can bet 50K, another should get at least 2K, so 4%, ending the $0.25 versus $250,000 extremes Storm. We'll lead off with you on this one. You can answer if you think that the proposed fix that I just brought up works, or just your thoughts in general on this?
10:46 - Storm Pig (Host)
I don't think it works, again because I don't think a blanket solution works. I don't have as much of a background as somebody like Shipper, for instance, but he had a pretty succinct reply to Spanky Sweet about how, unless the ratio is something insane, if you're going to do something like that, then it makes it impossible for the books to profit. And then you're circling back to the same conversation we just had. How is the book going to offer products that makes it profitable for them when lawmakers are saying you have to basically let everybody come in the front door and win money off of you hand over fist? And I love this conversation because you get this kind of catch 22 of, like sharp guys almost taking the side of the book sometimes, which you would think is kind of counterintuitive. But it has to be an ecosystem where both sharp bettors can profit and the book can profit. It can't just be one way traffic or else there's not going to be any more book Like a perfect example is you know, back in the day there used to be these PPH books and, like I'm sure Kanishk would have some and you know we would all of us would go in on the same guy and the guy would offer $5,000 on props and you know, three months later that guy was no longer around.
12:02
And you know. And you know, three months later that guy was no longer around. And you know that last week nobody got paid by them, because you can't just operate a business where you're constantly handing money out to people. It doesn't work like that. It's not the real world.
12:14 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
You mentioned that typically sharp guys don't like to take the side of sports books. I implore you to watch the Monday show where Kirk Evans gives you a run for your money on that tape. Kanish your thoughts on this proposal from Massachusetts.
12:28 - Joey Knish (Host)
Yeah, same type of thing where I don't. It's just the model, like the math doesn't work out that way and it's good if you institute, like I was saying, a blanket solution, it doesn't have any of the intricacies to make the actual business of running a regulated sportsbook work, especially which a nice segue of some of the topics we'll get into this show with some of the competition they're now facing in the space. So you can't really, if there's not enough juice to squeeze, as Storm said with the PPH example, what happens? The business no longer exists and then there's no juice and then you got nothing. So I don't think you can really push the envelope this much with any type of blanket solution.
13:15
Because, as we see, look at the blanket solution in Illinois with the whole bet fee thing, disaster, and so, like they did there, there's no nuance. There was just like okay, we're going to charge you. This is like blank If you got to hit these stipulations and it's completely stupid. And that's the same type of blanket regulation here. That's not going to have enough nuance to really be effective.
13:38 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
And finally Flop, Storm and Knitch. Kind of on the same page, Are you as well?
13:44 - Flup (Host)
I actually kind of thought maybe even a 25 ratio, 25 to 1 ratio, might work. Um, maybe I'm naive. I mean, if shipper disagrees, I'm going to obviously concede to his opinion. He's obviously going to be much more knowledgeable than me here. But the one thing I would just ask I think fando does a good job of this I just want to know what my limits are. I can't tell you the number of times where I fired a bet on Caesars or like DraftKings or something like that. I get the spinning wheel or whatever. They climb my bet and then they move the number and I'm like, okay, that is just like. Come on, just tell me what it is beforehand. Fandle does that. Why can't every book do that? I don't care if my limit is nothing. Just tell me before, only ask I would have it. I don't see how anyone could disagree with that All right.
14:30 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
I think that makes sense and we had some interesting takes from this conversation. We'd love to hear some additional takes in the comment section down below. What do you think the solution is for limiting? Do you support a blanket limit for all the customers or do you think that it should stay how it is? Just any thoughts you have in this conversation? Please put them in the comment section down below. While you're there, again, make sure you do hit the like button and consider subscribing to the channel. I might be biased, but this is, without a doubt, the best college football show around Brad Powers and Joey Knish.
15:00
Every Friday at 5 pm Eastern time on the Hit the Book YouTube channel. Eastern time. On the Hit the Books YouTube channel. Come for Brad's insights and Kanisha'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.
15:24
Next topic, we move into something that some recreational books may also oppose, and that is on a conversation surrounding Cal Shee's launch of their Build your Combo, which is a direct competitor now to SGPs.
15:33
We had Dan Birdstein who says Cal Shee appears to have launched a Build your Combo parlay feature for tonight's Bengals-Broncos game. That was Monday Night Football earlier in the week. In their new update, alfonso Straffan, who used to be a bookie, now does trading says well, shit just got real, and the DraftKings stock and the Flutter Entertainment stock, which own FanDuel and other sportsbooks, should react accordingly, and that it did. Isaac roundrobin42, who was on the show last week, said all this talk about touts, spoiling edges and silly prop markets. Meanwhile Alfonso Straffan is leaking them in multi-billion dollar ones and we see an 11% decrease for the DraftKings stock and the Flutter Entertainment stock, and even BetMGM went down 5.5%. Let's go to you first of all on this one Storm. What sort of impact can this from CalShe and perhaps other exchanges? What sort of impact could this have on the industry in attacking Rex in their most profitable portion of their business?
16:30 - Storm Pig (Host)
I think some people are slightly overreacting to this. You still need better UI. You still need a much better user experience. I haven't used Calsry as much Maybe Chris can speak to this but it's all about friction to entry, right? How's the deposit process? How's the withdrawal process? Can a guy go and hook his Venmo up to Calci and Venmo 200 bucks to go place a parlay before he goes and sits down to dinner? So I still think long term, I guess you know people are pretty bullish on this, given the way that the stocks are reacting and just talk in the industry in general.
17:17
When I was at SBC in May in Florida, all of the talk was about this, obviously, and those conferences are mostly operators and I'm going to G2E again in a couple of days, so I'm curious to see if that's I'm assuming that's just going to be the whole basis of conversation. There is these prediction markets and I made my tagline, half joking, half not. It's trading, not gambling. That is the what these guys are sticking to. It's you're trying to take this different approach to it and I get it's because of the legality surrounding it and stuff.
17:56
But at the end of the day, how do you grow your product if you say it's trading, not gambling, when most of your rec bettors don't want to speak like that, right, they want to say I fired this parlay or I did the same game parlay. So it's really a friction thing for me. How seamless can you make the process? How much can you make it sports betting, even though you don't want to call it sports betting? How similar can you make the product? Or what sort of improvements can you make over a traditional sports book?
18:27 - Joey Knish (Host)
Flop. Explain, because this is a Flop wheelhouse of here. Explain how one this is even possible offering a same game parlay on a trading market and then you're like would a user have the ability to actually go in and build their own, or are they betting preset ones that Kelsey is offering?
18:46 - Flup (Host)
A couple couple things. So, um, I don't fully understand, but I can probably give a good understand, a good explanation of it. So you can go in and you can customize your own parley and it's literally just like it's called. You build, build your own combo on calci and click a couple buttons and you can have a different, different combinations. You can request whatever combination you want. That gets sent to some sort of back end which any other user has access to and can see that order pop up and then every other person this can be you, like Kanish you can log into CalSheet and you can see these orders coming in. You can then offer a price on that. So if I'm building a customizable parlay say, my parlay tonight is puka nakua to score touchdown and the rams to win you can see that. Come in and say I'm going to offer you minus 200 or something like that, and then storm could come in and offer minus 220 or minus 190, etc. Etc. But this happens instantaneously and then that gets listed to me as whatever price. That I'm, whatever is best offered to me, shows up on my screen.
19:54
So now you might be first asking well, if it's instantaneous, who can really do this? Well, the truth of the matter is really only market makers can do this, and someone with a sophistication level Joey Kanish by himself is just not going to be able to. Chris Dirkus by himself, storm by himself is just not going to be able to do this. I mean, maybe you could. You'd have to build a very sophisticated thing to price every single model, but it's going to be nearly impossible, so I'll push back on it.
20:19
I've heard some people this is peer-to-peer bullshit. It's not peer-to-peer, it's peer-to market maker, which I have no problem with. I don't think it's a problem by any stretch and it's going to require more competition because multiple market makers can compete for the same parlay. So they've got to inherently offer better prices and more competitive pricings in the long run. So that's how they're able to do it. So the point of the matter is anyone can come out and take the opposite side of it. That's what makes part of the exchange, and also anyone can create any combination they want, which is what keeps the exchange in nature. The real tricky thing, and what they're really kind of doing to circumvent it, is it makes it so difficult that really only market makers are going to be able to post it. I would be shocked if any individual user does it and if you're able to price it, you're probably pricing hundreds of parlays, not just like one set of them. Does that make sense, kanish?
21:12 - Joey Knish (Host)
Yeah, no for sure. And I would say just to like with Storm's point about friction and that analysis like that to me and I know there was the initial like stock market reaction and I'm sure it becomes more user friendly down the line. But that seems like for your, your standard rec who just wants to put together, throw an SGP together. It sounds like there's some layers there that they probably need to work through.
21:39 - Flup (Host)
Right, because the problem right now is if you, if you did like I, was testing the poly system, like a good example is in the Bengals game for Monday night versus the Broncos Jamar Chase two-plus touchdowns and Bengals' money line paid worse than Jamar Chase two-plus touchdowns by itself. So they're a long ways away from making actual, real competitive pricing. But I will push back. A user can make a parlay right now and if you know, robinhood users are not the most price sensitive folk and they don't really care, and if they don't realize they're getting screwed over, they're still going to make some parlays. I also want to push back.
22:16 - Storm Pig (Host)
Yeah, so when you say it's instantaneous from the user end. You know so. You submit your parlay, you get your price offers, say, like you're on your phone, you put your parlay in and you look away or you go to another app. Do you have to go back in and accept those offers? Like, is it a two-step process? Um, you know, which just is another step added to it.
22:37 - Flup (Host)
Yeah, I mean, it's literally the same as like a fan duel or a draft king, where it's like you click this button for this leg, you click another button, you get an updated offer. Okay, every time you add or remove a leg, you get an updated offer as to based on how much you want to bet, and then you just swipe up and click okay, so it's.
22:54 - Storm Pig (Host)
It's an instant place based on the price that they're giving you as you add or subtract the legs. Okay, so that's.
22:59 - Flup (Host)
That's pretty good as product wise for getting you know to the end user, absolutely but I would also push back is I'll give Mr Peanut better as much as I dislike this to give a little shout-out here. I was talking to him about this and I said oh look, the market's reacting and I always fall victim to this thing that you guys are falling victim to here. This is not the real reason, or even the main reason as to why the stocks actually fell, or even the main reason as to why the stocks actually fell. Draftkings and FanDuel both reported that they had unfavorable NFL results. Let's think about it. Think about Circus Survivor, for example.
23:35
We've had a very like chalky few weeks. Almost every favorite is winning and every favorite is like covering, et cetera, et cetera, and all these like like wrecks. What do they love to do? Five big money line favorites all parlayed together. This adds a lot and they uh. Direct quote is we estimate fando saw a negative 130 um million give it a headwind during the month, resulting in only plus 44 million um for the quarter, which is pretty bad. They're saying they're losing a lot of money because of this. That's why they're going down.
24:13 - Storm Pig (Host)
I also saw some interesting tweets that app usage for both DraftKings and FanDuel is down massively month over month and year over year over the course of the last two years. So maybe it's something we're coming into this period, after the whole player acquisition push, where you're not retaining those players that you were acquiring at one point and, chris, maybe you can speak to this Somebody else had replied to these tweets saying that it wasn't related to anything business-wise with these companies at all. It was just in tune with something having to do with consumer lending in the market and there was some sort of correlation with gambling or surplus funds, I guess.
24:54 - Flup (Host)
I haven't heard anything about that. It's possible and look. Another thing to think about this is do you really think, like we heard about people? There's been talks about Cal State bringing parlays and same-game parlays in for weeks at this point. Do we think that Wall Street is stupid enough to not know that it was coming and then, the day it was released, like panic, sell minus 10% DraftKings, minus 10% Flutter? No, that's not how they operate. They're pretty sophisticated people.
25:21
Sure, maybe some of them thought it would take a lot longer. Maybe some of them thought the initial launch would be much worse than it was and they reacted negatively. But it's a combination of multiple things. Until this actually starts taking real market share and real parlay, hold percentages down from FanDuel and DraftKings, et cetera, I don't think it's going to have as big an impact as people think. Plus, let's talk about what's really going on. This is regulatory arbitrage. The people that are in Texas and California, I'm going to guess, are going to be some of the biggest users of the Cal Sheets when Polymarket Adventure comes the Polymarkets of the world. They don't impact DraftKings and FanDuel's bottom line right now and they'll just be going on Cal Sheets. So it doesn't really matter bottom line right now and they'll just be going on on calci, so it doesn't really matter. It just added benefit to the entire sports economy as a whole.
26:11 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
All right, a lot of different perspectives for this conversation. But, uh, if you do want to test out this builder combo, uh engine that they have developing or any of the other markets available on calci they are our sponsors you could do so with the link that is in the description at any point in the watching or listening experience, or you can use the QR code that is on screen right now. You can get involved with these markets, some of them unique, some of them with very high liquidity, and you can support the show at the exact same time. But we're not done talking about Kalshi for the moment, because there was another conversation that prompt up from at Morris, from Kalshi, who had a hypothesis he brought up Now this this does work for any sports book, but specifically mentions Kalshi says once a favorite team did below 5 cents on Kalshi, buy them either. Ride out this discounted favorite to win, swing for 10 to 20 cent profit If they gain momentum back on a score change thesis if you're betting on the favorite team to win at a discounted price, if the team was favored to win, they are a better team, still better at a 50 50 discount. Uh, all other factors, like time left in the game. Why the price drop? Pre-game odds comeback heavy team and wants to back test this. So uh for me.
27:22
I've seen this theory and hypothesis proposed in many different words. This is just the latest. Let's go first of all to you on this one Storm. Can you see any flaws with the way this is being laid out?
27:38 - Storm Pig (Host)
Yeah, I would say it's probably not the best plan in the world To bring him up again. I think Shipper had the best response. He ratioed the hell out of the guy. It just said boom value.
27:51
And I picture like Shipper and Sprott's with all these horrible prediction market adjacent tweets, just like having aneurysms behind their keyboard every day reading stuff like this. It's so bad, most of this prediction market content, that you have to wonder if it's rage bait at this point, just to drive engagement, drive clicks. The other side of it, if you want to look at the other side of the coin, is if it's not rage bait, then maybe you know we all need to take a step back and adopt the policy of thinking like, hey, let's dunking on people and more of embracing this is going to be my counterparty on these sites. The unfortunate part is, most of the time you know these guys will do these tweets or these write ups, and sometimes these guys do have alpha, these prediction market Twitter accounts that seemingly popped up overnight out of nowhere kind of makes you wonder where they came from. But then you look at the bet size and they're betting like $10 on these things. So is it really going to be that beneficial of a counterparty if these guys are basically seemingly doing this for content and not really getting their hands dirty in the space.
29:08
And the other thing that I love about these accounts again is they're really pushing the. It's trading, not gambling sort of thing, and it's not sports betting. This is changing the future of how these things can go, and I tweeted it like a month ago. It was like you know. I know they're the sponsor of the show, but like there seems to be this coordinated effort, especially on Calci's part some Polymarket too.
29:32
But I've seen it more with Calci of these accounts that popped up like overnight out of nowhere pushing this prediction market agenda. And you know it's a lot of these guys that I don't know if they sign them to like affiliate deals or whatever, but they don't seem to understand the product that they're trying to advertise. And to the traditional sports betting community it's kind of like these guys are laughingstocks. They think they reinvented the wheel and that sports betting is really just that easy. So I don't know if they're trying to appeal to the crypto side of Twitter to try to drive more rec flow into these exchanges. But it definitely makes you wonder where did all these guys pop up from overnight putting all this horrible content out there.
30:23 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Let's go to you on this one Flip. How do you feel about it? I will add some context and say I don't. I don't personally believe this was rage bait. Uh, I could see, maybe, why you'd think that. But morris quoted and said sorry everyone, I'm not a professional. Better, I'm sure y'all had these hypotheses when you were starting out. Uh, did you flop that? Think like this and just your thoughts on it I probably did think like this.
30:46 - Flup (Host)
I not going to pretend like I was just a genius and did everything right at the start, but it's just so funny for me to see this when Prediction Market Twitter meets like a Sprots or a Shipper. It's just like. I love those interactions. It just always makes me laugh and obviously his hypothesis is idiotic. I mean, it's actually funny. It's such a fish logic that most of the rec books have this priced in. And if there's an NBA game, for example, where like, say like the Celtics are playing the Hornets and the Celtics are like a 10-point favorite and they're down by 10 at halftime, the odds I'm on the Hornets and doing the opposite of this is like very high because there's almost internal value baked in because so many people think like this. It's just very funny that this is how it works and I totally agree with Storm here. I don't know what these prediction market Twitter accounts just tilt the shit out of me.
31:47 - Storm Pig (Host)
They're like they're populating your For you page and they're not accounts that you follow. They're not accounts that other people follow who you follow. So who's targeting the algorithm this way that all this stuff keeps popping up like this? I know.
32:02 - Flup (Host)
Can you just be transparent? I love I use Calci all the time. I do a ton of volume. I'm not trying to bash them, Just fucking tell it straight. I'm not an idiot.
32:11 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Go ahead, Kish.
32:12 - Joey Knish (Host)
I mean, this is the next wave Like. A few years ago, we saw the like, what I called like the picket wave of better come into the scene of like oh I'm doing like they put EV in their handle. They had scene of like oh I'm doing fly. Like they put ev in their handle. They had a picket. They screenshot the picket every day about like, oh look how much money I made arbon. This is the next wave of annoying new person that's coming into the space here and it's like it's trading. You know market guy. That's like coming out through a different up. You know different upbringing that like might have done. You know crypto, nfts, and now it's like see. The one massive difference I'll say, though, is like Pickett person had a like, a normal pathway to win. I don't know if trading market person like they're the. I don't know if that on ramp to actually weigh it might not be just like picket thing might have not been sustainable, but it was very like, like it was doable.
33:14 - Flup (Host)
I'll put it like that there's a great tweet. Golden pants has a great tweet about this. The bangles have tested this level twice, but this time it's in line with the fibonacci, like just a total, like trade trading. It's like when these crypto Fibonacci, which is a total trading. It's like when these crypto bros that are trading they try to trade sports live or whatever. That's just not how it fucking works.
33:33 - Storm Pig (Host)
Yeah, but again it goes back to what I said, right? Do we constantly dunk on these guys? Or are we like, hey, this is our counterparty, so maybe we should nurture them a little bit? I'm not really sure where to stand on it.
33:47 - Flup (Host)
I feel like Porter, we, we gotta we gotta be nice to those.
33:53 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Someone's got to lose Just because these guys are smarter than me the way to describe it. I just want to like make it very clear for anyone maybe dumber than me watching this Respectfully. In the example you gave chris, where the celtics are down by 10 at half to the hornets in a game, the celtics were favored by 10 points. The reason this hypothesis doesn't work was because the new price is factoring in the time remaining in the game. It is factoring in things that have happened in the game so far. That is the new price. That is the new efficient price. Maybe it's not a live prices aren't as efficient as pre-game prices, necessarily but this is the new price that is factoring in all the developed information. So you can't blindly just bet on uh the favorite to come back because they're the better team. That's baked into it. The book knows that team is the better team and it's priced accordingly. Just to make it crystal clear for anybody watching the show today, but an interesting one nonetheless, and interesting as well when we go to the next conversation, which was brought up by China at China Maniac, who has been the fourth on the Circleback Friday show. We also referenced China on the Monday show, but he once again went at pick sellers, saying that 99.9% of pick sellers are touts and frauds.
35:06
And there was a lot of pushback from AtCoversVanZak who we actually feature on the show quite a bit as well because he said you need to consider that rec gamblers don't care about winning. You assume that a tout can't help the rec gambler lose less. Touts often provide a community, which some people value, and sharps tend to think that recs want to be like them, when they don't. Some touts or sorry, some rec bettors don't want to be super sharp. They want to enjoy the betting experience, even if that is going to lose them a bit of money.
35:33
And there was a lot of back and forth between China and Conrad Van Zack on this one. However, what it came down to is Conrad Van Zack equated China, who wanted to get involved with betting groups, and think you're better off getting involved with a betting group, of supplying them with accounts, rather than going the tout route and buying picks. And Commerz Van Zaks said essentially, you're also selling something, china, because you're promoting a partnership and perhaps a partnership you are involved with and you want to get these sorts of rec bettors involved with that. That is what you're selling, and he says partnerships essentially almost equal to touts. Partnerships equal good. Touts are bad when they are something that is quite similar. I never quite looked at it from this perspective, but kind of wanted to see fill up your thoughts on this and whether you agree with China or Van Zack on this one.
36:24 - Flup (Host)
I think they're both right here, and what I mean is Van Zack is actually right in theory, because if you partner with someone, you're effectively kind of, because someone is giving the plays. That person is touting their plays to someone who is betting them and they're just splitting the profits that way as opposed to just selling it, and in theory, like it works the same you get one person provides the plays, the other person typically provides the accounts, and in a tout manner, they're paying for the plays and then betting them in their own account, but in a partnership way, the partner is simply providing the plays and the person is just not paying them but just betting themselves, but they can also offer free rolls. There's also some partnership deals where they actually pay for volume, et cetera, et cetera. They actually work very similar than most people realize.
37:15
The difference, though, is, even though in theory they're the same, in practice they end up being wildly different, because in a vacuum, once a tout has gotten your money, he does not care if the play he sends is winning or losing. He only does care that it's winning, because it's more likely to make you a repeat customer and get other customers, whereas in a partnership, most of the time, if I'm partnering with someone and I send them a play, for example, I want that play to win, because I want to win money too. I don't want it to lose. I'm incentivized to win and I think that's the key difference. And also in practice, I would say the majority of partnerships end up being more beneficial.
37:54
And sure you can have one side of partnerships, bad partnerships. I've had partners, people that have ended up costing you money, had said they were winning when they were losing, et cetera, et cetera, losing, et cetera, et cetera. And I would say the vast majority of touts are not winning. And this is the key Typically, if you tout, you're better off going to a partnership route, but you don't go in the partnership route because it's a little bit more work and your plays aren't actually winning, and the partners would realize that and quit, because those people that want to go into partnerships are typically a smarter subset.
38:24 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
So that was part of the pushback from China on this conversation, which I didn't specifically reference. But China said the same thing the tout's going to make money no matter what if you're buying picks off them, whereas partnership, if the picks aren't winning, you're both not making any money. So the partner has more incentive for the relationship to go well and for the picks to win. Kanish, I kind of want to get your perspective on the pick seller side of things and somebody who's buying picks. Is there value? Are people looking for value in the form of community? Is that something that can actively be preached for pick sellers? Because to me that kind of just seems like a cop out way for someone who's selling losing picks to say like I'm still providing value.
39:07 - Joey Knish (Host)
What do you say? Yeah, I mean, this is again. One, I think the three panelists here aren't good. This is not the most unbiased panel in terms of uh, you know, partnership or touting. But two, I think community is usually that phony word that a lot of people you know throw out there. I will say I think there is something, and I'm not saying like do I think this has? Everyone's gonna have their own answer because it's subjective of does this have value?
39:30
But there is something that is an allure for people that want to go into a discord and everyone's gonna get to bet the same. You know, five leg sgp and root it home. And you know, if you want to, everyone's in the discord rooting it in. They got three out of five legs. Are you cashing out of my cash? You know, I do think people I'm not saying that that has what I'll call, you know, financial value, but there is a draw to it that I think a lot of people, when they're signing up for these services, there's, there's that something there. They want to be in there sweating with people that are on there saying stuff, chatting back and forth, and even more so if someone's losing. It's like misery loves company, if they have a bad beat, if the play loses, if the tout is going on a bad run, you have this group of people to then commiserate with. So I don't know if that has like dollar value. I do think it is a draw, though, for people to find out.
40:25 - Flup (Host)
It's like when I'm watching, Hit the Books and I tail conditions like losing plays.
40:29 - Joey Knish (Host)
I know they're losing, but I don't mind. Yeah, you can get in there and be like fuck this guy.
40:35 - Flup (Host)
Exactly.
40:37 - Joey Knish (Host)
And people are like yeah, yeah, so yeah, that's why we got so many viewers.
40:42 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
But I think still the bottom line is, somebody who's buying picks, their first thought is not this great community.
40:50 - Storm Pig (Host)
I think it's such a cop-out because then the easiest response is okay, well, you can have a free community. And then you always get hit with the same thing oh well, I want to be paid for my hard work and time. And then you get the guys that are like I spend all day researching, which is like looking at espn box scores or whatever it is that they say they do. But to me, I hate that argument of oh well, you know, these guys value a sense of community, because then these guys that are creating these communities and charging people, they're preying on people essentially Like whether you're preying on somebody who's lonely or somebody who's valuing companionship, whatever it is that they're looking for in a community. The second, you start preying on that and like saying, oh well, these guys value community. Who cares if I win or not? Okay, well, circle back, Do it for free. Who cares if I win or not? Okay, well, circle back, Do it for free then. And if you're not doing it for free, then you're preying on vulnerabilities of these people that want to be a part of these community. And, generally speaking, if you're emotionally vulnerable like that, where you feel like you need to be a part of an online sports betting community, for example, you're probably not somebody who should be betting in the first place, you know that's. Those sort of personality traits are going to flesh out in gambling as well, and I just I hated that whole argument that, oh well, people don't value money. You know they value community and, yes, I agree with that. But I don't think that that makes it right.
42:26
And I actually responded to that tweet from Zach. I said if your partners aren't profiting and your group isn't profiting, if your customers aren't profiting, as it's how you still are, it's not that difficult. He said some people don't care about profit. And I said your original post mentions good and bad in the scope of gambling. What else could be construed as good besides profiting? So when you twist the argument to say, oh well, not everybody cares about winning, right At the end of the day, that's what it's about. If you find yeah, you disagree?
43:01 - Flup (Host)
Yeah, so look at the who's the biggest community in the space right now Bookit HQ. They post their picks for free, but Bookit for Trent is openly admitting that he's a losing player, posts his losing picket month after month and he blows everyone out of the water in terms of viewership and, honestly, you could make an argument that maybe he's more predatory, because what's he doing? He's getting people to sign up for the prize picks, knowingly that they're losing, but no one cares because they're having a good time and they love the community. And I bet you, if he charged $20 a month to join a Book it HQ Discord, he would get thousands, maybe tens of thousands of people to sign up. So I think you're just a little biased.
43:46 - Storm Pig (Host)
Yeah, I'm not as tapped into that side of things. I'm more tapped into like the Twitter tout side of things forever. So, like the content, communities and stuff like that, you're right, it's like an afterthought, like I don't consider that aspect of things. But then again, like you said, it circles back to what I was saying. You're preying on these vulnerabilities that people have that want to belong to something and using gambling as an instrument for it, and that's just disastrous for a lot of people.
44:17 - Flup (Host)
I don't think Trent is bad in any way because he's very transparent with what he's doing. And the thing is, if people are open at their touting and they're saying you're joining this community, I have to give them a little credit because they're being transparent about it, as long as they say the picks are losing too, but this is a very unique example where he's very open about his gambling results.
44:39 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
I would think at least 90% of the places that are promoting the community aspect of joining the group are promoting the fact that they're selling winning picks as well, when in fact, they aren't selling winning picks.
44:51
This is like a unicorn sort of example where, like this, this is a place that does promote the community and that's why people are invested into it, but a lot of other places you've used the term cop-out because they are trying to sell winning picks and that is a form of promotion for the group. That's how they get people in the door.
45:08 - Flup (Host)
I guess my question to you guys would be like take someone like an SGP Vic. I think we'd all agree he's very likely to be a losing pick seller and everything like that If he told his entire community right now my picks are losing. Unsubscribe, if you want to keep subscribing, if you want to follow what percentage of people would stay with him? I would make the argument that probably almost half, if not more, would stay with him.
45:34 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Maybe a lot would stay.
45:36 - Flup (Host)
A lot for sure? And if the answer is a lot, then aren't they right that the community aspect is actually a big deal to people.
45:44 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
I wonder if from the infancy of sgp vic, if that's how the account was portrayed. I wonder if that, if that would have been a successful strategy to build up the consumer base that exists already um, yeah, I think that's a fair point I would wager it doesn't?
46:00 - Storm Pig (Host)
so yeah, I think that's a fair point. Like you, just because you kind of like bait and switch people so just because they're already invested, versus you know, if you start from the beginning, hey, I suck at this, pay me a bunch of money for my picks You're not going to build up the same community that's going to be invested or dedicated to being part of that going to be invested or dedicated to being part of that.
46:23 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Yeah, I see what you're saying, Flip, but I still I mean, we all agree you're probably better off not going the route of a tout, and I can see that some people are interested in the community aspect, but I just don't think that that'd be a successful way to promote your pick-selling service.
46:36 - Flup (Host)
I am curious because, in all seriousness, I would imagine that if you actually tailed every pick from Kanisha's Hit the Books, you'd probably be a small winner.
46:45 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
It's going to be hard because— Well, we track it every play, as we do at the Hammer, so we can just check right now what are the results. I'll check right now. Hit the Books is minus one and a half ROI all time, minus 1.5 ROI all time.
47:01 - Joey Knish (Host)
But positive, the past two years in perfect tout, in symmetry here including 25 and 15 on the year.
47:09 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
I will concede down 8.5 units, 2.8% CLV, so perhaps a bit of bad luck in some respects.
47:18 - Flup (Host)
These modules are clearly better than just randomly spraying the board, and they are much better than everything else, and it's likely that their picks are some of the best out there. So I'm going to ask you, kanish, why do you think people listen to you? Is it because they know your picks are better than almost anyone else? Or is it the chemistry between you and Brad Powers?
47:37 - Joey Knish (Host)
I would say, much more of the entertainment, chemistry, informational factor than just the pixel. Obviously, I think there are some people there that are for the. Usually we'll do a show on a Monday. It will have some market movement, but that's more of the niche, more in-depth, better than, I would say, most people. And I agree with, like as the point you made about Trent, if he was doing that type of thing, I'm with you, I think it would just be absolutely explosive, and so that to me is a little bit more from the wide-ranging thing of what your average consumer wants.
48:15 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
All right, good discussion. I mean I started the discussion very much on the side of China, but I can definitely see Van Zack's perspective a lot more after it. Maybe you guys have some thoughts you want to give in the comments down below. Anybody watching or listening that would be greatly appreciated. We'll move into our next topic, though, to keep things moving on the show, and we have maybe the bad side of pick selling, because this is just the classic, the absolute classic. So BeatinTheBookiecom said who wants my 120-1 TD score parlay for today? Then quoted it with said parlay and it's a Hunter Henry Amon Ross, st Brown, quinton Johnson, dalton Kincaid, nico Collins all to score a touchdown on a parlay. Now, four out of five of them got the touchdown. Nico Collins did not. Because this is a parlay, this bet lost. The bet that was promoted lost, but in true tout fashion beating. The bookie says if you played the td scores separately, you made six units. Uh, kanish, do we see a problem with this and promoting it like this?
49:19 - Joey Knish (Host)
I mean this is we've talked discord a little bit Like this is every long shot, discord's like go-to. I'm going to give you 20 home run parlay, touchdown parlays and then, like you know, if 19 of the 20, or 12 of the 28, you go, well, if you just bet them straight you would have been a winner, baby, it's just that easy. Nobody's fucking betting these straight. Like nobody is doing that in the, everybody wants the long shot. But then it's a very easy cop out to be like well, if you're round Robin, you bet them straight. You did them like this.
49:56
We'll go to the hit the books example I give out a 14 like underdog money line round robin every week. If you've bet them straight or round robin them over the last two years, you've made money. If you've parlayed them every week, you've made nothing because they've never. We've never gone four, we've gone three for four, we go two for four. All the time we're actually like 500. But if you bet them all for just just the parlay, we haven't hit and that's the difference. And so I can come on here and be like look at this, I'm picking underdogs at like a 50 50 rate. Nobody's fucking doing that, they're just betting the 14 parlay. So, yeah, it's a very, it's a great cope for the person giving it out, which I use myself. But I mean, when you're like touting it, they're like come on now I have.
50:41 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
I have seen you use that that strategy before where it's like, look how smart I am I. Three out of four of these I managed to call uh pretty bad, look I. I say uh, fluff, you're laughing. Uh, do you want to add anything to this?
50:54 - Flup (Host)
this is the classic just like if it went over four. You just lost a unit right, right, right, two for two. Oh, look like you made we're on the right track. We're getting the right. We're on the way there. It's brilliant. It's honestly like very, very sharp, and I'm I'm glad to know that someone as sharp as kanish is using that same uh, storm, you go ahead.
51:19 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
What do you want to add?
51:20 - Storm Pig (Host)
it's the usual like emotional free roll that that all these guys use. Uh, I've, I was laughing that you brought up sgv-gp vic in the previous segment when I knew that this one was coming up because he I think he's the one who coined the uh term watering down which and I remember when he first, like, popped up in the elf spaces, everybody was dunking on the guy because he he printed out a poster of a parlay that he had hit like nine months previously or something and put it up in his like home with his wife and children and stuff and that was like his claim to fame was like the one parlay that he had. He was riding that wave ever since. I mean, I've seen stuff here and there.
52:04
I'm sure you guys have too Guys that were tracking his plays down 200 units in the last month or something, if you played all of his plays. It's just incredible the way that these guys like the mental gymnastics and the advertising tactics that they use to keep people signing up. I do have to say the amount of money that somebody like him makes selling picks is astronomical and sometimes it makes you scratch your head like why don't I do this? And then you remember that you have a soul, and then you just keep grinding.
52:34 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
We had the exact same conversation last week about that. Why would we not become pick sellers? I do love the term watered down, which would I use for the rundown. This is technically not watering it down. This is actually less egregious. Watering it down would be like well, if you just if you played this without Nico Collins, like maybe you only wanted to play for you would have won the bet, Like literally just changing up the bet that was given out. That's far more egregious to me than saying you could play them all individually. But kanish is right, obviously nobody's fucking playing these individually. You asked who wants my 121 td parlay. That's what people uh were were interacting for in the comments that I saw.
53:13 - Flup (Host)
Not all right, I'll play them all individually my favorite is when someone gives like a, a home run list or like a touchdown score list, and then they say four hit and they said who parlayed these four? Look how good.
53:26 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
If you did parlay them, you would have won this and they were like whoa, why didn't I think of that? Oh my God, I just have to choose the right four players from this huge list. Yeah, just, you got to look out for these classic examples and if anybody is interested in buying picks, you got to be aware of things like this. You got to look for people doing doing it the right way. Let's go to our last full scale topic in just a second here, because on this channel, we're bringing back Wednesday content and we're bringing back Q and A's. We've seen a lot of Q and A's in this channel featuring people like Joey Kiddish. Those episodes have gone over very well, but we're going to be going back to some Q&As. Rob Pozzola, ceo of the Hammer, and Kirk Evans, seasoned basketball bettor, are going to be doing one of these. So if you have any questions for anybody that you want answered, you can respond to the comments down below. You can email us at circlesoffatthehammerbet or post it in our Circles Off Q&A channel in Discord, discordgg, slash hammer, which is also linked in the description, and while you're down there, guys, please make sure you do smash that like button, subscribe, or we just hit 20 000 subs. We're now on the road to 25k, 30k and beyond. You get content, like I said, on those wednesdays and circle back monday and friday, last full scale topic. I moved it out of the chopping block because I really wanted to talk about it. Uh, we have redacted gambler reporting on the latest from Steve Fezzik.
54:45
Now we were live on the Forward Progress Channel, which is the Hammers NFL content division. We were live for a watch along when we found out about what was going on here. So, essentially, steve Fezzik, pick seller, gave out to his Dolphins first quarter money line and then realized after he gave it out that he actually wanted to bet the other side, which was the Jets first quarter spread at plus half a point, calling it a middle, which is not actually a middle because one side is a money line, one side is a spread. Rob, who had fun with it on the show and then the next day said, had a wild dream, some tout sent out Miami first quarter, realized they made the mistake, then sent out the Jets plus half, which, by the way, was minus 150. When he bet it to try and middle it and this was also after the game had already kicked off Woke up thinking that that was an insane dream. Nobody would do that in real life.
55:42
And then there was actually some pushback from some of Fezzik's community I guess we'll call it people that are buying Fezzik's picks. There was some pushback, as reported by Adrian Badgerowski, and Fezzik's reply was reportedly go buy someone else and saying that 2008, fezzik would crush this type of tout. This is what we have in 2025. He says we fire on value. And then to make it, to add on to all of that, fezzik who's down like 80, was it 80 units? On MLB, it was like at least 70, I think it was posted a photo of himself at Peter Luger's. It says living the dream, showing off his expensive dinner at a fancy restaurant. Eps. It says living the dream showing off his expensive dinner at a fancy restaurant. Ep Sports 22 says down a bazillion units, bankrupting clients, but flexing the subs money at Peter Lugers Absolutely zero shame. This, I mean this, is just like. I think this is the furthest Fezzik has ever been from reality. Kanish, what do you think If?
56:40 - Joey Knish (Host)
it makes anybody feeling better if you're a Fezzik has ever been from reality Kanish. What do you think If it makes anybody feeling better if you're a Fezzik pregame sub? I guarantee he didn't pay a cent for that dinner because he's a Caesars seven-star rewards member and part of the package is you get free dinners, dinner comps at every periodically, so don't be fooled thinking that that cheap fuck went to peter luger's and paid full price so he could have a shrimp cocktail. I get that. This is the guy who's mad that the starbucks prices went above for ten dollar comp.
57:14 - Storm Pig (Host)
So we had to pay, you know, a dollar 25 for his cold brew or something like that.
57:18 - Joey Knish (Host)
He's not going to peter luger's and putting that on the tab, so don't worry, I guarantee that was comped by caesars uh star, what do you think on this one?
57:28 - Storm Pig (Host)
there's only one, peter luger's, first of all, and that's the williamsburg the og. The rest of them don't compare, so I just want to put that out there. Um, the other thing is, when you say you know he's so far detached from reality with the role that he's on the past couple of weeks, I wouldn't put it past him to be self-aware enough to be doing this stuff to troll all of us, this whole audience. I think that he relishes being on these shows, having people talk about him every single week, and I think it's rage bait at this point and I think he's really good at it.
58:05
Um, because I think, like earlier we were discussing, we were choosing the topics and every like I think chris and I passed on this and we said like, um, you know, I just I don't, I don't think it's a bad topic, just like we talk about physical all the time, right. And then, like, the other side of the coin was like, yeah, but everybody loves talking about it, right, like it, it's good content, it gets drives good engagement, and I think he knows that right, I think he's self-aware of it and I think he just relishes and having his name brought up every single week. He's, he's definitely uh taking advantage of uh the clout that he gets from making all these horrible tweets and doing things like betting both sides of the first quarter.
58:48 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
But also, as much as you could say, any press is good press. The press, the clout he gets from this show, is extremely negative. We're referencing specifically people who are buying his package, who are upset with the state of it right now. Would this not be a?
59:08 - Flup (Host)
negative for Fezzik. Okay, but the problem is, who's the target audience? I hope that the average circles off and circles back. It's just a little sharper. They're probably not going to be signing up for Fezzik. But the problem is what happens is you have more casual people that say to their other casual friends, listen to for Fezzik. But the problem is what happens is you have more casual people that say to their other casual friends, listen to this Fezzik episode. Then they hear the name Fezzik, then they look up who's Fezzik. Then maybe they buy their package and think, oh, it's a good and that's all that happens. I can totally see situations like that happening and that's kind of agree. At this point he's either so delusional that it's like insane. But I actually agree with storm at this point. I think he's self-aware and he's doing it, he's farming, he's making money off of this and I don't want to help him.
59:50 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Well, no, I, I think, okay, I think there's peter luger's tweet is is an example of that where this is just rage bait.
59:57 - Flup (Host)
I, I, I'll, I'll concede to that no, no, no condition is right. He, he just loves getting the free cough. So much back to excitement that he got this for free.
01:00:09 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
It's too good but what I was going to say is on the, the middle quote-unquote middle on the monday night football game, uh, that I mean, that's just embarrassing, that's just completely embarrassing. Like it just you made a bad pick, just live with it. Why chase a minus ev bet with another minus ev bet, like what good is that going to do? I I guess the point rob made was because he's down so many units, he's just trying to escape it as much as possible. But, uh, extremely horrific and embarrassing. Look for that service.
01:00:41
In my opinion, we'll go to the chopping block now. Three things featuring on the chopping block, stuff that didn't require full-scale segments but we wanted to discuss Nonetheless. The first one comes from Computer Cowboy, who says, in popular opinion, based on reading tweets about last night's game this in reference to the Cowboys-Packers game which ended in a tie not only are ties fine, but for the sake of the players there, a tie. Not only are ties fine, but for the sake of the players, there shouldn't even be overtime in regular season. End of regulation. Equals tied Storm. Would you support this for the NFL?
01:01:10 - Storm Pig (Host)
No, of course not. If you look at like group chats or Twitter or any other social media when these games go to overtime, you will never see more people talking about a football game than these overtime games. It's exhilarating. I like the new rule changes where both teams have a chance of getting the ball. I think it makes it better for live betting. It's certainly a great opportunity. That I won't get too much into why, but there's a lot of mispricing going on in overtime so I it's just a weird tweet to me in general from a guy whose account is about tweeting about football. Why would you want less football in general? I don't understand that.
01:02:00 - Joey Knish (Host)
What about you? I mean, I just I hate the tie in general, like even with I agree. I don't want the regular. I don't understand that. What about you, kanish? I mean I hate the tie in general, like even with I agree. I don't want the end of the game to be a tie. I don't want the overtime to end in a tie. It's stupid and it's also it's like a weird. The way the NFL does records a tie almost like effectively is a loss too in a number of ways and also in the contest.
01:02:23 - Flup (Host)
Know, I know some people that had, uh, you know, the, the packers, and then that was not me. I don't want.
01:02:27 - Joey Knish (Host)
That was the week before, wasn't it? You took the backer. Yeah, I, I honest I had one queued up and then I now, and now it's remembering me like wait, no, that was the week before, so uh jeff benson I'm not gonna lie.
01:02:39 - Storm Pig (Host)
That ran through my was like didn't Flop, have the package Can he tweet out his grandissimo. Can I dunk on him for this?
01:02:45 - Flup (Host)
I lost the grandissimo. I still have one left which is on Rams tonight. Hopefully that comes through there. But I okay. I have always been a pro football fan over college football. I still like college football. It's probably one of my second or third favorite sports to watch. Their overtime is so much better than NFL. Honestly, I don't mind if NFL wants to keep it like this, but maybe we get the alternate two-point conversions to see who actually wins the game. Just super high variance. That's how the game is. That would be sick. That would be great to watch. They can keep this regular 10 minutes they want, but I think the start of the 25 is a great rule and culture ball. They should bring it back and I'm going to tie is dumb and we don't. That way. Jeff Benson can't call it in and rig it in, so people like get more limited on survivor.
01:03:37 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
And also it says for the players sake, there shouldn't even be overtime. Players absolutely hate ties. Every player talks about it hates when they tie, so naturally they want to avoid that. So I think currently the overtime ruling has improved in the NFL, but perhaps can still be improved. But no, I disagree completely with that one. The next one comes from Legion Hoops reports a lot on the NBA. Nba, Just when you thought you couldn't get more degenerate. Amazon will allow NBA fans to connect their FanDuel account and display live bets placed bets on screen during NBA action. An interesting one for sure. Kanish, what do you think about this?
01:04:17 - Joey Knish (Host)
I mean, you know what. We're already so deep in the waters now in this country. Go for it. I don't care. If Isaac was here he'd give us some eight-minute rant about responsible gaming. I don't know how to do that. It's not good for us. I don't give a shit anymore. Put it on the. You know what I want to mail order a kiosk so it can be right in my living room and I can just buy whatever I want right there. I don't have to do it on the tv. Every kiosk for every home, like whatever that thing was at franklin roosevelt. Well, I don't know microwave or whatever. It was. A kiosk for every home. Just drop it at the door. Have amazon. I want to be able to Amazon. A kiosk to my house to be able to bet. So go for it, okay.
01:05:06 - Flup (Host)
I think something that people are missing here is if I have a big bet on a game or sweat on a game, I have to turn and I'm lie betting and I want to sweat the game, I have to turn off my app because the odds update. Yes, yes. So, like, like I'm watching, like can you imagine if I'm watching like a, an nfl game that's like fourth down to convert, to claim, I can't watch it because if the odds get turned off, I know they brick the conversion or whatnot I want to watch it in person, so how are they going?
01:05:33
to fix that problem as a true degenerate who sweats his games all the time. That would bother me and annoy me to no end. I'm with joey at this point like fuck the regular, like who gives a shit.
01:05:45 - Storm Pig (Host)
Ridiculous at this point I'm gonna go out full conspiracy theorist and say I don't really know who would go through the trouble of integrating their fandle with their amazon for the purpose of doing this. So people, do it I'm gonna say that this is a psyop for people that sign up for this and display their bet slips on their TV to automatically have their information forwarded to problem gambling councils.
01:06:10 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
So this will work in the same way. Like someone in like a Twitch stream, for example, they're happy when their name gets shouted out by the person running the stream. I think this will work in the same way. Well, you'll just be excited. Well, that's my bet on the stream. I think this will work in the same way. You'll just be excited. Whoa, that's my bet on the screen. It'll be a great place to see just the most square bets, because anybody who knows anything does not want their fucking bets broadcasted to the public to see what they're betting on. So interesting one For the watching experience of the NBA. I don't like this, but from a sports sportsbook perspective, I can see why this is an interesting idea to bring up for the upcoming season yeah, just in general.
01:06:48 - Storm Pig (Host)
it makes it makes the watching experience horrible, like I love seeing all the comments every year when we get a new football season and people complaining about the score bugs and how they just continuously start taking up more space on the screen every single year and it just makes watching horrible. So the more shit you're going to throw up on the screen is not good.
01:07:09 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Absolutely Last thing we have for today comes from Cairo. C-y-r-o Sandbox. C-y-r-o says BetOnline balance 5,600. Fanduel 4,800. Draftkings 7,600. Checking 87,600. Fanduel 4,800. Draftkings 7,600. Checking 87,24. Wife says let's go on vacation. Me can't, we're broke Few understand Flup? Are you in this same category?
01:07:31 - Joey Knish (Host)
This is Flup's Kelshi, except with a lot more zeros. He's in some shoebox apartment in New York when he could be living in the Hampton because he's got hold on, hold on.
01:07:40 - Storm Pig (Host)
I can confirm, because when Flop and I first became friendly with each other, he was like Storm, what, what can I do in Manhattan to take my wife out for something? And so I was like I recommended him a really great Thai massage place. But it was funny because like it's like what can I do in New York versus like can I take her on a vacation? So this literally, literally is Flop.
01:08:00 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
That's why I let off of them. Do you resonate with this Flop?
01:08:04 - Flup (Host)
It's also pretty funny because the other day I just deposited a bunch into CalSheet. My wife texted me. She's like did we get hacked? What happened to our chat? I was hysterical because I had a lot of positions out, I a bit more and um, but I thought this was a great tweet and I'm serious because it like I'm so sick of these finance bros that are just like all all this money investments, are all this money in the 401k. It's just like so ridiculous and it puts me on tilt. So just to see someone push back on that, I love that it's just really fun.
01:08:42 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
I mean, I resonate with this in a way where, like, I'll be like watching a game I bet on at a bar and I'll be like sweating over, like paying like two dollars extra for a dipping sauce on the side, like do I really want to spend two dollars? Meanwhile I have like a thousand x that on the game, on the screen. It's just interesting perspectives. Uh, what do you think, kanish?
01:09:01 - Joey Knish (Host)
no, I mean let's, I think I, I, I'm, I'm with here, uh, in terms of that and I'm with it. You know, at there's some thankfully I'm not married so I don't have to. You know, nobody's looking at my account balances and any other thing there, so I can just, you know, uh, load up kelsey to the guilds. But, yeah, I also great tweet because, yeah, there was, uh, it all originated from that one guy who was like, oh, I got 10 million in my 401k and, you know, six dollars in my checking account. So, uh, great, great spin-off on this tweet uh, you finish off storm.
01:09:36 - Storm Pig (Host)
Yeah, I, I think it's also like a play on the ones that have been around forever. That, um, it's like, uh, you know bills, my monthly bills two thousand for rent, a thousand for food, five hundred for restaurants, two hundred thousand gambling losses um, how can I afford living? And I think this is another good play on it. It's. It's one of those things where people who gamble just instantly get it.
01:10:01 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
It just hits right at home sorry to add one more thing, for from my perspective, I am not married, but I am getting married, hopefully, hopefully, soon. Uh, and the reason that is just oh my god, another vacation this is a while from now. This is, this is and earliest next summer, if not summer 2027, don't worry.
01:10:23 - Joey Knish (Host)
No, not more time we've uh got a new producer by then, because otherwise we're gonna be like oh well, yeah, jacob's getting married, we'll see him in uh 18 months. Who are across africa right now on a sunny moon uh, to continue the point anyways.
01:10:38 - Jacob Gramenga (Host)
Uh, for the wedding fund. Uh, my, my, my soon-to-be wife talked about taking money out of betting accounts to do it and I had to say I don't think we can do that. We're going to have to find another way to get the money in for the wedding. So, yes, I resonate with this one very much, which is why I did put it up last on the list. Thank you so much, everybody, for tuning in to the show today. If you did enjoy, remember to hit that like button. Also, make sure you're subscribed to Circles Off. We have Circle Back Monday live at 1 pm. Fridays. This show pre-recorded 8 am Eastern time and we have some bonus content coming at you every Wednesday at 1 pm Eastern time, stuff like Q&As, which you can ask those questions by going to the Discord, by going to the comments, by going to the email which I had on screen previously. Thanks again for watching.
