Thread by @d_feustel

I have read several threads about which is more difficult: winning at Sports betting, or winning at 21. It really depends on scale. If a person knows what to study, how to practice, and has $20k they are "comfortable" losing there are different curves for sports vs 21. 1/

No person lacking discipline and work ethic has a chance in either. On a small scale, sports is easier than 21. If you want to win at 21, you need to memorize basic strategy (unless you're @rxgamble, who is a unicorn at advanced techniques, and probably still has perfect BS). 2/

@rxgamble A 120 iq person can learn 21 basic strategy, counting, and execution in 100 hours. Your next 100 hours, you work out kinks. Your 20k bank can earn $50/hour, +/- $500/hour. You better ace bankroll management in that 100 hours. If you miss any piece, you're dogfood. 3/

@rxgamble In sports, if you do algebra, the learning curve is much shorter to win a little. If you learn/read the right sources, 20 hours of learning can probably double your money your first year with a 20k bank. Both 21 and Sports need mentoring to hit these quickly. /4

@rxgamble At a small scale, sports takes much less time than 21. If you simply attack promotions, you can make a lot with not much work. As long as you really understand bankroll management. At the easiest levels, sports is not a time sink. 21 is. /5

@rxgamble If you want to give up your day-job and earn enough to live without worrying about next months' bills, reality check: sports and 21 are much harder to win at a scalable level. Variance and your opponents scale up the game as the stakes increase. Better have 200k br to try. /6

@rxgamble In sports and 21, winning at a high level takes more. In 21, you need a game that isn't immediately crushed by the eye in the sky. You're not just beating the game, you're attacking the system. The casino is built to stop you, and they are good at stopping frontal-assault. /7

@rxgamble If you want to crush 21, you have to keep your sessions shorter than you like (which costs you money), learn new attacks making you look like a muggle (while not throwing away money), or use team play. Winning big at 21 is doable, but it requires both quant and social skills. /8

@rxgamble As in 21, there are different ways to scale up in sports. Beard (which risks having your balance stolen, and maybe criminal charges in the future). Whatever your mo of attack, you can add lots of outs for better pricing. Sports vectors of attack are more diverse than 21. /9

@rxgamble There are many scalable approaches to Sports, but it has one advantage over 21: every casino turns away AP players. In sports, some books will knowingly book AP sports players. Every 21 approach uses stealth. In sports, you can choose between stealth and frontal assault. /10

@rxgamble Vectors of winning 100k+/year in sports: 1. bearding + bonus abuse. Open your account. And Gf's, and Cousin, friends', and 10 homeless people you paid $50 to "borrow" their ID. Pretty clearly illegal, and most common. This is the lowest hanging fruit. This will end badly. /11

@rxgamble 2. Top-down aka "white collar ditch-digging". You watch the screen and bet books slow to move. Grind a little vs market testers; constantly look for new accounts. It's work. Requires social skills to get new accounts, some understanding of math for conversions, and the grind. /12

@rxgamble 3. Bottom-up. Rocket science. Look at stats, build a model, make your own real line. Attacking openers is real option, even for newbies. Most young guys spend more time building model than what's put into openers; opener-assault can earn even w/o bearding. /13

@rxgamble 4. Right-to-left. Come up with an idea of how the world should work (right). Build predictions based on the market number to price smaller markets (e.g. NFL spread/total to predict h1 or q1 total or CPs with efficient markets). Test vs data (left). Not many people do this. /14

@rxgamble Whichever approaches you use, you edge-stack. Any quant-work is better with more outs. Any bet is better w/ more promos. Combine bottom-up to get better number with top-down (you know where market moves) or right-left (better market for input to derivs); advantages multiply. /15

@rxgamble In sports and 21, there are often monster edges short-term or in micro-markets. Both have spots where 30% edges exist awhile and vanish. My opin is limited because there are ideas in 21 that maybe I've never been exposed to. In my limited reality, 21 has scalability issues /16

@rxgamble You have to know a lot and have contacts to make 500k/yr in 21. I'd guess fewer than 20 people make 500k/yr in 21, and I'd be stunned if 20 people made 5m/year in 21. In sports the top 20 (probably top 200) make 5m/year. The high end of sports makes much more than 21. /17

@rxgamble 21 is a finite game. Sports has many more vectors of attack, and even the regulated markets with collaring are much more liquid with the shenanigans. I can confidently say sports earns more than 21 at high end, because high end 21 players are not educating me. /18

@rxgamble My guess: you have 20 hours to learn, 20 hours to bet a year: do sports. If you have 100 hours to learn, 300 hours to grind, and $20k, do 21. If you have 1000 hours to learn and bet (and have or will acquire $20k), sports is better. If you have 2m, skip all and enjoy life. 19/19

@otag143546mot 100's of accounts are frozen based on beard IDing. Does public care if someone using 100 accounts that stole $500k from DK goes to jail? There's a threshold. When it's hit, there will be a paradigm shift. Most bettors have no idea of abuses already happening, and won't care. 2/2