Stooges of Degeneracy, Ep. 11 NSFW

[BobbyFK]

disagree there. I think Bobby looks better than he has in years.

lost weight? just a recent shave?

looks closer to the young man reviewing twizzlers like he was back in 2008 then any time in the past 5 years to me

Thank you! Yes I have lost about 15 lb and have gotten a haircut recently

 

[Enikk]

disagree there. I think Bobby looks better than he has in years.

lost weight? just a recent shave?

looks closer to the young man reviewing twizzlers like he was back in 2008 then any time in the past 5 years to me

Agree, Mrs Bobby whipping that boy into shape. GJ Bobby

 

[stormtrooper8]

Team Tampa full of studs.

Let's make this a good night gentlemen.

Just need WAGs on it as well, though I know he's down on his Bucs

On tbay too vitty

Let's keep growing this list boys

United we stand

 

[JDS]

Thank you! Yes I have lost about 15 lb and have gotten a haircut recently

Did you stop drinking less soda like I recommended ? That usually helps right away when you cut that sugar out of your diet.

 

[Tanko]

Did you stop drinking less soda like I recommended ? That usually helps right away when you cut that shit out of your diet.

He switched his food reviews from cookied/ice cream/donuts to salads, vegetables, and fruit.

 

[JDS]

He switched his food reviews from cookied/ice cream/donuts to salads, vegetables, and fruit.

Don’t know how true that is, haven‘t been around to notice. If so great decision Bobby. Had no idea he was losing weight.

 

[stormtrooper8]

Thank you! Yes I have lost about 15 lb and have gotten a haircut recently

Noticeable.

You look less like a stooge each episode

 

[JDS]

My favorite part of the show, was when Enikk gave props to Venditto on mentioning taking the short ML price instead of the +1.5 & not pay the books juice, even though the juice is already built in that ML price. I definitely go that route as well.

 

[JDS]

Good show guys, well put together.

 

[vitterd]

Did you stop drinking less soda like I recommended ? That usually helps right away when you cut that sugar out of your diet.

I just don’t drink sugary drinks and haven’t for years. Very rarely I will have a coke but everything I drink is zero sugar. Gatorade zero and Fiji water. They are at my side all day and night.

 

[JDS]

I just don’t drink sugary drinks and haven’t for years. Very rarely I will have a coke but everything I drink is zero sugar. Gatorade zero and Fiji water. They are at my side all day and night.

Same here, lost about 10 lbs a few years ago just by changing that one thing.

 

[BobbyFK]

He switched his food reviews from cookied/ice cream/donuts to salads, vegetables, and fruit.

Probably won't happen

 

[stormtrooper8]

taking the short ML price instead of the +1.5 & not pay the books juice, even though the juice is already built in that ML price.

The juice is in every price you pay

It's all a numbers game in the end

To each their own. Ends up paying out the same in the end with either strategy

 

[JDS]

The juice is in every price you pay

It's all a numbers game in the end

To each their own. Ends up paying out the same in the end with either strategy

From my experience more times than not that less than +3 is irrelevant win or lose.

 

[stormtrooper8]

From my experience more times than not that less than +3 is irrelevant win or lose.

I assume you mean football

In case of hockey, most frequent outcome is the favorite beating the underdog by exactly 1 goal. Obviously there are a very wide range of outcomes, but that is the #1 most frequent outcome.

An event with a 38% chance of happening is gonna hit about 38% of the time, just like an event with a 70% chance of happening is going to hit about 70% of the time over the long haul. The question is if you can consistently get a price that pays out better than the true probability of something happening.

Like if an event's price is +190, but the true price is more like +175 based on the actual probability of the event, that's when you're in business . Obviously identifying those opportunities is the hard part

People are gonna play a +170 ML over a -130 +1.5 because hitting the former is more fun, pays out bigger, but reality is if you flat bet each of those 1000 times you're coming away with about the same result in terms of profitability

 

[vitterd]

From my experience more times than not that less than +3 is irrelevant win or lose.

In ncaaf bowl games and preseason football…..I will always take the 1.5 or 2.5. Teams in those situations are likely to go for two in game ending situations.

 

[JDS]

I assume you mean football

In case of hockey, most frequent outcome is the favorite beating the underdog by exactly 1 goal. Obviously there are a very wide range of outcomes, but that is the #1 most frequent outcome.

An event with a 38% chance of happening is gonna hit about 38% of the time, just like an event with a 70% chance of happening is going to hit about 70% of the time over the long haul. The question is if you can consistently get a price that pays out better than the true probability of something happening.

Like if an event's price is +190, but the true price is more like +175 based on the actual probability of the event, that's when you're in business . Obviously identifying those opportunities is the hard part

People are gonna play a +170 ML over a -130 +1.5 because hitting the former is more fun, pays out bigger, but reality is if you flat bet each of those 1000 times you're coming away with about the same result in terms of profitability

Yeah I’m definitely referring to football. Was Venditto referring to hockey I didn’t even realize.

 

[JDS]

In ncaaf bowl games and preseason football…..I will always take the 1.5 or 2.5. Teams in those situations are likely to go for two in game ending situations.

Valid point in those type of games.

 

[stormtrooper8]

Yeah I’m definitely referring to football. Was Venditto referring to hockey I didn’t even realize.

Lot of nuances in sports

I always like hearing people's thoughts on this stuff

I come from a quant/stats/data heavy background so I naturally like looking at things from that angle. When it comes to probability, I will argue to the death.

Yet I got better at this when I allowed sports knowledge, intuition, etc to become a bigger factor in picking games.

It take a good combo IMO

 

[JDS]

Lot of nuances in sports

I always like hearing people's thoughts on this stuff

I come from a quant/stats/data heavy background so I naturally like looking at things from that angle. When it comes to probability, I will argue to the death.

Yet I got better at this when I allowed sports knowledge, intuition, etc to become a bigger factor in picking games.

It take a good combo IMO

Your football threads are impressive & you pick a shit ton of games. I’m more from the old school & spot bet my best bets per week. This method has always worked better for me & it allows me to bet a higher % of my bankroll.