Dude, he was celebrating. You are looking at it wrong.
TO doesn’t want you gambling
- Thread starter Siryacht
- Start date
And I would be willing to bet that you would be wrong on half of your assumptions.
If every casino within a day's drive closed down do you think your family member would all the sudden have a nice set of tires, an emergency fund, and a fat 401k? Be honest, they would just find something else to blow their money on.
Last edited:
They need some sort of saying for this...Like, I don't know...
Don't just a book by its cover, maybe?
Much higher percetage of people have issues with alcohol. New York times noted 29% of people who drink do in excess and 10% meet definition meet of alcoholic.
While I believe adults should have choice, alcohol and gambling have huge negative impacts to society for portion of folks that cannot moderate behavior.
I disagree with but fully understand people like Osborne that feel there should be more legislation in these areas.
I like when they came up with the term "Functioning Alcoholic" to make women happy.
"So, your hubby works all day, never misses a day of work, provides, pays for everything, is a great dad and never misses kids events...but he drinks?"
"Hmmmm, well, we can't let him just be happy...we will figure out something."
TO is also against porn, which means he is against women making a lot of money.
If you you are in this thread and haven’t watched the movie Let It Ride, you need to.
A comedy classic that isn’t as far away from the truth as some might think.
A comedy classic that isn’t as far away from the truth as some might think.
Oh I'm not pitching God's Pocket as the best movie ever, but I enjoyed it. I think it might have been Philip Seymour Hoffman's last movie. After he died, it didn't get much publicity.
Spoiler alert: When the neighborhood chips in for your stepson's funeral expenses and you take it straight to the off-track betting site, life's not too good.
**Edited to add**
First of all, I'm no connoisseur of all things gambling.... far from it.
I play horses. I enjoy playing slots. Last year I wagered on college football for the first time since 1983.
I won playing nothing but parlays which people say can't be done, but I proved that it could be done.
I've never bet on ANY other sports in my life.
With respect to many of the board members, they gamble on college and pro football, college and pro basketball, MLB baseball, hockey, golf, tennis, and maybe another sport or so. Those are your connoisseur's of all things gambling.
just having some fun with this quote
MLB and golf are my two best sports. but I gamble on everything. had a pretty good college football season and an awful ncaa tournament.
NBA playoffs, hockey playoffs quickly approaching. certainly some lucrative futures to be had in the latter, as always.
This will likely be a TLDR type post for the majority of the members. Feel free to enjoy a different thread.
kong, we all do things differently, and that's a good thing.
In my world, its all about how I construct my wagers. If I were playing multiple sports as you do, I know I would designate %'s based on what I was the best at, versus what my least profitable sport(s) was.
Let's say you play college and pro football, college and pro football, hockey, golf and futures. My result spreadsheet would have told me where I need to be in terms of wagering on each type athletic event.
If I made 75% of my money wagering on college football, NBA playoffs and hockey playoffs, those three would each get @ 25% of whatever my bankroll was. Then the remaining 3-4 sports would get the remaining 25%, maybe 10%, 10%, 5%.
I've always had my results tell me where my money should be allocated. The difference is the sports you and others wager on have definite seasons of play, so naturally you will move from sport to sport even though 1-2-3 may all be going at the same time. In horseracing, its a year around thing, so I don't have to bounce from sport to sport to apply my skills.
Those of you who don't care about wagering on horses are free to leave now, as I'm gonna give kong a nickel view of how, over the LONG haul to be really successful in wagering. Not that I know it all, but its proven itself over 50 years.
I have what I consider to be a "Dream Team". That means, I play trainers that run from coast to coast year around.
Meets come and go, but the human element remains the same. I've identified the very best of the best in multiple categories.
There are multiple tracks that have both a spring meet and a fall meet. Some trainers do jack shit, by design, in the spring meet, but kill it in the fall. Others vice versa. I never force a trainer to be something that he's not. When he is always cold in the spring, I will give his horses cursory looks, but no cash. Will he occassionally fool me? Of course.
With 300 trainers, there are always going to be ample guys who are playing for real, regardless of the time of year. It took me 3 years, and a TON of hours to develop my methodology. I wanted to have LIVE trainers to bet year around so I never had dry spells. In other words, I never had to wait a month or two for a track to open because I had 2-3-4 other tracks I was playing.
Let me explain a simple reason why most horseplayers can't win consistently. They "think" they pay attention to details.....
If you look at the bottom of a horse's Past Performance, you see this trainer has won 11% of his 435 sprint races, okay, so that means he won 48 races. I look at ALL his sprint races, from 4F, 4 1/2F, 5F, 5 1/2F, 6F, 6 1/2F, 7F. 7 different distances in sprint races, and including dirt, turf and artificial surfaces.
On the dirt, this trainer might be 0-8 in 4F races, 1-9 in 4 1/2F, etc etc. I find that ONE distance that this trainers wins his races in. Sometimes a trainer runs 6 1/2 F races and wins 17 of 22 times, or 77%. What sprint race among these distances do you think I concentrate on? Then, of those 22 races and 17 wins, how many did he use the same jockey, or for the same owner, or moving from 6F to 6 1/2 F? It tells the story of how this guy pays his bills, and likely gambles.
In other words, just like with a 3rd base coach, these trainers have "indicators." If 8 of those 17 races were won when the previous races were 7F, then 6F then the 6 1/2F race for the win, that's telling me this horse will run his eyeballs out. And they don't run their eyeballs out at 2/1, its more 20/1, 30/1, 40/1 and up.
In those other distances when that trainer is 0-8 or 1-9 I will let him beat me on occassion, because percentage wise, I'm generally gonna toss that horse, or play against him. I hope that makes sense to you. If he beats me 1 out of 17 times, so be it.
I don't rely on good luck, I just hope to avoid bad luck. Over the years, I've played a horse that I KNEW was gonna fire, and some longshot, out of the blue, would jump up and beat me. Did I get pissed? No. I told myself, okay what did that outsider do to get that piece of shit looking horse to run so great today? And presto, after diligent research, I had another really dangerous trainer added to my stable. If he had this horse good enough today, to beat a proven trainer who I knew was going for the win, has this new guy done this before? Almost always, the answer is yes.
Personally, I don't care how big or how successful any trainer is, they all have chinks in their armor at different distances, surfaces, jockeys and owners. That's when I play against them with confidence.
If you lasted this long, kudos.
The first step is to admit you have a problem😉
So there’s do-gooders that don’t realize that life costs less in Nebraska when gambling is legal?
Warren Buffet get's the same kind of treatment in many people's eyes.. if only more people saw how he ran his businesses, they would understand how scrooge like his organization really is.
Buy companies and layoff people to make them more profitable to drive up stock price. Buffett is an unscrupulous POS
If it's that far over your head, I'm sorry, next time I'll dumb it down even further for you.
The 6th word of my post said "TLDR"... I said it was TLDR for those who are not interested, apparently you can't read or comprehend.
You had an issue with another thread I had awhile back, apparently you have a short attention span.
Go whine to the Moderator again.
Why the vitriol against Osborne? If people acted more like Tom Osborne the world would be a better place.
Last edited:
People love Buffett because he made them rich. Give me some details on how he runs his businesses. I'm genuinely curious as a long-time Brk-b holder.
Yeah I don't get it either. I think people who bag on him to this day look like tools. Idiots. Gasbags. Etc.
I don't agree with TO's views, but he is an insanely nice man. I've met him a number of times as he went to Hastings with my grandfather. He used to stop (to my gparents) by for a few minutes on recruiting trips to my hometown. Just a fantastic man. I don't agree with some of his views, but that is fine. As 8990 said, we need more people in the world like him.
Some companies are inefficient in their systems and use of manpower. If a new owner wants to clean it up and views that as an area to help turn I don’t see the issue?
Does your frustration come from him allowing women to hold leadership positions?
I’m sure if you were “cleaned up,” you’d feel different. He’s not a good person
My feelings wouldn’t matter and yes it would suck. But if the organization is inefficient and a new owner comes in, I may be able to argue my contributions but I would understand. Unfortunately poor leadership causes companies to be fat and happy and new leadership is blamed for the sins of others. Businesses can’t make logical decisions solely on how everyone in the organization will feel about decisions.
I’ve had to “clean up” and it’s not fun and I do my best to accomplish this through natural attrition but there are times when you have to get more aggressive.
A side example. Many years ago I had friends that worked at Sprint. Sprint put “dark rooms” in the building with recliners so if the day became too stressful team members could use the rooms to have a bit of quiet and recharge for 10 mins or so. Well, some people would get hungover the night before and sleep in the nap rooms for the morning. If there was an overtake of sprint and new bosses questioned what that room was, would it be too insensitive to eliminate those and potentially let some folks go who no one notices are doing nothing for half the day?
