they have to believe.....they're true:toast:Stories are so outrageous, most won't believe....I watched "Let It Ride" again for the 200th time and laughed outloud, that shit never bores me and to my surprise "Tin Cup" was the next movie...About a book, might happen in the next few years...
Stories are so outrageous, most won't believe....I watched "Let It Ride" again for the 200th time and laughed outloud, that shit never bores me and to my surprise "Tin Cup" was the next movie...About a book, might happen in the next few years...
Welcome back Buddy ! :toast:
Yeah, Love Both of those movies. I'm the same way, seen those movies about 100 times or more.
When I retire, IF I retire..LOL Being Like you, might be on my list.
But Don't think I can pull it off. You have to remember, I'm Married
hno:Don't think it would Work.:nohead:
Having my cup of coffee, going to meet the Book keeper.
Already got a call about two guy's that will be Short this week.
Can't wait till I hear these Stories
Since I am on my way out now, I will update the two stories Tonight.
You have to remember, that I'm dealing with Agents..Not Customers
So, for some..You will hear what an Agent has to say when they are Short for the week.
Ok, Met with Two Agents Today. Both coming up short on their Sheet.
First guy ( we'll call him Harry ) Says to me that he will be Short this week because he has two guys that are on Vacation.hno:
Heard this one before and with a Normal person, it would be ok.
But most of the time I would be told ahead of time.
But here's the thing, If you are Working on a "Half Sheet" You have other Guys on that sheet that will Cover you.
So it's like when a Player shorts the Book, and a Book should NEVER Short a Player.
Now if the Agent has a Losing week, and Can't Cover the Loses.
( meaning the Gamblers Won )
In Some cases, the Book will help the Agent Cover the Loses (payout)
This might not work the same with everyone, but this is how we have done this.
Now if the Agent had a Winning week ( gamblers Lost ) The Office MUST BE PAID !
So Harry is in the Wrong here, as he is Shorting the Office. After having a Winning week.
Will something Happen to Harry ?? NO
Am I Pissed at Harry ?? YES
If Harry does this again, will something happen ?? YES, His Sheet will be Closed down. Until he Pays the Office.
....................................................................................................
Agent # 2 ( we will call him Tony )
Now Tony has been with the Office for 11 Years. Good guy, has never been short.
But Tony took on a guy ( through another player ) and the New guy came in Strong.
Lost $15K !! and the guy is nowhere to be found.
In this case, the Player who said the New guy is a Friend of his and is OK
Is Responsible.
And it was already worked out by the time I got there.
The Reg. Guy will Pay $5K a week on top of any loses that he might have.
To top it off a good start, he had won $2,300 last week and told Tony to keep it. Plus will meet Tony This week with $5K
NOW THAT'S a STAND-UP GUY !
BUT, if the Agent had a Winning week
First guy ( we'll call him Harry ) Says to me that he will be Short this week because he has two guys that are on Vacation.
hno:Heard this one before and with a Normal person, it would be ok.
But most of the time I would be told ahead of time.
But here's the thing, If you are Working on a "Half Sheet" You have other Guys on that sheet that will Cover you.
So it's like when a Player shorts the Book, and a Book should NEVER Short a Player.
Now if the Agent has a Losing week, and Can't Cover the Loses.
( meaning the Gamblers Won )
In Some cases, the Book will help the Agent Cover the Loses (payout)
This might not work the same with everyone, but this is how we have done this.
Now if the Agent had a Winning week ( gamblers Lost ) The Office MUST BE PAID !
So Harry is in the Wrong here, as he is Shorting the Office. After having a Winning week.
Will something Happen to Harry ?? NO
Am I Pissed at Harry ?? YES
If Harry does this again, will something happen ?? YES, His Sheet will be Closed down. Until he Pays the Office.
....................................................................................................
Agent # 2 ( we will call him Tony )
Now Tony has been with the Office for 11 Years. Good guy, has never been short.
But Tony took on a guy ( through another player ) and the New guy came in Strong.
Lost $15K !! and the guy is nowhere to be found.
In this case, the Player who said the New guy is a Friend of his and is OK
Is Responsible.
And it was already worked out by the time I got there.
The Reg. Guy will Pay $5K a week on top of any loses that he might have.
To top it off a good start, he had won $2,300 last week and told Tony to keep it. Plus will meet Tony This week with $5K
NOW THAT'S a STAND-UP GUY !
BUT, if the Agent had a Winning week
The first bettor Vouched for his friend. If the friend doesn't pay, the First bettor will be held Responsible for those loses.
Now if the first bettor tells his Agent or Runner of the Agent about a guy that bets. And says well I know this guy, he's a friend of mine.
The Agent or Runner will ask, Can you Vouch for him.
If the bettor says, well I'm not that close with him. I really don't want to Vouch for him. Then it's up to the Agent
Then it becames his Own problem.
Under those conditons HELL NO.
I am not sure where to start here.
First off what is in it for the guy who vocuhed for someone, a referal bonus? Sounds like the book gets it's cake and eats it too.
Does the guy who vouched for get a cut of the guys losses when and if the player loses or does the book get too keep all of that also? This cant possibily be a one way street. So if guy losses he is responsibile for everything this guy owes if they guy doesnt pay but if he does pay then the book keeps all that.
Who in their right mind would agree to this setup?
So now this legit player who I assume has a decent reputation not only has to worry about winning on his own, etc but he also has too worry about how the guy he vouched for is doing, etc?
Isnt he helping the book out here by giving them a player? The book needs players (new ones espcially) more then the player needs a book, as there are bookies everywhere nowadays.
I have vouched for guys for years with bookies I have grew up with and never in a million years would I be involved in someting like this. I have know idea how or what they are all doing after my bookie decides to take them on but I know one thing it isnt any of my business what goes on between those guys UNLESS I am partners with the book in some way shape or form.
Sorry but i think this is wrong in so may ways unless I am missing something here.
I would have nothing to gain and everything to lose, not the kind of tradeoff I am looking for while the books has all the perks in this. Te books has almost no risk if the guy is a standup guy and agrees to this.
The only possibile way I think this is even a possibily is if the guy is his brother or something and even then I still think this is really nobodies business but the two parties involved.
The book needs to appreciate the extra money they are about too make. The whole bookie game is setup by referal and it needs new blood becasue a lot of players wise up and get out after a few years of beatings. This is the bookies sole responsibility, IMO. You would lose a lot of good quality paying customers (and god know there isnt enough of them) over something stupid if you ask me.
The only possibile way I think this is even a possibily is if the guy is his brother or something and even then I still think this is really nobodies business but the two parties involved.
The book needs to appreciate the extra money they are about too make. The whole bookie game is setup by referal and it needs new blood becasue a lot of players wise up and get out after a few years of beatings. This is the bookies sole responsibility, IMO. You would lose a lot of good quality paying customers (and god know there isnt enough of them) over something stupid if you ask me.
Of course the first guy was going to get a piece of the action !!
Not a big piece, I think it was 10%
First off, Only if the Agent was a Prick. would he hold the guy to the Full amount. ( sorry I didn't make that clear )
I went back to check and see if I posted that. But I didn't.
The Agent has a 50/50 Sheet. So he is Only Responsible for half the amount. Which in this case it's $7500
But because the guy Lost, First time out.. The guy has to pay that amount.
Now as far as the Office goes, they don't care if the Agent or Runner gets Fuked out of the money. We don't want to hear any stories.
This is a Business, we give you the service, you bring the customers
You get screwed out of $10K or $50K, not our problem.
The agent has a business, and his business deal is with the office.
We get paid no matter what. Unless it's something really bad that happens to the Agent ( like getting busted ) That we can understand.
But if you have a good sheet ( 100 guys ) or +
then you should be able to take care of what has to come to the office.
Again, if you are in "the Red " sometimes the office will understand.
Sometimes you stay in the Red for a long time. Not earning
But if you are in "the Black" and you had winning weeks
The office doesn't want to hear that you can pay because you just Bought a House !! LOL
You need to save a little Nest egg for down the road. Your Bettors aren't going to Lose ALL THE TIME.
Hope that makes it more Clear.
Some of this is true. But there are Levels of Vouching.
If you have a Credit line of say $20K a week, and you bring a guy in.
You can Vouch for him at a Level.
Maybe the guy isn't that big of a Bettor ? You can say to the Agent
Hey I'll Vouch for up to $1K, if you Raise it higher then that, You are on your own.
So are you saying that nobody that you ever vouch for, never have a problem with Not paying ?? That Good !
I have a hypothetical question for you with this:
There is Tom "the Voucher" who has played for years with this current book and paid in full on time. He introduces and vocuhes for lifelong friend Steve "the new bettor"
Let's say week 1 Steve "the new bettor" losses $2,000 and pays this to the book on time. Now Tom "the Voucher" (who vouched for this Steve) gets not a penny in this setup.
Now week 2 comes along and Steve "the new bettor" losses again but this time it is $5,000. After weeks of everyone trying to get ahold of Steve how would this be handled?
Now remember Tom vouched for Steve and Steve lost and paid the 1st week and Tom "the Voucher" got nothing for this and the book got the whole 2k profit. Not sure how Tom "the voucher" and the book have any sort of partnership here after the book refused to share in any of the week before winnings but now week 2 is Tom still 100% resposnisbile for Steve again?
There is Tom "the Voucher" who has played for years with this current book and paid in full on time. He introduces and vocuhes for lifelong friend Steve "the new bettor"
Let's say week 1 Steve "the new bettor" losses $2,000 and pays this to the book on time. Now Tom "the Voucher" (who vouched for this Steve) gets not a penny in this setup.
Now week 2 comes along and Steve "the new bettor" losses again but this time it is $5,000. After weeks of everyone trying to get ahold of Steve how would this be handled?
Now remember Tom vouched for Steve and Steve lost and paid the 1st week and Tom "the Voucher" got nothing for this and the book got the whole 2k profit. Not sure how Tom "the voucher" and the book have any sort of partnership here after the book refused to share in any of the week before winnings but now week 2 is Tom still 100% resposnisbile for Steve again?
I know you still going to say it doesn't sound Right.
But it's a Business Deal. You are Vouching for this guy because the agent says. Hey you bring this guy in and you can make some money.
Again, from my last few posts. He could turn around and say to the agent
I really don't want to vouch for the guy. And I'm not looking for any Money.
The agent might say, Ok. I'll take the guy on, and if everything works out
I'll throw you a few Bucks for turning me on to the guy.
But it's a Business Deal. You are Vouching for this guy because the agent says. Hey you bring this guy in and you can make some money.
Again, from my last few posts. He could turn around and say to the agent
I really don't want to vouch for the guy. And I'm not looking for any Money.
The agent might say, Ok. I'll take the guy on, and if everything works out
I'll throw you a few Bucks for turning me on to the guy.
Yu are typing too fast, LOL. I posted the above stuff before I read your last 2 answers. A little more clear now but would still like to hear your opinon of my example. I get it now.
I am sure I vouched for some guys back in the day when I was in my early 20's, we were all young and looking for a bookie. I would assume somoene out of that group either slow paid or didnt pay or whatever, we were young and some were irresponsibile but it would have been easily less than $500 but also it wasnt my business what went on.
I have NEVER EVER screwed a bookie in any way shape or form. I am probably my old bookies best customer and the people I associate myself are also usually awesome customers but with that said I would be stunned after all these years someone would hold me responisibile after all the good business i have given them if they got screwed.
I would go out with my bookie to the bar back in the day and he would tell me that he had 50+ guys who had stiffed him thru the years (and he was young, that was probably the problem). He says it was all apart of doing business.
One way he did do things was this and now when I think about it this is along the same lines. If I had a new guy I would call it in under my name and now I wouldn't explain who bet what to him, obviously. We just kept one big total and me and the 3 guys underneath me broke it down between us and kept the others total indiviaully. Yes I was 100% responsibile for that because I CALLED IT IN. He gave me 10% of my (our) losses when I collected it ( I was actually an agent and never realized it, LOL) all for him but eventually I got out of that mess as I didnt like being in the middle of it all and wanted to do my own thing. I remember he wasnt happy about this cause it made his job a lot easier as I was the only point person for him and now he had to talk to more people and deal with all that bullcrap. I guess that is sort of the sameas what you are talking about.
I am sure I vouched for some guys back in the day when I was in my early 20's, we were all young and looking for a bookie. I would assume somoene out of that group either slow paid or didnt pay or whatever, we were young and some were irresponsibile but it would have been easily less than $500 but also it wasnt my business what went on.
I have NEVER EVER screwed a bookie in any way shape or form. I am probably my old bookies best customer and the people I associate myself are also usually awesome customers but with that said I would be stunned after all these years someone would hold me responisibile after all the good business i have given them if they got screwed.
I would go out with my bookie to the bar back in the day and he would tell me that he had 50+ guys who had stiffed him thru the years (and he was young, that was probably the problem). He says it was all apart of doing business.
One way he did do things was this and now when I think about it this is along the same lines. If I had a new guy I would call it in under my name and now I wouldn't explain who bet what to him, obviously. We just kept one big total and me and the 3 guys underneath me broke it down between us and kept the others total indiviaully. Yes I was 100% responsibile for that because I CALLED IT IN. He gave me 10% of my (our) losses when I collected it ( I was actually an agent and never realized it, LOL) all for him but eventually I got out of that mess as I didnt like being in the middle of it all and wanted to do my own thing. I remember he wasnt happy about this cause it made his job a lot easier as I was the only point person for him and now he had to talk to more people and deal with all that bullcrap. I guess that is sort of the sameas what you are talking about.
Last edited:
