A simple logic test resolves these such questions. I am very skeptical as to the accuracy of such claims. Who is taking bets of even 50K on 2nd half NBA totals? Not an online book on the planet. And any book that has a player winning millions would kindly assist a player to the nearest exit. Companies don't purposely go into business to go broke.
Vegas casinos won't book such action unless they know it's a whale who will toss the deeds to expensive apartment buildings out the window like a normal man would toss a penny on the street.
I saw a video of Voulgharis a while ago and I found him not believable.
Just break down the math.
He would not be getting down even $22,000 for NBA 2nd half. So we can cross that out. Let's go with what is easily attainable.
$2,200 total per wager.
Assume (and this is a big assumption) he can get 55% long-term.
$2,200 x 450 = - $990,000
$2,000 x 550 = +$1,100,000
1000 picks at 55% risking 2200/2000 yields + $110,000
3000 picks at 55% risking 2200/2000 yields + $330,000
5000 picks at 55% risking 2200/2000 yields + $550,000
I can tell you that as production increases, quality will simply decline. It is a law of nature. Even producing 55% over 1000 picks over a 8 month season is incredibly hard to do. Increase the volume and the winning % will simply go down. One of the reasons is b/c you won't be opting for optimum opportunities.
If he went with just 1000 picks and managed to get down 11,000/10,000 cumulative, then maybe he could crack $500,000 profit in one year.
Psychologists craft tests that pinpoint honesty and consistency to move towards an accurate assessment of the reality. I'm sure I could sit down with a team of doctoral psych candidates and we could devise a series of tests based on simple Q&A that could be given to Voulgharis and it could be categorically determined that he is lying. End story.
