What's the definition of a recreational player.

[100KbyXMAS]

Many books state that they only take recreational players, or that bonuses are only intended for rec players, yet they don't bother to define that term

So, what makes a recreational player? (and what can a book figure out about you?

Someone who bets lower than the limit? Doesn't win? Beats them to the line only by coincidence? Doesn't log on and then decide to pass? Or doesn't spend much time logged on per wager? Doesn't make a living from gambling? (how do they know?) Someone that doesn't take a lot of withdrawals? Someone that enjoys wagering? One who bets favs, overs and parlays?

Do they check with other books to see if you have accounts there and are line shopping?

This seems like an excuse just to boot someone on a winning streak.

 

[Dawoofdaddy]

If you beat them to moves you are not a recreational player.

 

[SVT_Cobra]

When you have been in the business long enough, you can ID them a mile away. Comes with the terroritory.

The best books have no problem taking their action and paying quickly.

 

[Dante]

I think a hobby bettor like myself would be recreational..for fun bettor..


you might win 500.00 in a month then lose 300.00 back the next....if you win you win small as a rec gambler IMO

 

[SHAWN GOTTI]

THERES A GUY DOWN AT THE BAR, HE BETS THE STEELERS WITH ME EVERY WEEK! ALWAYS BETS AT LEAST $20, NEVER BETS MORE THAN $50! I WOULD SAY HES A RECREATIONAL PLAYER!

 

[blueedwards]

recreational player = loser

 

[TheGeneral+]

recreational player = loser

95% of all longterm gamblers.

 

[Journeyman]

Do you really think its 95%...is that a known stat ?

Its always mentioned 95% lose longterm...is this a myth ?

That means that 95% of the Rx'ers lose more than they win ...I can't believe 95 out of 100 here lose more than win.

 

[TheGeneral+]

Exclude scalpers and I figure very close to 95% if not more. Jman, you have said many times you can't see how people lose at gambling. I assume you are in the 5% of straight bettors who will win longterm.

 

[Fishhead]

Do you really think its 95%...is that a known stat ?

Its always mentioned 95% lose longterm...is this a myth ?

That means that 95% of the Rx'ers lose more than they win ...I can't believe 95 out of 100 here lose more than win.

JMAN- Rx posters are much sharper than the MEDIAN type sportsbettor, thus you are correct, the pecentage of winners is higher.

-F-

 

[blueedwards]

i heard its closer to 97%. dont know how this could ever be measured.

 

[TheGeneral+]

I think pretty easy to measure when on the bookmakers side of the counter.

 

[Rainbow]

I would like to make a wager that over 5% win betting, years ago I would agree, but I dont think so these days. betters are 100 times smarter these days. I know one thing for sure if you dont stay on your toes dealing with wiseguys, they will rip you appart.

 

[TheGeneral+]

I agree with Fish. If you are a poster at a gambling forum, then you do increase your chances if you are really seeking to learn and understand the concepts taught about MM, reduced vig, no chasing, etc....

 

[Fishhead]

10-15 years ago, 97% would probably be the consensus figure for losers.

Would say with the invent of the internet, that number has decreased............for many reasons.

-F-

 

[TheGeneral+]

I would like to make a wager that over 5% win betting, years ago I would agree, but I dont think so these days. betters are 100 times smarter these days. I know one thing for sure if you dont stay on your toes dealing with wiseguys, they will rip you appart.

What % would you set it at Rainbow? Taking into consideration all gambling. Lottery, horses, props, parlays, riverboats, casinos, etc...

Thanks

 

[Dawoofdaddy]

Most certainly lose, but there are many top shelf gamblers @ rx.

However, I wish more of the rx members would post daily plays. That way we would be able to measure how many 'experts' are net winners.

I am told how some of these guys are gods but I never see any plays from them. Too many of these 'experts' simply sit like flies on the wall and only post criticism to others' plays and/or posts. I don't see how they contribute to this forum.

Win or lose, when in town I try to post my daily plays.

 

[Journeyman]

I don't think its 95% , JMHO...

Don't most serious bettors get better as the years go by?

If you don't chase (which is where I am guessing most people hit the wall) you can't really lose much if you flat bet and use common sense....I had one really crummy year ( AND IT WAS BECAUSE I CHASED BIG TIME 3 YEARS AGO) , other than that its been good, last year was tremendous, this year I haven't done much either way...

I wonder why so many keep doing it if 95% lose...

I don't play casino games...Now that to me is like throwing money down the drain....sports betting you have a very good chance to win if you just DON'T CHASE.

 

[blueedwards]

10-15 years ago, 97% would probably be the consensus figure for losers.

Would say with the invent of the internet, that number has decreased............for many reasons.

-F-

i'm a net winner and you're one of the reasons. thanks fishy.

 

[Journeyman]

What % would you set it at Rainbow? Taking into consideration all gambling. Lottery, horses, props, parlays, riverboats, casinos, etc...

Thanks

I was speaking only about sports betting....to hell with the rest of it