Better ROI - Bonus Hunter/Scalper or True Handicapper?

wilheim · Apr 5, 2004

While the bonus hunter/scalper is a recent incarnantion thanks to internet gambling they have become a viable force in the Offshore sportsbetting world.
On the other hand purely handicapped wagering has been the main reason why bookmakers have moved numbers for decades. In today's Offshore enviornment which method is more lucrative?

wil.

D2bets · Apr 5, 2004

A top-notch handicapper thinking long-term who applies all the necessary tools will make more than the bonus hunter/scalper in the long-term, HOWEVER...EVERY bonus hunter/scalper (can I add middler?) with half a brain will turn a profit both short and long-term, some who work hard will make pretty good money. NOT every handicapper will turn a profit in the short-term or even the long-term. That's why it's called gambling, even for those who fashion themselves as good cappers.

As for which is more is more "lucrative", for 95%+ of potential online bettors, the hunter/scalper route would probably be more lucrative and most definitely would be safer.

DarrylParsons · Apr 5, 2004

IMO if you rank all sports bettors you will find that the bottom 80% are handicappers only, the next 15% are a mix of handicappers and middlers/scalpers and the top 5% are all handicappers again. Of course I am talking about ranking them by EV, not actual results, since the latter includes a significant luck element.

TheGeneral+ · Apr 5, 2004

As time goes by, are we seeing better gamblers? In other words, we state that 95%+ lose longterm. Is there any sign of this number slipping lower?

D2bets · Apr 5, 2004

TG, I don't think so. No matter how you slice it, you need the losers to pay both the winners and the books. I think the rich (the winners) are getting richer and the poor (the losers) are getting poorer as the sharps get sharper.