I have many, many terrible qualities.
I don't always follow through with things after I've deemed them unimportant (lol I said I was going to write 1-2 blogs per week), even if others do still find the thing important.
I hold grudges - forever. I've written this before, but I have an incredibly detailed memory. I believe in forgiving, but never forgetting. Which eventually ends with very short-lived forgiveness.
I hold others to unrealistic standards when it comes to things like attention to detail and timeliness. Those are two qualities I value deeply, and I expect others to show me the same courtesy. When they don't, I don't handle it as well as I should.
But above all, my worst quality is how much I enjoy someone else having to eat crow. I absolutely love it. When someone was up on their soapbox acting "holier than thou" and being so morally superior to everyone else, only to find out they aren't any different than you or me, well.....it just warms my heart.
I wish I could put that feeling in my back pocket and revisit whenever I like. I wish I could bottle that feeling up and drink it. I wish I could chop that feeling up into nice, neat lines and snort it...whoa, didn't expect to go so Alan Boston so fast. But the point remains, I love when someone has egg on their face, especially when they're loud, obnoxious, and deserving of the ridicule that follows.
Make no mistake, I understand how terrible this sounds. But I know so many of you sickos reading this feel the exact same way. I see you on gambling Twitter calling out the same old bullshit and rooting for others to fall flat on their face the same way I am. I know we're supposed to have empathy for others. I know the more mature route would be to enjoy it briefly, but then move on. Let the "morally superior" individual go about their life as if they hadn't been acting like a complete asshole. But in the end, it's just too good to let go.
However, what ends up happening far too often is that we get the lack-of-accountability-blue balls. I believe that's the exact medical term used in these instances. We get these egotistical, holier than thou sports betting figures saying and doing dumb shit. They get called out, proven wrong, clear as day. Yet, they offer nothing in terms of accountability. No "hand up, my bad, I was wrong." No tweets revisiting the the issue and explaining all the things they got wrong. And the worst part? Most of them keep the same attitude! They go on speaking as if their word is the only truth on a subject. They speak in a way that is absolute, and to think contrary to what they've said should be ignored or laughed at.
Listen, I don't need these people begging for forgiveness. I don't want them to stop participating in our sports betting ecosystem. All I would like to see is some accountability every so often, and maybe sprinkle in some humility here and there. When you get called out, fight back. But when you're proven wrong, put your hand up, tuck your tail, and take a few laps. Let's dive into some examples I've seen in the past.
BM Doesn't Limit
One of my favorite contributors, Elihu. Long story short - Elihu, who absolutely DOES NOT work for Cris, and would like everyone to know that Cris and Bookmaker have NOTHING to do with one another, firmly states that Bookmaker never limits customers. He is then presented with some pretty damning evidence of Bookmaker limiting customers.
Wouldn't this be a great time to write a few posts in the Discord about how you were wrong? Realizing that one of the sharpest books in the world DOES, in fact, limit sharp players should warrant some follow up statements and general education for readers. I mean, this is a contributor who speaks with such authority and conviction, there's just no way he could be wrong. And surely, if he was, he would be just as loud when correcting his take, right? This would be the stand-up thing to do, so I would assume that's what Elihu did, right? Incorrect. The best we got? He'll poke around. Seems fair.
Professor Knish's Class is in Session
Here's Joey Knish choke slamming some poor Action Network writer from the top rope. Now, I am cheating here. This fella actually did exactly what you would want from a "writer" who wrote an article for a major sports betting contributor filled with hilarious inaccuracies - he put his hand up and said my bad. 100% good for you BJ, that's how you lead by example.
With that said, how in the world does something like this get published for a major sports betting contributor? We as the general public give so much credit to these places and believe they're scanning these articles for even basic fact verification. I'll be honest - I have an extremely low opinion of the Action Network. I once got into it with my guy Raheem because he wrote an article for TAN explaining how Wong teasers are a good thing to bet on, and you should tease the Bills from +3.5 to +9.5 and the total up or down from something like 54.5 for a Thursday night game. Wong teasers. +3.5 to +9.5. Total of 54.5. This all happened. And as is tradition with that particular writer, I believe the back and forth stopped when he wanted me to come to Philadelphia to box him, or something like that. Guys, please don't challenge random Twitter users to real-life boxing matches.
Back to my original point - accountability. This writer wrote betting advice using information that was entirely wrong. I assume this article went through some sort of editorial check and STILL made it to publication. There's a chance people read this article and used it to inform an actual bet. I know that we have lifetime sports betting losers doing the same thing every single day, but this came from a legitimate outlet that should have rules, checks, and balances. And what ends up happening every single time (as it did with Raheem above) - the content creator says "they're a lifetime learner." Once you're a lifetime learner, you literally can't be wrong. Incorrectly applied Wong teaser logic? Always learning, can't critique. Wrote an article littered with inaccuracies? Too bad, lifetime learner and the learning is happening.
When you have a relatively large audience, and are writing/speaking on topics that can influence how people spend their money, you now have accountability. There are no "beginner mistakes" when someone higher-up than you has determined you're ready for a bigger platform and you're speaking to the masses. "Lifetime learner" and "always trying to get better" can't be the responses when being held accountable for terrible advice.
Mr. Tent, Come on Down
Before I start in on this, I would like to go through a few things:
1. Tent knows ball.
2. Tent is a tout.
3. Tent has been very profitable over the course of 4 seasons.
4. He had a losing season on pre-game sides and totals, which is what most of his followers want.
5. He makes very good season-long bets.
6. We get it, you have a Jayden Daniels Heisman ticket. How often do you see RAS begging for a win? Also, don't you end up betting on like 6 different players to win the Heisman?
7. He had Joe Burrow 200/1.
8. Dude, it was 4 years ago.
First and foremost - everyone,
please, please stop with the "Thanks for subscribing/listening/reading!" responses. That is very high up on the list of how you know you've lost an argument or aren't clever/witty enough to think of a response (more on that later).
If you're a tout and the portion of your betting that most people are following is unprofitable for the season, just own up to it. Show accountability, don't dig into page 1 of the tout playbook and post whatever screenshot is going to make you look best. I promise you, it never looks the way you think it's going to look. I am a Tailgate Tent fan and legitimately enjoy consuming his content. But the following is also true: people want to see him lose, he had a losing season on his highest volume bets, and he doesn't take criticism very well. It's no different than any other tout, and especially so in this case because of the confidence (and occasional jabs at other CFB people) he spoke with prior to the season. Lastly, and this goes for ALL touts and public figures who post bets - stop blocking the "haters." You should care what the haters think, but that's a post for another day.
One of my favorite tweets of all time. So simple, yet so spot on. Someone find someone else willing to write, in detail, the entire lifespan of that "asset."
I know this blog is about accountability, but it's impossible to pin the NFT fiasco on any one person. It took a village of scam artists, shills, and grifters to fuck over all those poor saps holding the bag. That collective effort was truly impressive. I'd like to believe it was a one-of-a-kind lifetime event, but you know those same con artists will be at it again in the not so distant future.
Here's what I will say: log on to the twitter machine, check out @BalesBets profile, and search for any of his tweets containing "NFT" or "Top Shot". Do the same for any Cheetah's that have NBA Top Shots to unload.
One last time, Simon Hunter:
https://youtu.be/U8gZcsL8_yU?si=nO7DEEZBXm__IEZV
There's the link to the Circles Off episode in which they destroy Simon Hunter for his no good, terrible, awful podcast appearance. You know the one where he discussed "buying syndicates." No joke, this happened so long ago and yet, I still giggle when I think of him saying he bought multiple syndicates. Anyways, this is the last time I'll be bringing this up, but it is a perfect example of people that are unwilling to stand behind what they say.
What I really want to discuss is the accountability, or lack thereof, when anything like this happens. First, if you're Simon Hunter or Chad Milliman (Simon's boss?), how in the world do you not take Rob and Johnny up on their offer to have you on the pod and present your side of the story? They would absolutely have you on and let you defend what you stated. You have a chance to try and change some of the sharper betting community's opinion of you, and yet, you pass on the opportunity? Yes, I know that your loyal followers don't understand how much of a fool you made of yourself. They don't actually know there is a sharp betting community. But if sports betting was something I did as more than a hobby, I would care what respected members of the community thought of my content.
Obviously, the reason Simon, and all members of the sports betting community that pass on these chances, do so because they know that the more they talk, the more likely they are to be exposed for the clueless bettor they actually are. It's so easy for them to hide from the confrontation. They'll mention haters, post some screenshots of a few winning bets, and liberally utilize the block button. They will continue to live in their echo chamber and paint everyone else as the bad guy. And the rest of us are left with our accountability blue balls.
Sports Betting trends that I'm enjoying
- I just wrote a bunch of stuff on lack of accountability, but I do want to mention how much I enjoy it when certain Twitter users ask for updates after someone says something particularly stupid, but is going to pretend it never happened. Diggs and Rick (chattim3) come to mind as some of the pioneers of this trend.
- Tangent: Does Diggs really like Taylor Swift that much? Was it one of those things where he did it as a shtick, but then fell in love, and now he's truly obsessed? Is it all one massive bit that only he is in on? Did it start as a bit, then he liked her, but now he's sick of her, but now it's "his thing" and he has to stick with it? These are the things I think about.
- It seems like a lot of bettors are back to sweating bets and following along, almost every second of the game. For a while, it felt like we were going to let the "I don't know any player names" and "I make the bets and forget about them" crowd gain a stronghold. Guess what? Tracking the shittiest college basketball game on your favorite score app is BACK. What was the final score? Who knows, the game is so shitty the app can't even make sense of the play by play! Big win for those of us whose thumbs are starting to hurt due to refreshing the page.
- People are turning on those bitching about rec books limiting players. No one thinks rec books are actually good at what they do, but in a wild twist, people that bitch about being limited by DraftKings, MGM, BetRivers, etc. are somehow coming off looking worse than the dressmaker. I think we'll have to find some sort of balance between hating on the complainers and accepting the rec books' actions.
Ranking the ways to tell if someone lost a Twitter argument:
1. Finishing a reply with "I'm done engaging in this discussion. Have a good day," but then responding to subsequent tweet.
2. Subtly attempting to dox the other side. Usually comes in the form of dropping the other person's first name, letting them know you're willing to tell the world who they are because you aren't clever, witty, or smart enough to develop a response.
3. "Thanks for reading!" "Thanks for listening!" "Thanks for subscribing!"
4. Tagging someone else, who is probably smarter/wittier than you, to help you argue.
5. Consistently engaging in the argument, but not addressing the very real, very true criticisms that keep getting brought up.
6. Responding with "K."
We'll do it again sometime.
Ferris
@FerrisB_86
.jpeg)
