which gambling games nowaday do you think have the most odds that the time and effort in studying it will be actually worth?

Let's consider the thing not aonly theoretically but under all aspects that can involve.


For example, even if actually I don't know much about it, bettors seems the richer professional gamblers out there, still I am not sure if trying to become a professional bettor is more plus EV than let's say, becoming a professional poker player, as in betting I guess things are not easier at first when you are building your bankroll, like with poker microstakes, but betting it's the same if you do it for 1 dollar or 1000, and this is definitely an huge obstacle.


Another example would be BJ cards counting, which surprisingly that takes the least amount of study for becoming a professional (I actually don't know if it's really like this or card counter just feel the need to enphazise the simplicity of their activity just because of how mystified it was from Hollywood) but still variance is so brutal.

Or again, winning in live poker is something probably still doable just after reading 6 or 7 books at the 1-2 of any casino, so when it comes to enriching a $7 per hour is maybe the most plus EV game out there, but then if we speak about acheiving 70$ per hour it's all another story and maybe there would be better games to do it.

So, what's your opinion about it guys? What are the best games now a day? And which are the worst? (in case of poker please let's specify between live and online)

Best (i.e best chance for managing a regular ROI by studying the game) - poker

Worst - slot machines since that is pure luck; but really any table games won't get you too much of an edge (or a reliable winning edge) based on research.

Sports betting gives ample opportunity to research and have that research improve your odds, but it is still tough to cover the vig and hit a % winrate that makes you a LT winner (some would say nearly impossible for the vast majority of bettors.)

AP opportunities are AP opportunities. If you've got the make-up to be an AP you're probably better off not specializing (and if you've got the make-up to make specializing worth it you'll figure that out).

actually progressive slots are beatable

If you have to ask that question here, you probably aren't equipped for any field of AP.

even if, where's the **** is the connection. If I was writing in a forum about
jellyfish it's because I wanted to learn to swim? Why I am not surprised of your postcount

Even if what you are saying could be true in some contests, places and player, still, doesn't mean two AP are the same because are both EV+, does it? And yes of course if I was Amarillo Slim I would have knewn it by myself

It means it's often more about the spot than the ability of the spotter and if you're good enough to learn how to take advantage of one spot it's usually rather trivial to take advantage of the others.

As an example if you're a pro poker player who gets invited to the occasional slot tournament if you're good enough to figure out how to be a pro poker player you should be good enough to calculate the ev of the slot tournament and then make your choice. Just one of many examples. Skills cross over. It's less like deciding to specialize in baseball or football than deciding whether to specialize in adding or subtracting.

Even within poker, the most visible AP on this board, you see people who get to the absolute top in one discipline who still look for other spots in other disciplines. Specializing usually isn't an option long term.

You can combine sports and poker stay away from casino games unless you are rain man lol

Ugh there's just so much that you're missing.

How good a game is is defined by a ratio, the standard deviation divided by the winrate (SD/WR), the lower the better. Blackjack has a very poor SD/WR achievable, something like 15-30. LHE tends to be better, 10-20. NL is the best, 5-15.

The problem with poker is that it's not scalable. So while 1/2 can easily be crushed for $20/hr, 10/20 can't be crushed for $200/hr. On the other hand, blackjack is scalable, if you can beat $10 blackjack you can beat $100 blackjack for the same per unit rate.

A lot of "advantage plays" are really high SD/WR. You'll need to calculate out the risk (SD) to reward (WR) ratio yourself.

What a lot of people miss is that there's global labor arbitrage. That means that in general the rewards for work are proportional to rarity; when one opportunity becomes insanely easy or profitable, people gravitate there until it's less profitable. Poker mid-2000s was a boom: read a book, make $50/hr. That was unsustainable, a bunch of people did that and the games got tougher and tougher until they reached equilibrium. Blackjack in the 70's was a boom: computers were available to some but not all, a bunch of nerds worked out the math and beat the casinos until the casinos changed the rules.

Find something rhat you're good at, something you do better than others, rather than try to find the mythical easy money.

or learn a few things, keep your eyes open, and jump from easy money to easy money.

Play keno you dumb
Son of a bitch

and wouldn't you like to share with us where easy money are now?

Depends on where you are at, what you have access to, to some extent what you're good at and your over-all life situation.

callipygian gave good information even though I at least somewhat disagree with his last sentence.

get a real job gambling professionally is not a good choice for most people

Baccarat is good. I've never heard of any regulars and/or commoners get pushed back from baccarat because of winning too much money. Blackjack on the other hand...

Probably because none of them ever win too much money.

Go play blackjack and scout for weak/new dealers. Play and take shots. Distract the dealer, make your motions look confusing. You'll be able to reduce the house edge and tip the scales in your favor. Yeah it's scummy but you can find a way to be profitable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[QUOTE=EndoBird;50859697]Go play blackjack and scout for weak/new dealers. Play and take shots. Distract the dealer, make your motions look confusing. You'll be able to reduce the house edge and tip the scales in your favor. Yeah it's scummy but you can find a way to be profitable.
/QUOTE]


So, this is what you do? Would you tell us what's more or less your edge? Thanks for commenting

[QUOTE=1moreHand;50867370]

I work as a floor supervisor. It's not what I do, but the casino will always favor towards the player as to keep them there and happy playing.

If that means they get an extra bet or two because of this, then there's your profit.

One example: you chunk $30 in nickels for a bet, the dealer accidentally locks up your push. When going to give you your money back, you can say you bet $40 or $50. Surveillance can't confirm this and you just made $10-$20 off this shot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Itt we learn that advantage play = criminal activity.