We can't orginiate but we try to get more action on our plays, and there isn't a sharp in the industry who wouldn't max bet the same plays.

Yet another post that makes zero sense.

I would take any sort of logical reasoning test vs you for nosebleed sums. Or any test involving ethics.


A simple question: Do you understand what "conflict of interest" means?

Another simple question: Do you understand that someone else betting a play is not the same as "I bet"?

It is time to move on from this pointless debate and back to the original purpose of this thread.

If anyone has any legitimate questions for HoopsEdge, I will be hear to answer.

I don't believe that you have answered this (correct me if I'm wrong): what do you believe your edge is going forward? I understand that it may be difficult to quantify exactly given your limited sample and other factors, but I would accept a range (say, 53-55%). Also, do you believe that you have lost some of your edge since 2008, or is your recent downturn simply negative variance?

It is difficult to quantify, but I think 53-55% is a very reasonable, if not conservative, expectation going forward. The market has gotten tougher since 2008, but we have also gotten better. I definitely believe the plays are worth betting and at this time I would give that same advice to any close friend or family member.

But not if they had to pay for them amirite?

That would depend a lot on your unit/bet size.

So you did engage in front-running for a six week period? Just making sure that everyone knows this. This isn't exactly something you hand-wave away and say "Oh, mistakes were made." You cheated your customers, straight up. Period.

This has been rehashed and discussed at length from both sides already.

Here is my side if you did not want to read through the thread again:

For about six weeks at the start of the 2008 CBB season, we made mistakes and worked with untrustworthy people to the extent that some people who should not have knew some of the total plays before they were released to clients.

Nothing similar to this had ever happened before or since, and will not happen again.

As I have explained previously, the service could not have nearly as talented people working for it, nearly the same play quality or volume, or provide nearly as much +EV to clients, if the people involved did not have the freedom to earn from placing wagers. It just would not make business sense otherwise. With that said, considerable measures are taken to ensure that any bets made are done so discreetly and quietly so that they have minimal to zero impact on the service.

It is extremely misguided to think that originators involved in a handicapping service that produces comparable long term win rates as we have would NOT be betting on their plays in some capacity.

The two prevailing viewpoints from this situation are:

1. We cheated our customers and are sleaze/slime ball scammers, despite the fact that the service has performed well beyond any reasonable expectation before, during, and after the above incident.

or

2. We originate high +EV plays that are worth betting, and regardless to what is speculated otherwise before release, the plays have always maintained an extremely high +EV when released to clients, resulting in solid ROI given past and current the subscription rates.

Clearly if you wish to read more from both sides, there is plenty in the previous 9 pages.

That is hilarious.

#1 and #2 are not mutually exclusive. You both cheated your customers and released +EV plays. Just because you released plays with an edge does not mean you did not cheat paying customers. Take some ****ing responsibility.

How do you want me to take responsibility? I have already said that we ****ed up, regret it, etc. many times in this thread alone. "Cheating customers" is a biased, inaccurate, short sighted depiction of what happened. It does not come close to relfecting the average customer experience or other aspects of how the service has been run before, during, and after.

It sounds like your regret was getting stiffed rather than screwing your customers out of EV. Classy.

Yes. That is what I am trying to point out. As was Thremp. And TC. It should not go unnoticed.

How could it possibly go unnoticed? It's been brought up about 20 times ITT. Time to move on.

It'll be time to move on when 2p2 management addresses why they allowed an advertiser that front-runs their clients' picks, essentially robbing them of value as shipitkthx pointed out.

ETA: I already know what the answer to this conundrum is. But I'd like to hear the excuse/justification anyway.

This. It's understandable that as a poker-focused site 2p2 might not know the story about RAS but now that they are aware there is no excuse.

No, it's time to move on now.

If you want to discuss 2+2's decisions WRT what advertisers they allow, feel free to PM Mat or myself, or start a thread in ATF.

So you're ok with one of your advertisers scamming their customers?

For the LAST time:

I really don't think that's so much to ask. It's not like this issue has been kept out of this thread; it's been brought up many, many times.

If it's 2+2 policy you want to discuss, this isn't the place for it.

This is a joke, considering everyone checks Sports Betting for... Sports Betting information. But so be it:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/55...ertiser-795755

Holy **** Thremp was banned over this. Perf I even suggested locking this days ago through reporting it. Why do you snap lock every other tout thread and let this one stay?

EDIT: See he's an authorized advertiser

Uh, because RAS paid 2p2 money and Perf doesn't have authority over that. Not to mention that Thremp was probably banned by someone other than Perf and for saying a lot of mean things in the post that was deleted.

Believe it or not, I have a lot of respect for TomCowley & Thremp. They are sharp posters and fill an important role on this forum. I sincerely hope that no one has or will be banned permanently as a result of posts in this thread.

Both of them and others here were effective in bringing attention to important issues involving use of our service or any other successful, market influencing service.

I only wish they and others in this thread would take a more balanced, unbiased, and open minded apprasial of our entire body of work, BEFORE passing judgement. Not just win/loss results, but all aspects of how the service is run. Give honest criticism when appropiate, but give credit when it is due. We are not perfect, but we are obviously doing some things right, and that should be acknowledged if we are to engage in a credible debate.

As for the "front-running" speculations and accusations. I have already explained that our current business model calls for retaining talented originators which is not financially feasible without allowing them some level of freedom to earn from betting. If we eliminated this model, the service would undoubtedly not be able to provide as much +EV as it has in recent years. So while it is speculated here this business model "steals" +EV from clients, it actually enables us to provide clients with more +EV than otherwise possible.

Hi Tom:

I'm just starting to get into this issue. But speaking generically, one of the reasons to allow a thread like this is that is there is a problem, it will get quickly communicated to our posters.

Best wishes,
Mason

I have a question about this. It seems to me that your obligation should be to provide significant +EV to your clients. Just being a tiny winner isn't good enough. Do you agree?

Mason