May 25, 2005

This is an old betting technique that I learned from a friend. It leverages odds with the ignorance of most people. The best way to explain this is through a modern example.

Let’s look at the upcoming Mike Tyson/Kevin McBride fight. If you look in the paper or at a sports book, it looks something like this:

Heavyweight Fight - Washington DC 06/11/05 23:00 ET
Mike Tyson -1000
Kevin McBride +600

What this means is -1000, - refers to the fact that he is favorite, and + refers to the underdog… So, -1000 means you lay $1000 to win $100. And +600 means you lay $100 to win $600.

So, let’s take a gambling scenario and say you bet $1000 on the underdog, meaning you stand to win $6000 (a net profit of $5000). Then, you go to the bar and listen to your friends talk about Tyson being washed up and no good. You tout that he is the best there ever was and try to convince everyone at the bar to bet you that Tyson wins (straight up). So, in summary, you have $1000 on McBride with the sports book and $1000 on Tyson with your friends.

Now, lets say that Tyson wins.

1. You look cool in front of your friends and collect $1000 from them
2. You pay the sports book $1000

All in all, your net profit is $0

Now, lets say that Tyson loses.

1. You look like an idiot in front of your friends (until you tell them your plan) and pay out $1000 to them
2. You get paid by the sportsbook $6000

All in all, your net profit is $5000

Now, I know you think that finding someone to bet you $1000-straightup is hard to do but go to bars and you’ll find a lot of idiots with money they would rather burn. Also, sometimes you’ll find the ideal fight like Mike Tyson vs. Evander Holyfield.