That's just it. I don't think somebody has to be an associate to be connected. You equate the two as the same thing, while I don't. An associate is obviously connected, but a guy can be connected without being a full fledged associate on the record.



pizzaboy told me the same thing - that he couldn't send me a PM. In the past, I never had a problem sending or receiving PM's and I didn't do anything to change my profile or whatever. So I'm not sure what the problem is. If one of the mods read this, maybe they'll know.

99% of books outside of the NE dont pay any protection at all. Few guys have the juice to shake down as big a guy as Ron Sacco. Some big books use connected guys to collect... Or even as agents. In the northeast^^ i would agree with u. But not out west. Not saying it doesnt happen, but it would be rare.

I agree that Sacco probably wasn't being shaken down. It was a case of the mob and him working together in their gambling networks. Layoffs and what not. That's the one thing about the mob that is national in scope. Even international. Their gambling networks.

But I would argue that it's distance that kept him from being taken over by the mob and not so much the size of his operation. You look at just recent cases of the sports books either being run by the mob in NY, or paying protection to the mob, and they rival, if not surpass, anything Sacco has - or had - back in the 1990's.

mob only have small stake in sports gambling, I.T. guys have most control

Still waiting for an example of one of these "I.T. guys" from you-know-who.

Ivy- i agree... Even tho i was responding to azguy but you get the point lol. Id say if laying off with a connected Book makes you connected in LE terms.. Sure i guess so. But a book the size of Sacos doesnt need to layoff... Its all profit in the end.. The only time most bookies who are worth their salt ever lay a bet is... Perfect example... Right now. If Saccos book lays off any bets (which i doubt) hes doing it right now... Calling in markers in vegas....not nyc. Lets be honest, would you trust a wiseguy to give you a quarter million in cash when 49ers beat that 3.5 point spread??? Which, btw is probably closer to 5+ in LA right now.

Well, for one thing, I'm not sure how active Sacco is anymore. The last bit of news I read about him was from 20 years ago. This was before the internet and before the offshore sites in Costa Rica and elsewhere became the big thing.

Especially back then, bets were largely geographical. Bookies in a given area are usually going to have more action on the local teams and have to lay off with a bookie elsewhere to balance thing out. I can see mob bookies laying off with Sacco back in the day but I can also see it going the other way. It doesn't matter how big an operation is. If they have too much action one way, they'll lose money.

As for your question, any bookie (including a mob bookie) worth their salt is going to pay out to a winner, whether it's $2,500 or $250,000. That is, if they plan on being in business for long. Stiffing a winner would kill their rep. But all this is hypothetical because, as you know, the whole point is to balance the bets. As long as they're balanced, the bookie is paying the $250,000 to the winner with the money lost by the losers. It's not coming out of his pocket.

This is where id rather pm you....

As re laying off, if youve ever taken action or even looked at balance sheet for a sportsbook... Then you will understand it better. I understand the math of it, in fact probably a lot better than you, no offense, just ive been around it... The one *human* aspect of a sportsbook, is the realization that some how, all gamblers lose. You think it would be an easy 50-50 but even with really sharp guys who win more than they lose (which are rare), a book will always come out ahead... Laying off, is just losing uneccesary money. Usually the win to loss ration of bets comes to 45:55... Thats also before juice. If your action is completely even... Which it never is... The most your making is juice off one side. (.091919*Losses (.5 of total wagers)) equals .046 rounded... The former way of doing things (not laying off) is preferable... Also you need to factor in agent commisions, which ur leaving out. At most agents get 75% and least 10%. Average low level guys is a quarter sheet... So 25%... Of NET losses. On their package, not the book. Say your agent take 6gs on the under and 4 on the over... We'll do both scenarios... If you lay off, your action is an even 5:5 thousand correct? Considering no one lays off with you... Your profit is juice.. (.0919x5000)=450 dollars (rounded). And considering ur odds given is even... Say the under wins. You pay your agents nothing bc their Net Balance is -2000... And you pocket $450.. Best case scenario... Also assuming losers pay up. Now say the over wins (the line has never changed)... You pay out perfectly... To the bettors AND you get to keep 450 bucks... But one problem, ur agents have a Net Balance of +2000 (in black)... They are owed 25% of their balance...$500 bucks. Putting the book in the red at -50$..... Just food for thought:)....

Idk if u were talking to me about the IT comment but, yeah tech guys are good for ur biz.. If ur interested in that kindof thing... VPN tunnels, proxy browsers, monitering ur http traffic.... Shoot me a pm and i can go into more detail.

As for how the sports betting business works, you're not exactly the first guy to come on these boards, say he has personal experience in the business, as well as say that there's no need to lay off. While I don't question your first claim, I do question the second. And I think I can do based on the fact that the law enforcement investigators who go after these illegal sports books still talk about them laying off on a regular basis. And the fact that former mob bookies, like George Freselone, also said the same thing.

It comes down to simple math. Typically, in order to win $100, a player must risk $110. Ideally, a bookie is going to want equal bets on both sides of a game. That way, regardless of the outcome of the game, the bookie can pay $100 to the winner with the $110 coming from the loser. And the bookie, of course, keeps the $10 as his cut.

Of course, the bets usually are not going to come in equally on both sides. One team is going to be the favorite, local fans will put more action on their team, etc. Now moving the line can help control the action and keep it relatively balanced. But often not completely. And if the bets are not completely balanced, the bookie's own money is at stake if the side with more bets ultimately wins. That turns the bookie into a gambler, which he doesn't want to be. He must have some way to balance his bets or he risks being wiped out. And typically the only way to balance the bets is to lay off.

And keep in mind this is just one game where a decent sized bookmaking operation is going to be taking action on several games in several sports.

By the way, I wasn't talking about you when I referenced the IT guys. That's an inside joke regarding a poster on another board. This guy claims that the mob hasn't had any big bookmaking operations since the 1980's and that the big players in the business now are "I.T. guys." Of course, he hasn't explained exactly what he means by that, nor has he given any examples.

Now obviously IT guys are needed to set up and run these offshore websites and phone banks the mob uses. But it's not the IT guys who control the gambling operation itself. They just help facilitate the technical side.

Did you not read any of the math i posted above? You only lay a bet if you cant cover the hit if it goes one way or another. The only bets that layoff on a regular basis, is numbers and teaser/parlay bets. It is common to see layoff s on money lines... Im not saying bookies dont lay off ever, but the good ones try and limit how much they do... And usually only if their small, inexperienced, or overexposed.... Or a combination of all three. Dont take this the wrong way or anything man, but your looking at more of the Theory of bookmaking. Just look at the math i did in my above comment, it shows that laying off is impractical today... Like i said, books will only lay if they are really REALLY exposed... 10-15% differential on either side, thats all good, in fact very common and where most wager tallys end up.

And my example didnt factor in the PPH fees, or runners, or rent on an office, or if you have super agents, vpn subscriptions, computers, internet, prepaid cell phones, rice paper...etc. which adds up faster than you think.

Most likely the same guy who claims the mob was never involved/dealt in drugs i bet.

Of course I read your math. I don't respond to a post without reading it first. But, and maybe I'm missing something here, I'm just not sure how your math adds up. Pun intended.

But I so think we already agree on a few things...

First, obviously it's up to a bookie to choose when to layoff. Some, for one reason or another, may be more comfortable with being exposed than others.

Second, a bookie doesn't want to layoff if he doesn't have to. And there are any number of ways he can try and avoid it.

Third, I understand what you're saying when you talk about the "human" aspect of the sports book. But I think that "human" aspect is also due to simple math. While the player's chances may appear 50/50, because of the built in vig, it's not. Even if he wins as many bets as he loses, he's going to ultimately lose money. I can't remember the exact number but, for a player to win money, he's got to win a little over 52% of his bets.

Just for the sake of argument, I would ask you why a bookie would want to risk having to cover a hit when it's not necessary. But that question is sort of pointless because, nowadays, the bookie simply attaches himself and his package to a larger operation. And that larger operation handles the balancing itself, including paying out all losses. We saw this very thing in the Lucchese operation out of Jersey. Don't know if you say it but the criminal complaint gave a very extensive and detailed view of how various individual bookies aligned themselves with the Pernas.

Aight.

Basically the human factor of betting out weighs the mathmatical factors, thus making books profitable while being able to have large wirerooms/pph bills, master/super/regular/sub agents, offices, etcetera...

i'm not really familiar with sports books, as i pretty much hate all sports except the UFC and boxing. with that said, it seems like its a gamble on whether or not to lay off some of the action. in terms of bookmakers paying tribute to lcn in the northeast, i would assume laying off a portion of the action would be almost standard procedure, although i'm sure some take risks. i would think that the more established operations would go with a safety first mindset, as these kinds of operations generate cash over the longterm, so it pays to be on the safe side.

True, i didnt mention boxing... Those kind of sports are risky... Most small books dont take boxing action, bc its risky... Soccer too oddly enough.

Off the top of my head i can think of 2 guys not connected who make book in jersey... Another 2 in PA, 1 in the boston area, and 1 in syracuse who i know aint connected.

Is George Bedigian the guy in Syracuse you're talking about?

No. Never heard of him.. You may know the guy in MASS...but you dont know anyone else. Unless before living in utah, you were a degenerate bball gambler in eastern PA...

In Mass you talking about Ronnie Heppenstall or Chipper Bafoli?

No... LB are his initials. Has 6 sons...

The big guy for sports betting up in Syracuse in recent years has been George Bedigian. His operation has been busted a couple times. Others guys who've been involved in those busts have included Dennis Burgos, Salvatore Tumino, Michael LoSurdo, and Joseph "Oink" Carucci. Bedigian is supposedly not connected to the mob.

I'm not sure who the other guys you mentioned are.

By the way, I fixed the PM issue.

Thats what i mean... Dont take this the wrong way, but you wouldnt know of them with out them getting arrested. The guys i listed are just guys i know personally. I could probably think of 30 guys in the NJ/NY area alone who take action. I also know others outside of the NE... GA, FL, VA, The westcoast... Thats personally... Not i read their name in the newspaper. Anyways... Ill go into more of a detail via pm, but right now im gonna eat some breakfast.