The Top 17 Most I.P.O.T.F.S.B.

[Beyond the Bets]

(07-13-2012 01:53 PM)Edward-RAS Wrote:  You are right. Guilty as charged. I've evolved a lot over the years. Hopefully for the better.

I'm not convinced, Edward. I just scanned through the people you follow on Twitter (I do this often, just to see who people I respect in the industry also follow), and low and behold ...

YOU FOLLOW A PREGAME HANDICAPPER!?



Now, Edward, what value could a Pregame handicapper possibly carry for you? Sure, Gill has a podcast that is a great listen, but he's also one of many Pregame touts with a documented long-term losing record.

And again, he works for "low-hanging fruit," the place you despise, the place you don't respect, the place you think we should all avoid.

Isn't it possible that somebody could click on your Twitter page, scan the very short list of people you follow, and then ALSO follow the Pregame tout? What if they then start to take a liking to the Pregame tout, and then they end up visiting the Pregame site, and then they end up purchasing picks, and then they lose, and then they lose more, and suddenly, THEIR house and wife and kids are all gone?

Well, isn't that POSSIBLE!?

I'm just. Well, I'm stunned.

I can't believe it.

[Edward-RAS]

Before this discussion goes any further, do we all agree that Pregame and other sites like it misrepresent themselves and mislead clients? Or is it still up for debate?

I haven't seen BTB acklowledge this yet.

If/when he does, than I think it is an open and shut case that he shouldn't be defending/supporting (whatever you want to call it) RJ Bell's twitter feed, or others who engage in similar business models within this industry.

[Beyond the Bets]

(07-13-2012 02:01 PM)Edward-RAS Wrote:  he shouldn't be defending/supporting (whatever you want to call it) RJ Bell's twitter feed, or others who engage in similar business models within this industry.

By following a Pregame tout on Twitter - as you do - are you not supporting them? By posting links to Pregame on your site, as you did, are you not supporting them? By allowing service plays threads to appear in your forum, service plays threads that no doubt post plays from places like Pregame, are you not supporting them?

At some point, Edward, you need to stop taking yourself so seriously and start becoming a bit more self aware. You're looking around the industry and seeing all these problems, but in the end - regardless of whether you want to admit it or not - you've helped contribute to these problems.

You've done next to nothing to educate and inform people about the specific sites and touts to avoid. You'd much rather speak in generalities and make vague tweets, tweets that you probably think are making a difference when in reality they do nothing.

Like, do you actually think this tweet (below) accomplished anything?



Two retweets. One response.

In other words: Crickets.

[Edward-RAS]

(07-13-2012 02:01 PM)Edward-RAS Wrote:  Before this discussion goes any further, do we all agree that Pregame and other sites like it misrepresent themselves and mislead clients? Or is it still up for debate?

I haven't seen BTB acknowledge this yet.

This is where I am hearing crickets.

Are you going to acknowledge this? Or just play dumb?

I have acknowledged it and I have corrected my mistakes. I took down the service play thread on my forum years ago despite it being hugely unpopular. I took down the Pregame testimonial the moment I was reminded it existed. Simply following someone associated with Pregame on Twitter is of extremely minimal consequence. Maybe I want to keep tabs on competitors, or whatever the case may be. No one is holding you or anyone else to that type of standard.

Do you still stand by your defense of Wagermind's decision to include RJ Bell & Covers in their most "influential" twitter sports betting list despite the type of business models the two engage in? That is what this discussion comes down to.

If you still defend it, then we'll just agree to disagree and move on. If I can't change your mind, who's mind am I going to change? There isn't really anything else to say that hasn't already been said.

This thread is a great reason for me not to be more outspoken.

As for the tweet, I am trying to be more active, like you and others have suggested. Give a guy a break! :-)

[Beyond the Bets]

(07-13-2012 02:38 PM)Edward-RAS Wrote:  

(07-13-2012 02:01 PM)Edward-RAS Wrote:  Before this discussion goes any further, do we all agree that Pregame and other sites like it misrepresent themselves and mislead clients? Or is it still up for debate?

I haven't seen BTB acknowledge this yet.

This is where I am hearing crickets.

Are you going to acknowledge this? Or just play dumb?

I wish it weren't Friday in the middle of a sports betting dead period, because if the forum were humming - and if people were around - there would be poster after poster (after poster) rushing to my defense on this one.

If you don't know my stance on Pregame and Covers pick-sellers by now, then you haven't been paying attention.

There have been message board threads; posts; tweet fights; burned bridges; and on and on. Me and RJ have gone after it a number of times on Twitter - publicly - and it's usually after I call him out for spewing out nonsensical things that I felt were misleading or deceptive.

Again, and to reiterate - we blasted Pregame touts on Deadspin and provided a link to their documented long-term records, records that weren't flattering or even close to flattering.

Then, when RJ took exception, we gave him the opportunity to respond and then continued the discussion here on the forum.

Read my comments in the thread. They don't exactly read as, "Go, Pregame!" Quite the opposite, actually.

Do I stand by the fact that RJ is an INFLUENTIAL on Twitter? Yes. It's inarguable. He has a following. He has exposure. He has media contacts and credible people who perceive him to be credible. His account provides information, no different than Gill Alexander's account - an account YOU follow.

Do I agree with everything he tweets? No. Not even close. Do I think he's a useful follow? Yeah, I would say that. Do I like the pick-selling side of his company and all that it encompasses? No. I don't.

But in the end, I must remind myself: Twitter is fun and games. The tout industry is a circus. Everybody - you included, apparently - takes themselves WAY too seriously, thinks they're a WAY bigger deal than they really are, and ultimately, I think it's kind of sad and pathetic.

Nobody is more irrelevant than me. Being called a Twitter "influential" won't change that - not in the mind of the public or in my own mind.

I embrace my irrelevance. I live for it. Sometimes, in moments of weakness, I even laugh at myself.

It's kind of fun, actually. You should try it.

[Skating Tripods]

Saying someone is influential doesn't support or condemn them. Influences are bad and good. That's the point BTB is making. Bell's tweets, presence, whatever, do alter people's opinions. For better or worse. Whether he should be listened to or not has no bearing on if he is influential or not. He gets people talking and has an in with ESPN. That makes him influential.

[Beyond the Bets]

(07-13-2012 03:01 PM)Skating Tripods Wrote:  Saying someone is influential doesn't support or condemn them. Influences are bad and good. That's the point BTB is making. Bell's tweets, presence, whatever, do alter people's opinions. For better or worse. Whether he should be listened to or not has no bearing on if he is influential or not. He gets people talking and has an in with ESPN. That makes him influential.

Ding! Ding! Ding!

An influential, by definition, is someone with the ability to influence. Lindsay Lohan is a fucking idiot. She's a trainwreck. She's also ... an influential. If she puts on a sweater and tweets a picture of it, thousands of teenage girls who thinks she's incredible will go buy the same damn sweater.

Similarly, if RJ tweets out that "Worldwide Super Bowl betting handle is an estimated $6.5 billion," dozens of media writers looking for an alternative or interesting story will run with it, write about it, credit RJ, and pass it along as fact.

Do I believe that stat is a fact? No. It's complete bunk (and I said as much publicly.) But, really, what am I supposed to do? You want me to track down writers at Bloomberg, the NY Times, the LA Times, the Chicago Tribune and say, "Hey! Guys! That stat isn't true! It can't be proven! Don't listen to RJ!"

I couldn't do that even if I wanted to.

At some point, you have to recognize what IS and ISN'T in your control. Much of this stuff is beyond my control, and a Twitter "endorsement" - real or perceived - isn't going to change any of it.

The only thing I can do is try to educate readers of this site and members of this forum and hope that elsewhere, like-minded people with similar viewpoints are doing the same.

[Edward-RAS]

Well, you're right. I haven't paid enough attention. Glad that we are on the same page there. All of that just doesn't seem consistent with our discussion. I would expect that the person who did all that to expose services, would be my biggest advocate in this thread!

I don't agree with dismissing Twitter as "fun and games", or that it makes it okay for a industry news/commentary site to condone the Pregame business model in any way, shape, or form. Just because other parts of the site are free, fun, good, or he has a ton of followers, whatever, doesn't make it okay. Just repeating things now.

Frankly, I think you're Twitter feed and your site are the nuts. There hasn't been anything like it ever in the industry. I don't know how you come up with so many things to write and tweet about on a daily basis, and sustain it, and make it all nice and presentable with the graphics. Seriously, its good stuff. Not sure why you are dismissing or discounting its value either. It is a big deal.

I think what RAS has accomplished is a big deal too. I have my faults like anyone else, and have already agreed that I did make too big of a deal about this. It is just frustrating to be the nuts and not get recognized by the few people who should know better while others continue to get rewarded for their deceit.

[Edward-RAS]

(07-13-2012 03:01 PM)Skating Tripods Wrote:  Saying someone is influential doesn't support or condemn them. Influences are bad and good. That's the point BTB is making. Bell's tweets, presence, whatever, do alter people's opinions. For better or worse. Whether he should be listened to or not has no bearing on if he is influential or not. He gets people talking and has an in with ESPN. That makes him influential.

Good point, but the piece did not include any sort of negative commentary or indication that some of the "influences" could be bad.

[Beyond the Bets]

Edward, I must share a secret: Message boards are also "fun and games" to me.

We agree on just about everything, I assure you, and we share a similar vision for what this industry should and ought to be. My criticisms of you - done mostly tongue-in-cheek - are so small and insignificant that I struggled to type them without laughing.

Like, really, do you think a "service plays" thread is that big of a deal to me? Of course not. Do you think I care if you had a Pregame testimonial on your site? Or that you follow Gill Alexander, a person that I also follow? Again. No.

Our site - a sports betting news and information site - has a very particular approach that we take when it comes to covering the tout industry, and it's more calculated than you might think. If all we did was nitpick and criticize and attack, attack, attack, people would view us as a site with "an agenda" or with an "ax to grind."

We'd become nothing but noise, and there's already enough noise in this industry.

But by picking our spots - and by not opining on EVERYTHING - it gives us added credibility, or at least I think it does. Our words, hopefully, carry added meaning.

I can tell you for a fact that prominent pick-selling sites are aware of our site, have read our articles and industry commentary, and have actually made changes for the better. I know this because some people at these sites have actually reached out to discuss some of the issues we've raised.

Are some of these sites perfect? Of course not. Would I recommend them? Uh, no.

But progress is progress, and we aren't done yet.

[RyanParrill]

(07-13-2012 02:38 PM)Edward-RAS Wrote:  This thread is a great reason for me not to be more outspoken.

Why?

[Edward-RAS]

(07-13-2012 03:36 PM)RyanParrill Wrote:  

(07-13-2012 02:38 PM)Edward-RAS Wrote:  This thread is a great reason for me not to be more outspoken.

Why?

It just seems like a lost cause. A lot of time and effort with little to no gain.

[Beyond the Bets]

(07-13-2012 03:20 PM)Edward-RAS Wrote:  Frankly, I think you're Twitter feed and your site are the nuts. There hasn't been anything like it ever in the industry. I don't know how you come up with so many things to write and tweet about on a daily basis, and sustain it, and make it all nice and presentable with the graphics. Seriously, its good stuff. Not sure why you are dismissing or discounting its value either. It is a big deal.

This would mean much more if it came from someone influential.

[Edward-RAS]

Just read through that RJ Bell thread. His arguments were insanely flawed. Really surprised you guys let him off the hook that easily.

I'd be shocked if he had even 1 or 2 long term winners on his site. Even 1 is unlikely.

I'm tempted to bump that thread.

[RyanParrill]

(07-13-2012 03:41 PM)Edward-RAS Wrote:  

(07-13-2012 03:36 PM)RyanParrill Wrote:  

(07-13-2012 02:38 PM)Edward-RAS Wrote:  This thread is a great reason for me not to be more outspoken.

Why?

It just seems like a lost cause. A lot of time and effort with little to no gain.

That's too bad, I'm not sure Roe V. Wade was going to be overturned in this thread but I thought some valid points were brought up by all.

Rarely do you find a legitimate discussion in this setting among respected, and positive influential, people in this industry. This, at least, accomplished that.

If nothing else, at least your site is a little cleaner now.

[kreatture]

(07-13-2012 04:00 PM)Edward-RAS Wrote:  Just read through that RJ Bell thread. His arguments were insanely flawed. Really surprised you guys let him off the hook that easily.

I'd be shocked if he had even 1 or 2 long term winners on his site. Even 1 is unlikely.

I'm tempted to bump that thread.

Based on discussion in this thread, I know RAS has no interest in getting their hands dirty, so I put my gloves on and bumped the aforementioned thread. (Even though the respected opinion of Right Angle Sports in the Industry would certainly carry more respected weight than opinion from an often ridiculed Pregame business site).

[Edward-RAS]

I beat you to it. Let's do this.

[kreatture]

(07-13-2012 04:18 PM)Edward-RAS Wrote:  I beat you to it. Let's do this.

[Beyond the Bets]

(07-13-2012 04:00 PM)Edward-RAS Wrote:  Just read through that RJ Bell thread. His arguments were insanely flawed. Really surprised you guys let him off the hook that easily.

I'd be shocked if he had even 1 or 2 long term winners on his site. Even 1 is unlikely.

I'm tempted to bump that thread.

We didn't. He left and never returned.

[KnicksFan1221]

I'm new to the pick selling business, but are there any services that have documented long term success like RAS? Most sites only show the past month or so at most.