You're right, because nobody would ever bet on the Jets
"In the middle"
- Thread starter Charlie Hustle
- Start date
Dunne is pretty new to things. Most of us old hounds go way back to the Executive days when Shannon Daulton was a kid robbing everyone.First time i've ever someone complain about this. Gotta love AZ sometimes.This phrase/saying has been standard on just about EVERY streamed gambling match for at least the last 5-7yrs, maybe more. BTW, according to Dom Dunne and others there was more action at DCC this year than in a long time and this is what people whine about? Please.
DieselPete
Active member
I wanted to read through and see if anyone else mentioned this before I was going to!
I was wondering just a few days ago how often the weight is the money, as opposed to ball weight or games on the wire. Does that ever happen for big money?
"Sure, I'll race you to 21 with no balls or games, but you put up $6k and I'll put up $4k for $10k in the middle..."
so you mean a 75% favorite to mean he will win 75% of the time? okay.
then he needs to put up 150 to the other guys 50 to be a fair game. if that is what you wanted it to be.
so you see then why a money line bet is rare in pool. and hard to handicap.
in any case the better player hardly ever gives enough spot or weight to make the game even close, unless they played close already with little spot.
then he needs to put up 150 to the other guys 50 to be a fair game. if that is what you wanted it to be.
so you see then why a money line bet is rare in pool. and hard to handicap.
in any case the better player hardly ever gives enough spot or weight to make the game even close, unless they played close already with little spot.
All nonsense. The side bets are irrelevant. Who cares how much the onlookers are betting on the side?
Super Bowl LIX, played last February, had $1,400,000,000 in the middle if we count the bets on the game. Does anyone think that this represents what the players received? Actually, members of the winning team got an average of $171,000 each, while members of the losing team got an average of $96,000. Hence, about $75,000 was at stake per player with respect to the result. Still, $1,400,000,000 in the middle sounds more impressive.
Super Bowl LIX, played last February, had $1,400,000,000 in the middle if we count the bets on the game. Does anyone think that this represents what the players received? Actually, members of the winning team got an average of $171,000 each, while members of the losing team got an average of $96,000. Hence, about $75,000 was at stake per player with respect to the result. Still, $1,400,000,000 in the middle sounds more impressive.
In play? 
here how it goes in real life.
it only matters what the players put up in their own money. that is what they are really playing for.
if they have backers money then they are free rolling with nothing or little at stake.
generally the backers give a percentage to the player. some after each win. and those are the biggest suckers as they don't win often enough to break even with the payouts. and that is the way most players try to get.
the smarter backers put up all the money. but the player has to make up loses before he gets any money. and the backer makes or lets the game be played if he likes the chances. and only after a certain time period say 3 months. then they split winnings or wipe out loses and the backer leaves or starts a new deal.
usually the player gets into the backer as he borrows for expenses he needs. that is why being a backer is almost always stupid unless you can get a large enough edge to overcome all the downfalls.
for the most part backers are the biggest suckers in pool. only a smart few come out ahead.
it only matters what the players put up in their own money. that is what they are really playing for.
if they have backers money then they are free rolling with nothing or little at stake.
generally the backers give a percentage to the player. some after each win. and those are the biggest suckers as they don't win often enough to break even with the payouts. and that is the way most players try to get.
the smarter backers put up all the money. but the player has to make up loses before he gets any money. and the backer makes or lets the game be played if he likes the chances. and only after a certain time period say 3 months. then they split winnings or wipe out loses and the backer leaves or starts a new deal.
usually the player gets into the backer as he borrows for expenses he needs. that is why being a backer is almost always stupid unless you can get a large enough edge to overcome all the downfalls.
for the most part backers are the biggest suckers in pool. only a smart few come out ahead.
My impression has been that backers are not really concerned about making money. They are in it for the action, and to them, being out of action is far worse than losing.
Reply is masks and guns.
Is Ryan McCreesh there?
It took me a long time before "in the middle" quit grating. As far as I am concerned it is a bullshit term for promoters and I'm not likely to change my mind. Now when I hear about a bet I automatically divide by two unless they make plain they are talking about the bet and not "in the middle."
As a courtesy, when I am practicing and people want a table to gamble on it I will usually give it up. I do ask about the bet though. If they tell me they are playing for six dollars in the middle I keep the table!
I can't remember two gamblers negotiating a deal at a local hall for an amount in the middle. Sounds like something the small time hustlers would try to do then give you half if you won and collect all of it if they won.
Hu
As a courtesy, when I am practicing and people want a table to gamble on it I will usually give it up. I do ask about the bet though. If they tell me they are playing for six dollars in the middle I keep the table!
I can't remember two gamblers negotiating a deal at a local hall for an amount in the middle. Sounds like something the small time hustlers would try to do then give you half if you won and collect all of it if they won.
Hu
" In the middle" is pretty lame, I think "jack it and back it" is even worse. The nits seem to love it though.
Jack it and back it is very lame. I often wonder if people even think about what they are saying. The only time it makes any sense at all is at hill-hill and the other person has the break. Then I am more than glad to offer to jack it and back it!(grin) If they are timid soles and offer it themselves I jump on it like white on rice. The older double or nothing is just as bad, aint that play again?
I have watched people keep playing double or nothing until the modest bet got quite large. Turned out neither one had table time!
Hu
In my experience better players don’t want to play an even game. In this case $100 vs $50 gives about a 12% ROI for the better player. Not stealing but still worth it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
, just say race to 13