Dead Bottom-Up Edges and SPs Triumphant Return | Ep 159

First we welcome SP back to the podcast and he shares some exciting life news that explains his absence last week.

Then SP and GP both give an example of an originating edge that they had at some point - not shocking that the "sports" are Golf and League of Legends. Big news week and some great questions follow.

0:00 Dead Originating Edges
33:10 News 
1:17:30 Questions

Welcome to The Risk Takers Podcast, hosted by professional sports bettor John Shilling (GoldenPants13) and SportsProjections. This podcast is the best betting education available - PERIOD. And it's free - please share and subscribe if you like it.

Follow SportsProjections on Twitter: https://x.com/Sports__Proj
Follow GP on Twitter: https://x.com/goldenpants013

Transcript

SPEAKER_02 0:00

This one specific market took like a hundred percent of the outsized effect of this pin. So it just kind of like everything comes together and it's just like this perfect spot. So yeah, like basically every bet on that back pin was like yeah, like 20 to 40 percent EV, depending on who it was.

SPEAKER_01 0:20

Um and then I assume that this is in in dead edges. This this is now, you know, dead.

SPEAKER_02 0:44

GP with the return of uh of the hero SP. We got rid of that Mr. Peanut Better guy, and we're we're back on track. Uh well welcome back to welcome back to the pod.

SPEAKER_01 0:58

Yeah, I mean I I I was telling you in uh and uh I guess he doesn't want to go as Mr. PB anymore based on the last pod. But I was saying, like, I I gotta retire because I you know it it added a new podcast for me to listen to, you know, because I I obviously don't listen to it when I'm on here. So it was it was nice to have an additional podcast to listen to last week.

SPEAKER_02 1:20

Yeah, I think that's like you don't listen to a podcast you make. Like I get asked, some people will ask, like, do you listen to the podcast? No, I don't, even though I think it's good.

SPEAKER_01 1:31

Like I used, I used so when I we first started doing this, I would listen. Uh I'd obviously um, you know, I probably could still get something from it just listening back and also improving our own. But yeah, I know there are rumors circulating, you know, the many mysterious reasons I was out. We had uh me and me and me and the wife welcomed baby projections into the world last uh last week. So I figured, you know, I'm not, you know, sometimes the athletes get flack for for missing a game or a you know tournament for for the birth of their child. I guess I'll get that same flack, but but I you know I I told my my now daughter that I'm a very important celebrity on a on a very niche part of the internet and the people need their podcast. So uh I'll be back in a couple hours.

SPEAKER_02 2:17

I mean, awesome, awesome news. We, you know, I'm sure that she's gonna be one of the she's gonna be in no time um making the markets fairer at her school um lunch for Pokemon cards and all of that. She'll be bringing truth to the to the markets and uh can't can't wait to see that.

SPEAKER_01 2:43

Yeah, no, it's a it's you know great time for you know outlook on on the world is is is you know truth seeking's never been more in. It's a it's a it's a great time to have children.

SPEAKER_02 2:52

So it's um but yeah, I obviously uh big congrats and uh thank you, sir. Will this um will this make our podcast under two and a half hours? We'll see.

SPEAKER_01 3:07

You're very busy, you're very, very busy. I think we need to. We yeah, I I I don't want to get in too much trouble. So I think we can keep this under two hours.

SPEAKER_02 3:14

Okay, okay. SP's a very, very busy man now. So we you know, hour and hour and 45, like you you might have to just take that and say, like, all right, that that's enough. That's enough for these guys. So we're gonna get into it. This was a question, so our main topic is a dead originating edge. Um, this was a question asked by Troy, who was uh a guest on the pod a couple weeks ago. He asked it basically like we've asked, we've gotten like a lot of like some dead edges, or you know, we did a dead edges episode of Metro Mike. We'll we should get him back because he has the best dead edges. But uh, this is one where it's like we would actually walk through um more in detail an edge that was originating based instead of like, oh, the sports book didn't realize these two things were correlated and you can parlay like this, or you could, you know, there's a lot of interesting dead edges that come from the sports books kind of making a mistake with what they allow you to do. This was going to be one where like we originated a number and uh can walk through that process. So it and SP and I talked about this, like we're going into more specific examples, right? SP.

SPEAKER_01 4:35

Yeah, yeah. I I I jotted down one one very specific example. Mine's actually gonna be sort of like I kicked around a couple of different options. Um, because honestly, like I haven't most of my my time in like betting broadly hasn't been like sort of traditional OSB. It's been other stuff. Um, mine's actually gonna be sort of like a a situation related to, I don't know if you'd consider it a we'll see when we go through it, but a situation related to DFS specifically back in the day, um, which I think like is in the spirit of the question that Troy asked a couple weeks ago. Um but why don't you start with yours? Because I'm guessing yours is is sort of more conventional and uh and like what maybe more people could relate to.

SPEAKER_02 5:20

Yeah, sure. So I think I've I've maybe like mentioned this once or twice, but I haven't gone into detail about it. So in the Masters, and now you're you're an expert on this, Masters whole scores, but um there are there was a time when the basically you could get some you could originate some alpha based on knowing what good pin locations were worth. But it's not as simple as like because obviously there's there's a mul there's a few steps to this process. So okay, if you don't know golf, basically they move the location of the hole on each green every day. So there's four locations for the tournament. Um these locations aren't available like anywhere for any in any like CSV format. They're not on data golf, like there's no way to just know what the locations are. So this would fall into a situation that I classify as like hard to get information, um, and probably more of an informational advantage. So what you can do is you can go and find all the pin sheets, the old pin sheets from the masters, and basically jot down. This is what I did was jot down next to each day, or basically add that as a field into the database. So now, you know, each day had a pin location associated with a hole, but you have to like make up the pin locations yourself. Like you have to kind of circle them on the green and say, like any pin that lands within here, we're calling that pin location one, any pin that lands here, pin location two. Because if they don't the masters isn't like this is pin location two, like you have to define which areas of the green are the pin location, and then you basically like attach that to the scoring information. So and the reason why at the masters pin locations are more important is that the greens have there's a lot more um contour to the greens. So some pins are in areas where the green will run away from it and down back into the fairway and make it very hard. Some pins will be in the middle of like what you call like a bowl, and a lot of the shots will funnel towards the pin. So you can think of like a traditional funnel pin out of gust as like 16 on Sunday, or like usually like when Tiger chipped it in, and you know, it started out of the right, rolls down to the left. So I'll give a I'm gonna take a break, uh pause, but you know, does that kind of make sense from your understanding of golf? What I'm saying.

SPEAKER_01 8:24

Yeah, yeah. No, it it makes it makes total sense to me. I know um when I was trying to do the whole score stuff, like for what was it? It was a PGA, I guess, or no, you were doing the masters. Oh, it was the masters, yeah, you're right. It was the masters. Yeah, one of the things that like even me being a uh a novice golf, I I was very aware that like the pin locations on the certain days mattered a lot. So like when I was trying to come up with the numbers for that, like I knew it was important that I um I did two things. One, I looked at I tried to look at the pin locations for this year's, like when they were released, and then like on Twitter or whatever, and then last year's and make sure they're approximately the same um for most of the holes, like on Sunday or whatever day I was betting it. And then um when actually like you know, coming up with the model and pulling historical stuff, only using Sunday, because I knew it would be like very um meaningful. Um I think I blended a little bit with the tournament um to try and capture some conditions, but mostly on like Sunday stuff. So yeah, it makes total sense.

SPEAKER_02 9:29

No, I think that's really smart because it's like how can you approximate this like really annoying amount of work quickly so that you can quote this relatively well and like get recreational. I think that's like a great that is actually really cool you did that because it shows like two ways you can approach this problem. Like, so you know, the the way that yeah, I did it was I created pin locations and I grouped them, you know, every year, you know, I would go and mark down all the pins. This is where it was Thursday, falls into this group. So now I have pin locations, yeah. I number that one, two, three, four, five, you know, if if if all is five. And then I basically, you know, attached that to the score, and I could figure out what in certain pin locations, like what the scoring average for the whole was, what that you know, what the birdie or better par bogier worst percentage was for each pin. So there's two there's basically two markets this effects. One's round score, the other is the whole score. Now, obviously, the whole, you know, so obviously the whole score is more sensitive to where the pin is than the round score, right? Um, but for the whole score, you get three options birdier better, par, bogear worse. So, but the markets are pretty heavily juiced. So I went kind of through and I was like, okay, like where are the pins that I think matter a lot, and like some that came to my mind were that pin on 16, there's like a pin on seven that's in a funnel. But when they list the whole score props, DraftKings, for whatever reason, like likes to only put out the first few holes. They they won't list like the entire board. So, you know, you kind of get this this you get a lot of people on like holes one, two, three, and four, but you know, what are the pins there that matter? The only hole that I thought like would really matter was three. Because the way three works is it's three is a short par four, but it the green is very difficult. It's an elevated green, and there's this massive false front, which basically just means like if you hit the ball and land it just slightly short with too much spin, it will roll all the way back down to the fairway. Very, very difficult shot. And three of the pins are basically right up against that false front, running from left to right of the green. But there's a fourth pin that's in the back, and it actually funnels from front to that back pin. And I was like, okay, I think that three is gonna be the most intri the most relevant like pin location hole of all of the holes. So I did it. I you know, I basically created like a fare for the field, like what is the average uh, you know, bird year better, um you know, par, bogear worse. So I went back and actually looked at this stuff. This is using this isn't updated for uh last year's data, but what we have is on the third hole for the regular the the average basically the average pin placement, you have about twenty two percent uh birdier better, you have uh 66 or 22 better. Yeah, twelve or sorry, twenty-one percent birdier better, um sixty-six par Bogear Worse is uh I added VIG to this, so like 14 basically. Um But if you have what I call the fourth pin, which is that back pin, the fare for birdie or better is 31.8%. So even if you're even if you added um took like the juice line, which would be like plus 300, you still have an EV of 32.5%. Now there was basically no other time where like any pin, any of these would bets would be EV. Like par is never EV, bogey is EV and one pin, but it's not as high. But like this one situation because the increase of birdie rate went up by like 50%, like it's just this massive, massive increase. Because it's like, oh, the whole score, the hole got like um 0.2 strokes easier, but it's like where did it get easier? Not because of less of fewer bogeys and more pars. It was it was all birdies, like every the thing driving the scoring difference was birdies. So it's like this one specific thing like took this one specific market took like a hundred percent of the outsized effect of this pin. So it just kind of like everything comes together and it's just like this perfect spot. So yeah, like basically every bet on that back pin was like yeah, like 20 to 40 percent EV, depending on who it was.

SPEAKER_01 14:52

Um and then I I assume that this is in in dead edges, this this is now you know dead.

SPEAKER_02 14:58

Well, yes, that'd be so funny. Yeah, um, but this is the funniest part, and this is why I know this edge is dead, is because um after like getting down a ton on this whole location, this guy from like fried egg, which is like this lame like golf architecture, I don't know what they're called, like a media company was like, hey, like don't you know do people know like this backpin location? You know, there was like a lot of birdies last year. Like, why is DraftKings pricing it at this? And then it basically got less.

SPEAKER_01 15:44

Was this before the round that that that this was like it was like it was like right before like as the round was started.

SPEAKER_02 15:52

So we had like mostly bet it, but um yeah, I mean still I was like wow, you know, it's it's funny because it's somebody who's not like in the gambling space, and then they actually more forgivable, you know, they probably have no idea, you know like what they were doing, but yeah, no, I think that's that's a that's a great example.

SPEAKER_01 16:14

That's like in the spirit of Troy's question. I think Troy, when he when he asked the question two weeks ago, like the example he gave was the Heralabob um like second half total type thing, like being in front of your bench or or something like that. So something that um is obvious in hindsight, but requires some math and and some numbers to to maybe flesh out is like you know how I how I sort of took this question. So my example, like I said, it's a DFS one. So I'll I'll try and give as much context on it that is is needed for it. Um I know I've talked about some of this on on the podcast. So this was um, you know, for my beloved sport, League of Legends. Um so I think I've explained, like the way, if you're not familiar, like the way a game of League of Legends works, if you're thinking about like fantasy points, like everybody knows how fantasy scoring works in football or whatever. Like you score a touchdown, you get fantasy points, you have a good game. In in like League of Legends, you know, it's five on five. The the winning team, the team that wins the game is gonna just like score better. So it's like fundamentally different than football, where you know, football, a score of a game could be 42 to seven, and someone on that team who scored seven points could be the highest scoring, you know, have the most fantasy points. That's like never gonna happen in League of Legends. It's like extremely correlated to the team who wins. Um, and so when you were playing these like big tournaments and all these people were getting into it around COVID, um, the general consensus in the you know tournaments, and it's you know, mostly correct, is like you want to stack teams together. Like this is a common thing in baseball, you know, like if a team sort of like goes off, like for people who are not familiar with DFS or anything, or this is just like a concept in same-game parlays or anything. But like if a team scores 10 runs, you want a lot of players on that team. Like maybe a position player comes in to pitch and you're you're capturing correlation between teammates. Same thing with League of Legends. So you I can't even remember the size of the roster, maybe seven people in your your your roster for DraftKings. And so most people would do some combination of like four players from one team, three from another. You couldn't have more than that, was the most you could do is four from one team. So it'd be something like that is like the conventional wisdom. And that's like broadly how you know you should like people should have been playing, at least at that time. And to be clear, like I've not played in years at this point. So that's why this, you know, dead edges could all be different at this point, like depending on what's going on in the lobbies and contests. But that was like the general strategy back then um to capture like correlation. Like if this team has a bunch of kills, like they're all gonna get assists and kills and sharing it, and it'll be, you know, that's what you want to do. And so I think that the dead edge that came up from this was people sort of took that line of thinking and and didn't change how they they're thinking for different contest sizes. Specifically, like if we got into like something like a head-to-head or a cash game, um, meaning like half the people get paid, um, or you know, you're playing one person, people would still build like in build lineups in basically the exact same way. So they would, you know, take two teams that you know that are playing on the slate. Let's say it's a five-game slate, they take the two teams who are the biggest favorites or like reasonably sized favorites. There's obviously salary cap constraints. Try and build the best team with the two big favorites. And people had like an extreme aversion to playing more than two teams in their lineup because like at its surface, it it can make sense because you say, okay, if I play three teams, now I'm I'm sort of hitting a three-leg parlay to have all my teams win. And one of these teams could lose, and then I have losing players, like players who lost their game in my lineup, and that's bad. They're not going to score as well. So I'm just gonna pick two. That's gonna give me the greatest chances possible to to um to get all my players as winning, you know, like on the winning side. And so that's like I think the the fundamental reason people did it. Um, but like I spent a lot of time, like, you know, I at this point, like this is fairly early, like when I was taking, like, I've only continued to take all of this more seriously from that point. And I would say this is like one of the catalysts for it of like trying to actually simulate out whether that's correct or not to play like that. And it became pretty apparent to me that that was not like the optimal way to play, and that that's like just uh heuristic or bias or whatever that does is not actually like founded in the numbers if you if you sim it out. So, like to give an example of of why it like an example where it wouldn't make sense, and where like these would be the spots where you know I would I would try and get as much in play as possible because I knew broadly what people were gonna do. So let's say you had like a very small slate, let's say you had a two-game slate. There's only two two games. Um, so you could pick a total of four teams from. And one of the teams is like one of the games, the favorites like minus 1,000, huge favorite. And the other one, the favorites minus 120 or 130 or something. Like, so they're a small-ish favorite. People would, you know, try and build with the the minus 1000 and the minus 130. Um, and just because of the way salaries work, like they they couldn't play the best players in the best spots. Um, because there's like a captain where you get you know 1.5 multiple. They couldn't do that with the best team, like the minus 1000, but they would still try and jam it in. And like if you just think about it, like even from sort of first principles here, like if it if the underdog is like 48% to win, it's okay. Like you only have to. cover like even if that team loses like if you take like one player from the losing team in that close game like it's not like you're just totally dead if they that team loses and they get like seven winning players and you have six like you're still alive and and if you and if you basically auto win 48% of time like you just need to win a very small percent of time when that team loses um to make it like the optimal strategy and so like that could be that was like that's like a very obvious way to explain it like where where even you're playing teams like because it would be like I I remember being like on Twitter and Discord and certain things and people would like I remember seeing my lineups be posted and be like this guy has no idea what he's doing. He's playing like two guys he's playing players from teams playing each other. But like nowadays I think you know it's I don't know in League of Legends I think when I was getting out people were starting to understand this as like um some of the sites like actually allowed you to sim stuff. Like I know Sabi Sim and stuff was pretty early on that and they've like sort of made it clear that that was optimal. It's like a common strategy like a very common strategy in MMA now like for cash games to play like the five round fight to play both fighters because you know you get five I potentially you get five rounds and you you guarantee a winner. Because that's that's a thing people miss is like by playing people from both sides like yes you're gonna have a loser but you are guaranteeing like six winners like six winning players too. And so like that was that was a situation where you just had to sort of mouth it out and you could go infinitely deep like of the optimal team to play if you know exactly what the other person is playing. Because it like it's not just play the highest median team it could be I know this person's gonna play this. So like my game theory sort of optimal thing is to play only one player that's different. Whereas if this player is playing something different is you know so it it could go deep but that was like the the core of it. And I guess the kicker which I sort of alluded to was like because it was doing something that was like unconventional at the time like I was actually able to get like games whereas like a lot of times the the regs don't won't play each other like like I said like people thought I was so stupid like they would get I'd get scooped like immediately in the beginning.

SPEAKER_02 24:32

You know so it was uh it was fun and it you know something something cool at the time I I you know I think that's the coolest part of DFS is that that aspect of it of like how other people's lineups um actually impact your strategy and I had a couple questions pop up while while you're going over that so question question one is if you're playing a strategy where you're you know playing two teams playing each other or playing the two MMA fighters who are fighting each other that strategy presumably goes up in value if the more a percent of the field is stacking right and then it goes up in value if well yeah I guess that's my first one is like because everybody's playing this high variance style your that that your strategy of like two teams playing each other is that that's why it's so valuable right is because everybody else is playing like a kind of like a you know like a bigger field contest and going for very like higher variance stuff and they're probably duping each other in this you know style as well like does the duping matter of the other players in like a 50-50 or like head to head or whatever like the the duping that part like doesn't matter.

SPEAKER_01 26:04

Right like if you're so so like everything I'm talking about there was specific to like a like half the field gets paid type thing like that would what I described would generally not be a good strategy like in the like actual large field. Because what I'm what I'm effectively doing like the more teams you play is I am like lengthening the odds that all my players win. But like if I'm only playing one person, that's not like I don't care about that. Like I don't need all my players to win. I need to beat the one person or the the 50-50 sort of cut line right so I think people had this this like again I don't know if it's bias or heuristic or or sort of like they just didn't want to have anybody on their team lose. Like they they viewed it I see part of the issue is like I explained League of Legends is very binary and it is but at the end of the day it was it's really like bimodal like there's two normal ish distributions two peaks it depending on whether they win or lose and those peaks like they do like the if you imagine like two normal distributions like sufficiently close to each other like the tails run into each other. And so as long as those tails run into each other like at like like like in the example I said like the 5% such that a losing player does outscore a winning player like 5% of the time it could have it was good in the example I gave. So it obviously was like odds dependent all these things dependent um because it there's just like infinite scenarios because like imagine a four game slate where you have minus 1000 favorite, two minus 200 favorites and then a pick um in general you couldn't fit the minus 1000 with like the minus 200. You couldn't build a team with those players it was just too much salary. So they'd say I need two favorites I'm gonna take the two minus 200s whereas like I could say I'm gonna take the minus 1000 and then just like take one player from the coin flip and like then I have like I'm basically I have much higher chance of getting six right than you know they do.

SPEAKER_02 28:06

And so like that it really depended on the odds and the number of teams and it was all very like slate by slate dependent but the idea was that if you're just playing one person or a cut line like it doesn't matter like if you if someone loses like like if you're second like someone is going to lose you're just trying to score more points than your point opponent my second question was and I think you kind of answered it there but like did people not seem to have this problem in baseball on a small slate or or whatever because on on the you know on your head to heads they wouldn't stack and they would spread it you know would they would they much easier would they be much more willing to play like a median median maxing in our new like you know our new 2026 lingo strategy?

SPEAKER_01 28:56

It's a great question. I mean I think early on like like base so baseball is just so much like further along as a DFS sport than League of Legends. Like like the reason this happened was because League of Legends was very new to a lot of people and sites weren't covering it and people weren't thinking about like I remember early MLB DFS content people would say stuff like actually the opposite they would be like don't play too many players from the same team because you're like people didn't understand like medians and and all these things and sims and all this but they would say like don't play too many players from the same team. So they had like the general idea of like you in a head to head you do want to decrease variance. That's not exactly like correct either like you shouldn't just be like arbitrarily saying I'm only I'm only gonna play three guys from a team like there should be like a reason or math behind it. You can't just like blindly say that. But I think I feel like even that was understood. And that's like more comparable because MLB and football and all these things like I said are the it's not like you lose the game. It's not so correlated. Like your you to your teammate is not so correlated like it is in MMA or or league.

SPEAKER_02 30:22

Yeah in MFL you could have the highest projected player on the team that's like a six point dog, you know that's impossible.

SPEAKER_01 30:33

I mean obviously the highest receiver is that you know yeah right right like you want you want receivers like from games where they're gonna lose the game right so right um yeah it's just it's like a very different sport than than all the other sports and and like there's like negative correlation between wide receivers potentially um like depending like you know Jamar Chase T Higgins like it's not clear like it's not clear that there's like a high positive correlation there. It depends like probably where in the distribution you are but yeah yeah for leaders just like it's very very clear and I think people just like had this like aversion to to having a losing team because it like you know tilted them or whatever.

SPEAKER_02 31:16

Yeah that sucks when you lose when your team loses no I I love that one. I love that one yeah I think like yeah DFS it's it's it's so cool. So cool. I think we're getting some yeah I feel like some of the player versus player stuff is coming back into um importance with the prediction markets but certainly doesn't feel as much of like straight you know like population study like uh poker and and DFS you know and I I thought about that when I was giving this example like is it just like so out of date and nobody cares.

SPEAKER_01 31:53

But I think the one thing that I thought was um relatable to the exchange when I was thinking about it is like the idea that if you know what someone is going to do, you should be able to exploit it in some way. And so like I was thinking about this in the in it's obviously different but I was thinking about it in like the way of um you know like if you know how bot is going to behave for example or you know how it's gonna post or repost or the timing or the spread or whatever. Like in theory you should be able to take advantage of it somehow. So exactly that's the part that's similar I guess.

SPEAKER_02 32:28

Definitely and that's when you feel it the most you're like oh I figured this guy out you know whatever you know that that is that is the kind of similar to being like oh this guy actually like checks back like never checks back value on the flop. Now I know exactly how to play this guy you know or whatever. Alright I thought I thought those were a couple couple good ones there. So we got a we have a big uh big newsweek uh here they the yeah I feel like the industry kind of waited for you to you know settle into fatherhood and get back on the show to launch to to you know put out some some big announcements so um yeah should we get we get started there yeah yeah let's hit it let's hit it okay um okay call call i sorry I read the second item first which is the funniest one but call call she form this is not the funny one call she formalizing a void policy yeah I mean well actually you know I'll I'll I'll I'll I'll kick this one to you I'll kick this one to you yeah I mean the only thing I wanted to say on this I I saw just like a press release on this I didn't have a chance to to read it in too much detail the thing I wanted to say on this though is like I feel like there's it's like we keep having this narrative of like prediction market can't do this and then they do it and everybody's like how did they get away like how are they getting away with it like because like if we just rewind parlays I don't know when we had the episode with Fluff I remember a big topic of that was like they're never going to be able to figure out parlays or something like along those lines and then now parlays are like a huge portion of their business and that's like a main topic of this podcast.

SPEAKER_01 34:11

And so like with the void policy you know we've talked about that you know like we've had like you know the exchange people being like it's just physically impossible to do a void like no the void thing the other thing that always comes up is like the promotions like yeah sports books are are protected because they can actually boost and promo. Like these companies are going to figure out how to do the equivalent thing if that's what's going to get them business. Like these are not like insurmountable problems. It's not like we are breaking the laws of physics to figure out how to give you know customers on an exchange a promo or a boost. Like it doesn't mean you need to um basically like charge the winners like I know that's the route different exchanges have gone like basically instead of like you know incentive programs for makers like you're basically you know taking from them to give to the the rex to keep them happy and like if that's what you need to do in a in the ecosystem like that's what they're gonna do. They're gonna do whatever they think is going to keep the ecosystem and grow. And if that's like giving money to recreationals or coming up with a void policy to protect them or any of this like they're just gonna figure it out.

SPEAKER_02 35:22

Yeah it's a good it's a great point. And this is good because it there's certain things like there's certain things in uh the sports books basically the one area and this is where like the Kaelish thing I I had I you know I was behind him for a bit but it's like catering to like the actual massive whales is going to be very hard for exchanges um because they expect like loss back and all of this and the exchanges aren't holding the PL so like they only have a take a small fee and they you know who pays that person etc but something like this like getting a void policy that everybody you know like expects obviously now you know just wait until NFL season happens and people you know like they know what's being they know what's coming like it is you know like but uh but I think like this is one of those like no like anything that you can do that like makes the it better for like the non-whal wreck because those are all feasible changes that you don't have to like yeah you you you don't have to like foot a massive bill with with those people is gonna be I think like clearly what they're focusing on and what they should be focusing on. And I think the void is void policy is good because if you think about it everyone's like oh they're just markets or whatever. It's like yeah but like it's stupid that there's a time when I could just make money by knowing a golfer is going to withdraw like 10 seconds faster than everybody else. And then like that happens and what was that you know what what you know it's just like that's not the thing that you're betting on at the end or trading on or whatever. Like there there's just certain things that like leave a bad taste in everybody's mouth and you know you can kind of you can be a purist and you know want everything to be you know settled by some decentralized like logic or you can be a realist and want things to settle in the common sense way that makes the least amount of people frustrated and makes the most sense. Agree okay um this this is uh great polymarket leaves call she is spying on them um so this came across Twitter maybe well five six days ago but I don't know if you went into like the replies or whatever but there's one like kind of thread of replies where it was like yeah like and it's obvious like who it is so I don't know like there I did not see that okay yeah the polymarket employees know who the spy is that no it was like I used to work I think oh fuck well whatever like we're not saying that we know the news exactly but it was like I used to work at I think it was I used to work at Cal she and it's like obvious who the person is or something like that. Was and this is just these are just not these are unsubstantiated allegations right but that was uh in response to this post which I thought was like one of the most interesting parts it was like it kind of because at first you're like that's so ridiculous. You're like that's there's that's so ridiculous. But then if you see if you think about how these two companies have interacted with each other.

SPEAKER_01 39:13

I mean like the grocery store thing is truly like I know we just sort of like glossed over that but like in retrospect that is like truly an insane thing to happen. Um that's crazy. The perp thing was also strange like the perp thing was the reverse though wasn't it call she announced and then Pauly was like we're getting the exact time in the article I read um the the polymarket spokesman like used uh the perp thing as an example of potential because you know I what I know I don't know when when polymarket announced it I know I guess I had spoken about it like Cal she put out that graphic of like a spinning wheel saying like timeless or whatever and then said it was coming out like the next week or something like a next couple weeks and then it did not happen on that time and now I guess they are out um right but like yeah in the article that I read like I think it was a New York Times article or something I think the polymarket person mentioned that I mean like I what do you think it seems insane it seems insane like it's here's here's my take if your polymarket like stop worrying about this thing this type of thing and like get a product that is usable and people want to use like well the other thing is like what is spying like is spying like you have people at Call Shean Poly talk and someone's like yeah we're doing this grocery store and then they're like hey like Polymarket's about to launch a grocery store is that like spying it's probably like just like the incestuous nature of the badgers on Twitter like the people with badges like the whole network of badges who was you know it's like one month they get paid by Calchi and then Polymarket offers them a dollar more and then they go to PolyMarket like no on I mean there's just like a whole network of people who are not directly tied to both companies who probably talk to people in both companies all the time like I don't whatever it is like it's just not worth like I I just can't imagine this is like the high leverage thing I would want to be spending resources on. Like fighting this or like investigating this or whatever.

SPEAKER_02 41:24

Like it's just it's gonna turn out it's just some like yeah yeah it's either yeah it's gonna turn like there's no way there was like a formal position hired to like then go plant inside or me I mean look.

SPEAKER_01 41:38

How good would the Netflix documentary be if there's like an actual spy situation?

SPEAKER_02 41:44

Well this this is gonna end in some type of documentary. Yeah oh no doubt like no doubt what do you think what do you think who who if it goes to a movie who's gonna who's gonna play our voices very good voices or are we our voices because I don't know we'll just they'll probably be you know they'll say like this was a dorky podcast.

SPEAKER_01 42:06

Maybe this is our big moment maybe they'll take our voices direct and we can be in maybe yeah it's it could pull us aside like expert witnesses as we were like witnessing the whole thing go down.

SPEAKER_02 42:14

Well it's the thing like you know then are we gonna be testify like there's there's some world where we have to explain this in front of Congress. So I guess we just get get ready for that. But yeah I mean the the doc and the whatever it's gonna be it's gonna be a ripper. How about a company that nobody's gonna make a documentary on Rush Street Interactive submits an application to become a prediction market.

SPEAKER_01 42:39

Rush Street is like Bet Rivers basically I I know they have a couple other skins right but I yeah I can't this just gives like the vibes of like you know those those like plumbing companies who put ai in their their company name to try and like pump uh yeah I I honestly don't have much more on this good luck to Rush Street. Yeah yeah let's just kind of move on from that okay this one's interesting was uh okay so DraftKings announced this was today at least I saw it today uh this thing called Moonshot which is like a new way to bet on sports I don't fully get it but basically what it sounds like is like one of those uh I have a description I found a good description as well okay the example that I read uh I know it's from an article I apologize for not giving attribution but it says as an example how Moonshot would play out in real time imagine a user placed a $5 wager with a target multiplier of 4x. So I think you pick the multiplier um a full win would pay $20 a loss would pay zero users can cash out when available a better's goal would be to accumulate enough multiplier points to reach the 4x amount and trigger the 20 payout $20 payout before an hour Is recorded. So this is for baseball. So you'd you'd place the bet, batter would go up, you'd you'd click 4x multiple, you'd you'd want to accumulate um points or like multipliers until you get to 20x. So how do you do that? Every pitch adds 0.25x to the multiplier, meaning that an eight pitch at bat that ends in a double would fulfill the four X multiplier because each pitch is 0.25, a double is two, and so you know you get eight pitches, 0.25, 0.25, and then multiply by two, you get to the 4x um multiplier. So it's like I saw a game, like I have no idea this this rocket casino game that they're comparing. That's what I was gonna say. Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_02 44:41

You've never seen this one, Crash.

SPEAKER_01 44:43

Is that what it's called? Crash.

SPEAKER_02 44:45

I think that's like they they slap different things, like it's a rocket sometimes, and it's this, but yeah, it's I think it's called Crash.

SPEAKER_01 44:52

So it seems like the the the gist of this is you you pick whatever odds you want and um and then hope the outcome of the bat at bat breaches those odds. So like I'm guessing if you pick like very long odds, you'd like need a long at bat, and again a home run or a triple or something like that. Um something more rare. And so honestly, I think it's pretty cool. Like I've always thought that the way um most people bet is they don't even like care generally what they're betting on. They like what they're filtering by first is the length of the odds. So like if I think of like how my friends bet, they're like, I'm gonna bet $10. I want that to be $10 to win 80 approximately like not exactly, but they're like, I want this to win like 70, 80 bucks, is like in their head, even if it's like not conscious. And then they go like make a parlay to get to that point. And so this just like skips that step, and they can just, you know, people can just click like effectively what odds they want, like how long of odds they want, and just like automatically does it. So I think it's pretty cool, honestly. I mean, obviously it's like in the um micro betting, whatever. So say with you know, we've we've discussed that, but I I actually think it's sort of a a cool product that I think a subset of people will uh really like.

SPEAKER_02 46:12

Yeah, I I think it it adds this thing. So I don't know if you know who who Ben Lamb is. He's like a successful poker player who launched uh like a crypto casino, basically. Uh I don't I don't know too much about it, but the only reason I know about it was he posted like this mock-up of this game he made. I think it was called like Lamb Chop or something. But it's like the lamb like starts on the left of the screen and like hops, you know, over like it hops like one space you know at a time. And it's like you could land on that space and be safe, and that happens a lot of the time, but like sometimes something will like come out and kill you, and you have to decide like when you're gonna, you know. You I think you get to like different check marks and you can like stop then or like keep going. But it's like this suspense factor of like, ooh, am I gonna because it's like okay, the pitcher throws the pitch, it's not out, okay. We survive, we got a little extra, you know. It's like that building and building. Like, I think there's a lot of uh, which is like kind of what the the crash rocket game does. It's like, you know, you're you're building, you're building, it's like, oh, this is getting better, this is getting better, and then it could all like come tumbling down, or you know, it could be a success. It seems like that vibe is what a lot of uh rex are looking for.

SPEAKER_01 47:42

That's like an old Mario Party game, I think, if I if I remember correctly, where you gotta like blow something up and you don't want to be the one that that makes the last blow and it explode explodes or something. So I guess we're teaching our kids young.

SPEAKER_02 47:55

Yeah, Mario Party was was legit, just like like skill-based casino games, right? Um but yeah, I mean, you know, I think it'll be successful. I think the other interesting question for this podcast is like, will they make a mistake that some AP or group of APs is gonna like really rinse them for? Because I'm sure like the margins on this stuff, like whatever they've calculated them to be, are like the theoretical hold that I imagine is quite high, or they believe it to be quite high. But that's kind of that situation where like you know, it can be quite high, but then this one thing, you know, for whatever reason, like this situation or this like, you know, this market, you know, market that they put up is kind of broken or can be exploited in this spot. You know, I have no clue, but you know, I think that's always our our lean whenever something new comes out is like, well, you know, are they all buttoned up there? You know.

SPEAKER_01 49:04

I can think of some scenarios where certain ad bats like would have much higher likelihood of certain events happening that are low likelihood than others. So I'll have to I'll have to I'll have to noodle on that a little bit.

SPEAKER_02 49:17

Um yeah, everybody DM us the ways we can exploit this and uh keep the show ad-free. Um uh this one was was kind of coming. So the Better Business Bureau launched an inquiry if Cal she's breaking federal advertising disclosure rules.

SPEAKER_01 49:39

Um I think I think this was really about like the the fact that people are like doing ads, like influencers doing ads and not disclosing it. I don't think it's necessarily like on the way I it's not on like the contents of the ads. I know yeah um that's been something we talked about. I think you talked about that last week with uh Mr. Peanut Butter, but um yeah, I think it's like about the disclosure because I I mean like even a while back on Twitter, the the I think his name's like Nikita or something, like high up on Twitter was like going after all these like undisclosed prediction market ads. Because I think the prediction markets are partnering with a ton of the big accounts and and getting them to like reference them so to just be like you know, like a news aggregator. Oh yeah, yeah. Yeah, like basically saying like what's happening, like according to Polly Market or Kashi or whatever, it's like these are paid advertisements, they're not like just organically doing this.

SPEAKER_02 50:40

Um, so well, there's this big one with golf where they'll be like, and maybe it's happening in other sports too, but it'll be like, what was the best shot you know Tiger Woods ever hit, you know, and people and then it'll be it will call she will say like you know, what was the best shot that Tiger Woods ever hit, and then underneath it's like Tiger Woods is like 14% to play in a PGA tour event this season or something, and then like people quote tweet it with like a video of like Tiger Woods' best shot according to them. And it's just like hashtag ad, like you like it's definitely an ad. It's it's not just like people, it's it's not like people with no followers, it's like accounts that have a lot of followers, you know.

SPEAKER_01 51:29

I mean, this is why part of the I get where the like anti-advertising for gambling or any of these things, like I get it all, like where it comes from. But I just think that sh to some extent that ship has passed in society that like we're gonna turn off the ads on like a televised sporting event and that's gonna solve our problems here. Like, kid, that's like that's like not how kids consume media. Like, are you gonna police like YouTube creators and like all these, you know, like all these like undisclosed, like it's just just advertisements and brands, and uh it's just like so intertwined with like media and influencers and personalities and everything. It's like there's no separating it anymore. So like I don't and I don't know how you ban like that stuff. Like I guess there's an attempt at having people disclose it, but like well, it's like on Twitter, right?

SPEAKER_02 52:24

Like that's why it was like that guy Nikita is going so hard because it actually like kind of I think it makes like the Twitter experience worse, right? Because you're like, oh, is this this and that? Is that and that?

SPEAKER_01 52:35

I mean it's so funny the difference in like advertisers, like 10 10 years ago is on Twitter and and the advertisements you get now, it's just like laughable. Like it used to be like you know, huge, like GE is advertising on Twitter, and now it's like you know, like gas station medicine companies, like like you know, so yeah, I mean, yeah, I can't imagine it's good for Twitter to just be like all like advertisement garbage. So I mean I think it's it's good to try and fight back. I just think it's like a hard, hard thing to like separate influencers from brands and like what is organic and what isn't.

SPEAKER_02 53:16

Right. Okay, I think this was the the biggest one, but we still haven't gotten like I still haven't really gotten clarification on this. But this is the La Liga team that uh, if you haven't saw the news, that basically allegedly used Calci. Uh, I imagine this was a block trade executed directly with uh Susquehanna on whether they would be relegated or not, basically. Um for the team, you know, the team obviously is trading against themselves in this situation. I think somebody made some clarification that like the they actually bought insurance and the insurer, you know, traded on to traded with SIG, but you know, it's like I we can kind of get into that. Um but but yeah, I mean you know, this is and then we should I don't know, there's not enough details on this, like I think we would like more, but there's basically the important what it looks like on the outside um to a lot of people is the team is obviously betting against itself, which it is, but like you know, there's also this is one of the most um obvious economic uh uses of uh of call of call shoe sports is a team because of how expensive it is to drop how much it costs to drop down in leagues. I know like I don't you know some people were floating different numbers like a hundred million or or more. Um but yeah, I think like they call the that playoff game to get from the championship to the Premier League, like the $200 million match or something. Like relegation and promotion is serious financial fluctuation. Like, like if you were one of those businesses, like hedging out your relegation and promotion um fluctuations, I think would be what any like serious business would do if they had like spiky PL or revenue like that. Like if it wasn't this conflict of interest, like they would be hedging out. Like that that's what like oil drillers do, right? You're hedging basically because you have this like spiky revenue stream. Um and and yeah, but obviously, you know, the other version of the headline is team bets two million dollars against itself or whatever.

SPEAKER_01 55:55

Yeah, I mean, I I I read the the initial release and then I saw there was like a clarification. I mean, the initial release read like uh, and we have a question about, you know, Flupp asked about the the the bar thing with the Knicks as well that we'll get to. But the initial release read like like a statement that was concocted with Calchi in mind, like like to give positive PR to Calci. Um, like I don't know why a team, like if you're just a team, like I don't know what incentive you have to release this. Like, I don't think it makes you look favorable like to your fan. Like, I don't think the fans are gonna be like, ah, great, you pulled out insurance policy, so like now we got relegated, but thank God you guys like have steady revenue. Like, I don't think it makes looks good on the team. So I'm guessing it was, you know, Galaxy's clearly doing these coordinated efforts to try and um show the value of sports in predicts. And I I think this was like an attempt at that. If you know, this is just my opinion, no inside information, just speculating. Um, but yeah, I think you just it's the you got to think about the optics of this because like people don't think of sports as businesses, most people, first, like first and foremost. And so they just broadly don't like the idea of their their owner running it like a business and not like living and dying with the team's success and failures. Um, so like that in of itself has bad optics, but then that coupled with like the betting against your team has bad optics. I'm guessing almost every team has done this for a long time. Like it, I'm guessing this is nothing new. Like, there's all sorts of insurance in athletics, like injury insurance and all these things that you could argue like has perverse incentives. I think, I think this is good and fine, and teams should do this. If you're like if you're running a business, like you this is optimal to run a business. But like it should be transparent and um like you can't like the way this you can't have the headline be like team, like just bet on Calci. Like that can't be the headline. The headline's gotta be like ideally. There should be clear but if there is gonna be a headline, it's like team, you know, insurance company, like an insurance company that helps insure the soccer team helped reduce their risk through Calci. Like because like the the company should be buying the insurance because you would you don't the reason it needs to be transparent is just like you know, buying house insurance or something. If your house is worth 500k, like you can't get an insurance policy for four million dollars, like exactly like you can't do that. So that means that's the thing, yeah.

SPEAKER_02 58:39

La Liga, this is a La Liga question too, right? It's like how much do we put, how much do we actually put, like economic? I know people love to throw around like how much promotions worth, but like it might have to get down to the point where you're defining certain the value of certain things, like the value of a win. I know people in baseball like to talk about like how much is a win worth actually, because it's like how because then it's like how do you value players based on war and all of this, but it's like there's gotta be some there's gotta be some definitions that kind of come out so you don't have situations where like the team is actually betting against themselves. Because if they take out this hedge, they're not betting against themselves. The hedge was tiny. It was like if if it's actually worth like a hundred million or even twenty million, like the hedge was they're still losing if they if they go down, it just makes it a little less less painful. And it sh they should be able to do this. And the insurance could the funniest part was like it came out, like the insurance company was basic Shipper tweeted it was like giving them plus 400 when like they were buying the insurance company was buying like from Sega like plus 700 or whatever uh the call she number was and the DraftKings number was you know, it's just like the insurance company like if a team is doing this and they're getting a bad number through insurance, like you should be able to get a better number in a liquid market. And the rule really needs to then revolve around like creating, like you said, like perverse incentives. Like there, you gotta draw the line and figure out like how much you can actually hedge out.

SPEAKER_01 1:00:28

Agreed. I I think you know, transparency, the league's engagement, like you know, each league setting some like precedence around this, like because like this this could matter for college sports like in the future in the US, and I could see that being like really like if if that got more press, like that could be ugly. Um, you know, so yeah, all of that I think leagues should be uh mindful to get in front of.

SPEAKER_02 1:00:57

Yeah. Um okay, we have CFTC must submit a report to the House Appropriations Committee detailing how its oversight and regulation of such markets align with these established federal, tribal, and state frameworks, and how it will work with tribes on rules. Given, I didn't know this, given 30, 355 million to do this. To do what? Submit the report?

SPEAKER_01 1:01:26

Yeah, so they they they gotta get in the reports. You know, obviously I don't wear the gaming, but like, you know, I I mean, what a beautiful day for those consultants who land this contract to to write that $355 million to write this this uh this report.

SPEAKER_02 1:01:43

Um I mean I think we're open, by the way, for part of the if if you're looking to spend like five million, yeah, yeah, we're here.

SPEAKER_01 1:01:54

We can do a small part of it, you know, just add a little bit of expertise. But yeah, that that's a heck of a contract. I mean, what what these generally are is like um a way for you know, like tribes lobbied some um lawmaker to get this in to to be something that the CFTC has to do. The CFTC will do it, they will likely work, like I said, with consultants and contractors and whatnot to actually write this report and do the research. And I mean, the thing with this is like the the authors of it like is you know, like the CFTC. So you could expect like what's gonna be in there, like it's not gonna be like or generally expect how it's written. I think the reason you could ask like what is the purpose of this? I think if you're the tribes uh in this case, like you're effectively just being like ignored at this point, like like nobody's doing anything or listening to your complaints, really. And so this is a way to like grab a foothold of like make them put pen to make them being the CFTC put pen to paper on how they're like actually going to protect our interests and work with us. And then that is something like you can actually work with, right? Um, once you actually have something that's basically like an actual response, right, to to your complaints and issues. So this is this is basically like a lobbying way to force their hand to actually like respond to their issues. And um, yeah, I if I can get a piece of that 350. I feel like I could be boots on the ground, I can get out to to California wherever I need to be, and you know, we could put ourselves in the mix for this thing, you know. Me and Sealag are tight, so hopefully he he he gives me the ring.

SPEAKER_02 1:03:39

Has he interacted with you on Twitter? No, no, he hasn't.

SPEAKER_01 1:03:43

I really I'm I'm getting closer, I can tell.

SPEAKER_02 1:03:47

His hot you're gonna be he's gonna accidentally feature your hot dog stint in the report and you're gonna get paid a million dollars to talk about it.

SPEAKER_01 1:04:02

Yeah, I can't. I mean, we'll we could we could go to I mean Flip's question was like we're going into the questions. Flip's question was sort of in that spirit. It was it was uh SP was out of the world, so he wants to know did did SP get teary-eyed seeing a bar hedge risk like SP does with this hot dog stand? So I did I don't know, did you guys talk? I can't even remember. Did you guys talk about this?

SPEAKER_02 1:04:21

SPO I can't remember either.

SPEAKER_01 1:04:25

I can't yeah, so I mean if you missed it, there was a Knicks bar that um came out with some promotional video that they were like hedging, they're giving free drinks or something and hedging the risk, like if the Knicks win and they're hedging the risk on Calci. Um this to me gave the same vibes as that soccer thing, except he was like even more over the top and like um clear, like who was directing the video. Like it was like this bar's Twitter account who hadn't tweeted in like three years. I went on their webpage and like very normal webpage for a bar. Like I'm sure it's a a lovely bar um to go to, but like it was pretty apparent to me that this bar was not making like these videos with these professional cuts and animations and stuff. So it's it's like a coordinated effort to show the value of um sports on prediction markets, which is like I'm all for keep doing this stuff if that's what's gonna keep it. But um yeah, you know, like uh a rising tide lifts all boats, you know. For for us at the intersection of uh hospitality and high finance, this is uh this is the direction I want to see. We need we need more exposure.

SPEAKER_02 1:05:34

So it's like the mattress Mac thing. I actually was like, it's actually not a bad business to run. Like what Mattress Mac does. We had discussed this in we had more than one meeting on this before prediction markets on like should we buy like a golf like online store? And basically, like, if so and so wins this tournament, like everybody who bought, you know, drivers like gets them for free. And like, you know, like as long as the margins work out, like it actually isn't like a terrible business idea. Um basically you're allowing the people are basically gambling with their driver purchases. So you it it it's like this like kind of interesting way to like book basically legally. Um so again, there's use for this with businesses and promotion because people love to gamble. So like doing this type of thing, I don't think like the bar business has a high enough margin to make it worth it. Like why mattress Mac makes a lot of money doing this is because I'm sure his margins on mattresses are really it's really high. Um, so it'll work out, but I don't think like this is everybody brushes it off, like it's oh, it's the stupidest thing ever. Like, as somebody who's literally considered doing this, like there is a business case to running these promotions. Um, but it's like to SP's point, like it's obvious what's going on here and why.

SPEAKER_01 1:07:18

Yeah, no, like it could be a legitimate thing. It just this wasn't a legitimate, this was like you know, five thousand dollars and the it probably costs more to produce the video.

SPEAKER_02 1:07:28

Yeah, that that's a but Mattress Mac's betting like four million dollars.

SPEAKER_01 1:07:31

Yeah, and I mean I guess if you're if you're gonna play devil's advocate on this situation, and I and I see both sides, honestly, is like Mattress Mac did this with uh prediction markets, right? Like he didn't he didn't need prediction, you know, like he there's this thing called sports betting. So like he but you know you can make the argument like that's onerous to go to other states and like all that he actually had to do.

SPEAKER_02 1:07:56

Um so yeah, I think with like mattress, I don't I don't know his I I know Risk uh Riskaroon did something with him, or I I I forget someone did something with him. Uh could have been gambling with an edge, but um he owns I think he's like the sole owner of his stores, so like his PL is like his store PL is his betting PL. But if you're like a true company, like you can set up a core, you know, you can set up account on an exchange as a company, and it's like a little bit easier to I think to kind of do your books that way instead of like going and get collecting like yeah 100%.

SPEAKER_01 1:08:42

Like you're not gonna get a real store like taking millions of dollars to Biloxi or something to right, you know, like that she's not gonna act.

SPEAKER_02 1:08:51

So right, like Bed Bath and Beyond isn't gonna go no send their CEO to like I think Mattress Mack is you know Mattress Mac, he is he is literally Mattress Mack, it's in his name, so that store is him, so it's easy for him to hedge. But anyway, um the last one I just want to quickly touch on was Sores B, the Texas Tech quarterback, actually got allowed to play, which I didn't see coming. Peanut Better had him uh for like Heisman, so this is good for him, but uh yeah, the courts allowed him to play, and everybody in the NCAA is kind of freaking out. I don't know, like you know, how many of the athlete betting scandals are we gonna cover? It's they're all kind of the same, but this is the first time I think like something truly like where the person who was betting on their games, like he bet on his team to win. I don't think there's ever been any um any uh are there's not been any like credible suspicion of him throwing games, right? It was only on his team.

SPEAKER_01 1:10:04

Yeah, I didn't read it all. I think he bet on his team to win, and I think it was only when he wasn't like suited up, even technically. So he's fine. God I mean I I I think it is like if you if I could have my way, you would be very, very strict on everybody who gets caught with this at all leagues early on to set like a precedent that like athletes coming up, like kids who are 12, 11, they just hear these stories and hear like, oh, he bet he's he was like totally disgraced, and they they have that like ingrained in them from an early age. Um, I you know, because I with the way legalization happened, like there's always gonna be growing pains of people who don't understand the severity, like kids and stuff. Um, but if you can like make it part of the culture as like just uh you know like an absolute disgrace, like then and you've thrown everything away, I think you could you could really limit it. Um but as far as like college sports, like nothing matters, like it's it's it's it's not, it's just like minor, it's just minor league at this point. Like there's no rules, like people just go play wherever like and I don't think like people like to make a big deal about this, or like I'm gonna stop watching or whatever. Like nobody's gonna stop watching. Like everybody's gonna still catch it. Like it's not as pure as it once was. Well, I generally agree with that, but like well, that's true, but it's not because of this. It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter. Like, people still love it. People love football, people love college football.

SPEAKER_02 1:11:30

So I like the one coach. Though uh the last thing I'll say on this was the coach who I forget what team he was, but he was like, My takeaway is that I need to teach all my athletes, student athletes to be better gamblers. We'll bring in people from Vegas and make them better gamblers so they can go and bet on the games they play because the the what we're teaching, you know, I want to teach them like you know, give them the best you know, experience for them, or like have them achieve the best outcome, and that's clearly just gambling on their own games. I don't know. It's like this rant he went on, but it was but I mean the the that's another consulting fee we can get. I was gonna say, you know, people from Vegas, they don't have to be from Vegas, they could be from uh Charleston, South Carolina. We're opening up, we're open to consulting uh big business. I know, but uh yeah, I thought I also kind of I I mean, I don't know. I always feel bad for the athletes. Like I I I don't know. I understand why you need to lay down a law in these situations, but but like is this kid not really gonna like get to take a crack at the NFL NFL?

SPEAKER_01 1:12:38

Like I don't know, maybe it's it'd clearly be like to me, like just in a vacuum, like um the crime doesn't fit the punishment generally. If you but like you have to if you're just thinking of like the holistic picture, I think it would be like maybe net gut, so right, right, right.

SPEAKER_02 1:12:57

Yeah, I mean it's like it's like the Calvin Ridley situation, like you're just like what? Like Yeah, right, like the crime clearly didn't lead to punishment there, in my opinion, but right, but like you do have to protect certain like this is the thing, and everybody's like, oh well, you allow all these athletes who are like scumbags to compete, and like that's my gut reaction, but then it's like that doesn't necessarily put the entire like I I you know I'm not saying that there should be lax laws about who can compete, but it's a different story than like when the integrity of the actual sporting event comes into play. It's like very expensive to the league.

SPEAKER_01 1:13:36

So you know, but I think one of my my new hot takes is people like actually don't care about the like like it could come out that that you know like NFL player was throwing games.

SPEAKER_02 1:13:48

This this is a hot take that I'm workshopping, so I want to I want to hear I'm I'm like already buckling up for this.

SPEAKER_01 1:13:54

Like like uh a main player could be throwing games, like a cool game. And it would have like effectively zero impact on the handle of NFL games.

SPEAKER_02 1:14:06

Okay, I have to think about it. Or watchability, like or that that's the with the ratings go down.

SPEAKER_01 1:14:13

I I don't think it would maybe like long term if it kept happening, but like a couple, I don't know. I actually don't think it would like I don't know anybody who would stop watching. Yeah, would you see that? I think my belief has been updated on this partially because of my experience on the prediction markets and seeing people bet on stuff that's predetermined and people know and is quote unquote like fixed. Yeah, and they do they just don't care, they keep betting on it.

SPEAKER_02 1:14:43

Yeah, I the other thing is like everybody will always the other the the the corollary to that is people will also be like like FanDuel made the call on like something that's just a regular season like Milwaukee Bucks like NBA game.

SPEAKER_01 1:14:59

So if people are already saying that that's what I'm saying, I think people's brains are so broken that they they like legitimately, so many people legitimately think there's like weird fake and they still bet it. So like I don't know why. If there was actually evidence, they'd be like, now the line has been drawn. Like, no, like they believe it's fixed already.

SPEAKER_02 1:15:18

You know what? Sadly, I think you're right. Which when you first started saying that, I was like, you're so wrong. And then I was like, damn.

SPEAKER_01 1:15:29

I just think it's like how people think now. Like everything's like a conspiracy theory. So if there's like an actual legitimate thing, I don't think people would care.

SPEAKER_02 1:15:36

Because they would be like, of course, like that's one of 12 quarterbacks who's throwing games, they're so obvious. Why aren't they going after the other, you know, or they're like, yeah, the sacrificial lamb, they're hanging him out to dry when the other 30 are doing things just as bad.

SPEAKER_01 1:15:53

Maybe it's you know, like a small slice of online that I see that is not representative of the whole. That could definitely be the case.

SPEAKER_02 1:16:00

Are you talking about the caution ideas section?

SPEAKER_01 1:16:03

No, man, it's dark. Yeah, I mean, you go on some non-sports stuff, and it's like truly the most like some things that are like yeah, it's truly the most insane stuff. I've I'll have to see some up for this.

SPEAKER_02 1:16:13

We're in the questions. I'm gonna put my own question to start this off. The question is, have you ever seen an actual idea in the Kalish ideas section?

SPEAKER_00 1:16:24

I mean, I've seen ideas, like some of the most amazing.

SPEAKER_01 1:16:27

Like, I was in there today, and I uh I yeah, I won't talk about what market, but I was in there, it was a non-sports market, and there was this guy who had left maybe 30 comments on various other people's comments, like insistent that the rules were something else, which they were not, like very insistent that the rules are something else. And it almost makes me wonder. I think I've seen this before, like of legitimate people, like what seems like legitimate, like like trying to put something in the comments that is like clearly wrong. Um that seems like sort of has to be going on.

SPEAKER_02 1:17:05

I I've I've heard like people accuse very well-known, you know, non-sports people of doing that.

SPEAKER_01 1:17:13

Yeah, I I'm pretty I mean, because like if you're like someone who's going into a market, you know nothing about like maybe the first thing you do is go look at the comments, like what people think. And so yeah, I mean, it's that's sort of like underhanded to me. Um yeah, right. I mean, I'm sure people are doing it, yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:17:31

Yeah. Um, okay, we get into the questions from actual listeners. Connor. Uh, say you're recording this same episode three years from now about dead prediction market edges. Do you think most of the edge graveyard? That's a great recall by Connor for the one time we did the edge graveyard music. Bring that back. Um, will be the do you think most of the edge graveyard will be market structure slash order book stuff or people um finding better fairs, basically like originating edges? Um you wanna Yeah, I'll go first.

SPEAKER_01 1:18:08

So for me, like when I think of the the edge graveyard or dead edges, I think of like fun stories or like you know, unique things or stuff we talked about today, sort of. So like I guess my answer to those would be like I think the the people who are gonna make the most money are gonna be like the order book structure stuff. Like those are the people who's gonna be like, like the person who's gonna be on risk of ruin five years from now is gonna be someone who like did that probably. Um but like I think in terms of like dead edges, I think they're gonna be stuff like stories about people breaking bots or someone's automated strategy and like exploiting it. Like that I could see being a good story, or um like finding the big spots where we're talking about big spots where like public is in in involved, um, and maybe like less obvious ones, like the obvious ones that are that come to mind is like the the Jake Paul thing, the I guess the mayor thing, which I may have not been involved with, but like that seemed like a a like a big edge for people. Um so it'd be like I I think those would be like the stories to the spirit of the dead edges, but to your question, like I think the people who are gonna make the most money are gonna be the the order books, you know, structure stuff.

SPEAKER_02 1:19:22

Yeah, I responded to the question. It was that was I think the first question. So I was like on, I just responded, like I think the order book, but let me think about it. I actually flipped that where I think the order book dead edges will be like you said, the things that make the most money, but the quantity probably will the more quantity will fall into the originating like pricing stuff. Um, and to your point also, if you look at it from like what would we talk about on the podcast or who's likely to come forward and want to discuss the dead edges, it even skews harder to the originating, I think. But A, because they're you know, they're more fun to kind of talk about and B, you know, a true order book dead edge that made a hundred million dollars. Like A, that person probably they you know, they might not want to come on the podcast, they might want to, but they might not want to never talk, they might probably never want to talk about that. But yeah, I I think I think probably the the more will be the affairs, actually. And there'll be a lot of cool ones because there's a lot of non-sports stuff.

SPEAKER_01 1:20:32

Um so you tagged. I could read the next one because it was it was sort of a combined one. Um, Max and Ian asked a similar question. Um, Max's was was for sports, people should should people treat prediction markets like a sharpest possible book in terms of efficiency? Uh and then Ian asked a very um similar question. Do you think exchanges are becoming the efficient price already? Um so you want to take this one first? Sure.

SPEAKER_02 1:21:02

Yeah, I think I think in most markets, uh most main markets, the exchanges are probably already at the sharp price. Um there's some things that are still, I think, like keeping them from being absolutely like the the like super super sharp, which is like the high take fees. Um basically you could have a what that means is like you could have a price up on the exchange that is value before the taker fee, but not after, and then nobody will none of like the sharp sharpest people will hit that price, even though the price is technically wrong. So there's still this band um and close to the fair that it you know it's not gonna hone in exactly. Like uh with smaller tick sizes, you know, the makers will kind of take care of that problem a little bit more. But um yeah, I think like what like I've I've talked about this like a few times. Like I think that uh I think that we're there in a lot of the main markets. And if you think about like what Pinnacle, what Bookmaker, you know, what circa is willing to take on markets, and you see what's up on Polly and Calci, you know, it's it's a lot bigger, it's a lot bigger size there. It's not apples to apples, again, because of the take fee, you're a little more protected on the the prediction markets, but uh yeah, I don't think like there's now with prediction markets you're able to to get more down, especially passively. Like you wouldn't want to, if you were the kind of end boss originator, you wouldn't want to move Penny or move Circa or move Chris when you could just sit on the bid or the offer at Call She and get you know 300,000 down like in a couple hours.

SPEAKER_01 1:23:13

Yeah, I mean I think that point is the the thing that I think is most interesting about this is like if you have like the nuts, like if you have the true number, like what it should be. Um but you can keep you can you can either uh artificially or or not express that number until late into the market or not at all, then you could you could write like infinite at a good number on the prediction markets right now, or or take even like at an a ton. And so that's like I think the potentially like interesting part about it um is that like there's so much liquidity on the prediction markets relative to the sharp books that exactly that incentive is is in place. I mean, the other thing that I think, at least for me, I've been thinking about is like, and I think we have a question about the next question is about being a maker taker. I think I've said it a couple of times on the podcast, like I don't know if this is a hot take of mine or not, but like there's no way some of these markets should be trading as thin as they are. Um and I think in hindsight, like it's people are gonna be like, that was crazy. And I think it's just taking some some people like some time to build up the um processes, skills, models, whatever, to like make people pay for that effectively. Um and I'm mostly thinking about like stuff that's like even like not sports, honestly. Um like stuff with sports, like it's a pretty efficient market, it's been a market for a long time. But like there's just no way some of this stuff that like there's no market to like should be trading at like one cent. Like it just it shouldn't be. And um, you know, to that's gonna be something I think potentially like makes it like in one regard, you could think that makes it more efficient that it's so tight. I think there's just like a ton of like penny jumper, bot trader, all this stuff, which you could argue like makes it more efficient. I would actually argue potentially makes it less, like, because if I just like randomly pick a market on, and this is gonna maybe be like obvious or like no duh, but if I just randomly pick a market on DraftKings, almost all the time the fair is gonna be between like the the spread, like yeah, like the overwhelming majority is gonna be on Calchi right now. Like the if you had God's like fair, it's especially on non-sports, it's like never gonna be between it'd be like a miracle for it to be, yeah, right. Like if something's trading at you know 50, 51 or whatever, like it's not between there. Like nobody like people don't know. So like there's edge there, like whether you have it or you need to work to get it or whatever. Like people are not that sure of like what Trump is gonna, like, even a market that's traded regular, people are not that sure of what Trump. There's just no way. Um he might just fall asleep and then it's over. And I mean, like that's that's a market that happens, like that. That's one of the more predictable ones. Like things that are truly like one of one, like you just I just believe there's like a a a cap on people's certainty on some of this stuff, and it should not be like one cent. Um, I do think you're protected with the taker fees and rec flow can like just wash all the importance of that away. If so, like why people are doing it, I think those could be explanations, but like I think it's a mistake to just like be like this is one cent, the probability is truly between here. Um, because I don't think that's the case in like yeah, if we're talking like live MLB, you're probably okay with that. If you're talking something else, maybe not.

SPEAKER_02 1:27:11

Yeah. I think it's a do you want to get to that take or maker question? Just go right to that.

SPEAKER_01 1:27:16

Yeah, I think I think basically I was I was leading into what I was saying is like yeah, for fees and you know, the adverse selection part of it and like your your counterparties, I think it's still obviously beneficial to make. Um, but I've done more taking recently, um, especially in like non-sports stuff. Like the stuff has gotten out of control, like what people are posting and how tight they're posting. And it's just I don't have to be that um correct to to have an edge in that stuff. Like if you're if you're truly want to post at like one cent wide on on something that like has never happened before, I don't need to spend that much effort to think I have a good, like a better. Price or a winning price, right? Like it is like the market is so confident they know the answer. Like they are certain it's between 50 and 51%. Like I think I can figure out that it's not between that.

SPEAKER_02 1:28:15

I am gonna surprise everybody here, except for all of the people who know I'm just trying to sim for the sharp takers. I'm still you know, I'm still a maker, obviously. Making is makes that's more of our PL, but as SP said, and for the exact reasons you said, we've been taking more and it's going great. I I love it. And it's in the markets where people are you know maybe incentivized to post liquidity and they're posting super tight on the exact situation. You know, as SP is saying, but like we've been we've been taking a bit more, and you know, taking is taking that makes money, you know.

SPEAKER_01 1:28:59

Don't you don't you feel like you know, like your testosterone increasing when you take instead of yeah, yeah, you know, you just turn it off.

SPEAKER_02 1:29:06

What they call like a uh ethical hooper now. Um yeah, you know, taking. But uh, but yeah, I I mean I like I like taking. You know, you're like fuck you when you take or whatever, and you're right. Um there is a bit more, yeah. You have more, it's more of a high T alpha male type type move. So, you know, that's why. Um I don't know, maybe this is gonna accidentally be the first time this guy listens to the show, and it might he might be like, these people are idiots. Um but we'll see. Uh, Mr. Nobody, if you were to attempt to model an event like the World Cup where players change teams very temporarily to form a new league, would you apply a correlation coefficient to players from the same pro team playing together in the event? So, like the correlation coefficient, I think maybe is like would you give them a boost? This is how I'm reading it is would you give that team a boost? Would you because they have X number of players who've played on the same team? Is that kind of how you read that?

SPEAKER_01 1:30:20

Yeah, I don't think it's like a core. I guess I could read it one of two ways. Like I I read it that that makes sense to me. Honestly, the way I read it would be like, you know, like in in in college basketball, like in the NCAA tournament, like if a big ten, if if the first weekend or first day, big ten teams do really poorly or something, then you dock the other big 10 teams or whatever. Like, basically like uh a halo effect or something that like lifts all these players, but when they're not together, they're not as good or something. Um if it's not apparent, me and you, I don't think know anything about the World Cup. The thing that's always interesting about the World Cup to me is the limits are always have always been enormous, right? Um but it's this it is this event where it feels like very one-offy to me.

SPEAKER_02 1:31:10

Like, meaning right, it's not obvious that the limits should be enormous because of how easy it is to price.

SPEAKER_01 1:31:19

Right. Right. That's what I'm saying. Like it seems like a very hard pricing problem and the limits are enormous, right? Like if I if I compare that to something like, I don't know, the NBA finals, which is going on. Like, I don't do basketball, but that seems like a much more, um, and maybe people will get mad at me for saying this, like basketball, seems like a much more manageable modeling problem than um than like the World Cup, where you know, you don't have the people playing together um like ever, really. And like how hard are they trying in these friendlies and qualifying and stuff, especially with the good teams? So um I honestly don't, I have no idea how I'd approach this. You know, it wouldn't be like in my skill set or what I would be good at.

SPEAKER_02 1:32:00

So you know I bet there's some countries where like a lot of the well, no, they probably all play in the same league, but maybe not the same team. I bet it's really rare to have more enough people on the same team on the same World Cup team for it to matter. Like it does feel like it's like two max. Um, so I probably wouldn't. My gut is also like I probably wouldn't factor it in, but I know nothing. But I you know, I'm in I'm excited. I'm you know, I'm excited to see what the World Cup's like on prediction markets. Certainly am, and I'm not like saying I'm not gonna pay attention to it. I probably should start thinking about these types of things.

SPEAKER_01 1:32:39

Okay, yeah, coming up soon.

SPEAKER_02 1:32:42

Yeah, flop, we did. Dennis is was so funny. Um I recently, this is Dennis Montero or Denny Montero, uh Denny Caps. Uh I recently learned people who have real jobs and use quad slash LLMs may have to share their transcripts. What is the worst thing you've ever said to Claude that you wouldn't want to share with your boss? I I can go if you want first.

SPEAKER_00 1:33:12

Yeah, you can go.

SPEAKER_02 1:33:13

Okay, so I actually what I would be, and I'm just gonna I'm assuming like what I would be like embarrassed to share publicly, like not necessarily my boss or whatever, but if I had to like post my transcripts on Twitter, I would actually be most embarrassed by how like deferential and nice I am to Claude and like how much I'm sucking up, like trying to get Claude to like me and not pushing, but I you know, push back where you have to, but like it is embarrassing like how much I treat Claude like a person. Like I think it I don't know, it makes me like do I think subconsciously like this is actually a person talking back to me? Like, do I think I have like a relationship with Claude? Like, I do not know. I've I've not really said anything um sadly mean, too mean to uh Claude. And I think that in itself is kind of embarrassing.

SPEAKER_01 1:34:14

Yeah, so I don't, I mean your your answer goes with mine. I I my answer is I think so. I've always thought this. I think one of the biggest like alpha, long-term alpha, like to to to keep your your your head on your shoulders is like to never talk to an LLM like a normal person. Um, I think like there's going to be this mass AI psychosis of people, like of people our age when they're you know 50, 60, 70, who like it's gonna be bad for them. Like humans are not designed to talk to a non-human who talks like so much like a human, and like their brain not like you you saying like you're too nice to it doesn't surprise me at all. Like, Mr. I can't disagree with anyone, but like I think I think like so we're not like evolved to do this. So I honestly make an effort to like not be mean, obviously, like just just give it no emotion, like not be mean, not be nice, like just treat it like a tool because like I can feel myself sometimes slipping into like this is a thing, right? Or like a being, or you know, more than just like linear algebra doing math in the background, trying to do you know, like I don't I don't want that type of psychosis.

SPEAKER_02 1:35:34

So yeah, I I will say like I don't I'm not uh I tend to do that, but there'll be occasionally like we'll we'll get something, I'll be like, that worked, like thank you. I'm like, what am I doing? Why am I thinking it? Like that's embarrassing. Like I guess I did now share this, so wait to answer that. But that is hilarious, like that people at work have to share. It is interesting, like you, you know, you're obviously um in the corporate world, and you you know, you might have more uh like experience around how bigger companies treat LLMs, but like from talking with my wife, who's you know in a corporate role, like they're very cagey about LLMs and you know, allowing their data to to go um basically to be shared with the LLM. And it's very tight and strict still, like in some in uh at least what my wife was telling me from her her corporate.

SPEAKER_01 1:36:34

Yeah, I mean, I think there's all the the the data stuff that's obvious. I think you know, I think these like if you if depending on what your company does and how important it is to your business, obviously they get extremely helpful in the actual actual aerial world. Uh like you could fit your own basically, or like have your own version on your network that's like secure and stuff. Um, but even like you know, anyone that works with like customers or clients or like outside of your organization, like there's just a huge risk of you know putting out something like AI slop that's wrong. I mean, I've seen some of the like big consulting companies that have seemingly done that. So um, yeah, I think I think you know, like anything, the big companies probably move slower than like individuals can move.

SPEAKER_02 1:37:22

Yeah, makes sense. All right. This one I'll ask you because this this is from Shipper to you. What what is SP's most embarrassing song that he will play when he's in the running hurt locker? And does he get post-nut clarity on how ridiculous his song choice is once he stops running?

SPEAKER_01 1:37:42

So I mean, I I'm curious your your thoughts. You run too, uh, and do other types of exercises and and do Pilates and stuff. Like I mostly, I don't know if this is like a weird thing about me. I've never really talked with anybody about this. Like, I mostly just listen to music I like. Like I don't, I don't really listen to like like you know, like cringe music when I'm running. I I mean I used to be like much more into like indie and alternative when I was like more college. Now, now I'm much more into I'd say like, you know, house or electronic or like stuff with fewer words because I can listen to that and actually work. And you know, my my brain can't handle actual words and stuff as much anymore. Um, so I mostly listen to like that electronic house type stuff when I run still. Um so I don't necessarily have great answer. I mean, like maybe some of the more extreme stuff like that. Like, so if I put on like a mix with that occasionally, like, you know, a song that would play like, you know, like in a frat party back in 2013 or something will come on and I'll be like, this is a little ridiculous. Um so maybe like something like that. Or my wife's a big T Swift fan. You know, we went to a concert a couple years ago. I was trying to learn all the lyrics to to make it a better you know experience for me. So maybe one of those songs. But I like I honestly don't even mind that music either. It's like not what I would listen to just myself. Like it's it's fine. So I I want to know which I want to know what Shipper listens to. Like, what is he?

SPEAKER_02 1:39:10

Yeah, I was gonna say, like, this is almost like more telling on Shipper, and we'll have to ask him about this.

SPEAKER_01 1:39:17

Yeah, like I mean, there's like some ridiculous, like not ridiculous, but like some of the like there's like some of like the more like almost into the techno stuff, which I would never listen to, like really, unless I'm like working out. Um I guess back in the day there was some like more, I don't want to say like emo, but like punk, like more that, like when I would lift. Um but yeah, no, uh it really mostly music I'd like though. So I would like listen to it not doing it. So I I don't I don't really have anything I that I that is embarrassing, I guess. I want to hear Shipper's answer.

SPEAKER_02 1:39:54

I want to hear Shippers answer. I mean, you know, for me, I was gonna say, like, so I think my weird thing is I listen to podcasts a lot when I run or whatever. So I'll be running, and then it's just like Rufus being like, Jeff, Jeff, can you just let me ask my question or something? Like, that's probably the weirdest thing I listen to.

SPEAKER_01 1:40:13

There's no way you can listen to that while you're in the hurt locker, though.

SPEAKER_02 1:40:16

No, no, no. If it's really serious, I I wouldn't listen to that. So for the case.

SPEAKER_01 1:40:21

I can listen to that if I'm doing like some zone two, whatever, but like if I'm actually running, like I can't listen to that.

SPEAKER_02 1:40:27

Yeah, I I agree with that. So for me, it's like I mean, I'm not embarrassed by this, but like I'm I'm a huge, you know, T Swift is a big running genre of mine. It'll either be rap or it'll be what I call like the female pop stars. So like Olivia Rodrigo, T Swift, Gracie Abrams, whatever. Like it'll just be a Spotify mix of those. But like those are good artists. I stand by that, you know. I don't know.

SPEAKER_01 1:41:00

It's a no-shame podcast. We're just you know proud of who we are here.

SPEAKER_02 1:41:04

That's right. That's right. Um, okay. Troy's question is is a is a long one. Wait, that's the next one, right? Yeah. Okay. Troy, do you I kind of want to like summarize this and okay? You summarize it. Okay.

SPEAKER_01 1:41:20

So his question was basically like the the the punchline is do you think beating NFL's sides is quote unquote too hard, or is a liquidity just not high enough to be profitable after the cost of resources? And then he went on to say, like, you could go like infinite, like assuming you could get like let's just say you can get billions down, like you could you could incur a lot of costs, like through legal, potentially illegal methods to like you know, put uh as far as putting like satellites in space or other types of things, like how you could go infinitely far to gain an edge. And so the the closing questions are how do you assess is this market unbeatable, or do I just not have access to what it takes to beat it? And if I do get access to resources, will I be able to get down enough to still make money after after those costs? Um, I could go first quick. Like, yeah, I I think I mean I guess I'll start with like I think there are people who beat NFL sides at post. Like, I think I think that's like like people don't think those people exist. I I believe those people exist. I I know um I don't follow like the the NBA finals market that closely, but I think there was a pretty sizable move late for game three, yes, like what would have been yesterday. Um right, like I and that's that's obviously like not an NFL side, but that's the NBA Finals, so like comparable, right? And so like I someone has to be the best at this, like just by definition of how ordering goes, like someone has to be the best at this. And so the person who's the best at this will always be able to like should always be able to like be reasonable at close. Like it can not not every game, but like there's certain spots where they're gonna have a different opinion at close. Um so like I think those people exist. How I determine, like, like for me for this type of question, like it's just like a these hard problems, it's just like not ever something that's been intriguing to me because it's like the return versus the time and effort and just other opportunities are like far easier relative to my bankroll wealth, whatever. Um but like I'm sure these people exist. I think like this is probably honestly like what the the huge syndicates, like the star lizards and stuff, like that's like what they're like they're doing this stuff. Like, I'm not saying the legal stuff, right? Or whatever, but like they're pushing like every boundary and yeah, deploying huge resources, huge numbers of employees and stuff. So um, I mean, that's how I think about it, though.

SPEAKER_02 1:44:01

Yeah, I I I think the same. I like how Troy asked the question. I mean, my favorite of his suggestions was build a fake player management ERP company, you sell to the league that operates at a loss, but has backdoor to your models, so you get player info first. It's like that's probably illegal, but like the the con the concept of like, are you truly like actually doing turning over every stone? Um, and thinking outside the box, I think it generally works well in the AP world. Um to the actual NFL question, I agree with SP, like somebody's probably beating them at post even. Um, but to the other question, like you have to worry about the thing with like doing a lot of like upfront investment is why it's like probably good for the NFL is like that market will always be really liquid, but there's not many markets where like you're gonna be given a very long period of time to receive like your return on investment, um, because of how sports works and how edges work, and you know, close up, people get smart, like you're betting into people, you're giving now away certain information, you know. Um it's always gonna be difficult. So I think that like idea of like how much to invest is very difficult in and stuff like in stuff like this. Um and it's always it's always good to it's yeah, you net like I wouldn't like go out and like build this, you know, fake player management company now. Um but like the concept of like are you actually doing enough and what's what is Star Lizard doing, you know, probably interesting outside the box stuff because they have a lot of people, so yeah. I agree. But now let's get to the question that we both spent too much time on. Um this is Broner's question. Give me a rule change for two different sports, one you care about and one you were ambivalent towards slash don't like that you think would make the sport assuredly better. Um so I've so the one for a sport I like is is golf, and it came rather easy to me. But the the one for the sport that I'm like ambivalent towards, and I think you we talked about this beforehand, you had the same experience. Like I have written down like four different things, and I was thinking about this all day. Um, and I want to pitch a couple of them to you in front of it. Okay. So I'm gonna start with golf. Golf, I think the easiest rule change, everybody's like, oh, you should be allowed to drop out of divot in the fairway. Who cares? That doesn't matter. The the the rule change golf needs to make is that out of bounds needs to play a lot, like a lateral hazard. Basically, what happens is if you hit a ball, let's say there's like water, a lake running down the right side of the fairway, and then on the left side of fairway, there's out of bounds, which is like somebody's backyard or whatever. If you slice one into the lake, you get to go all the way up to you know where the ball went into the lake, drop it, hit it. It's not a good shot, but it's just not like absolutely devastating. It's a tough tee shot, right? If you hook it out of bounds, you have to basically take a two-stroke penalty, and now you hit another one from the T hitting three, it's a difficult shot. So the penalty is actually on holes like where there's out of bounds, it's actually higher than two strokes, it's like two point whatever strokes. Um and it's just too much. It's too much. And the thing is, like at the at the pro level, they don't hit a lot out of bounds, but like in as a you know, playing competitive junior golf and like kind of you know, obviously not being as good, like out of bounds, like haunted my dreams. Like it is just the most terrifying thing in the whole world. It's just too much stress. Like, like, let's move it out.

SPEAKER_01 1:48:24

That's a great take. I mean, I'm a total hack. And like when we would play, we would just like if we're playing, we would just play. You hit it OB, you just drop near where you hit OB, you know, basically like whether it's water. I mean, because like if you're you know, all of my takes were for professional sports.

SPEAKER_02 1:48:39

I'm glad you, you know, you're a real man of the people, giving a fix that helps the common player of the and I I do think like it should also be implemented in professional golf, it just doesn't matter as much. But the other thing is in your your example, like when you're playing casually with your friends, but then you decide to like play for money. Well, what are you playing? Like if you hit one out, if your if your opponent hits one out of bounds and you're playing for money, like do you be like, yep, you gotta re-t.

SPEAKER_01 1:49:06

I think you all just like we would just collectively agree on you know, yeah, is this right and which is done.

SPEAKER_02 1:49:13

Right. And I think like that that is that is the change that needs to be made. Um so I didn't know if you had one for a sport you cared about, and then we can just so the thing for me is like I don't I don't know if I like care about a sport more than any other.

SPEAKER_01 1:49:26

Like I go in and out of what I care about sports, yeah. So I have I have a big long list. Uh why why don't you just give yours and then I'll give it a okay.

SPEAKER_02 1:49:34

I'll I don't want to I guess we're kind of I'll give the three that I'll give the three that kind of made my final cut. Okay. So these two I didn't make the final one, but I think in hockey you should be able to kick the puck into the net for a goal. So in in the way the rule is now is if you place your skate but you don't make a kicking motion and the puck goes off your skate and into the goal that's a goal but if you make like a little shoving kicking motion that's not a goal and there's every you know you'll see this you know a handful of times like the they'll go through like a five minute replay of like was that a kicking motion or did he just put his skate there or whatever um and I just think like it's a cool goal like if you're you get like your stick tangled up and you're like off balance and the puck kind of comes your way and you give it like a kick in like that's like a highlight like that would be on ESPN like that's a cool play like um the reason and I was like very very convinced to to go with this but I started doing some Googling and I think the reason why is like they don't want to incentivize like kicking skates around the goalie like as far as a safety concern. So I'm gonna caveat that is you know can we find a way to safety far too much thought I'm just gonna rattle off takes that I've not researched at all okay then the the the non-research one that I think now is a bad take is if you have a free kick in soccer, you know you should be able to throw it if you want to because I don't know if you've watched but like there's this guy in Brentford that like does these crazy long throw-ins that actually like play kind of like corner kicks um but they're from the sideline. So I think like maybe making throw and it's it's those are pretty cool. So making throwing more of a part of soccer. And then the one that I'm sticking with as my my main is you know I think people are kind of trying to like figure out why baseball you know it's not you know no one's playing ethical baseball anymore. They're not getting the ball in play you know it's home run, strikeout walk, right? Everybody's trying to do all this weird thing stuff to fix it. I mean I think the issue is the value of a ball in play is not high enough. So you just I think what you need to do is you need to pluck a defender off the field in baseball. Just take one out you know and then you can you and the thing is like they have all you can't play the shift or whatever. Literally just pluck a defender out of there and let them place the eight you know where they want to place them and then like the value of a ball in play goes up and you don't have to do like these weird synthetic like shift rules that don't that are like weirdly hard to you know you have to like kind of be like oh I know it when I see it like it's a shift or whatever. But yeah that that's my my main one.

SPEAKER_01 1:52:32

I like that I'm honestly I think a lot of sports this is you know if you say this to any sports purist they're gonna be like what are you talking about? But on like for sports I don't know that much about it's like I feel like if you removed a player it would be better. Like I feel like that is true in soccer. I I feel like that's true. Yeah um but those were those weren't mine I can give mine so okay for all sports I I alluded to this only people on the field or court can challenge that's like one I love that one rule for all sports it would get rid of I've been watching you know NBA like all this ridiculous like finger spinning of like go look at it every time like any play happens like they spin the finger it's a challenge you better be right you get a couple of them like it would get rid of so much of that so only the players can challenge um for I I know Broner I think he's like a boxing person so I even got a boxing one in here um for anytime I've watched boxing it's extremely frustrating like that they just like grab each other so it's a point deduction if you grab or lock up with the uh opponent like we're we're done with that we're we're here to to punch and fight we don't we don't get to catch our breath and grab each other if you're like in a bad position there'd be more knock all would be dead yeah exactly it would be but it would be better action so you're not allowed to grab uh so that's my boxing one for F1 um there should be stages like NASCAR like NASCAR there are stages so it resets the race because you know F1 is just like the person that gets in front and then it's basically over NASCAR is far more interesting because um there's stages the other thing is F1 shouldn't allow like 70 people to touch the car on a pit pit crew uh like the pit crew like the pit stops in that in F1 are like two seconds in NASCAR they're like eight or nine or something like that. It makes it much more interesting and important the pit crew pit crew variance right the variance adding stages and reducing the number of pit crew people would make it more interesting in my uh in my opinion um soccer hockey um this is like one I always hear so I honestly don't know how good of a take this is the offsides thing seems insane to me I'm not saying you get rid of offsides but it should not be like one pinky is over the line like in these soccer things that I've seen. I'm sure there's going to be one in World Cup where like someone's pinky toe is like past the last defender and they call him offsides. I think it should be more forgiving something like the entire body needs to be past the line in soccer I don't know enough about hockey to know what the rule is but like these this like weighted unbated breath is the goal real for those sports every time one happens is just bad for the sports so they got to figure out something to to fix that. NBA I had to three the shot clock should start when you inbound the ball we need to get rid of this like roll the ball and like let it sit in the backcourt and run time like nobody wants to watch this. It should start when you inbound the ball um and last one is you should get a defined number of substitutions a quarter like you know in soccer you only get so many substitutions in baseball once you sub out you're done in the NBA you shouldn't just be able to like sub offense defense a million times at the end of the game it slows the game down and also like devalues the importance of two-way players which should be important and valuable so you should only get so many subs um a quarter or something in the NBA uh NFL last one um I think I've said this before pass interference should not be a spot foul like if you uh I was wondering about if you were gonna bring this up yeah like it's extremely I I'm the reason is like you don't want to give someone an incentive to just grab someone 50 yards down a field when you're beat. I've watched a lot of football it is extremely rare I see that in college football but I see every weekend like a 50 yard pass interference penalty and so in the NFL so I don't think they like even out um so there should be no spot fouls like that um related a five yard penalty on something like third and 20 should never be a first down it should be a five yard penalty. And then lastly there shouldn't be an onside kick. You should after you score a touchdown a field goal you should get the ball team that scores should get the ball back but it should be fourth and 20 from like your own 25 yard line and you can either go for it or punt. Obviously most of the time teams will punt um but that's a good one. The key with this is it couples with the pass interference one because you can't have fourth and 20 and then get like some 30 yard pass interference that is so but isn't everybody gonna tackle like that's one where like people just start tackling their receivers right right but that that's that you know it should be hard right but like you get a 15 out there right yeah that's true that's that's actually true that that's true. Yeah so like they can do that but you can't get the because like it would be so frustrating like yeah so those those two have to go together. So that that was that was my list.

SPEAKER_02 1:57:34

I'm sure there were some horrible takes in there so but hopefully some good ones too I like that we stuck to our our brands and the UN like very wide did a ton of different sports and I was like going down uh um you were Reddit hole on why this actually happened you know why didn't they make this a rule and like um okay there's a couple quick hitters and then uh basically we have one from Matt will there be markets on the YouTube golf tour and will you bet them I think there almost certainly will be on on Polly and in Call She just judging by what's we've seen um will I bet them probably not probably not maybe I'll take a I might take a punt I that I could see those being a good spot where you take like a you're gonna it's gonna be all ball knowledge and you just take like a couple big no positions against a couple people I could maybe see that that being uh case I assume you're skipping the YouTube golf question. I got nothing on YouTube okay big pop but you get a button that gives you a hundred grand every day but every press lowers your energy level by one percent permanently how many times are you pressing it? So did you read this as if you press it once you get a hundred grand a day or just you get a hundred I originally didn't but now I'm reading it like that I I can't imagine that's the the answer because clearly you you press the button right yeah I just press it once just press it once and that's probably good. So so let's take it as you get a button you can press it you know every day but each day you press it you lose one percent of your energy and get 100k um but the energy is permanent I would not I wouldn't press it you wouldn't press it a single time not even once I'll be honest like I feel like my like my energy like I'm walking a fine line like I don't have a ton of energy I honestly thought I mean the way I thought through this is like there's zero percent chance I'm pressing it more than like like five to ten times like there's I'm saying there no no I'm saying there's like zero percent chance I'll ever press it more than that like it's just a knee knee jerk reaction.

SPEAKER_01 1:59:40

Yeah I think it depends on how meaningful pressing it like something like three to four times would be for you um yeah I'm probably not I might press it a couple times like how how much is one percent energy that's what I was trying to quantify it's like I don't I'm a couple years younger than you too that's that's true. You'll notice maybe I'll feel differently in in a couple different when you're 35 man it catches up um but you can feel it like you feel the difference in like energy just between like now and when you were like in college absolutely like if you asked me that in college I'd be like I don't know I'll let it rip like I it's like but now I'm like I need every bit of energy I can I can get and I certainly don't want it I'm gonna assume I'm gonna get less and less energy so like if it's permanent I'm also planning for you know John in 20 years. Yeah it's it seems unlikely you know like 70 year old version of yourself is going to say I would rather you almost certainly would say I'd I'd rather have a 1% more energy than 100k so exactly and that being said like if you if you're in a spot like you really need 100k that's a great opportunity to have like I would certainly I mean people trade their energy like people make physical sacrifice like all the time. So like that's why I think it really depends on where you are in life.

SPEAKER_02 2:01:01

But I I I I don't think anybody should press it more than like yeah 10 times especially if you listen to this podcast you know come on you you'll be fine out there and make some money. Okay or peanut question of the week I'm more curious to know if you think this was like a good peanut question of the week or bad but um you know this is the peanut question of the week get hiccups an hour every day and I think he clarified it was like 10 a.m you get the hiccups or something um uh ranging from very minor to extremely uncomfortable or sneeze 70 times per day randomly throughout the day heavy sneezes but you know your nose isn't runny you don't have a lot of snot whatever uh I I for me this one's easy so I don't I thought this was an easy one too my answer is sneezing wow we are opposed mindset okay so it is a good question okay that's a good question is for people to actually disagree yeah I mean I I could give my yeah you go you go I mean I don't know when the last time you have hit had hiccups are they're like and especially if they're uncomfortable it's like you can't really do anything when you have I mean like it's not pleasant like to have hiccups like and sneezing 70 times a day that's what like three sneezes at an hour?

SPEAKER_01 2:02:14

Like that's not you sneezing in your sleep that was an important part like are you waking up regularly let's assume you're not waking up because of the sneezing then it would be I was assuming I think it's like a no-brainer yeah but then you're sneezing seven if I sneeze four times a day or four times an hour well it wouldn't be four times an hour it would be like yeah it would be four right well it was like three I it would be like three if you if it was every hour but assuming you slept so four yeah it'd be like four and a half times an hour big sneezes.

SPEAKER_02 2:02:49

Yeah that's my life's not changing at all yeah I'd have to like set aside 10 a.m every day well that that's the thing is you can schedule it so I just set it aside I'm like okay I can't I'm not being reached at 10 a.m I'm gonna sit and watch TV and just hiccup. And you know what I'm not gonna feel guilty. It's very minor to extremely uncomfortable yeah like you can feel extremely uncomfortable for an hour that's okay like I know when it's coming I can talk about any point. Yeah but you're gonna go out and like okay you're you're you're a new father your kid is gonna go to school you're gonna now be going around all these parents and whatever you're gonna be known as the guy who just violently sneezes all the time like I did think about that like the uh the social aspect is clearly worse. Yeah right this one I'm just I'm like I'm setting up at 10 a.m I'm gonna hick up and I'm gonna watch you know yeah but sometimes you need to be able to avoid like imagine how embarrassing that is to be like you're not gonna be at like parent teacher conference or something 10 a.m like you're gonna go in there and hiccup for an hour. But do those ever happen at 10 a.m I feel like my 10 a.m is like under my control.

SPEAKER_01 2:04:02

Right like I'm sure you've had a 10 a.m commitment at some point in your life.

SPEAKER_02 2:04:06

But what I would I would obviously be like really trying never to have a 10 a.m commitment.

SPEAKER_01 2:04:11

Yeah no I I I got you so I don't know this is a good question then because I thought I was like oh yeah like this is obviously the uncomfortable part of it the uncomfortable part of it makes it a no-brainer for me because like a sneeze like I'm making other people uncomfortable maybe but yeah heavy sneeze yeah yeah I mean for me I just like the scheduling I'll be honest um well we ran over two so I don't know if you had a Bayesian update but I'm okay to to to punt it no the only thing I had I I I enjoyed uh your and your podcast with uh Mr. Peanut Butter last week and thought it was uh a an affirmation that is great to hear like people like I know we do our interviews and everything I'd love to like even get people who've been on like in a more free flowing manner um to like talk just for an extended period of time like in the space. I think it's really um cool to hear like other voices in like a more free flowing way. So hopefully more people uh maybe maybe everybody should start their own podcast.

SPEAKER_02 2:05:20

Because I enjoyed having one extra one to listen to so right it is I I do I I echo that like I'm always I'm always excited to see people um who are doing it like get people on and talk with kind of like their guard down and and whatnot and and you know I do think there's a lot of good podcasts these days uh th I like Thon on circles circles off was really good and when Shipper went onto the panel with uh flop and peanut butter that was really good you know I I'll echo that as as my Bayesian update it's like let's you know get more of it if you're you know if you're trying to start a podcast but you don't know um what to do yeah DM us happy to help we don't know great to well we don't know what to do but if you you know I'll tell you what uh web software we use to record that was you can go from there uh but yeah uh you know great to have you back and and you want to say anything to to the audience um on your triumphant return no I you know obviously didn't don't have you know full full sleep or anything but hopefully uh it was uh it was a a valiant performance that was great all right uh we'll see everybody next week