|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 291 OF 501 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jun-24-14 | | dakgootje: <How did people cheat at this?? > From CG's previous post: <There was a potential cheating scandal last leg, which if true, means that several accounts were being maintained by one person.> |
|
| Jun-24-14 | | notyetagm: <dakgootje: <How did people cheat at this?? > From CG's previous post: <There was a potential cheating scandal last leg, which if true, means that several accounts were being maintained by one person.>> Damn, people are cheating when there is no real money at stake??? Cheating over play money?? And I thought I had no life. :-) |
|
| Jun-24-14 | | hms123: <dak> <How did people cheat at this?> It seems easy enough: set up phony accounts to pour money into very low odds bets at the last minute so that the payoffs to the favorites would be higher than they should be. Then bet the favorites. My guess is that most people don't bet the favorites but bet the <pick 3> instead hoping to get lucky. As you can tell from my results, I just bet for fun on the basis of nothing in particular. |
|
Jun-24-14
 | | OhioChessFan: I think there's 2 distinct camps of winners:
1. The bet big on Pick 3's and hope to get lucky.
2. The math/stat freaks who critically analyze the odds and bet heavy on games where the bookie payoff is higher than the real life odds would suggest. Hard work, but it does seem to produce pretty consistent results. |
|
Jun-24-14
 | | WannaBe: I always choose B-B-B on the pick 3, and I always lose. |
|
| Jun-25-14 | | wordfunph: <chessgames.com> i'm starving, any update? please. |
|
Jul-04-14
 | | Chessgames Bookie: ♗ UPDATE ♗
Great news! After a 3 month break, the ChessBookie! game will be returning. The new leg will start in a few days, thanks largely to the selfless offer by <SwitchingQuylthulg> who is now being trained in the finer points of chess bookmaking. This year will have a shortened season with only two qualifying legs and then the Championship. So the Summer Leg starts shortly, then comes the Fall Leg, and near the 1st of the year the Championship Leg will start as always. There may be some small rule changes and other nifty features introduced, more on that soon. |
|
Jul-04-14
 | | Annie K.: Wonderful news - thanks sooo much, <Switch> and <cg>! You couldn't have made a better choice. =) |
|
| Jul-05-14 | | wordfunph: <Switch> come on down! |
|
Jul-05-14
 | | Stonehenge: I like this bet:
Fireworks wager |
|
| Jul-05-14 | | dakgootje: Nice job SQ :)
<<SwitchingQuylthulg> who is now being trained in the finer points of chess bookmaking.> I like how you pretend there are things he doesn't know yet :) |
|
Jul-05-14
| | OhioChessFan: At least <Switch> went out on top: <288. SwitchingQuylthulg -73,217> |
|
Jul-05-14
| | OhioChessFan: I have an idea. Why don't you let <Switch> run the Christmas Hunt too? |
|
Jul-05-14
| | Annie K.: <dakkie> heh, I had that thought too! ;) <Ohio> um, hate to break this to you, but I can't see any reason why <Switch> couldn't continue playing the Bookie game just because he's now the Bookie. It's not like he'll get to know the bet outcomes ahead of time! :D |
|
Jul-05-14
| | OhioChessFan: Oh man, and here I thought the competition would be thinned out. |
|
Jul-05-14
 | | SwitchingQuylthulg: I will not be playing this leg. I haven't quit playing for good, though; other users have also volunteered to help with the Bookie game, and the plan is for another (highly qualified) member to run the game next leg. When that happens you'll see my evil comeback as a player :) |
|
Jul-05-14
| | Annie K.: Very good, I was also thinking that several volunteers taking turns would be a great setup for the Bookie, to ease the workload, although I don't think I have mentioned that particular idea to <cg>. But I still can't see any reason why the Bookie operator shouldn't participate in the game. Srsly, there's not only no issue of "insider knowledge" here, there isn't even any conflict of interests whatsoever! :) |
|
| Jul-05-14 | | hms123: <Annie> <Switch> It is a question of appearances. The Bookie has decisions to make about how to handle late bets, when to cancel bets, possible cheating, which bets to offer, etc. Even if the Bookie were (like <Switch>) above reproach, there still might be complaints about a decision anytime that decision benefited the Bookie. |
|
Jul-05-14
| | Annie K.: <hms> I believe Daniel handles late bet (usually simply refunded) issues and possible cheating investigations, not the Bookie, and the question of which bets to offer could be simply determined by a minimal tournament category number requirement. Well, yeah, I trust <Switch> to the nth degree, where n is definitely not delta, ;) but I suppose there may be a point about appearances muttering here. :s |
|
Jul-05-14
| | Stonehenge: I don't trust Quylthulg at all, see http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/quylt... |
|
Jul-05-14
| | WannaBe: I don't trust anyone whose name I can't spell. |
|
Jul-05-14
| | Annie K.: <Stonehenge> so you trust him to have picked a representative username then? ;p |
|
Jul-05-14
| | Stonehenge: Yes, but not as representative as your username :) |
|
Jul-05-14
| | Annie K.: That falls under 'unimaginative', more like... :D |
|
Jul-05-14
 | | perfidious: Bookmaking without representation? I think not!
I'm taking unimaginative as my own at -450; y'all want to play, +350 is the number. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 291 OF 501 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
