The Ultimate Sucker Bet

Nick Douglas

Registered User
Forum Member
Oct 31, 2000
3,688
15
0
49
Los Angeles, CA, USA
I posted this on my page but I thought some of you may like to read it here as well. I would love to get feedback from y'all as well.

THE ULTIMATE SUCKER BET

I challenge any serious NFL handicapper to produce for me a documented record on teasers that makes money and betters their record on straight NFL plays. It may happen over the course of a few weeks or maybe even a season, but it won't happen long term and here is why.

Teasers are a bad bet, period. They are bad mathematically and to make matters worse, they prey on the worst attributes of the gambler by dangling a sweet red apple witha poisonous pulp.

The standard NFL bet is a -110 wager, or 1.91. That means a winning NFL bet returns you 91% of your investment, while a losing bet returns you 0%. A -110, two team, six point teaser is a -262 bet, or 1.382. That means over the long haul, if each play coincides with each other teaser play at absolute randomness, each teaser hit will return you 38.2% of your investment, while each losing teaser side or total will return you 0%.

Even if one team teasers were allowed, this would be a bad bet. Let us accept that with an additional six points, the average NFL bet would hit at 67%. Taking 38.2 * 67, we get $2,559 in positive money from a 38.2% return on investment hitting at a 67% clip. On the other hand, we take a $3,300 loss from the 33% of the games that lose. That means if we played 100 games risking $100 each ($10,000 total wagered), we would lose $741, for an average return on investment of -7.4% mathematically (for those who don't know, -4.5% is the average return on investment assuming a 50% winning percentage on standard side or total plays).

It is now proven that teasers are a bad bet mathematically. There is no question about that. But in reality teasers present a far uglier picture than a staggering *64%* increase in the house edge.

Teasers cannot be played as straight bets. They must be parlayed. You cannot simply take 6 points and bet a single game at -262. The games must be parlayed. While parlaying games poses no theoretical mathematical disadvantage, any experienced gambler will tell you the danger of parlays. Letting the fortunes of one strong play rest on another is risky at best. For side/total correlated parlays, I endorse this tactic in small numbers on select occasions. There will sometimes be a game in which the style of play by a team will favor an over or an under, and therefore parlaying the two plays gives the player a distinct advantage. In shorter terms, if one hits, the other is likely to hit. That is the exception to the rule. In general parlays hurt the player.

All of the mathematical disadvantages of teasers are obvious, but what really troubles me about them is the way it lets books prey into the weakness of the player. I believe that the most damaging temptation for a handicapper is the allure of easy money. By easy money I mean a bet that looks too good to be true.

With a teaser, the player has the opportunity to whiddle down any play giving up to 7 points down to a virtual pickem or maybe even a slight dog. In the players mind, they are now getting a strong favorite who needs only to win the game outright to cash the ticket. That scenario is the quintessential example of easy money. Anyone can pick straight up winners, right? The hard part is allowing for the line.

There are a myriad of ways this hurts the player. First of all, the goal of the teams you are betting on is to win, not to cover seven points. By teasing the game down, you are paying greater odds but your opponents goal is the same. They want to win. A seven point underdog does not care if they lose by 5 or 15, a loss is a loss. So now you are essentially paying -262 for seven meaningless points that could have been had for -110.

Teasers give meaningless points to underdogs, too. A dog that loses by 3 is no happier than a dog that loses by 8. They are trying to win the game. Your bet gives you a slight mathematical advantage, but it does not make the team you are betting on any more likely to perform in the acceptable range for you to cash a winning ticket.

I am well aware that the six points are actually not always meaningless and that many times they can turn winning wagers to losing ones. But my goal is to win over the LONG TERM. A month or three months of losses are troubling, but as long as I make money over the course of my lifetime, I am happy with my handicapping. Over the long term, teasers give more of an advantage to the house mathematically and psychologically.

I know many of you will still play teasers so my piece of advice to you is to meticulously track your results and compare them to your results on straight bets. Choose your teasers carefully and play very few of them to minimize the added house advantage. I have noticed a large increase in teaser plays on this site and I believe it was due to fletcher and Nolan Dalla having success betting teasers a year ago. I urge you all to consider the hard facts about teasers and play them more conservatively so that we can all have profitable NFL seasons.
 

phoenix566

Cannabis Sativa
Forum Member
Jun 20, 2001
1,571
0
0
inside your head
Hate to agree
wink.gif
but I do here. I was thinking about this on my ride to work this morning and how smart a move I made, playing 6 team 6 point teasers at 6:1 for only $20 and at most 2 per week. This will not hurt my bankroll. This play I EXPECT to lose, just like I expect to lose if I buy a lottery ticket, which I don't. If it hits, yippee, in most cases I had the sides in normal plays and hopefully did well with them.

A book evens out their action to ensure a profit for them. Sometimes they make take sides, or be perceived to, yet for the most part, at 50/50 they make a nice chunk. How do books even out parlays and teasers? I am not aware of a way that they can. But they don't have to thanks to the mathematical percentages explained above.

How many times have you been on a 3 team 10 pointer where two win handily (and would straight up) and the other 10 point fave becomes your heartbreaker? Straight up you would be +.9 units.

TEASERS/PARLAYS = DEATH. Play them small or play them for fun, but understand they ain't gonna make you money.
 

Bonovox

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 29, 2000
140
0
0
NY, NY, USA
Nick, I tend to agree with you. In fact, Anders and I just had a conversation about teasers last week.

However, just for your formulas, there is no return on investment. You're looking at expected value. There is no commodity, it's just a pure expected value. Plus, the expected value on a loss isn't 0% - it's negative. The problem is, you can't do an ROI analysis here. A winning bet brings you +91% and a losing bet drops you into negative. A tie would give you a 0% expected value. If you have a 50/50 chance to win and you're betting -110, 50% of the time you will win 1 unit and 50% of the time you will lose 1.1 units. So your expected value is actually negative not 0% - which is why there is a Vegas.
 

Nick Douglas

Registered User
Forum Member
Oct 31, 2000
3,688
15
0
49
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Bonovox,

I must not have pointed that out clearly enough in the writeup. The ROI for regular -110 plays is about -4.5%. That is how I got the additional 64% house edge on teasers. The house normally gets a 4.5% egde, but with teasers they get a 7.4% edge. 2.9/4.5 =64% added edge for the house. Hope that clears things up.
 

yyz

Under .500
Forum Member
Mar 16, 2000
45,192
2,783
113
On the course!
What's really funny?

Most teasers I win, and I am not bullshitting here, cover the spread outright.

So, the parlay would have been better.

There is no "free meal", and never was.

To me, a teaser is what I play when I just want a play, and have no solid choice.

If you think about it......at -110, a straight wager is a bad investment too.
 

Nolan Dalla

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 7, 2000
1,201
2
0
Washington, DC/Las Vegas, NV
Fellow Handicappers:

I'll address this question further in tomorrow's write-up. I have a great deal to say about this subject -- and I will support my hypothesis with quite a bit more material, based on facts which accout for standard deviation.

However, because this is somewhat time-sensistive -- I do want to clear up a few misunderstandings here in reponse to Nick Douglas' post.

Nick Douglas in his write-up commented that teasers are a poor bet, mathematically speaking. He calls them "the ultimate sucker play." Certainly, when teasers are played INDESCRIMINANTLY, he is correct. I spent a couple of paragraphs pointing this out in my column (see "The Problem" in today's report), so this idea is nothing new. In fact, you could very well say the very same thing about all sports gambling, that all gambling in and of itself is a bad investment since it is mathematically disadvantageous to the player.

How can a player win, you might say, when the house had a 52.38 percent advantage? If you can't win at a craps table with a 51.45 percent disadvantage, how can you buck twice the vig???

Answer: It's all situational. We CAN find plays that are PROVEN to be good investments. What I pointed out in my write-up (I thought the point was rather clear to readers -- maybe I should go back and re-write it to make it more simple) was that IN SOME SITUATIONS betting teasers can be a profitable play. To prove this, I have data that goes back 11 years. Again, I will give addtional evidence on this point in tomorrow's report.

I am certainly not suggesting to play teasers INDISCRIMINANTLY which is a losing propostion, but to play them based on picking up key numbers. Furthermore, I am also stating that not only should you not bet the teasers based soley on math, but that you should also look at other factors. If anyone has EVIDENCE to refute my numbers, go ahead and put it up.

Anyone wnat to challenge the 82 percent WIN RATE of situational teasers (home dogs getting +1.5 to +2.5). Based on 181 trials (games) it is beyond 2 SD (statisitical deviations) to see results that have been produced.

My conclusion is that THERE IS indeed a correlation between teasing teams in given situations and picking up key numbers, and having a mathematical edge in handicapping.

-- Nolan Dalla
 

Bonovox

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 29, 2000
140
0
0
NY, NY, USA
Gotcha, and just so you know, I agree with you completely.

I just wanted to let you know there is no ROI analysis, it's expected value of return - only because there is no "investment".

Anyway, the teaser expected value is far below 0. And you're correct, in the long run you're going to lose cash because in most instances you don't need the extra points.

As an analysis I will use Nolan's teasers for the year. Let me first say that I am in total awe of Nolan's handicapping skills and have been following his picks since 1997. This year he kinda shocked me with all the teaser plays.

So far he is 9-10 this year on teasers. But, if he played these all straight up instead of in teasers his record would be a lot worse - it would be 15-23.

Of the 9 wins:

3 of the teasers won both games ATS - not needing the 6 points. (He would be 6-0 ATS on straight bets)

5 games spilt, one team needing the 6 points. (He would be 5-5 ATS)

Only 1 teaser won when both teams lost ATS - Cincy and GB on 10/8. (He would be 0-2 ATS)

So in his 9 wins, if he bet them straight up instead of +9 units he would have +3.3 units (11-7 ATS record)

However, of the 10 losses -

4 games lost with one game winning ATS and the other losing even with the 6 points. (4-4 ATS straight up)

1 game lost with both teams losing ATS but one team covering the additional 6. (0-2 ATS straight up)

And 5 games lost with both teams losing ATS and with the 6. - neither needed the 6. (0-10 ATS straight up)

So in the 10 losses, instead of a -11 units, he would have -13.6 units (4-16 ATS)

Which means, although Nolan is not making a profit with his teasers, his losses have been minimized YTD. Instead of only being down 2 units to date, he would be down 10.3 units

And Nolan is absolute right. If you pick and choose your teaser places, you can definitely increase your expected return based on prior stat trends. But you're correct, if you just pick blindly, you're expected return is terrible.



[This message has been edited by Bonovox (edited 10-23-2001).]
 

phoenix566

Cannabis Sativa
Forum Member
Jun 20, 2001
1,571
0
0
inside your head
If your team needs the teaser points to cover, why wouldn't you be looking at the other side ATS?

Bonovox, It is hard to quantify the comment that Nolan has lessened his losses by playing teasers. He said that he looks for situations to pick up key numbers. To me this implies he would not have played many of these straight up, therefore not be 15-23.

I just think, situational or not, teasers/parlays present difficult odds to overcome (not impossible, but very difficult)
 

pepin46

Registered User
Forum Member
Oct 6, 2000
525
0
0
miami, fl.
now we are talking.

personally, you all know i bet for fun and then profit, so i do wild teasers and parlays, avoiding straight bets like the plague.

there is a time and place for teasers. i think last night was a case in point: you want action, but are not sure if "el sucko"
giants (that should be a thread in itself) will cover or not, or conversely, you like philly but everyone is telling you to go with the giants.

so what to do? tease it and take the extra 6 or 7 in the totals for security. the under was the way to go (this is one of those that nolan nails real good and we don't pay attention), despite a lot of speculation on the over, including yours truly. this particular game was a winner for all who chose either side and had the common sense (not me) to do the under, not trying to outsmart raw facts. an excellent action/defensive play that got you a winner.

one thing i do not like is to "key" a team for multiple plays. it really has the effect of all or nothing. i did not disagree with nolan teasing balt, but am not too enthusiastic about the multiple bets. this is regardless of the outcome. same applies to the pitt tease wheel. the effect here is obvious: one multiple winner and one multiple loser, or the other combinations: a clean sweep or a total loss, and a few others in between.

in conclusion: for my style of play, the teaser makes a lot of sense in some special situations and for a multiple payoff, like 5, 6 picks and beyond. the idea is not to push the number of picks for the sake of a higher payoff, but do only those teams you feel you have on the right side; choose the total wisely (research) and you should be in the ballgame, cashing them in with a certain regularity.

i would guess every week presents itself with no less than 3-4 teaser games in itself (8 picks), where you can get two picks from each game. if you have a side, you should have an idea of the total, or if you have a total, you should have a pretty good idea of the side. i don't believe you can have one without the other. each one interacts on the other, and yes, there are exceptions, of course.


pep
 

Nick Douglas

Registered User
Forum Member
Oct 31, 2000
3,688
15
0
49
Los Angeles, CA, USA
I can understand the idea that certain games are more likely to come within six points of the spread more than others. And I don't want to be misunderstood: I am well aware that some players make a profit on teasers.

My point is that I believe strongly that time spent actively handicapping teasers would be better used handicapping regular sides and totals. Adjusting your handicapping to the new pointspread and the -262 odds is added work that, frankly, I and most other handicappers don't have time for. There is already infinite work that can be done handicapping sides and totals. Why add teasers?

I stand by my theory that you will be hard pressed to find a handicapper that produces winning teaser results over the long haul that are better than his side and total results. Anyone who can prove me wrong is welcome to post their plays in the forum and track their record.

Lotsa people like teasers as a fun action bet and I can understand that. Whatever floats your boat is your perogative. I am mainly speaking to those of you who handicap for profit.
 

theGibber1

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 27, 2001
8,615
64
0
Dallas TX
you are right but with crazy games in the nfl this year, im loving teasers.

last night all i needed was the giants to complete a 7 team 7pt teaser.
i dont go real big on teasers, but they are fun. most of my bets i do straight up, and then a 7pt teaser with all my picks.
a 6-10 team teaser has a better chance of hitting than a parlay. but its just for kicks. i totally agree with you........

ps nice call on the eagles nick.
 

Nolan Dalla

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 7, 2000
1,201
2
0
Washington, DC/Las Vegas, NV
****PLEASE NOTE THAT MY COMMENTS WILL FOLLOW BELOW (see NOLAN):


Nick Douglas wrote:
I can understand the idea that certain games are more likely to come within six points of the spread more than others. And I don't want to be misunderstood: I am well aware that some players make a profit on teasers.

***NOLAN: Bingo! I don't mean to be smart here with you Nick, but I have examined 621 trials over 11 years (the combined results of all +EV situational teasers). That's a shitload of evidence. What's that -- 55 plays a season, or about 3-4 plays a week? If indeed we have a QUANTIFYABLE EDGE why would we not exploit it? If we believe we have a possible +EV here (and I'm convinced with 97.5 percent certainty that we do) why not make some money?


My point is that I believe strongly that time spent actively handicapping teasers would be better used handicapping regular sides and totals.

***NOLAN: I'm not sure how to respond here. These two types of wagers do not necessarily exclude the other. In fact, they go hand-in-hand with resgular methodology....measuring teams strengths, motivations, emotional factors, etc. Perhaps if someone only has ten minutes to handicap games, he might be advised to focus on totals or sides (then again, he probably shouldn't even gamble on the games). I am assuming someone takes handicapping seriously and wants to: (1) IDENTIFY and (2) EXPLOIT every possible angle.

Adjusting your handicapping to the new pointspread and the -262 odds is added work that, frankly, I and most other handicappers don't have time for.

***NOLAN: I have no comment here. To each his own.

There is already infinite work that can be done handicapping sides and totals. Why add teasers?

***NOLAN: Because, if they are bet situationally, they provide an excellent way to make money?


I stand by my theory that you will be hard pressed to find a handicapper that produces winning teaser results over the long haul that are better than his side and total results.

***The two bets seem to go hand-in-hand. If a capper does not do well in sides betting (totals are a completely different matter) he may struggle with teasers, as well. However, I disagree with the notion that serious handicappers avoid teasers altogether. And, if "our" numbers are small, that doesn't prove anything. Anytime new ideas break, the public is the last to catch on. Keep in mind -- this is a fairly new area of handicapping (not much data has been published on the subject...in fact almost NOTHING has been produced on the subject!) which is why it has some exciting, and certainly very interesting possibilities and potential. Frankly (if I may be so bold) I think we are really on the cutting edge here. If you prefer a more traditional approach and that works for you, that's is wonderful. By the same token, I spend a considerable amount of time data mining and trying to come up with quantifyable angles. I believe we may have discovered one that is proven to be profitable.

Anyone who can prove me wrong is welcome to post their plays in the forum and track their record.

***NOLAN: I'm not sure anyone's track record really proves anything. If you look at my teasers this season, for example, I have bet a wide variety of plays (not just the situation I described) with marginal results. Short term results are not an indication of the plausibility of a theory or idea. It takes MANY games, and sometimes MANY years to come up with something that is really meaningful. Furthermore, I want to comment on the previous post that took my actual results and said I had "minimized" my losses by betting teasers instead of sides. I believe that's a legitimate point, although a trial of just 20 games or so really doesn't prove anything (other than the fact that I was out of my mind for playing the Ravens last week
smile.gif
)

Lotsa people like teasers as a fun action bet and I can understand that. Whatever floats your boat is your perogative. I am mainly speaking to those of you who handicap for profit.

***NOLAN: I do want to point out to Nick that if he does not like teasers or has no interest in them, that's fine. But as it applies to handicapping theory and gambling principles, teasers can be profitable plays in some situations. That's the point I was trying to make. FURTHER NOTE: I will post my mathamatical analysis of the results in my latest page update, which is going up at 6:00 pm today (Tuesday). FINAL POINT:
Thanks to Nick and to all for the discussion. We may disagree as to allocating time and work vis-a-vis handicapping (to each his own), but as a matter of theory, I stand by the hypothesis.

-- Nolan Dalla
 

Night Owl

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 4, 2001
264
0
0
Bremerton, WA
This is a very interesting topic. I think Nolan had the best point. To me, after doing this for about 4 years now, I have to agree that everything in gambling is pretty much situational. I've made the mistake before (unfortunately more than once) of playing multiple teasers in a week or playing 3, 4 or even 5 team teasers. Needless to say, that was a pretty dumb idea. When you start to incorporate more teams into your bets, it goes without saying that the liklihood of one of those teams screwing you increases greatly. So....I learned. I'm now all but done for good with parlays and teasers of 3 or more teams, the theory being that if you had a 4-team parlay, for example, and it won, that's great. But so would a 2-teamer, so why not put less risk into your bet(s)?? The first rule I ever came up with is never be unwilling to win a small amount of money. Isn't it better to win $30 than risk $30 trying to win $5,000 on something wild? I think so.

I think a case can also be made, like was mentioned, that any sort of gambling is a bad idea. Betting straight offers just as little of a guarentee as anything else, in my opinion.

That being said, if you use discipline and only play 2-team teasers when you feel convinced they will win, I don't think your odds of losing that bet are any worse than they would be if you made a 2 team parlay or played either/both games straight. I've found that when I play teasers -- but didn't do my homework and/or have any reasons to be making the plays I ended up making, that's when I lose em!

This may be pointless rambling and if so, I do apologize, but I want to point out an example of a teaser I won in which I DID do my homework, research, etc. One week, W. Virginia was playing Ohio U at home and Arizona State was hosting San Diego State. Granted, I should have just played those games straight because I did like them that way and so that part of it was a mistake, but seeing that on a teaser, all these teams had to do was win by 2, I took it. My reasoning was that here were 2 big-conference schools playing at home vs. 2 not-so-big conference schools and rarely do you see a smaller school like these go on the road against bigger (and better) teams and win outright. Plus San Diego State had just looked like crap vs. Arizona (at home, no less) the week before. Win or lose....at least I had a reason. I believed in my reasoning and it turned out well. So all in all, I think it comes down to homework, being selective and not including too many teams. No guarentee that you are going to win....but never was any guarentee on anything anybody else has ever bet or ever will bet, either. Just my 2 cents.

Night Owl
 

pepin46

Registered User
Forum Member
Oct 6, 2000
525
0
0
miami, fl.
nick

i don't know what you mean by "handicapping for profit". as far as i am concerned, most of the people in this forum do, including myself and all those who responded here.

i indicated to you earlier that the only way i could get serious about gambling would be to do games at 1,000 per, at least, and i refuse to do it. i do have better things to do with my money that yield much more than what i could get from gambling (or lose).

to me, serious sports gamblers (not necessarily handicappers) are hard pressed to gamble xx number of dollars every day or every week. that means that in the nfl you would have to pick one or two games and unload a full 6 or 12 pack on each, or pick a few games and look for different returns. i think most of us are out of that league. we thrive on the challenge of outsmarting the lines and count by either money or contests or whatever, but we are not serious gamblers in that respect.

if you are trying to compare teasers to straight bets as the roulette to blackjack, using percentage returns, there is no comparison, as those are strictly games of chance.

like i said, there is a time and place for teasers, and if nolan's increased use of them is what prompted the thread, i will have to partially agree with you. i have not commented to nolan personally because he is smart enough to turn around if he sees he is heading the wrong way.

now, there are a couple of factors that come into play here, and perhaps this is the angle you are getting at:

first, do you handicap for teasers or for straight "value"? i say you should not handicap for teasers, as they should be the end result of your analysis, mainly for those that are just too close to call. that is where the teaser should come in. if you handicap strictly for teasers, you will have a tendency to stretch the parameters and lose track of the correct side.

in that sense, even though last night was a good example of a teaser's value, nolan did identify, and quite right, the excellent value on the under, skipping the side. why didn't nolan use this under as his key play for teasers, instead of balt, for example?

it all boils down to game selection, whether you do straight bets, teasers, parlay, money lines, etc. n.e. one more time?

you know, nick, knowing the way you bet, and if you are seriously looking to make money, you should give the multiple teaser play a whack, just as you should the parlays. there is no other way to make serious money in football.

if we could conceive, right or wrong, that the top 5 hilton picks is about as good a 5 pack as you will find anywhere, and if those picks yielded 70% over the course of the season, then 5 x 17=85. at a thousand a pop, app win is 60m, loss is 27.5, net 32.5thous. come to think of it, that is not bad.

but at 60%, a bit more realistic and not easily attainable, we have 51m win and 37.5 loss, for a net of 13.5thou. pocket money for all the work involved, and you still have to risk 5m a week.

serious money in the nfl? only if you bet serious money.

i don't have time to edit, as i have to run to the casino. hope this stuff makes sense.

pep
 

Nick Douglas

Registered User
Forum Member
Oct 31, 2000
3,688
15
0
49
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Appreciate the thoughts, fellas. Very interesting discussion.

My point is kind of getting lost in all of this, though. Are six points worth the loss of value from -110 to -262? I think in almost every case, no. I mean, if you can buy half points for ten cents each, that would leave a six point tease at -230.

One thing I am looking at that may be good for teasers is a wheel. Maybe not with tons of teams but if you have a strong ATS play, maybe wheeling it five ways on two team teasers with plays that you like but are unsure about would be a sound strategy. Dunno if I will try that myself, but it may be a sound strategy.

Anyway, I still recommend to the average gambler who handicaps as a hobby and not a job that you concentrate on standard plays and keep the house edge at 4.5% rather than raising it to 7.4%, or whatever it would be.
 

rosso

Registered User
Forum Member
Apr 19, 2001
3
0
0
London, UK
Fascinating thread guys. For what it's worth, I agree with Nolan's assessment that teasing games over key numbers, when combined with your own analysis of the game should be a good strategy in the long term.
A couple of questions though:

1. No one has mentioned the 'pleaser' bet, i.e. worsening the spread by 6pts in return for better odds. Is it possible that the reverse analysis could be applied? - i.e. games that are terrible for teasers, e.g. expected blow-outs, could be particularly good for Pleaser bets?

2. I wanted to bring to your attention a new bet being offered by a bookie here in the UK (edit out) and see if a similar thing was available in the US, and whether it might offer any value.
Their system is as follows: You can vary the line/total on any game by half points, from -7.5 to +7.5, and the odds you are offered vary accordingly. One key aspect is that you don't have to parlay, you can bet single events.
Of course, these guys aren't stupid, and teasing over key numbers (3,7) costs you more than average. However, I wondered if Nolan and others saw any potential holes in their system that could be exploited.

thanks,

RossO

[This message has been edited by MadJack (edited 10-24-2001).]
 

Scrapman

Rollingdembones
Forum Member
Jan 6, 2013
5,929
112
63
south east PA
i will play teasers when i see a possible push line according to my math if spread poses a push i will move line by teasing it 6 points.

I do not tease every week but when i do it's 4 teamers for larger pay outs and i tease the team i figure who will win the game

NOT the loser
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top