Rose is totally lying when he says he bet on the Reds to win every night. Flat-out lie.
via the NY Times: According to the Dowd report, which included a diary of bets that Rose made on Reds games and many others it listed bets on 390 games over all, 52 of them involving the Reds, in a three-month period in 1987 Rose developed a consistency of not betting on certain contests.
In particular, Rose stopped betting on Reds games that Gullickson started. If Rose bet on his team to win other games but didn’t bet on Gullickson’s games, he was sending a signal to the bookies he was betting with that he, as manager of the team, didn’t think much of his team’s chances in those games.
As far as his betting pattern was concerned, Rose might as well have bet against the Reds in those games. Such wagers would have sent the same message to the bookies: “I don’t expect us to win these games.”
In that 1987 period for which Dowd found betting slips, from April 7 to July 4, Rose didn’t withhold his wagering money on all of Gullickson’s games. Initially, Rose fared well in Gullickson’s games. The same couldn’t be said for at least some of the other games Rose bet on.
For example, the records showed that in 69 instances, Rose bet $2,500 or more on a game. Astoundingly, he lost 64 of those 69, which computes to a .072 success rate.
Even betting the Dodgers to win every game would be a losing strategy over the long run if you wanted to do better than break even. I don’t know how anyone believes he only bet on his team and he did it every game. Might as well just give money to the bookie
Rose is totally lying when he says he bet on the Reds to win every night. Flat-out lie.
via the NY Times: According to the Dowd report, which included a diary of bets that Rose made on Reds games and many others it listed bets on 390 games over all, 52 of them involving the Reds, in a three-month period in 1987 Rose developed a consistency of not betting on certain contests.
In particular, Rose stopped betting on Reds games that Gullickson started. If Rose bet on his team to win other games but didn’t bet on Gullickson’s games, he was sending a signal to the bookies he was betting with that he, as manager of the team, didn’t think much of his team’s chances in those games.
As far as his betting pattern was concerned, Rose might as well have bet against the Reds in those games. Such wagers would have sent the same message to the bookies: “I don’t expect us to win these games.”
In that 1987 period for which Dowd found betting slips, from April 7 to July 4, Rose didn’t withhold his wagering money on all of Gullickson’s games. Initially, Rose fared well in Gullickson’s games. The same couldn’t be said for at least some of the other games Rose bet on.
For example, the records showed that in 69 instances, Rose bet $2,500 or more on a game. Astoundingly, he lost 64 of those 69, which computes to a .072 success rate.
Even betting the Dodgers to win every game would be a losing strategy over the long run if you wanted to do better than break even. I don’t know how anyone believes he only bet on his team and he did it every game. Might as well just give money to the bookie