Haralabos Voulgaris is a great follow on twitter for nba heads
- Thread starter the cool
- Start date
USSInsiders
Banned
I heard he's some rich fakkit from a wealthy family. Prolly betting his trust fund like all these other fake pros.
Nah he's not. He was just a regular dude went to college. He started a skycap company at an airport. He saved up 70k for two years. Then he took the lakers to win the entire title in 2000 at 6.5 to 1 odds. He put his entire 70k savings on it.
Dude just has balls
USSInsiders
Banned
Nah he's not. He was just a regular dude went to college. He started a skycap company at an airport. He saved up 70k for two years. Then he took the lakers to win the entire title in 2000 at 6.5 to 1 odds. He put his entire 70k savings on it.
That may be true but I read he's from Montreal and his family got money. Read about it online a while back. Not trying to hate, but noone in their right mind puts their 70k savings on some shyt like that if they really worked for it. He's a professional poker player as well.
I think he may have legit earned the money himself. It's just the stability his family provided allowed him to make such a crazy gamble. If his folks were just scratching and surviving then yes I doubt he would have thrown his entire savings into that. Also Im sure he had to have some kind of connections and/or family support in order to do that
USSInsiders
Banned
course he did breh. Don't get me wrong, there are some poker players out there who legit took huge risks and got big n/h, but a lot of these dudes are trust fund babies that don't have to worry about working a real job so they take their penchant for analytics and try and hit it big gambling.
If he tweets a play I'm running to vegas to make a wagerNah he's not. He was just a regular dude went to college. He started a skycap company at an airport. He saved up 70k for two years. Then he took the lakers to win the entire title in 2000 at 6.5 to 1 odds. He put his entire 70k savings on it.
USSInsiders
Banned
If he tweets a play I'm running to vegas to make a wager
Every once in a while I check his twitter out. Nothing but snarky insults to followers and repeating of the obvious. Seems like an a$$hole to me. You don't need his fakkit ass to bet on the NBA breh just hop in this thread 
http://www.thecoli.com/threads/for-...your-picks-thread.67012/page-703#post-7954560
<<TheStandard>>
I Am A God
Nah dude worked for his. His pops was like a degenerate gambler who he grew up around.
He's very snarky but that's because he's earned the right to be because like he said, he watches more basketball than just about anyone. When you're making around 3 million dollars a year betting NBA basketball and teams are hiring you to work with them because of your knowledge of basketball then you earned the right to be a bit snarky on this subject.
He'll never tweet his plays because once people understand your angle it's no longer profitable. At one point he was a situational handicapper and he started betting so much on 1st half and 2nd half totals the books started to adjust. That's one of the reasons why it's not profitable long term to follow a tout, even if they're honest. Around 2004 he almost went broke, then he shut it down and came back with a more analytical approach, rather than a subjective one and built a database with a model to simulate games.
He's very snarky but that's because he's earned the right to be because like he said, he watches more basketball than just about anyone. When you're making around 3 million dollars a year betting NBA basketball and teams are hiring you to work with them because of your knowledge of basketball then you earned the right to be a bit snarky on this subject.
He'll never tweet his plays because once people understand your angle it's no longer profitable. At one point he was a situational handicapper and he started betting so much on 1st half and 2nd half totals the books started to adjust. That's one of the reasons why it's not profitable long term to follow a tout, even if they're honest. Around 2004 he almost went broke, then he shut it down and came back with a more analytical approach, rather than a subjective one and built a database with a model to simulate games.
Absolut
Legal Bookie
i have a feeling its him that was leading out the last couple years on first half overs. you see shyt like the game total is 208, yet the first half total is like 113, and it still goes over. just a hunch that someone in his data collecting group found something with certain first half totals. books have adjusted the fukk out of it, and it still doesnt seem to be enough. it stayed under, but just today the total on the clips/lakers was 224½. first half total was bet up to 116½/117. 
im hardly an expert on nba, but why the fukk would a first half be that much higher than a theoretical first half total. ive seen shyt like this constantly, and it usually goes over. as far as ath topic goes, hes still a quality follow, but his analysis has been lacking the last couple seasons. he still throws out knowledge, but he used to give a lot more detail about shyt he was looking at. fukk giving picks, i much preferred him talking about stuff he looked for. give me stuff i can use going forward, instead of a pick on a single game
im hardly an expert on nba, but why the fukk would a first half be that much higher than a theoretical first half total. ive seen shyt like this constantly, and it usually goes over. as far as ath topic goes, hes still a quality follow, but his analysis has been lacking the last couple seasons. he still throws out knowledge, but he used to give a lot more detail about shyt he was looking at. fukk giving picks, i much preferred him talking about stuff he looked for. give me stuff i can use going forward, instead of a pick on a single game
Last edited:
i have a feeling its him that was leading out the last couple years on first half overs. you see shyt like the game total is 208, yet the first half total is like 113, and it still goes over. just a hunch that someone in his data collecting group found something with first half totals. books have adjusted the fukk out of it, and it still doesnt seem to be enough. it stayed under, but just today the total on the clips/lakers was 224½. first half total was bet up to 116½/117.
He exposed totals but I don't think it was what you're talking about, actually he might be the one behind that as well b/c he loves totals. He's the reason they stopped giving first and second half totals before games. The way they used to do it. They would just take the game total and split it in half for the total for both halves. So if the game total was 208, the 1h would be 104 and the 2h would be 104. He realized that there's generally more points scored in the 2h than in the first [late game fouling]. So he would kill the books taking 2h overs. Once the books figured out what he was doing they adjusted and got alot of their money back from him. But that wasn't the only thing he did. Dude knew the coaching tendencies to a tee of alot of predictable coaches like Eddie Jordan. He was able to exploit that as well.
Absolut
Legal Bookie
no im not talking about the old shyt. this is new to the last season or 2. his team, or maybe not his team, but someone found something with first half totals. the old halftime total method he exploited goes contrarian to the way high first half totals the last couple seasons. he exploited 2nd half totals in close ish games, as the second half total theoretically should be higher given the fouls/other weird endgame shyt that goes on when teams try to extend the game. somehow that wasnt factored into second half totals not that long ago. seems crazy. but theres not much explanation that i can see why a first half total should be a few baskets higher than it normally should be. maybe some nba guru like @Malta could shine a lil light on it, but it is completely opposite of the totals manipulation he used to pull in regards to half totals. why was the lakers first half total 117 when the game total was 225. the thunder total today was bet down from 212½ to close at 211, yet the first half total rose up to 107½ at some joints. makes zero sense