Trading vs. Gambling

Discussion in 'Trading' started by HorsesToTrading, Dec 10, 2005.

  1. As a sports bettor for over 20 years, I can honestly assure you that day trading is much, much, much easier to beat than sports betting.

    If Cuban thinks you can't beat the market, he's completely wacko.
  2. I agree with you...But I think he is talking about getting an edge. Online sports ARB you can easily attain an edge by using various sportsbooks, trade sports sites and physical bookies.

    I guess he is saying if the market is so hard for the professionals to beat, why should individuals w/ less resources be able to do so.

    Anyone else?
  3. Quote From Article:

    That was his whole point in suggesting the venture last year. "Individuals and small traders have a better shot making money gambling on sports than gambling on stocks," Cuban said. "It's a topic I'm passionate about."

    I find this absolutely laughable. In a publicized move Cuban invested millions in MAMA. Anyone remember this move? I think he purchased shares around May of last year.

    Anyway, that trade/investment is definetly paying off if he's still in it. Just look at the chart (sarcasm here):

    Hope he sold that loser stock... Might explain why he thinks trading is "gambling".

  4. Frenchy


    i use betfair and it s crazy !!! you can trade, you pick a looser and lay it....
  5. Sports betting - Sam 'Ace' Rothstein said in real life that sports is impossible lately - not like when he was betting (60's 70's)
    My father was a horse racing aficionado and I can tell you there are very few handicappers who are full time race bettors.
    POker - there are still some pro's but it ain't easy.
    Bottom line - Cuban is full of crap.
  6. cuban long gone from that p&d MAMA.
  7. wayne root = $$$
  8. Very few folk know a damn thing about horse betting or sports betting.

    And horse betting is the hardest thing in the world.

    With few exceptions, the same clowns that make millions trading stock and futures, wouldn't have carfare left over after a season at the racetrack.
  9. elroch


    For those who did not bother to read the Forbes article, or who do not know what arbitrage is, it is necessary to point out that several of the purportedly expert blanket statements above are irrelevant and incorrect.

    The proposed fund was to be based on ARBITRAGE, not on speculating on the results of events. That means the money was to come from pricing discrepancies between different betting exchanges and bookmakers.

    As a result the nonsense above about betting on sports being so difficult compared to betting on stocks etc. is completely irrelevant. It is not necessary to have any idea about what is going to happen in a market (read "sports event") in order to make money arbitraging it.

    Individuals reputedly make acceptable money arbitraging sports events. The reason the fund did not take off may well be because such opportunities are not very lucrative or particularly frequent. Few sports markets will stand large bets without moving, which means that there is quite limited profit from each arbitrage opportunity. A hedge fund needs to be able to trade at a sizeable scale to be viable.
    #10     May 24, 2007