sports betting

[Wiseguy]

Look. You can pull out any books or court cases you want. Ive lived it. Its the exception not the rule. Believe what you will. If you cant pay the bookie is more than likely to work with you. He wants you to keep playing. Not get bogged down with a loan payment. And if the guy doesnt pay he gets labeled bad and no one takes his action. Of course you can find examples of court cases where a bettor lost and some guy beat him up over it or something violent but again thats the exception not the rule. We’re also talking sports gambling in general. You cited mafia cases which i get we are on a mafia forum. But most books are not mafia backed.

Whyyyy must they be hardheaded? Im comfortable saying that cheech has more knowledge in this area than 98.5 percent of the members on this board. Im no one but im no slouch either when it comes to the sports. People know im close with the guys who were getting 2 billy and change in action over 15 months…. Even if in a nightmare if you make fifteen to 20 percent profit off that figure the number is quite large. CHEEEEEEEECH ! You know the shit cugine. Hope all is well. I’ll pm you.

I always thought the detailed affidavits in the 2007 Lucchese case gave one of the best looks to outsiders (speaking for myself) on the business. One interesting detail, which I suppose is a no-brainer in retrospect, was how the operation set varying limits on how much their players could bet; with raising the limit having to be approved by the Pernas or someone else high up in the operation. Point being, they weren't going to allow a player to bet a figure they knew he could never pay, but they would have to pay if he won.

[Cheech]

Look. You can pull out any books or court cases you want. Ive lived it. Its the exception not the rule. Believe what you will. If you cant pay the bookie is more than likely to work with you. He wants you to keep playing. Not get bogged down with a loan payment. And if the guy doesnt pay he gets labeled bad and no one takes his action. Of course you can find examples of court cases where a bettor lost and some guy beat him up over it or something violent but again thats the exception not the rule. We’re also talking sports gambling in general. You cited mafia cases which i get we are on a mafia forum. But most books are not mafia backed.

Whyyyy must they be hardheaded? Im comfortable saying that cheech has more knowledge in this area than 98.5 percent of the members on this board. Im no one but im no slouch either when it comes to the sports. People know im close with the guys who were getting 2 billy and change in action over 15 months…. Even if in a nightmare if you make fifteen to 20 percent profit off that figure the number is quite large. CHEEEEEEEECH ! You know the shit cugine. Hope all is well. I’ll pm you.

I always thought the detailed affidavits in the 2007 Lucchese case gave one of the best looks to outsiders (speaking for myself) on the business. One interesting detail, which I suppose is a no-brainer in retrospect, was how the operation set varying limits on how much their players could bet; with raising the limit having to be approved by the Pernas or someone else high up in the operation. Point being, they weren't going to allow a player to bet a figure they knew he could never pay, but they would have to pay if he won.

well, you and I agree! this is what I posted years ago in the Operation Heat thread

Someone should post this in the general forums. This is such an important document cause it tells you exactly what it's like. Exactly. A couple things I took away. They made a lot of money but not as much as you'd think.
Joe M Pernas perspective. The guy they say is running it.
Whatever the take is multiply it by 4-7% depending on sport. That's what you're likely to win. Divide it all in half now cause the agents are on a half sheet per this report. $5-$10 for every player each week for the PPH. 5-10% for the runners. Uncle Matty and Uncle joey D get there taste. 20% goes uncollected and that's conservative. Then cut it all in half cause he's splitting it with Mike Cetta. Great money but not what media and LE make it out to be. 100k worth of bets in one day you hope to win 5 (before expenses) Hell you may lose. If you don't have long paper,you won't make it for all the reasons above. These kids now never answered a phone. Never wrote it down. They think you wake,up and check the bottom. Don't work like that. These guys were calling every hour checking it out. One guy was betting sharp plays before the line moved and Joe P was all over it. Cut his limits and wanted to know where the plays were coming from so he can bet them. I'm surprised these guys were so lax on the phone. Had to know they were being watched.

and BobbyPazzo ran with those guys for sure.

[CornerBoy]

Cheech perfectly explained bookaking present day than anyone on here ever has

[gohnjotti]

Look. You can pull out any books or court cases you want. Ive lived it. Its the exception not the rule. Believe what you will. If you cant pay the bookie is more than likely to work with you. He wants you to keep playing. Not get bogged down with a loan payment. And if the guy doesnt pay he gets labeled bad and no one takes his action. Of course you can find examples of court cases where a bettor lost and some guy beat him up over it or something violent but again thats the exception not the rule. We’re also talking sports gambling in general. You cited mafia cases which i get we are on a mafia forum. But most books are not mafia backed.

Whyyyy must they be hardheaded? Im comfortable saying that cheech has more knowledge in this area than 98.5 percent of the members on this board. Im no one but im no slouch either when it comes to the sports. People know im close with the guys who were getting 2 billy and change in action over 15 months…. Even if in a nightmare if you make fifteen to 20 percent profit off that figure the number is quite large. CHEEEEEEEECH ! You know the shit cugine. Hope all is well. I’ll pm you.

I didn't mean to sound hard-headed. You're right in that I haven't lived this world. But it comes as a shock to me because it's discussed in the tape-recordings and interviews with former mobsters in the articles I referenced as if it's a common practice. Guy Fatato said on a tape-recording that Franzese's vig on a $30,000 debt was "like social security" for him.

I guess Cheech's point is that most gamblers are not problem gamblers. So I suppose 95% of gamblers don't get into that predicament. But it seems that the last 5% are a bit of a cash cow. And because it constitutes an additional crime (extortion or extortionate extension of credit), it comes up more in indictments.

Look. You can pull out any books or court cases you want. Ive lived it. Its the exception not the rule. Believe what you will. If you cant pay the bookie is more than likely to work with you. He wants you to keep playing. Not get bogged down with a loan payment.And if the guy doesnt pay he gets labeled bad and no one takes his action. Of course you can find examples of court cases where a bettor lost and some guy beat him up over it or something violent but again thats the exception not the rule. We’re also talking sports gambling in general. You cited mafia cases which i get we are on a mafia forum. But most books are not mafia backed.

That's my mistake. I'm thinking about Mafia bookmakers. I probably never explicitly said that, so I guess I'm moving the goalposts now. I know that bookmaking operations vary significantly in size and scope, even among the Mafia as associates will start books with less than ten customers. But if we're looking at the big, Mafia-run bookmaking operations, don't you think 'vig' on a missed payment is a given?

I'm not necessarily referring to violence. Even in most Mafia extortion cases, the "threat of violence" is what's prosecuted in lieu of any real violence. You said it best earlier when you mentioned how broken bones don't magically produce money from a deadbeat.

I'm not also not saying the debtor is directed to a loanshark, I'm saying that if an individual places a bet, loses, and cannot produce the money to pay for it, is there not vig built into that arrangement until he can pay back the original bet?

I think the argument that people will just run to the cops if the Mob puts pressure on them is also a bit off. Again, I don't live in New York, but when people have lived all their lives in a neighborhood, all their friends are from the neighborhood, their family, employment, social structure exists in that neighborhood and around these people, the thought of "running to the cops" over even tens of thousands of debt is not as simple as that, especially when the person is willing to work out a payment plan as Cheech mentioned.

[Tonyd621]

The whole guy who cant pay gets sent to a loanshark is overblown. Does it happen? Sure. More than likely, no. @gohn

probably strictly a NYC thing at this point if it does happen ,

It rarely happens, most books will just take a payment plan, and the only time there laying off is on Super Bowl or another big event

Payment plans is what it is now. It sucks but that's what it is

[gohnjotti]

The whole guy who cant pay gets sent to a loanshark is overblown. Does it happen? Sure. More than likely, no. @gohn

probably strictly a NYC thing at this point if it does happen ,

It rarely happens, most books will just take a payment plan, and the only time there laying off is on Super Bowl or another big event

Payment plans is what it is now. It sucks but that's what it is

I guess that sums up the original question I asked, which was how much do bookmakers rely on the vig payments of debtors.

Who are otherwise the main customers of loansharks in the 21st century if not degenerate gamblers? I understand legal payday lenders exist in New York just like anywhere else, and while their interest rates are stiff they're not quite usury.

I always thought the detailed affidavits in the 2007 Lucchese case gave one of the best looks to outsiders (speaking for myself) on the business. One interesting detail, which I suppose is a no-brainer in retrospect, was how the operation set varying limits on how much their players could bet; with raising the limit having to be approved by the Pernas or someone else high up in the operation. Point being, they weren't going to allow a player to bet a figure they knew he could never pay, but they would have to pay if he won.

That fact isn't mutually exclusive with interest rates being charged on gambling debt. I haven't read the Perna affidavits, so I'll try and find those if they've been posted on the forum. But I was curious if Perna's multi-billion-dollar operation involved loansharking, like many Mafia gambling cases do. First of all, I found the sheers numbers of the case are incredible; an average of $147 million wagered each month, $4.9 million a day is crazy to think about. An article from the Record (NJ paper) from Dec. 19, 2007 writes this (regarding the indictment):

Meanwhile, "collectors" paid winners and collected money from losers, often using threats or violence when gamblers could not come up with the money. Other debtors allegedly were forced to take loans at interest rates that topped 200 percent.

That is a vig of about 4% a week.

[Newyorkempire]

The whole guy who cant pay gets sent to a loanshark is overblown. Does it happen? Sure. More than likely, no. @gohn

probably strictly a NYC thing at this point if it does happen ,

It rarely happens, most books will just take a payment plan, and the only time there laying off is on Super Bowl or another big event

Payment plans is what it is now. It sucks but that's what it is

I guess that sums up the original question I asked, which was how much do bookmakers rely on the vig payments of debtors.

Who are otherwise the main customers of loansharks in the 21st century if not degenerate gamblers? I understand legal payday lenders exist in New York just like anywhere else, and while their interest rates are stiff they're not quite usury.

Um. People that need loans are their customers

[gohnjotti]

The whole guy who cant pay gets sent to a loanshark is overblown. Does it happen? Sure. More than likely, no. @gohn

probably strictly a NYC thing at this point if it does happen ,

It rarely happens, most books will just take a payment plan, and the only time there laying off is on Super Bowl or another big event

Payment plans is what it is now. It sucks but that's what it is

I guess that sums up the original question I asked, which was how much do bookmakers rely on the vig payments of debtors.

Who are otherwise the main customers of loansharks in the 21st century if not degenerate gamblers? I understand legal payday lenders exist in New York just like anywhere else, and while their interest rates are stiff they're not quite usury.

Um. People that need loans are their customers

I guess I set myself up for that response. That was a dumb question by me

[Tonyd621]

The whole guy who cant pay gets sent to a loanshark is overblown. Does it happen? Sure. More than likely, no. @gohn

probably strictly a NYC thing at this point if it does happen ,

It rarely happens, most books will just take a payment plan, and the only time there laying off is on Super Bowl or another big event

Payment plans is what it is now. It sucks but that's what it is

I guess that sums up the original question I asked, which was how much do bookmakers rely on the vig payments of debtors.

Who are otherwise the main customers of loansharks in the 21st century if not degenerate gamblers? I understand legal payday lenders exist in New York just like anywhere else, and while their interest rates are stiff they're not quite usury.

I always thought the detailed affidavits in the 2007 Lucchese case gave one of the best looks to outsiders (speaking for myself) on the business. One interesting detail, which I suppose is a no-brainer in retrospect, was how the operation set varying limits on how much their players could bet; with raising the limit having to be approved by the Pernas or someone else high up in the operation. Point being, they weren't going to allow a player to bet a figure they knew he could never pay, but they would have to pay if he won.

That fact isn't mutually exclusive with interest rates being charged on gambling debt. I haven't read the Perna affidavits, so I'll try and find those if they've been posted on the forum. But I was curious if Perna's multi-billion-dollar operation involved loansharking, like many Mafia gambling cases do. First of all, I found the sheers numbers of the case are incredible; an average of $147 million wagered each month, $4.9 million a day is crazy to think about. An article from the Record (NJ paper) from Dec. 19, 2007 writes this (regarding the indictment):

Meanwhile, "collectors" paid winners and collected money from losers, often using threats or violence when gamblers could not come up with the money. Other debtors allegedly were forced to take loans at interest rates that topped 200 percent.

That is a vig of about 4% a week.

Sometimes you get guys who try and take a shot at you. Meaning they never played with you before and the first week or so they and try and wipe you out and put you in a tough spot. My point is even when those guys lose thousands during say for example march madness, you can still be seeing him into fall of 2024 to collect your 1-200 bucks a week. That's the way it is. Hypothetically speaking...

[Tonyd621]

Just because someone has a short bag once or twice doesn't mean he's going to get juiced.

[Newyorkempire]

The whole guy who cant pay gets sent to a loanshark is overblown. Does it happen? Sure. More than likely, no. @gohn

probably strictly a NYC thing at this point if it does happen ,

It rarely happens, most books will just take a payment plan, and the only time there laying off is on Super Bowl or another big event

Payment plans is what it is now. It sucks but that's what it is

I guess that sums up the original question I asked, which was how much do bookmakers rely on the vig payments of debtors.

Who are otherwise the main customers of loansharks in the 21st century if not degenerate gamblers? I understand legal payday lenders exist in New York just like anywhere else, and while their interest rates are stiff they're not quite usury.

Um. People that need loans are their customers

I guess I set myself up for that response. That was a dumb question by me

Dont let it happen again

[gohnjotti]

Just because someone has a short bag once or twice doesn't mean he's going to get juiced.

So in the usual gambling/loansharking indictments that specifically refer to vig/juice on a gambling debt, what type of person does that apply to? Does someone have to have a few strikes to their name before a bookmaker (particularly a Mafia-run bookmaker, whose association with organized crime gives the implicit threat of violence) discusses vig?

I'm happy to agree with everyone on the forum telling me I'm wrong, or misguided in my original point. I'm not from New York so I'll readily accept the input of those who are, but it still doesn't answer the question about who are all these victims that so frequently occur in Mafia-linked gambling indictments, the victims paying 'vig' on large debts often exceeding the tens of thousands? I hesitate to post examples from articles or court documents considering the lukewarm response I got last time I did that, but Guy Fatato described such 'vig' on a gambling debts to Sonny Franzese as Franzese's "social security." It's such a common theme in these cases that it begs the question about who are the type of people whom the Mafia has to "juice" on a gambling debt, and whether or not that's built into the arrangement prior to the bet being placed.

[Cheech]

Keep citing fucking Sonny Franzese and Guy Fatado. They arent even bookmakes. You’re completely lost. Im being nice because youre a good guy but your argument is completely wrong and really not even close to reality. Holy shit.

Ill show you thru court docs. One second. Im getting lunch.

[Cheech]

Juicing people? Youre lucky you even get the fuckin paymemt plan.
You have no idea. The fact that youre citing sonny franzese and nicodemo scarfo is frankly embarrassing to your argument. Its driving me nuts.
Youre out of your league here, gohn. Way out of your league. Be smart enough to know that

[Cheech]

I dont even like TonyD that much and he’s right hahaahha

Im kidding tony. Youre a good guy. And youre right here.