4 ms·

I heard about a similar trick once in the framework of a scam, which may be the same (I'm not willing to watch this much youtube for the payoff), where out of t

by a12k 2y ago

I heard about a similar trick once in the framework of a scam, which may be the same (I'm not willing to watch this much youtube for the payoff), where out of the 1,000 people that reached out for answers to a 50/50 bet of some sort, they provided 50% of them one answer, and 50% the other. Out of the 50% that won, they provided 50% one answer and 50% another. Leading to a situation where eventually you had a small group of people who had received correct "lottery" or whatever answers five or six times in a row, priming them to believe the scammer had some major advantage. Then the scammer charged that last group of 15 or 30 some large amount of money to receive the last answer, and so on with the winners of that bet.

JKCalhoun 2y ago
"Alfred Hitchcock Presents" had an episode, "Mail Order Prophet", that was this (66 years ago).
vlovich123 2y ago
That’s basically the scam. At the end he has her bet one extra time and she loses. Except it’s revealed that Darren Brown had swapped out her ticket for the winning ticket somehow. Very likely he just placed bets on all horses and then did a sleight of hand to give her the winning ticket before she opened it. In other words he spent $20k of the show’s budget placing bets on all 5 horses and gave her the $13k of the winnings that were reclaimed from having bought a winning ticket.
- mrandish 2y ago
  That's not what happened nor is it how he accomplished the "trick". There's no slight of hand or trickery. Everything is fully revealed near the end of the special on YouTube (which I linked). She won every bet, including the last. He never had any of her tickets nor did he even see her place her bets. It's much simpler than that. Although the show appears in the beginning like it's a "magic trick" (though that is never actually claimed), in the end the audience is clearly shown how there's no trick at all. It's all simple probability and there really is no way to "beat the odds". Which IMHO is ultimately more entertaining and valuable than just some slight of hand or magic trickery.
  - ErrantX 2y ago
    You might be misremembering (it's my fav DB show btw...) It's not really revealed how he does the last trick. In the last bet she believes she loses because the horse he tips doesn't win - and during the race he reveals there is no system. However, he places the final bet - not her - and after the race ends she opens the ticket to find it's placed on the winner, not the tipped horse. Almost certainly it's slight of hand (which he is excellent at) but that is never revealed.
    - mrandish 2y ago
      Yes, it's been several years since I watched it, so I guess I'm not remembering it clearly. I remember a race where there were multiple volunteer bettors at the track who were unaware of each other and only one of them won. Maybe that was the second to last race. Anyway, I apologize for my error in recollection. I sincerely remember the gist of the show being as I described. Another reminder that memory can sometimes be weirdly porous yet not be correctly 'flagged' with an appropriate sense of uncertainty.
      - vlovich123 2y ago
        That’s fine. It was indeed the penultimate race shown where each bettor recorded themselves. The ultimate race had him and the lady and supposedly no other bettors. I take that at face value leaving betting on all horses and sleight of hand as the more likely explanation.
  - wfleming 2y ago
    Vlovich is describing the very last race only, where he did place the final bet. He takes her 4k and tells her he’s going to place the bet for her so how much she’ll win is a surprise. The horse he said he would bet on loses the race and then he reveals he actually bet on the winner. So for that race and that race only I do think he just bet on every horse and sleight-of-handed the right ticket to her. Timestamp 35:20 in the video you linked earlier. Right after that he explains how the “trick” worked for all the earlier races, which is what you’re referring to.
madeofpalk 2y ago
This is the plot of some daytime court drama tv/movie I half-saw ages ago when I was a kid like 15-20 years ago. It really stuck in my head for some reason, but never been able to figure out what show/movie it was.
vunderba 2y ago
yeah - this one was very popular in seasonal sports like football.
slyall 2y ago
A version of it was on the UK series "Minder". Broadcast 40 years ago https://www.minder.org/episodeguide/S04E04_SorryPalWrongNumber.htm https://www.minder.org/episodeguide/S04E04_SorryPalWrongNumb...
SapporoChris 2y ago
I am confident some of the stock advisor websites are doing the same thing. Just sending out random advice and collecting subscriptions from the winners.
- from-nibly 2y ago
  If stock advisors had secret knowledge that helped them make money on the stock market they would use it to make money on the stock market not tell people about it.
  - hakfoo 2y ago
    In the stock market, though, saying "I know $FOOBAR is going to overperform on earnings" could trigger other people to pump the price and INCREASE your payout. Conversely, if you know Santa's Little Helper is going to win the 6th race and told everyone, that would drive DOWN the odds and your potential payout. You'd have to have insider knowledge, then fabricate and disseminate a lie so that the actual winner gets bid down to 99:1 least-favourite before the race. So the incentive model is different. In a way, in the stock market, being seen as a psychic genius can be a self-fulfilling prophecy. $FOOBAR doubled in price because people chased your prediction, not due to fundamentals.
- dleink 2y ago
  In both finance and sportsbetting I assume anyone giving out information is part of a long con.

by a12k 2y ago

JKCalhoun 2y ago

"Alfred Hitchcock Presents" had an episode, "Mail Order Prophet", that was this (66 years ago).

vlovich123 2y ago

That’s basically the scam. At the end he has her bet one extra time and she loses. Except it’s revealed that Darren Brown had swapped out her ticket for the winning ticket somehow. Very likely he just placed bets on all horses and then did a sleight of hand to give her the winning ticket before she opened it. In other words he spent $20k of the show’s budget placing bets on all 5 horses and gave her the $13k of the winnings that were reclaimed from having bought a winning ticket.

mrandish 2y ago
That's not what happened nor is it how he accomplished the "trick". There's no slight of hand or trickery. Everything is fully revealed near the end of the special on YouTube (which I linked). She won every bet, including the last. He never had any of her tickets nor did he even see her place her bets. It's much simpler than that. Although the show appears in the beginning like it's a "magic trick" (though that is never actually claimed), in the end the audience is clearly shown how there's no trick at all. It's all simple probability and there really is no way to "beat the odds". Which IMHO is ultimately more entertaining and valuable than just some slight of hand or magic trickery.
- ErrantX 2y ago
  You might be misremembering (it's my fav DB show btw...) It's not really revealed how he does the last trick. In the last bet she believes she loses because the horse he tips doesn't win - and during the race he reveals there is no system. However, he places the final bet - not her - and after the race ends she opens the ticket to find it's placed on the winner, not the tipped horse. Almost certainly it's slight of hand (which he is excellent at) but that is never revealed.
  - mrandish 2y ago
    Yes, it's been several years since I watched it, so I guess I'm not remembering it clearly. I remember a race where there were multiple volunteer bettors at the track who were unaware of each other and only one of them won. Maybe that was the second to last race. Anyway, I apologize for my error in recollection. I sincerely remember the gist of the show being as I described. Another reminder that memory can sometimes be weirdly porous yet not be correctly 'flagged' with an appropriate sense of uncertainty.
    - vlovich123 2y ago
      That’s fine. It was indeed the penultimate race shown where each bettor recorded themselves. The ultimate race had him and the lady and supposedly no other bettors. I take that at face value leaving betting on all horses and sleight of hand as the more likely explanation.
- wfleming 2y ago
  Vlovich is describing the very last race only, where he did place the final bet. He takes her 4k and tells her he’s going to place the bet for her so how much she’ll win is a surprise. The horse he said he would bet on loses the race and then he reveals he actually bet on the winner. So for that race and that race only I do think he just bet on every horse and sleight-of-handed the right ticket to her. Timestamp 35:20 in the video you linked earlier. Right after that he explains how the “trick” worked for all the earlier races, which is what you’re referring to.

madeofpalk 2y ago

This is the plot of some daytime court drama tv/movie I half-saw ages ago when I was a kid like 15-20 years ago. It really stuck in my head for some reason, but never been able to figure out what show/movie it was.

vunderba 2y ago

yeah - this one was very popular in seasonal sports like football.

slyall 2y ago

A version of it was on the UK series "Minder". Broadcast 40 years ago https://www.minder.org/episodeguide/S04E04_SorryPalWrongNumber.htm https://www.minder.org/episodeguide/S04E04_SorryPalWrongNumb...

SapporoChris 2y ago

I am confident some of the stock advisor websites are doing the same thing. Just sending out random advice and collecting subscriptions from the winners.

from-nibly 2y ago
If stock advisors had secret knowledge that helped them make money on the stock market they would use it to make money on the stock market not tell people about it.
- hakfoo 2y ago
  In the stock market, though, saying "I know $FOOBAR is going to overperform on earnings" could trigger other people to pump the price and INCREASE your payout. Conversely, if you know Santa's Little Helper is going to win the 6th race and told everyone, that would drive DOWN the odds and your potential payout. You'd have to have insider knowledge, then fabricate and disseminate a lie so that the actual winner gets bid down to 99:1 least-favourite before the race. So the incentive model is different. In a way, in the stock market, being seen as a psychic genius can be a self-fulfilling prophecy. $FOOBAR doubled in price because people chased your prediction, not due to fundamentals.
dleink 2y ago
In both finance and sportsbetting I assume anyone giving out information is part of a long con.