What casino game do professional gamblers play? | Yahoo
What casino game do professional gamblers play? | Yahoo
How Professional Gamblers Make Money - Timeslifestyle
Where do Professional Gamblers Play? - SAC Games
How to Become a Professional Gambler
Table Games | Gamblers Pro
7 Sports Betting Tricks That Professional Gamblers Use
How do professional gamblers make money? | Yahoo Answers
7 Pro Gambling Tricks - What Tricks Do Professional
The Life Of A Professional Online Slots Player - SAC Games
How Professional Gamblers are Making Money from Video Poker
what games do professional gamblers play
what games do professional gamblers play - win
How luck plays an important role in the stock market (GME and others)
Fellow retards, I noticed that this sub is going to hit 2 million people soon, and I have decided to put aside my project assignments to write this DD (albeit more towards psychologically) on why luck is extremely important in the stock market, and what you can do to potentially get in favor of luck. Before I start, I want to congratulate you on being here. You have came a long way in life, and there’s more to come. Be happy. TLDR at the last paragraph. I want to talk mainly 3 things; luck, the psychology behind investing and what you should do to maximize profits. Luck In the book 'The Drunkard's Walk', under chapter of 'Illusions of Patterns and Patterns of Illusion', and I quote: "In 1978, Koppett revealed a system that he claimed could determine, by the end of January every year, whether the stock market would go up or down in that calendar year. His system had correctly predicted the market, he said, for the past eleven years. Of course, stock-picking systems are easy to identify in hindsight; the true test is whether they will work in the future. Koppett's system passed that test too: judging the market by the Dow Jones Industrial Average, it worked for eleven straight years, from 1979 through 1989, got it wrong in 1990, and was correct again every year until 1998. But although Koppett's predictions were correct for a streak of eighteen out of nineteen years, I feel confident in asserting that his streak involved no skill whatsoever. Why? Because Leonard Koppett was a columnist for Sporting News, and his system was based on the results of the Super Bowl, the championship game of professional football. Whenever the team from the (original) National Football league won, the stock market, he predicted, would rise." In the book 'Fooled by Randomness', the Prologue mentioned "...luck disguised and perceived as nonluck (that is, skills) and, more generally, randomness disguised and perceived as non-randomness (that is, determinism). " In the book ‘The Black Swan’ by Taleb Nassim Nicholas, Page 119 mentioned " A successful person will try to convince you that his achievements could not possibly be accidental, just as a gambler who wins at roulette seven times in a row will explain to you that the odds against such a streak are one in several million, so you either have to believe some transcendental intervention is in play or accept his skills and insight in picking the winning numbers." More often than not, luck is rarely on your side. I can provide many other articles, but I believe you get the point. To emphasize it, "the habit of mistaking luck for skill is most prevalent - and most conspicuous - and that is the world of markets." So why am I saying all these? What I am trying to imply is, do appreciate your GME gains, or whatever astronomical gains that you have. These gains, more often than not, are results of extremely lucky happenstances, where most people are incapable of harnessing them. Yes, there are tons of good DDs. But you yourselves are incredibly lucky to be part of WSB, and personally reading the DDs yourselves, and lucky enough to decide that you would be retarded enough to take the risk. You should be happy and grateful about it, because like I said, this is hugely, and heavily dependent on luck. Humans are flawed, because we have the tendency to look for specific causes that lead to effects. We often find it hard to accept that an event can be the result of total randomness, but sometimes it is. In financial forecasting, several times random volatility is mistaken for accurate prediction. In a group of many analysts, it is normal to expect that someone's predictions will turn out to be true (u/DeepFuckingValue). So, in case you get way too ahead of yourselves thinking you are absolutely a genius for having triple percentage gains in your portfolio, remember you're most likely just lucky. And since you're lucky, be appreciative and do not be complacent. Psychology behind Investing Several studies have fooled people into believing they are in control of something they actually have no control over. In fact, human decision-making shows systematic simplifications and deviations from the tenets of rationality (‘heuristics’) that may lead to suboptimal decisional outcomes (‘cognitive biases’). There are currently three prevailing theoretical perspectives on the origin of heuristics and cognitive biases: a cognitive-psychological, an ecological and an evolutionary perspective. To simplify that, it basically means that cognitive biases arise from intrinsic brain mechanisms that are fundamental for the working of our neural networks. Your mind is always on the cautious side of things, because it is trying to protect you. Remember a time when you were very near the edge of a building/cliff, and all of a sudden you feel hypersensitive to the surrounding around you? You are aware of every rocks and stones that might sabotage you. Another example can be that you shiver when peeing, because your body is exaggerating the signal that you are rapidly losing body heat, and is trying to shiver up the muscle fiber to keep you warm, etc. You get the idea. This unfortunately, applies in investing as well. Your mind will inevitably forces you to be on the safer side. A dip? Oh no... you panic. But relax, that is normal. In my last point, I will explain what you can do to overcome it. What you can do to stay calm? So now you know that it is in human nature to be a paper handed bitch. The first step is realizing that your own neural networks are playing a huge part in giving you a paper hand. When you realized that it is your own mind that is keeping you on the safer side, perhaps you can be more self-aware. Being impatient in the market is the worst mistake that you would commit while investing in the stocks. You have to know that if you do not have good patience in the market then you would find difficulty in getting the right stocks for your investment. You have to finally take your own decisions when you wish to select the stocks. Remember however, you do have to be lucky to hit the jackpot on certain investments as per my first point. Confirmation bias is also a bitch. As philosopher Francis Bacon put it in 1620, "the human understanding, once it has adopted an opinion, collects any instances that confirm it, and though the contrary instances may be more numerous and more weighty, it either does not notice them or else rejects them, in order that this opinion will remain unshaken." This happens very often in WSB, and I want you to be cautious as well. To show you how easy confirmation bias is, imagine I have 5 numbers here. After presenting you these numbers, I want you to guess what is the rule of the game. Here are the 5 numbers: 4 6 8 10 12. What will your next 3 numbers be? What is the rule of the game? The rule is: Increasing Numbers, the next 3 numbers can be 13 14 15 Most of you might have guessed "increasing even numbers and provided with 14 16 18, when in fact it is not. Luck does not solely come from deciding whether to listen to another retard's DD on a thread, and YOLO-ing your life savings onto some stocks. It also comes in the form of your birth status, etc. Having a $100,000 head start in the stock market, is almost always better than someone having $1000 as a starting capital (or worse still, negative capital simply because your parents are poor, that's unlucky). That being said, I believe all of us here are in some way privileged to be gathered here and discussing individually. The poor kids in some countries have to fight for clean water and food. So the next time you realized that you are earning money in the stock market, remember, it is incredibly hard to do it, and you should be proud of yourselves. And in the scenario where you lose your money, well, you shouldn't be surprised either way. You are bound to be losing. Here are some books you can refer to if you're interested: The Drunkard’s Walk by Leonard Mlodinow (How Randomness Rules Our Lives), Fooled by Randomness by Taleb N, The Black Swan by Taleb N, Who’s in Charge? by Michael S. Gazzaniga (on Free will and the science of the brain), Success and Luck by Robert H. Frank, The Most Good You Can Do (How effective altruism is changing ideas about living ethically) by Peter Singer. Clarification: Some people mentioned if this post was directed to "diminish the contributions of skill and the hard effort of anyone". Absolutely not. This post is assuming that in the top few % (if you're reading this, yourself included), everyone is just as talented. But to be part of that 1% in that 1%, to be the richest among the richest, you have to be incredibly lucky. TLDR: If you make huge gains, go and give some of it to other people that may not have been so lucky. Go and give it to the homeless people at the unemployment line, who ain't so lucky as you. Maybe buy him food. Get him clothes. Donate to your local charities. Most importantly, give it back to your parents, because your parents are the one who, most likely, set you up in this direction, and you are lucky enough to be here today. If you did not make any gains, remember, it is perfectly okay. Shorter TLDR: Be happy, be grateful. 🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀
The January 15th official short interest report stated 61,780,000 shares had been sold short. On the 15th, the share price was about $35. This is a crucial piece of information to consider. Short Interest is reported twice monthly, so the last report before January 15th was from December 31st, and the next was issued today February 9th, revealing a (still) staggering 78.46% short interest. Keep in mind, this report only shows short interest up to January 29th. Lets go back to the January 15th report which told us that 61.78 million shares had been shorted at prices less than $35. In other words, every single short of those 61.78 million was betting the price would be less than $35, and it's more likely that most were shorted around the $15 - $20 mark. We do not know the exact numbers. But what we do know is some of these shorts closed out of their positions before, that is evident by the SI report we received today. We can also draw another inference from this data: MOSTshort positions from the January 15th report have NOT covered yet. Today's report confirmed this speculation. The hedge funds and other players were able to drive the price down from $483 to $65 in less than a week. Regardless of the illegal actions they took to make this happen. They knew they would be able to do this. It didn't even take that long. So why in the world would they have covered even a single share above $100?? It is my belief that only the shorts who lacked liquidity and spare capital to pay interest were margin called, or chose to bow out early. Today's report all but confirms this theory. If you need more evidence, look at the overall market bleed that took place on the days right before the cut-off date for this report. What does that mean for the big players? The ones who actually have capital to sustain high interest rates and play the long game to mitigate losses? They are waiting to bring the price down to an acceptable level, buying far OTM calls, and letting the hype die down a bit before they even begin to cover. The current drop in price has been working in the favor of hedges in three different ways. First, calls far OTM are very cheap, and hedge funds are able to scoop up millions of dollars worth of options that they will later be able to sell or execute for profit. During the first peak, the furthest OTM call available were too expensive and to NTM for hedges to offset their losses. If my theory is correct, hedges stand to gain substantially on their far OTM calls expiring Feb. 19th. Second, the extreme price drop means there are tons of shares available for hedges to short now. During the last rise, there were nowhere near enough shares for hedges to short as the price dipped. Finally, it is obvious that shorts are better off covering at $50 rather than $480. They have effectively weeded out a large number of paper hands and profiteers. But that is neither here nor there, as we still control a substantial portion of the float, keeping sustained pressure on the shorts. Furthering my hypothesis, I do not believe Citadel gave 2.75b to Melvin to flush down the toilet. They are expecting Melvin to mitigate as much of their losses as possible. How might they do this? First, check the amount of money placed on 800c for 2/19. Obviously a portion of this money can be accounted for by retail traders caught up in the media bubble two weeks ago hoping to cash-in on the squeeze. Alternatively, I believe a large magnitude of the calls may have been strategically planted by hedges who had very low short positions, i.e. ~$35, and did not plan on covering during the first massive peak. Why not? Because now they have the opportunity, (FLUSH with 2.75B in cash for Melvin), to do some serious damage control. Would a professional gambler pay off his debt with a loan, or would he use it to cut his losses before repaying his loan? Now we know atleast 78% of the shorts ~$35 DID NOT account for the massive price increase. If give/take 40% of the shorts who did actually exit their positions before 1/29 attributed to the $483 price spike, IMAGINE what 78% can obtain. ALSO, while it is certainly possible that a decent chunk of this 78% have slowly been exiting their positions since 1/29, we also know that a large number of greedy bastards have been taking their place at higher price points >100, > 200, >300. While these positions are extremely profitable at this time (i.e. some hedges mitigating losses, while some reap ginormous gains after watching on the sidelines until the 29th), the low entry ~$35 shorts will eventually have to cover their losses. This will trigger a domino effect by inevitably applying upwards pressure on the new, high entry shorts, who will see the tidal wave coming and immediately take their profits (or maximum mitigated losses) and get the fuck out of dodge while they still can. TLDR: The most logical way to cut losses (while simultaneously accruing massive interest on current positions) would be by attempting to short the stock the whole way down from the top of the media bubble then finally closing out the terrible ~$35 short positions after driving the price down as far as possible, knowing that the price will skyrocket back up after they cover now they can cash in another fat chunk of change on the 800c 2/19 then short the whole thing back down again. At the end of the day, I have no clue how much they would net in losses, because that is contingent on the accrual of interest and which is directly associated with the price price point they actually have shorts located at (only they know this). In any case, this chain of events is the most logical way for a billion dollar entity to mitigate losses on a failed bet. Again, I want to reiterate, WHY would a hedgefund loan $2.75B to another hedgefund if they had not run countless simulations in order to determine the best possible outcomes? Disclaimer: This is my personal hypothesis based on the facts provided to us. This should not be construed as financial advice. I'm just a law student who likes money, video games, and stonks.
Alright Degenerates- I posted a small little snippet a day or so ago about BFT. I wanted to do a bit of DD on BFT but also wanted to highlight something that was brought to my attention by a degenerate gambler. Lastly, I wanted to compile some good little snippets that have been put together by some other members as well as from the investor presentation. Before reading further please understand the major Risks.
This is SPAC with ~10.00 NAV, if the deal falls through it could drop to 10.00 USD
The warrants could be very lucrative but they can be called and if a deal fails to materialize, these can become worthless.
If you're ok with the above risks, continue reading.
Keep in mind that this merger is not complete, but the terms of the deal have been provided to investors and we will be able to either vote yes for the deal or vote no and redeem our shares in BFT for 10.00 cash. So there is downside to this play should the vote not go through or should the two entities terminate the agreement. Right now the downside is ~3 dollars per share according to the close price from today.
Deep Customer Base with deep ties to gambling/betting industry with Deep penetration in Europe and growing customer bases around the world. Gambling is a tricky business and regulated differently than other industries. Many big players have avoided the industry and Paysafe has a great reputation and has become one of the early movers in the industry. The following are some notable customers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I actually know Paysafe and the usage quite well. PayPal has many restrictions in Europe regarding iGaming , so does Square. This is a big play on iGaming for those that aren’t aware. I was a mid- high stakes online poker player through the 2010-2018. Played a variety of sites. : iPoker; PokerStars, Paddy, MicroGaming, 888, Party. Why so many sites? Because I was always on lookout for where the action was, if a big whale sat down at one online casino; you bet your sweet ass I’m there. So let me give you my take as a consumer that’s probably spent over $100,000 in transaction fees personally on Paysafe. This was one of the cheapest and fastest ways to move money around online. Unlike Stripe this which is against risky business such as CBD and gambling, paysafe is actually one of the leading payment providers in both UK/AUS / Ireland for iGaming. Big example is William Hill, Bet365, Bwin. Now why would you want to move money online around as a gambler ? Well, Visa/MC charge close to 50%->75% more, online casinos = the merchant. They don’t wanna pay that, and in fact put limits on this type of payment processor. (Your visa’s credit cards etc). If a punter deposits / withdraws frequently, the online casino could literally be on the hook for like 20-30% of the turnover throughout the gambler’s period. (This assumes the gambler doesn’t lose all his money per deposit. Imagine you’re a professional sportsbettor, you’re not loyal to one site. Different spreads / odds are offered on every site, you want to be able to move your money from one to another quickly and cheaply. Arbitrage opportunities do exist in sports betting as bookmakers hedge their books to minimize risk, diff frequencies of bets occur on each sports book; you get the idea. For recreational punters, it’s simple: some sporting events that are smaller simply don’t exist on one site that exist on another. Eg. Perhaps you using Pinnacle / 10dimes for low spreads on high volume events, but perhaps you want to gamble on live events on bet365 on another day, and bet ponies on Hill. What if you only have $5000 ? Giant pain in ass to deposit money to each site, paysafe lets you move it around easily. Should you use visa, you may get blocked from depositing on various sites; Bodog, WHill, Bet365 just to name a few. Withdrawals and clearing deposits with bank transfers or checks takes days-> weeks and gamblers ain’t gonna wait for that shit. You can also buy prepaid paysafe cards from stores if you don’t wish to use your real credit card; and load that shit up. One of the biggest markets this is prominent in is South east Asia, they are some of the biggest punters and fucking loving gambling. Looking at you pinoys, Indonesians, Malays. Not everyone wants to fly to Macau to get their rocks off. As much as this is a play on FinTech, please understand this company has more or less the best Payment service on online gambling globally. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill has connections and a strategy to dominate Igaming.
Igaming addressable Market is expected to grow immensely from a few billion to tens of billions.
https://preview.redd.it/qfacblzz0b461.jpg?width=241&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dbcdace95286ffccf613daa79b93554ca3e5728b This is an end to end payment processor with big big big name relationships for very disruptive companies that have huge addressable markets. The reason I am excited is because IGAMING is just really starting to take off and Paysafe is a first mover with brand new experienced management and very very fair valuations that could pop after a merger. TL;DR- BUY BFT stock and BFT.W because BFT stands for big freaking tenderloins.
The January 15th official short interest report stated 61,780,000 shares had been sold short. On the 15th, the share price was about $35. This is a crucial piece of information to consider. Short Interest is reported twice monthly, so the last report before January 15th was from December 31st, and the next was issued today February 9th, revealing a (still) staggering 78.46% short interest. Keep in mind, this report only shows short interest up to January 29th. Lets go back to the January 15th report which told us that 61.78 million shares had been shorted at prices less than $35. In other words, every single short of those 61.78 million was betting the price would be less than $35, and it's more likely that most were shorted around the $15 - $20 mark. We do not know the exact numbers. But what we do know is some of these shorts closed out of their positions before, that is evident by the SI report we received today. We can also draw another inference from this data: MOSTshort positions from the January 15th report have NOT covered yet. Today's report confirmed this speculation. The hedge funds and other players were able to drive the price down from $483 to $65 in less than a week. Regardless of the illegal actions they took to make this happen. They knew they would be able to do this. It didn't even take that long. So why in the world would they have covered even a single share above $100?? It is my belief that only the shorts who lacked liquidity and spare capital to pay interest were margin called, or chose to bow out early. Today's report all but confirms this theory. If you need more evidence, look at the overall market bleed that took place on the days right before the cut-off date for this report. What does that mean for the big players? The ones who actually have capital to sustain high interest rates and play the long game to mitigate losses? They are waiting to bring the price down to an acceptable level, buying far OTM calls, and letting the hype die down a bit before they even begin to cover. The current drop in price has been working in the favor of hedges in three different ways. First, calls far OTM are very cheap, and hedge funds are able to scoop up millions of dollars worth of options that they will later be able to sell or execute for profit. During the first peak, the furthest OTM call available were too expensive and to NTM for hedges to offset their losses. If my theory is correct, hedges stand to gain substantially on their far OTM calls expiring Feb. 19th. Second, the extreme price drop means there are tons of shares available for hedges to short now. During the last rise, there were nowhere near enough shares for hedges to short as the price dipped. Finally, it is obvious that shorts are better off covering at $50 rather than $480. They have effectively weeded out a large number of paper hands and profiteers. But that is neither here nor there, as we still control a substantial portion of the float, keeping sustained pressure on the shorts. Furthering my hypothesis, I do not believe Citadel gave 2.75b to Melvin to flush down the toilet. They are expecting Melvin to mitigate as much of their losses as possible. How might they do this? First, check the amount of money placed on 800c for 2/19. Obviously a portion of this money can be accounted for by retail traders caught up in the media bubble two weeks ago hoping to cash-in on the squeeze. Alternatively, I believe a large magnitude of the calls may have been strategically planted by hedges who had very low short positions, i.e. ~$35, and did not plan on covering during the first massive peak. Why not? Because now they have the opportunity, (FLUSH with 2.75B in cash for Melvin), to do some serious damage control. Would a professional gambler pay off his debt with a loan, or would he use it to cut his losses before repaying his loan? Now we know atleast 78% of the shorts ~$35 DID NOT account for the massive price increase. If give/take 40% of the shorts who did actually exit their positions before 1/29 attributed to the $483 price spike, IMAGINE what 78% can obtain. ALSO, while it is certainly possible that a decent chunk of this 78% have slowly been exiting their positions since 1/29, we also know that a large number of greedy bastards have been taking their place at higher price points >100, > 200, >300. While these positions are extremely profitable at this time (i.e. some hedges mitigating losses, while some reap ginormous gains after watching on the sidelines until the 29th), the low entry ~$35 shorts will eventually have to cover their losses. This will trigger a domino effect by inevitably applying upwards pressure on the new, high entry shorts, who will see the tidal wave coming and immediately take their profits (or maximum mitigated losses) and get the fuck out of dodge while they still can. TLDR: The most logical way to cut losses (while simultaneously accruing massive interest on current positions) would be by attempting to short the stock the whole way down from the top of the media bubble then finally closing out the terrible ~$35 short positions after driving the price down as far as possible, knowing that the price will skyrocket back up after they cover now they can cash in another fat chunk of change on the 800c 2/19 then short the whole thing back down again. At the end of the day, I have no clue how much they would net in losses, because that is contingent on the accrual of interest and which is directly associated with the price price point they actually have shorts located at (only they know this). In any case, this chain of events is the most logical way for a billion dollar entity to mitigate losses on a failed bet. Again, I want to reiterate, WHY would a hedgefund loan $2.75B to another hedgefund if they had not run countless simulations in order to determine the best possible outcomes? Disclaimer: This is my personal hypothesis based on the facts provided to us. This should not be construed as financial advice. I'm just a law student who likes money, video games, and stonks.
The January 15th official short interest report stated 61,780,000 shares had been sold short. On the 15th, the share price was about $35. This is a crucial piece of information to consider. Short Interest is reported twice monthly, so the last report before January 15th was from December 31st, and the next was issued today February 9th, revealing a (still) staggering 78.46% short interest. Keep in mind, this report only shows short interest up to January 29th. Lets go back to the January 15th report which told us that 61.78 million shares had been shorted at prices less than $35. In other words, every single short of those 61.78 million was betting the price would be less than $35, and it's more likely that most were shorted around the $15 - $20 mark. We do not know the exact numbers. But what we do know is some of these shorts closed out of their positions before, that is evident by the SI report we received today. We can also draw another inference from this data: MOSTshort positions from the January 15th report have NOT covered yet. Today's report confirmed this speculation. The hedge funds and other players were able to drive the price down from $483 to $65 in less than a week. Regardless of the illegal actions they took to make this happen. They knew they would be able to do this. It didn't even take that long. So why in the world would they have covered even a single share above $100?? It is my belief that only the shorts who lacked liquidity and spare capital to pay interest were margin called, or chose to bow out early. Today's report all but confirms this theory. If you need more evidence, look at the overall market bleed that took place on the days right before the cut-off date for this report. What does that mean for the big players? The ones who actually have capital to sustain high interest rates and play the long game to mitigate losses? They are waiting to bring the price down to an acceptable level, buying far OTM calls, and letting the hype die down a bit before they even begin to cover. The current drop in price has been working in the favor of hedges in three different ways. First, calls far OTM are very cheap, and hedge funds are able to scoop up millions of dollars worth of options that they will later be able to sell or execute for profit. During the first peak, the furthest OTM call available were too expensive and to NTM for hedges to offset their losses. If my theory is correct, hedges stand to gain substantially on their far OTM calls expiring Feb. 19th. Second, the extreme price drop means there are tons of shares available for hedges to short now. During the last rise, there were nowhere near enough shares for hedges to short as the price dipped. Finally, it is obvious that shorts are better off covering at $50 rather than $480. They have effectively weeded out a large number of paper hands and profiteers. But that is neither here nor there, as we still control a substantial portion of the float, keeping sustained pressure on the shorts. Furthering my hypothesis, I do not believe Citadel gave 2.75b to Melvin to flush down the toilet. They are expecting Melvin to mitigate as much of their losses as possible. How might they do this? First, check the amount of money placed on 800c for 2/19. Obviously a portion of this money can be accounted for by retail traders caught up in the media bubble two weeks ago hoping to cash-in on the squeeze. Alternatively, I believe a large magnitude of the calls may have been strategically planted by hedges who had very low short positions, i.e. ~$35, and did not plan on covering during the first massive peak. Why not? Because now they have the opportunity, (FLUSH with 2.75B in cash for Melvin), to do some serious damage control. Would a professional gambler pay off his debt with a loan, or would he use it to cut his losses before repaying his loan? Now we know atleast 78% of the shorts ~$35 DID NOT account for the massive price increase. If give/take 40% of the shorts who did actually exit their positions before 1/29 attributed to the $483 price spike, IMAGINE what 78% can obtain. ALSO, while it is certainly possible that a decent chunk of this 78% have slowly been exiting their positions since 1/29, we also know that a large number of greedy bastards have been taking their place at higher price points >100, > 200, >300. While these positions are extremely profitable at this time (i.e. some hedges mitigating losses, while some reap ginormous gains after watching on the sidelines until the 29th), the low entry ~$35 shorts will eventually have to cover their losses. This will trigger a domino effect by inevitably applying upwards pressure on the new, high entry shorts, who will see the tidal wave coming and immediately take their profits (or maximum mitigated losses) and get the fuck out of dodge while they still can. TLDR: The most logical way to cut losses (while simultaneously accruing massive interest on current positions) would be by attempting to short the stock the whole way down from the top of the media bubble then finally closing out the terrible ~$35 short positions after driving the price down as far as possible, knowing that the price will skyrocket back up after they cover now they can cash in another fat chunk of change on the 800c 2/19 then short the whole thing back down again. At the end of the day, I have no clue how much they would net in losses, because that is contingent on the accrual of interest and which is directly associated with the price price point they actually have shorts located at (only they know this). In any case, this chain of events is the most logical way for a billion dollar entity to mitigate losses on a failed bet. Again, I want to reiterate, WHY would a hedgefund loan $2.75B to another hedgefund if they had not run countless simulations in order to determine the best possible outcomes? Disclaimer: This is my personal hypothesis based on the facts provided to us. This should not be construed as financial advice. I'm just a law student who likes money, video games, and stonks.
Casual Reader, 'Gah, Kvothe is suchhh a Mary Sue' Old Knower, '...No he's not. And I got the receipts to prove it' [Brings Up This Thread]
Lol. I'm not spending anymore seconds on this sub putting in effort to search up and then provide the quotes for casuals who think Kvothe is a Mary Sue. Here are the receipts, immortalized. I'm just going to refer them to this thread from now on. [Adem Signs Entreaty] Please do the same. Kvothe=Hero of a Greek Tragedy. In Greek tragedies, the heroes are almost supernaturally gifted, but brought to failure/humility by their inability to overcome their character flaws, their decisions, their lack of wisdom. His mentor's thoughts on him:
Ben took a deep breath and tried again. "Suppose you have a thoughtless six-year-old. What harm can he do?" I paused, unsure what sort of answer he wanted. Straightforward would probably be best. "Not much." "Suppose he's twenty, and still thoughtless, how dangerous is he?" I decided to stick with the obvious answers. "Still not much, but more than before." "What if you give him a sword?" Realization started to dawn on me, and I closed my eyes. "More, much more. I understand, Ben. Really I do. Power is okay, and stupidity is usually harmless. Power and stupidity together are dangerous." "I never said stupid," Ben corrected me. "You're clever. We both know that. But you can be thoughtless. A clever, thoughtless person is one of the most terrifying things there is. Worse, I've been teaching you some dangerous things."
...Is this your Kingkiller? (Note: I will be parodying a specific half a minute of dialogue from the movie Black Panther throughout my post, which you can find to the exact timestamp at this URL: https://youtu.be/uZMoFMGM48o?t=180 )
Kvothe constantly fucks himself over through his character flaws. Here's some of the Stupid, thoughtless shit he does throughout the series despite his cleverness:
I drew in a deep breath and spoke the words to bind the air in my lungs to the air outside. I fixed the Alar firmly in my mind, put my thumb and forefinger in front of my pursed lips, and blew between them. There was a light puff of wind at my back that tousled my hair and caused the tarpaulin covering the wagon to pull taut for a moment. It might have been nothing more than a coincidence, but nevertheless, I felt an exultant smile overflow my face. For a second I did nothing but grin like a maniac at Ben, his face dull with disbelief. Then I felt something squeeze my chest, as if I was deep underwater. I tried to draw a breath but couldn't. Mildly confused, I kept trying. It felt as if I'd just fallen flat on my back and had the air driven from me. All in a rush I realized what I had done. My body exploded into a cold sweat and I grabbed frantically at Ben's shirt, pointing at my chest, my neck, my open mouth. Ben's face turned from shocked to ashen as he looked at me. I realized how still everything was. Not a blade of grass was stirring. Even the sound of the wagon seemed muted, as if far off in the distance. Terror screamed through my mind, drowning out any thought. I began to claw at my throat, ripping my shirt open. My heart thundered through the ringing in my ears. Pain stabbed through my straining chest as I gaped for air. Moving more quickly than I had ever seen before, Ben grabbed me by the tatters of my shirt and sprang from the seat of the wagon. Landing in the grass by the side of the road, he dashed me to the ground with such a force that, if I'd had any air in my lungs, it would have been driven out of me. Tears streaked my face as I thrashed blindly. I knew that I was going to die. My eyes felt hot and red. I raked madly at the earth with hands that were numb and cold as ice. In hindsight, what I had done was glaringly stupid. When I bound my breath to the air outside, it made it impossible for me to breathe. My lungs weren't strong enough to move that much air. I would have needed a chest like an iron bellows. I would have had as much luck trying to drink a river or lift a mountain.
[Killmonger Voice]Is this your Mary-Sue?
Starting the beef with Ambrose in his rush to get into the Archives as soon as possible...only to get indefinitely banned from it:
"I've just gone through admissions—" He tossed up his hands, exasperated. "Then of course you're not in the book." I dug into a pocket for my admission slip. "Master Lorren gave me this himself." "I don't care if he carried you here pig-a-back," Ambrose said, pointedly redipping his pen. "Now quit wasting my time. I have things to do." "Wasting your time?" I demanded, my temper finally wearing thin. "Do you have any idea what I've gone through to get here?" Ambrose looked up at me, his expression growing suddenly amused. "Wait, let me guess," he said, laying his hands flat on the table and pushing himself to his feet. "You were always smarter than the other children back in Clodhump, or whatever little one-whore town you're from. Your ability to read and count left the local villagers awestruck." I heard the outer door open and shut behind me, but Ambrose didn't pay it any attention as he walked around to lean against the front of the desk. "Your parents knew you were special so they saved up for a couple years, bought you a pair of shoes, and sewed the pig blanket into a shirt." He reached out to rub the fabric of my new clothes between his fingers. "It took months of walking, hundreds of miles bumping along in the backs of mule carts. But in the end . . ." He made an expansive gesture with both hands. "Praise Tehlu and all his angels! Here you are! All bright-eyed and full of dreams!" Nahlrout was less powerful than these, but much safer. It was a mild anesthetic, a stimulant, and a vascular constrictor, which is why I hadn't bled like a stuck pig when they'd whipped me. Best of all, it had no major side effects. Still, there is always a price to be paid. Once nahlrout wears off, it leaves you physically and mentally exhausted. Regardless, I had come here to see the stacks. I was now a member of the Arcanum and I didn't intend to leave until I'd been inside the Archives. I turned back to the desk, my expression resolute. Ambrose gave me a long, calculating look before heaving a sigh. "Fine," he said. "How about a deal? You keep quiet about what you saw here today, and I'll bend the rules and let you in even though you aren't officially in the book." He looked a little nervous. "How does that sound?" Even as he spoke I could feel the stimulant effect from the nahlrout fading. My body felt heavy and tired, my thoughts grew sluggish and syrupy. I reached up to rub at my face with my hands, and winced as the motion tugged sharply at the stitches all across my back. "That'll be fine," I said thickly. Ambrose opened up one of the ledger books and sighed as he turned the pages. "Since this is your first time in the Archives proper, you'll have to pay the stack fee." My mouth tasted strangely of lemons. That was a side effect Ben had never mentioned. It was distracting, and after a moment I saw that Ambrose was looking up at me expectantly. "What?" He gave me a strange look. "The stack fee." "There wasn't any fee before," I said. "When I was in the Tomes." Ambrose looked up at me as if I were an idiot. "That's because it's the stack fee." He looked back down at the ledger. "Normally you pay it in addition to your first term's Arcanum tuition. But since you've jumped rank on us, you'll need to tend to it now." "How much is it?" I asked, feeling for my purse. "One talent," he said. "And you do have to pay before you can go in. Rules are Rules." After paying for my bunk in Mews, a talent was nearly all my remaining money. I was keenly aware of the fact that I needed to hoard my resources to save for next term's tuition. As soon as I couldn't pay, I would have to leave the University. Still, it was a small price to pay for something I'd dreamed about for most of my life. I pulled a talent out of my purse and handed it over. "Do I need to sign in?" "Nothing so formal as that," Ambrose said as he opened a drawer and pulled out a small metal disk. Stupefied from the side effects of the nahlrout, it took me a moment to recognize it for what it was: a handheld sympathy lamp. "The Stacks aren't lit," Ambrose said matter-of-factly. "There's too much space in there, and it would be bad for the books in the long term. Hand lamps cost a talent and a half." I hesitated. Ambrose nodded to himself and looked thoughtful. "A lot of folk end up strapped during first term." He reached down into a lower drawer and rooted around for a long moment. "Hand lamps are a talent and half, and there's nothing I can do about that." He brought out a four-inch taper. "But candles are just a ha'penny." Ha'penny for a candle was a remarkably good deal. I brought out a penny. "I'll take two." "This is our last one," Ambrose said quickly. He looked around nervously before pushing it into my hand. "Tell you what. You can have it for free." He smiled. "Just don't tell anyone. It'll be our little secret." I took the candle, more than a little surprised. Apparently I'd frightened him with my idle threat earlier. Either that or this rude, pompous noble's son wasn't half the bastard I'd taken him for. Ambrose hurried me into the stacks as quickly as possible, leaving me no time to light my candle. The red light swelled and I saw two scrivs turn a corner. They paused, then one of them bolted to where I stood and snatched my candle away, spilling hot wax on my hand in the process of extinguishing it. His expression couldn't have been more horrified if he had found me carrying a freshly severed head. "What are you doing with an open flame in here?" he demanded in the loudest whisper I had ever heard. He lowered his voice and waved the now extinguished candle at me. "Charred body of God, what's the matter with you?" I rubbed at the hot wax on the back of my hand. Trying to think clearly through the fog of pain and exhaustion. Of course, I thought, remembering Ambrose's smile as he pressed the candle into my hands and hurried me though the door. "Our little secret. " Of course. I should have known. One of the scrivs led me out of the Stacks while the other ran to fetch Master Lorren. When we emerged into the entryway, Ambrose managed to look confused and shocked. He overacted the part, but it was convincing enough for the scriv accompanying me. "What's he doing in here?" "We found him wandering around," the scriv explained."With a candle." "What?" Ambrose's expression was perfectly aghast. "Well I didn't sign him in," Ambrose said. He flipped open one of the ledger books. "Look. See for yourself." Before anything else could be said, Lorren stormed into the room. His normally placid expression was fierce and hard. I felt myself sweat cold and I thought of what Teccam wrote in his Theophany: There are three things all wise men fear: the sea in storm, a night with no moon, and the anger of a gentle man. Lorren towered over the entry desk. "Explain," he demanded of the nearby scriv. His voice was a tight coil of fury. "Micah and I saw a flickering light in the stacks and we went to see if someone was having trouble with their lamp. We found him near the southeast stairwell with this." The scriv held up the candle. His hand shook slightly under Lorren's glare. Lorren turned to the desk where Ambrose sat. "How did this happen, Re'lar?" Ambrose raised his hands helplessly. "He came in earlier and I wouldn't admit him because he wasn't in the book. We bickered for a while, Fela was here for most of it." He looked at me. "Eventually I told him he'd have to leave. He must have snuck in when I went into the back room for more ink." Ambrose shrugged. "Or maybe he slipped in past the desk in Tomes." I stood there, stupefied. What little part of my mind wasn't leaden with fatigue was preoccupied with the screaming pain across my back. "That . . . that's not true." I looked up at Lorren. "He let me in. He sent Fela away, then let me in." "What?" Ambrose gaped at me, momentarily speechless. For all that I didn't like him, I must give him credit for a masterful performance. "Why in God's name would I do that?" "Because I embarrassed you in front of Fela," I said. "He sold me the candle, too." I shook my head trying to clear my head. "No, he gave it to me." Ambrose's expression was amazed. "Look at him." He laughed. "The little cocker is drunk or something." "I was just whipped!" I protested. My voice sounded shrill in my own ears. "Enough!" Lorren shouted, looming over us like a pillar of anger. The scrivs went pale at the sound of him. Lorren turned away from me, and made a brief, contemptuous gesture toward the desk. "Re'lar Ambrose is officially remanded for laxity in his duty." "What?" Ambrose's indignant tone wasn't feigned this time. Lorren frowned at him, and Ambrose closed his mouth. Turning to me, he said, "E'lir Kvothe is banned from the Archives." He made a sweeping gesture with the flat of his hand. I tried to think of something I could say in my defense. "Master, I didn't mean—" Lorren rounded on me. His expression, always so calm before, was filled with such a cold, terrible anger that I took a step away from him without meaning to. "You mean?" he said. "I care nothing for your intentions, E'lir Kvothe, deceived or otherwise. All that matters is the reality of your actions. Your hand held the fire. Yours is the blame. That is the lesson all adults must learn." It was the nahlrout, of course. It had kept me from bleeding. It had seemed like such a good idea at the time. Now it seemed petty and foolish. Ambrose would never have managed to gull me so easily if my naturally suspicious nature hadn't been fuddled. I'm sure I could have found some way to explain things to Lorren if I'd had my wits about me. As I made my way to the far corner of the room, I realized the truth. I had traded away my access to the Archives in exchange for a little notoriety. "Banned?" Manet looked up at me. "He hasn't banned anyone in a dozen years. What'd you do? Piss on a book?" "Some of the scrivs found me inside with a candle." "Merciful Tehlu." Manet lay down his fork, his expression serious for the first time. "Old Lore must have been furious." "Furious is exactly the right word," I said. "What possessed you to go in there with an open flame?" Simmon asked. "I couldn't afford a hand lamp," I said. "So the scriv at the desk gave me a candle instead." "He didn't," Sim said. "No scriv would . . ." "Hold on," Manet said. "Was this a dark-haired fellow? Well-dressed? Severe eyebrows?" He made an exaggerated scowl. I nodded tiredly "Ambrose. We met yesterday. Got off on the wrong foot." "You won't need this piece of information for a while," Manet said quietly after a long period of silence. "What with being banned from the Archives and all. Still, I'm supposing you'd rather know. . . ." He cleared his throat uncomfortably. "You don't have to buy a hand lamp. You just sign them out at the desk and return them when you're done." He looked at me as if anxious about what sort of reaction the information might provoke. I nodded wearily.
[Killmonger Voice]Huh? Is this your Mary-Sue?
"What do I have to do," I asked, "to study naming under you?" He met my eye calmly, appraising me. "Jump," he said. "Jump off this roof." That's when I realized that all of this had been a test. Elodin had been taking my measure ever since we met. He had a grudging respect for my tenacity, and he had been surprised that I noticed something odd about the air in his room. He was on the verge of accepting me as a student. But he needed more, proof of my dedication. A demonstration. A leap of faith. And as I stood there, a piece of story came to mind. So Taborlin fell, but he did not despair. For he knew the name of the wind, and so the wind obeyed him. It cradled and caressed him. It bore him to the ground as gently as a puff of thistledown. It set him on his feet softly as a mother's kiss. Elodin knew the name of the wind. Still looking him in the eye, I stepped off the edge of the roof. Elodin's expression was marvelous. I have never seen a man so astonished. I spun slightly as I fell, so he stayed in my line of vision. I saw him raise one hand slightly, as if making a belated attempt to grab hold of me. I felt weightless, like I was floating. Then I struck the ground. Not gently, like a feather settling down. Hard. Like a brick hitting a cobblestone street. I landed on my back with my left arm beneath me. My vision went dark as the back of my head struck the ground and all the air was driven from my body. I didn't lose consciousness. I just lay there, breathless and unable to move. I remember thinking, quite earnestly, that I was dead. That I was blind. Eventually my sight returned, leaving me blinking against the sudden brightness of the blue sky. Pain tore through my shoulder and I tasted blood. I couldn't breathe. I tried to roll off my arm, but my body wouldn't listen to me. I had broken my neck . . . my back . . . After a long, terrifying moment, I managed to gasp a shallow breath, then another. I gave a sigh of relief and realized that I had at least one broken rib in addition to everything else, but I moved my fingers slightly, then my toes. They worked. I hadn't broken my spine. As I lay there, counting my blessings and broken ribs, Elodin stepped into my field of vision. He looked down at me. "Congratulations," he said. "That was the stupidest thing I've ever seen." His expression was a mix of awe and disbelief. "Ever." And that is when I decided to pursue the noble art of artificing. Not that I had a lot of other options. Before helping me limp to the Medica, Elodin made it clear that anyone stupid enough to jump off a roof was too reckless to be allowed to hold a spoon in his presence, let alone study something as "profound and volatile" as naming.
Kvothe's absolute failure in learning naming for the first half of WMF:
Elodin made a sweeping gesture toward me. “Then there is the third path. The path of Kvothe.” He strode to stand shoulder to shoulder with me, facing Fela. “You sense something between you. Something wonderful and delicate.” He gave a romantic, lovelorn sigh. “And, because you desire certainty in all things, you decide to force the issue. You take the shortest route. Simplest is best, you think.” Elodin extended his own hands and made wild grasping motions in Fela’s direction. “So you reach out and you grab this young woman’s breasts.” There was a burst of startled laughter from everyone except Fela and myself. I scowled. She crossed her arms in front of her chest and her flush spread down her neck until it was hidden by her shirt. Elodin turned his back to her and looked me in the eye. “Re’lar Kvothe,” he said seriously. “I am trying to wake your sleeping mind to the subtle language the world is whispering. I am trying to seduce you into understanding. I am trying to teach you.” He leaned forward until his face was almost touching mine. “Quit grabbing at my tits.” I left Elodin’s class in a foul mood.
Kvothe's blatant failures with Kilvin:
Kilvin let out a deep sigh. “Before, when you made your thief ’s lamp, you made a bad thing in a good way. That I do not like.” He looked down at the schema. “This time you have made a good thing in a bad way. That is better, but not entirely. Best is to make a good thing in a good way. Agreed?” I nodded. He lay one massive hand on the crossbow. “Did anyone see you with it?” I shook my head. “Then we will say it is mine, and you procured it under my advisement. It will join the equipment in Stocks.” He gave me a hard look. “And in the future you will come to me if you need such things.” That stung a bit, as I’d been planning on selling it back to Sleat. Still, it could have been worse. The last thing I wanted was to run afoul of the iron law. “Third, I see no mention of gold wire or silver in your schema,” he said. “Nor can I imagine any use they could be put to in such a device as yours. Explain why you have checked these materials out of Stocks.” I was suddenly pointedly aware of the cool metal of my gram against the inside of my arm. Its inlay was gold, but I could hardly tell him that. “I was short on money, Master Kilvin. And I needed materials I couldn’t get in Stocks.” “Such as your flatbow.” I nodded. “And the straw and the bear traps.” “Wrong follows wrong,” Kilvin said disapprovingly. “The Stocks are not a moneylender’s stall and should not be used as such. I am rescinding your precious metals authorization.” I bowed my head, hoping I looked appropriately chastised. “You will also work twenty hours in Stocks as your punishment. If anyone asks, you will tell them what you did. And explain that as a punishment you were forced to repay the value of the metals plus an additional twenty percent. If you use Stocks as a moneylender, you will be charged interest like a moneylender.” I winced at that. “Yes, Master Kilvin.”
Vashet slapping the murder and Mary Sue right out of Kvothe:
I sighed. “Must we, Vashet?” She raised an eyebrow at me. “Must we what?” “Must we focus always on hand fighting?” I said. “My swordplay is falling farther and farther behind.” “Am I not your teacher?” she asked. “Who are you to say what is best?” “I am the one who will have to use these skills out in the world,” I said pointedly. “And out in the world, I would rather fight with a sword than a fist.” Vashet lowered her hands, her expression blank. “And why is that?” “Because other people have swords,” I said. “And if I’m in a fight, I intend to win.” “Is winning a fight easier with a sword?” she asked. Vashet’s outward calm should have warned me I was stepping onto thin conversational ice, but I was distracted by the nauseating pain radiating from my groin. Though honestly, even if I hadn’t been distracted, it’s possible I wouldn’t have noticed. I had grown comfortable with Vashet, too comfortable to be properly careful. “Of course,” I said. “Why else carry a sword?” “That is a good question,” she said. “Why does one carry a sword?” “Why do you carry anything? So you can use it.” Vashet gave me a look of raw disgust. “Why do we bother to work on your language, then?” She asked angrily, reaching out to grab my jaw, pinching my cheeks and forcing my mouth open as if I were a patient in the Medica refusing my medicine. “Why do you need this tongue if a sword will do? Tell me that?” I tried to pull away, but she was stronger than me. I tried to push her away, but she shrugged my flailing hands away as if I were a child. Vashet let go of my face, then caught my wrist, jerking my hand up in front of my face. “Why do you have hands at all and not knives at the ends of your arms?” Then she let go of my wrist and struck me hard across the face with the flat of her hand. If I say she slapped me, you will take the wrong impression. This wasn’t the dramatic slap of the sort you see on a stage. Neither was it the offended, stinging slap a lady-in-waiting makes against the smooth skin of a too-familiar nobleman. It wasn’t even the more professional slap of a serving girl defending herself from the unwelcome attention of a grabby drunk. No. This was hardly any sort of slap at all. A slap is made with the fingers or the palm. It stings or startles. Vashet struck me with her open hand, but behind that was the strength of her arm. Behind that was her shoulder. Behind that was the complex machinery of her pivoting hips, her strong legs braced against the ground, and the ground itself beneath her. It was like the whole of creation striking me through the flat of her hand, and the only reason it didn’t cripple me is that even in the middle of her fury, Vashet was always perfectly in control. Because she was in control, Vashet didn’t dislocate my jaw or knock me unconscious. But it made my teeth rattle and my ears ring. It made my eyes roll in my head and my legs go loose and shaky. I would have fallen if Vashet hadn’t gripped me by the shoulder. “Do you think I am teaching you the secrets of the sword so you can go out and use them?” she demanded. I dimly realized she was shouting. It was the first time I had ever heard one of the Adem raise their voice. “Is that what you think we are doing here?” As I lolled in her grip, stupefied, she struck me again. This time her hand caught more of my nose. The pain of it was amazing, as if someone had driven a sliver of ice directly into my brain. It jolted me out of my daze so I was fully alert when she hit me the third time. Vashet held me for a moment while the world spun, then let go. I took one unsteady step and crumpled to the ground like a puppet with its strings cut. Not unconscious, but profoundly dazed. It took me a long time to collect myself. When I was finally able to sit up, my body felt loose and unwieldy, as if it had been taken apart and put back together again in a slightly different way. She reached out and ran her thumb along the side of my face. It felt cool against the swelling. “You must have angered her very.” “I can tell that by the ringing of my ears,” I said. Penthe shook her head. “No. Your marks.” She gestured to her own face this time. “With another, it might be a mistake, but Vashet would not leave such if she did not wish everyone to see.” The bottom dropped out of my stomach and my hand went unconsciously to my face. Of course. This wasn’t mere punishment. It was a message to all of Ademre. “Fool that I am,” I said softly. “I did not realize this until now.”
[Killmonger Voice]The Mary Sue who's supposed be unrealistically perfect and lack any flaws or weaknesses? This is your guy who does no wrong?
Sleat rubbed at his face. “Let me see. You play the lute passing well and are proud as a kicked cat. You are unmannerly, sharp-tongued, and show no respect for your betters, which is practically everyone given your lowly ravel birth.” I felt a flush of anger start in my face and sweep, hot and prickling, down the entire length of my body. “I am the best musician you will ever meet or see from a distance,” I said with forced calm. “And I am Edema Ruh to my bones. That means my blood is red. It means I breathe the free air and walk where my feet take me. I do not cringe and fawn like a dog at a man’s title. That looks like pride to people who have spent their lives cultivating supple spines.” Sleat gave a lazy smile, and I realized he’d been baiting me. “You also have a temper, so I’ve heard. I continued to meet with Celean in the grassy field next to the sword tree. I looked forward to these encounters despite the fact that she thrashed me with cheerful ruthlessness every time we fought. It took three days before I finally managed to beat her. Celean had a lesson of her own to teach me. Namely that there are opponents who will not hesitate to punch, kick, or elbow a man directly in his genitals. Never hard enough to permanently injure me, mind you. She’d been fighting her entire young life and had the control Vashet valued so highly. But that meant she knew exactly how hard to strike to leave me stunned and reeling, making her victory utterly unquestionable. So I sat on the grass, feeling grey and nauseous. “How dare you!” I spat back angrily. “I can’t believe I trusted you! I defended you to my friends—” I trailed off as the unthinkable happened. Despite my binding, Devi started to move, her hand inching its way into the open drawer. I concentrated harder and Devi’s hand came to a halt. Then, slowly, it began to creep forward again, disappearing into the drawer. I couldn’t believe it. “You think you can come in here and threaten me?” Devi hissed, her face a mask of rage. “You think I can’t take care of myself? I made Re’lar before they threw me out, you little slipstick. I earned it. My Alar is like the ocean in storm.” Her hand was almost completely inside the drawer now. I felt a clammy sweat break out across my forehead and broke my mind three more times. I murmured again and each piece of my mind made a separate binding, focusing on keeping her still. I drew heat from my body, feeling the cold crawl up my arms as I bore down on her. That was five bindings in all. My outside limit. Devi went motionless as stone, and she chuckled deep in her throat, grinning. “Oh you’re very good. I almost believe the stories about you now. But what makes you think you can do what even Elxa Dal couldn’t? Why do you think they expelled me? They feared a woman who could match a master by her second year.” Sweat made her pale hair cling to her forehead. She clenched her teeth, her pixie face savage with determination. Her hand began to move again. Then, with a sudden burst of motion she yanked her hand out of the drawer... I felt a sudden, jarring impact, as if I’d fallen several feet and landed flat on a stone floor. It was startling, but nowhere near as bad as it could have been. Through the terror, some small part of me marveled at her precision and control. The binding that held me fell away, and I drew a deep breath. “I understand, Devi,” I said. “But can—” “Get OUT!” she shouted. I got out. I would like to say it was a dignified exit, but that would not be the truth.
[Killmonger Voice]Him? He's supposed to be better than everyone?
Editted to Add More Examples: Updated 11/13/20 Here's hardened, grown men not even slightly taking him seriously:
The tall man shook his head somberly. "I was in the tavern when they came in with the news. They were gatherin' folk with wagons so they could go get the bodies. The whole wedding party dead as leather. Over thirty folks gutted like pigs and the place burned down in a blue flame. And that weren't the least oddness from what. ..." He dropped his voice and I lost what he was saying among the general noise of the room. I swallowed against the sudden dryness in my throat. I slowly tied off the last stitch on my cloak and set it down. I noticed my bleeding finger and absently put it in my mouth. I took a deep breath. I took a drink. Then I walked over to the table where the two men sat talking. "Did you gentlemen come downriver by any chance?" They looked up, obviously irritated by the interruption. Gentlemen had been a mistake, I should have said fellows, fellas. The bald one nodded. "Did you come by way of Marrow?" I asked, picking a northern town at random. "No," the fat one said. "We're down from Trebon." "Oh good." I said, my mind racing for a plausible lie. "I have family up in those parts I was thinking of visiting." My mind went blank as I tried to think of a way to ask him for the details of the story I'd overheard. My palms were sweaty. "Are they getting ready for the harvest festival up that way, or have I already missed it?" I finished lamely. "Still in the works," the bald one said and pointedly turned his shoulder to me. "I'd heard there was some problem with a wedding up in those parts...." The bald one turned back to look at me. "Well I don't know how you'd have heard that. As the news was fresh last night and we just docked down here ten minutes ago." He gave me a hard look. "I don't know what you're sellin', boy. But I ain't buyin'. Piss off or I'll thump you." I went back to my seat, knowing I'd made an irrecoverable mess of things. Tam grinned at him. “And what’re yeh doin’ in town?” “We’re just passing through,” I said. “We met up on the road and he was nice enough to walk with me.” Tam looked me up and down dismissively. “I wan’t talkin’ to you, boy,” he growled. “Mind yer betters.” ........Tam shook his head in exaggerated bemusement. “Even if I believed yeh for a second,” he said, “that means yeh should make four or five pennies a day. Not twenny. Wh—” I put on my most ingratiating smile and leaned into the conversation. “Listen, I—” Tam’s mug knocked hard against the tabletop, sending a splash of cider leaping up into the air. He gave me a dangerous look that didn’t hold any of the false playfulness he’d been showing Tempi. “Boy,” he said. “Yeh innerupt me again, and I’ll knock yer teeth right out.” He said it without any particular emphasis, as if he were letting me know that if I jumped into the river, I was bound to get wet. Tam turned back to Tempi.
[Killmonger Voice]This is your silver tongued 'Mary Sue' ?
While my mind was occupied, I misplayed and we lost another hand, putting us down four in a row with a forfeit besides. Manet glared at me while he gathered in the cards. “Here’s a primer for admissions.” He held up his hand, three fingers spearing angrily into the air. “Let’s say you have three spades in your hand, and there have been five spades laid down.” He held up his other hand, fingers splayed wide. “How many spades is that, total?” He leaned back in his chair, crossing his arms. “Take your time.” I covered a fellow student’s observation shift in the Medica in exchange for a jot and helped a merchant unload three wagonloads of lime for halfpenny each. Then, later that night, I found a handful of cutthroat gamblers willing to let me sit in on their game of breath. Over the course of two hours I managed to lose eighteen pennies and some loose iron. Though it galled me, I forced myself to walk away from the table before things got any worse. At the end of all my scrambling, I had less in my purse than when I had begun.
[Killmonger Voice]Him? The guy who's very often complete trash at card games is an 'unrealistically good at everything Mary Sue' huh?
Patrick Rothfuss on Kvothe being an Unreliable NarratoMary Sue:
However people read the book makes me happy, as long as they enjoy themselves. But I will say that one of the reads I find a little irritating is where they think, "Oh, he's the best at everything. Oh, he's telling this story where he's so cool all the time." Are you reading the same story that I wrote? Because, like, he is constantly shitting the bed. He is full of terrible decisions all the time. If I were gonna go back and mythologize my life, I would leave out so many of the terrible choices that I made. https://www.wired.com/2016/08/wired-book-club-patrick-rothfuss-interview/
My thoughts: Kvothe is really only a Mary Sue if you prize attributes like talent, intelligence, and power over things like patience, wisdom, thoughtfulness, and making reasonable choices and life decisions. Because then, that's all you see/focus on in Kvothe. His capabilities. Anyone who is or knows someone really intelligent, really skilled, etc. decently well knows that that doesn't mean shit-all if they go around making horrible life decisions or foolish choices in general. Assuming you've read the story fully, Kvothe's only a Mary Sue if you put his capabilities on a pedestal and then confirmation bias tunnel visions you to focus only on that aspect of him. If you can't relate to those qualities in him and this causes you to dismiss/other him as a Mary Sue.... how about you relate to the fact that he's a young, arrogant kid who thinks he knows everything while simultaneously knowing nothing about love/the opposite gender, who constantly makes dumb decisions. Same as most of us when we were his age. 11/13/20 Edit Update:
I guarantee half, if not most, of the people who can only say 'well, you sound mean and horrible in the post' as a response are people who stumbled onto this thread and subreddit from the front page and never read a page of the books. Feel free to return to the subs you usually frequent unless you have something substantive to say about the book series that this entire subreddit is about (as I spent this entire post doing)
Unfortunately, I just can't find it in me to care about your opinions beyond the books. Sorry, not sorry. ;-)
Review of Martin Scorsese’s 1995 Casino [A mob movie that has many actors that will go on to be in the Sopranos].
mods please lmk if this violates the rules. i’m posting here because I write about the mob/casino and many relevant themes that are important elements of the Sopranos, in my opinion. I think they’re of the same medium and genre so wanted to post here. Hope that’s alright. Cheers! (11 min read) ———————————————————————— EDIT 2: TL;DR - Casino is a story of sexual and financial intrigue, mob violence, union pension fund embezzlement, a “love” story, and the protagonist's masochist addiction to the pain and chaos his lover inflicts on him. It turns out that the sharp-minded genius who meticulously runs the casino, is no more rational than the gamblers who routinely frequent the casino, coming back to lose their money and hoping that the odds will magically shift in their favor. ———————- Every good filmmaker makes the same movie over and over again—Martin Scorsese is no different Scorsese's Casino is a phenomenal story of the condoned chaos and "legalized robbery" that happens on a daily basis to gamblers who bett away thousands of dollars and return each day for more “FinDom,” but without any of the sexual sadism. The whole scam only persists because the house always wins: the odds are stacked 3 million to one on the slot machines, but the same shmucks return wide-eyed each day hoping for a different outcome, devoid of any rational re-evaluation required to maintain their grasp on reality, and the liquidity of their bank accounts. Casino is a story of sexual and financial intrigue, mob violence, union pension fund embezzlement, a “love” story, and the protagonist's masochist addiction to the pain and chaos his lover inflicts on him. It turns out that the sharp-minded genius who meticulously runs the casino, is no more rational than the gamblers who routinely frequent the casino, coming back to lose their money and hoping that the odds will magically shift in their favor. Robert De Niro plays Sam "Ace" Rothstein, recruited by his childhood friend Nick "Nicky" Santorno to help run the Tangiers casino, which is funded by an investment made with the Teamsters’ pension fund. Ace’s job is to keep the bottom line flowing so that the Mafia's skimming operation can continue seamlessly. De Niro's character felt like half-way between Travis from Taxi Driver (of course, nowhere as mentally disturbed) and half of the addictive excess, greed, and eccentric business-mind of Jordan Belfort in The Wolf of Wall Street. Ace’s attention to detail gives him a rain-man-esque sensibility; his ability to see every scam, trick, hand signal, and maneuver happening on the casino floor make him the perfect manager of the casino, and take his managerial style to authoritarian heights in his pursuit of order and control over what is an inherently unstable and dynamic scheme; betting, hedging outcomes, and walking the line to keep the money flowing and the gamblers coming back. I’m not claiming Ace is autistic, I'm no clinician, but his managerial sensibilities over the daily operations of the casino, from the dealers to the pit bosses, to the shift managers, are to the point of disturbing precision, he has eyes everywhere, and knows how to remove belligerent customers with class and professionalism, but ultimately is short sighted in “reading” the human beings he is in relationship with. Ace is frustratingly naive and gullible in his partnership with Nicky and the threat he poses to him, and in his marriage with Ginger. Ace has no personal aspirations to extract millions of dollars for himself out of the casino corruption venture. Ace simply wants the casino to operate as efficiently as possible, and he has no qualms about being a pawn of the bosses. While Sam, “the Golden Jew”—as he is called—is the real CEO of the whole enterprise, directing things at Tangiers for the benefit of the bosses “back home.” Ace’s compliance is juxtaposed with Nicky’s outrage upon feeling used: he gripes about how he is in “the trenches” while the bosses sit back and do nothing. Note that none of the activity Nicky engages in outside of the casino—doing the work of “taking Las Vegas over”—is authorized by the bosses. Ultimately Nicky’s inability to exert control over his crew and the street lead to his demise. In the end, capitalism, and all that happens in the confines of the casino, is nothing but “organized violence.” Sound familiar? The mob has a capitalist structure in its organization and hierarchy: muscle men collect and send money back to the bosses who do not labor tirelessly “in the trenches.” The labor of the collectors is exploited to create the profits of their bosses. The entire business-model of the Mafia is predicated on usury and debtors defaulting on loans for which the repayment is only guaranteed by the threat of violence. But this dynamic is not without its internal contradictions and tensions, as seen in Casino. In a comedic turn, the skimmers get skimmed! The bosses begin to notice the thinning of the envelopes and lighter and lighter suitcases being brought from the casino to Kansas City, “back home”. The situation continues to spin out of control, but a mid-tier mafioso articulates the careful balance required for the skimming operation to carry on: to keep the skimming operation functioning, the skimmers need to be kept loyal and happy. It’s a price the bosses have to pay to maintain the operation, “leakage” in their terms. Ace’s efficient management and precision in maintaining order within Tangiers is crucial for the money to keep flowing. But Ace’s control over the casino slips more and more as the movie progresses. We see this as the direct result of Nicky’s ascendance as mob kingpin in Vegas, the chaos he creates cannot be contained and disrupts the profits and delicate dynamics that keep the scam running. Of course I can’t help myself here! We should view Scorsese’s discography, and the many portrayals of capitalist excess not as celebratory fetishization, but a critique of the greed and violence he so masterfully captures on film. See the Wolf of Wall Street for its tale of money as the most dangerous drug of them all, and the alienation—social and political—showcased in Taxi Driver. Scorsese uses the mob as a foil to the casino to attack the supposed monopoly the casino holds on legitimate, legal economic activity that rests on institutionalized theft. When juxtaposed with the logic of organized crime, we begin to see that the two—Ace and Nick—are not so different after all. The only dividing line between the casino and organized crime is the law. Vegas is a lawless town yes, “the Wild West” as Nicky puts it, but there are laws in Vegas. The corruption of the political establishment and ruling elites is demonstrated when they pressure Ace to re-hire an incompetent employee who he fired for his complicity in a cheating scam or his stupidity in letting the slot machines get rigged; nepotism breeds mediocrity. In the end, Ace’s fall is the result of the rent-seeking behavior that the Vegas ruling class wields to influence the gaming board to not even permit Ace a fair hearing for his gaming license, which would’ve given him the lawful authority to officially run Tangiers. The elites use the political apparatus of the State to resist the new gang in town, the warring faction of mob-affiliated casino capitalists. While the mob’s only weapon to employ is that of violence. The mafia is still subservient to the powers that be within the political and economic establishment of Vegas, and they’re told “this is not your town.” I’d like to make the most salient claim of this entire review now. Casino is a western film. The frontier of the Wild West is Vegas in this case, where the disorder of the mob wreaks havoc on, an until then, an “untapped market.” The investment scheme that the Teamsters pension fund is exploited for as seed capital, is an attempt to remain in the confines of the law while extracting as much value as possible through illegal and corrupt means for the capitalist class of the mob (and the ultimately dispensable union president). Tangiers exists in the liminal space of condoned economic activity as a legal and otherwise standard casino. While the violence required to maintain the operation, corrupts the legal legitimacy it never fully enjoyed from the beginning. This mirrors the bounty economy of the West and the out-sourcing of the law and the execution of the law, to bounty hunters. There is no real authority out in the frontier, the killer outlaw on the run is not so different from the bounty hunter who enjoys his livelihood by hunting down the killers. Yet, he himself is not the State. The wide-lens frame of Ace and Nicky meeting in the desert felt like a direct homage to the iconic image of the Western standoff. The conflict between Ace and Nick, the enforcer and the mastermind, is an approximation of the conflicts we might see in John Wayne’s films. The casino venture itself could be seen as an analogy of the frontier-venturism of railroad pioneers going to lay track to develop the West into a more industrial region. I would have believed that this was a documentary about how the mob took over control of the Vegas casinos in the 1970-80s … if it were not for the viewer being expected to believe that Robert De Niro could play a Jew; it's hard to believe a man with that accent and the roles he’s played his entire career could be a “CRAZY JEW FUCK!!” I kid! But alas, De Niro is a class act and the last of the many greats of a bygone era. At times, it felt like Joe Pesci lacked talent as an actor, but his portrayal of the scummy, backstabbing bastard in Nicky was genuinely remarkable, but I might consider his performance the weak point of the movie. It’s weird to see a man that short, be that much of physical menace. There are a number of Sopranos actors in Casino. I’m sure Vincent Chase watched the movie and said to himself, “bet, i’ll cast half of these guys.”The set design and costumes were gorgeous. The styles and fashion of the time were spectacular. Scorsese’s signature gratuitous violence featured prominently, but tastefully. The camera work, tracking shots through the casino and spatial movement was incredible and I thought the cinematography was outstanding, the Western-esque wide lens in the desert was worthy of being a framed still. The Nicky//Ace dynamic is excellent and the two play off of each other well. The conflict between the two of them escalates gradually, and then Nicky’s betrayal of Ace by cheating with Ginger marks the final break between the two of them. Nicky’s mob faculties represent a brutal, violent theft that is illegal and requires the enforcement of violence by organized crime. Despite the illegal embezzlement and corruption at play with the “skimming” operation at work at the casino, the general business model of the casino stands in contrast to the obscene violence of the loan sharks. Ace operates an intelligent operation of theft through the casino, and his hands-on management approach is instrumental to the success of the casino. Nicky’s chaos pervades the casino, and the life and activities of “the street” begin to bleed into Ace’s ability to maintain order in the casino. “Connected” types begin frequenting the casino, and Ace unknowingly forces one particularly rude gambler to leave the casino, who happens to have mob ties with Nicky. The “organized violence” of the casino cannot stay intact perfectly, because the very thing holding it together is the presence of the mob. Nicky is in Vegas as the enforcer and tasked with protecting Ace but his independent, entrepreneurial (shall we call them?) aspirations lead him to attempt to overtake what he realizes is a frontier for organized crime to brutalize and exploit the characters of “the street” (pimps, players, addicts, dealers, and prostitutes) and the owners of small private businesses. Nicky is reckless, “when i plant my flag out here you won’t need your [casino/gaming] license” Nicky thinks he, and Ace, can bypass the regulations and bureaucratic legal measures by sheer force of violence alone. But ultimately Nicky is shortsighted and doesn’t have a real attachment to the success of the casino. After all, he isn’t getting profits from it (or much anyway) and isn’t permitted to play a real, active role in its daily functions because of his belligerent, untamed personality. Nicky has no buy-in that would motivate him to follow the rules or to work within the legal parts of the economy, it’s not the game he knows how to play, and win. All that he is loyal to, or deferent too, is the bosses back home; for whom he maintains absolute, uncompromising loyalty to, but still holds intense spite for. And now to the more compelling element of the narrative. Sam “Ace” Rothstein is positioned as remarkably intelligent, he makes informed decisions that aid in his skill as a gambler, he can read people to determine whether he’s being conned, he has an attention to detail—aided by the casino’s surveillance apparatus which monitors cheating—that is almost unbelievable. Ace knows when he’s being cheated, he knows how to rig the game so that the house always wins, enacting psychological warfare to break down the confidence of would be proficient gamblers, who could threaten Tangiers’ bottom line. But in the end, the greatest gamble Ace makes is his marriage to Ginger. Ginger is the seductive, charismatic, and flirtatious madame who makes her money with tricks and her sexual power. Ginger works as a prostitute, seducing men, and extracting everything she can, almost as a sort of sexual-financial vampirism. Ginger is the bad bet Ace can’t stop making even when she destroys his life, her own, and puts their daughter Amy in harm’s way. Ginger is the gamble Ace made wrong, but he keeps going back to her every time, trying to rationalize how she might change and be different the next time. Ace is not a victim to Ginger’s antics. Ginger makes it clear who she is: an addict, alcoholic, manic shopaholic who will use all of her powers to extract everything she can from everyone around her. She uses everyone to her advantage and manipulates men with her sexual power in exchange for their money and protection. Ginger had a price for her hand in marriage: $1 million in cash and $1 million worth of jewelry that are left to her and her alone as a sort of emergency fund. Ace’s numerous attempts to buy Ginger’s love—and the clear fact that no matter how expensive the fur coat and how grand the mansion, none of it would ever be enough to satisfy her—mirrored Jordan Belfort’s relationship with Naomi in The Wolf of Wall Street. Both relationships carried the same manic volatility and conflict over child custody was found in both films, with the roles reversed in the respective films. Ginger may be irredeemable and a pathological liar, but Ace can’t claim that she wasn’t clear with him; when he asked her to marry him, Ginger said she didn’t love Ace. Ace replied that love could be “developed” but required a foundation of trust to develop. That trust was never there to begin with. The love was doomed from the start to destroy the two of them; two addicts, two gamblers, lying on a daily basis to one another and themselves about reality to justify their respective existences, the marriage, and Ace’s livelihood. And as Ginger pointed out, “I should have never married him. He’s a gemini, a triple gemini … a snake” Maybe astrology has some truth to it after all. Now I’m not licensed (but hey neither was Ace, and he ran a casino empire!), but Ginger has the inklings of a borderline personality: her manic depression, narcissism, drug and alcohol abuse, and constant begging for forgiveness all seem indications of a larger psychological disorder at play. In the end, Ginger runs away with all the money Ace left her and finds her people in Los Angeles, the pimps, whores, and addicts she fits in with, in turn exploit and kill her for 3 grand in mint coins by giving her a ‘hot’ dose. Overall, Casino is an incredible cinematic experience. I highly recommend watching this and seeing it as part of Scorsese's anthology of commentary on our economic system and its human victims. I’d argue that Casino, Wolf of Wall Street, and The Irishman all fit together nicely into a trilogy of the Scorsesean history of finance and corruption from the 70s to the 90s. ————- EDIT 2: TL;DR — Casino is a story of sexual and financial intrigue, mob violence, union pension fund embezzlement, a “love” story, and the protagonist's masochist addiction to the pain and chaos his lover inflicts on him. It turns out that the sharp-minded genius who meticulously runs the casino, is no more rational than the gamblers who routinely frequent the casino, coming back to lose their money and hoping that the odds will magically shift in their favor.
The 3 types AMC holders (IMHO- long read to kill time)
TL:DR - Ignore hype, choose YOUR strategy, and stick to it. All money matters are a gamble. New to the market, but paying attention to WS and learning for a couple years before finally jumping in. After now being a every-minute watcher on the market, the Reddit “movement”impact, and MSM reactions for a month, I’ve come to the conclusion that there are 3 types of AMC holders:
The Get Rich Quick holder- this is the smoothest of smooth brains that have wandered in and have unrealistic expectations of AMC’s potential. They heard from MSM and “a buddy who knows” that something BIG(!) was happening with GME, and guys sitting in their mom’s basement were making life changing money on this “sure thing”. The GRQ checked WSB and was encouraged by DFV screens daily, laughed at all the big swinging dick fratboy talk and memes. “Wow! This looks like fun!” Says GRQ, but GME is already too cost prohibitive for them, so they YOLO into AMC. “$20 is amazing! This thing is gonna explode with the squeeze and be worth $1000 a share, and imma be rich by Friday!” GRQ hasn’t done ANY DD, because emoji posting, Jordan Belfort, and LOTR memes are all the GRQ needs to hold until the inevitable squeeze on AMC happens. The GRQ thinks XXX% increases are easy to capture, the HF’s are on their heels, and everything is being manipulated- otherwise they’d already be rich. Short interest metrics give the GRQ a chubby.
Why GRQ is GOOD: Fresh money and exposure in market trading, lots of entertainment. Some GRQ’s will educate themselves into better investors long term. Why GRQ is BAD: Increased volatility, misinformation spreading, paper hands. These folks will lose interest quickly, and may incur life crippling debt by trading with money they can’t afford to lose.
The Safe Gambler Noob - (full disclaimer: this is currently me). The SGN is more diligent, more careful, but not necessarily smart. They also likely wandered into AMC based on the WSB hype. They know some about WS and “the way things work”, but just enough to be careful. The SGN is reading EVERY bit of information about AMC, taking on a 60/40 split of bullshit to actual DD. They likely only bought in with a small amount around 14-16. Their rationale is “hey, look at what happened with GME- I guess it’s possible that AMC can get $100 or more, and at the very least, it’ll go up after the pandemic, so there’s really no risk”. The SGN is rife with FOMO, but balanced enough not to YOLO. They understand that HF’s have the power to do whatever they want, but also think “maybe what Redditors are doing is changing the game” (spoiler alert, probably not). Any positive mention of their positions or a “green day” gives the SGN a chubby.
Why the SGN is GOOD: like the GRQ, it’s bringing more folks into the market who might still be on the sidelines. If the SGN doesn’t at least get their initial investment back, they’ll bag hold to the grave. Some will educate and make smarter plays moving forward, having dipped their toe in the ocean and liking the temperature. Why the SGN is BAD: They’ve already lost half their money, and may be hesitant to get deeper in or take any other positions. Lots of SGN’s will sell at the break even point (however long that may take) and never trade again, having taken the only beating they need to be scared away. Some reckless SGN’s falsely believe they have found a secret method or opportunity to “beat the system” because they got the first brain wrinkle.
The Long Term Pro: Raisin Brains. These are the DFV’s of the world. As soon as the price of AMC tanked due to the pandemic, they had the foresight to get in at the low (if they believed AMC would survive) or buy the shorts (if they believed AMC would bankrupt). The LTP blocks out the “noise” of the Reddit hype, because they trust their own analysis more than anything they hear or read. There is very little risk for them with their AMC position, because they have a well diversified portfolio spread between stocks, bonds, mutual funds, and other safe savings plans. They likely only check the tickers when they want to “check in”, but aren’t swayed by any fluctuations. They likely have someone else professionally managing their portfolio. Even a market crash can’t phase the LTP, because they can afford to hold and ride it out until it comes back. They get chubbies whenever they want, because they’ve earned that right.
Why the LTP’s are GOOD: This is arguably the type of investor we all should try to be. Some LTP’s enjoy offering DD and education to the SGN’s, passing on and elevating overall market knowledge. Lots of them are still entrenched in their AMC positions, and will be for 4-5 years. Why LTP’s are BAD: They completely ignore the GRQ’s as foolish, and stay away from ANY volatility. Most LTP’s that didn’t sell their AMC shares during the first Reddit hype peak, certainly did when the new offering dilution was announced. EVERY HF insider is an LTP, and knows how to make money in any market condition. These guys are very definition of “Bulls make money, Bears make money, Pigs get slaughtered”. My only point in this post (other than a “gut check” for myself and maybe others), is that ALL matters concerning money is a risk/reward scenario. Even if you are putting money under your mattress, that money is constantly gaining or losing value. Anyone trading or investing should appreciate this, decide what your own strategy should be, and see it through. Me personally, I’m striving for the DD of the LTP, the excitement of the SGN, and the stones of a GRQ. On yeah, and Hold AMC. 😁
These are the statistical top 500 movies of all time, according to 23 different websites
Hey everyone, great to be back again. Some of you might remember a similar title from a post I made back in April, where I made a list of the top 250 movies with 13 sources, or a preview of this list I made last month. I want to emphasize that this is NOT an official ranking nor my personal ranking; it is just a statistical and, personally, interesting look at 500 amazing movies. These rankings reflect the opinions of thousands of critics and millions of people around the world. And I am glad that this list is able to cover a wide range of genres, decades, and countries. So before I get bombarded with "Why isn't X on here?" or "How is X above Y?" comments, I wanted to clear that up. I sourced my data from Sight & Sound (both critic and director lists), TSPDT, iCheckMovies, 11 domestic websites (Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic, IMDb, Letterboxd, TMDb, Trakt, Blu-Ray, MovieLens, RateYourMusic, Criticker, and Critics Choice), and 9 international audience sites (FilmAffinity, Douban, Naver, MUBI, Filmweb, Kinopoisk, CSFD, Moviemeter, and Senscritique). This balance of domestic/international ratings made the list more well-rounded and internationally representative (sites from Spain, China, Korea, Poland, Russia, Czech Republic, Netherlands, and France). As for my algorithm, I weighted websites according to both their Alexa ranking and their number of votes compared to other sites. For example, since The Godfather has hundreds of thousands of votes on Letterboxd but only a couple thousand on Metacritic, Letterboxd would be weighted more heavily. After obtaining the weighted averages, I then added the movie's iCheckMovies' favs/checks ratio and TSPDT ranking, if applicable. Regarding TSPDT, I included the top 2000 movies; as an example of my calculations, Rear Window's ranking of #41 would add (2000-41)/2000=0.9795 points to its weighted average. I removed movies that had <7-8K votes on IMDb, as these mostly had low ratings and numbers of votes across different sites as well. For both Sight & Sound lists, I added between 0.5 and 1 point to a movie's score based on its ranking, which I thought was an adequate reflection of how difficult it is to be included on these lists. As examples, a #21 movie would have 0.9 points added while a #63 would have 0.69 points. So without further ado, the statistical top 500 movies ever made. I separated the scores into overall, critics, domestic, and international columns to make comparisons easier. This list on Letterboxd.
Ranking
Title
Overall Score
Critics
Domestic
International
Year
Director
1
The Godfather
93.89
97.73
90.50
89.36
1972
Francis Ford Coppola
2
The Godfather: Part II
91.93
93.30
89.04
88.06
1974
Francis Ford Coppola
3
Seven Samurai
91.05
97.38
87.63
85.90
1954
Akira Kurosawa
4
12 Angry Men
90.45
95.45
88.74
88.62
1957
Sidney Lumet
5
City Lights
89.94
96.75
85.67
85.93
1931
Charlie Chaplin
6
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
89.45
91.20
87.81
86.59
1966
Sergio Leone
7
The Shawshank Redemption
89.41
82.95
89.49
89.18
1994
Frank Darabont
8
Psycho
89.29
95.23
85.70
85.01
1960
Alfred Hitchcock
9
Modern Times
89.28
95.55
85.21
85.37
1936
Charlie Chaplin
10
Schindler's List
89.08
93.80
87.22
87.29
1993
Steven Spielberg
11
Pulp Fiction
88.85
92.60
87.69
86.42
1994
Quentin Tarantino
12
Rear Window
88.63
97.65
85.40
83.33
1954
Alfred Hitchcock
13
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
88.55
87.38
86.28
86.97
1975
Miloš Forman
14
Apocalypse Now
88.54
93.85
85.24
83.48
1979
Francis Ford Coppola
15
Tokyo Story
88.49
98.30
85.16
83.76
1953
Yasujirō Ozu
16
Spirited Away
88.34
93.78
86.80
85.91
2001
Hayao Miyazaki
17
GoodFellas
88.03
91.48
87.00
84.03
1990
Martin Scorsese
18
Vertigo
88.02
95.60
84.05
82.76
1958
Alfred Hitchcock
19
Singin' in the Rain
88.01
97.65
83.95
83.13
1952
Gene Kelly, Stanley Donen
20
Sunset Boulevard
88.00
95.45
85.44
84.22
1950
Billy Wilder
21
Citizen Kane
87.83
99.03
83.06
82.22
1941
Orson Welles
22
Harakiri
87.79
85.83
88.00
86.29
1962
Masaki Kobayashi
23
Rashomon
87.74
96.55
83.52
82.73
1950
Akira Kurosawa
24
Once Upon a Time in the West
87.71
86.65
85.48
84.62
1968
Sergio Leone
25
Fanny and Alexander
87.54
97.30
83.15
83.00
1982
Ingmar Bergman
26
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
87.40
92.59
86.06
85.38
2003
Peter Jackson
27
Andrei Rublev
87.39
91.90
83.80
83.94
1966
Andrei Tarkovsky
28
The Passion of Joan of Arc
87.39
94.65
83.88
83.57
1928
Carl Theodor Dreyer
29
Sherlock Jr.
87.36
96.45
83.64
85.60
1924
Buster Keaton
30
Bicycle Thieves
87.35
94.70
83.91
83.46
1948
Vittorio De Sica
31
Casablanca
87.35
98.00
85.25
82.62
1942
Michael Curtiz
32
Some Like It Hot
87.28
95.30
82.11
83.73
1959
Billy Wilder
33
Persona
87.22
88.20
84.28
83.07
1966
Ingmar Bergman
34
Children of Paradise
87.21
95.33
84.81
83.27
1945
Marcel Carné
35
Taxi Driver
87.14
93.88
83.60
82.06
1976
Martin Scorsese
36
The Dark Knight
87.08
88.81
86.96
84.80
2008
Christopher Nolan
37
Metropolis
87.03
96.00
82.92
84.01
1927
Fritz Lang
38
Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans
87.02
93.95
82.23
84.02
1927
F. W. Murnau
39
Stalker
87.02
92.30
83.86
83.29
1979
Andrei Tarkovsky
40
Pather Panchali
86.96
94.35
84.40
82.80
1955
Satyajit Ray
41
Lawrence of Arabia
86.95
97.65
83.76
81.49
1962
David Lean
42
M
86.91
96.20
84.34
82.92
1931
Fritz Lang
43
Ordet
86.82
98.10
83.08
82.55
1955
Carl Theodor Dreyer
44
It's a Wonderful Life
86.77
90.45
85.17
84.90
1946
Frank Capra
45
Satantango
86.76
90.45
84.58
84.21
1994
Béla Tarr
46
Parasite
86.72
96.34
86.55
83.15
2019
Bong Joon-ho
47
The 400 Blows
86.70
96.70
83.14
82.60
1959
François Truffaut
48
Ikiru
86.56
93.80
85.48
84.29
1952
Akira Kurosawa
49
Mirror
86.50
95.60
82.75
82.34
1975
Andrei Tarkovsky
50
Come and See
86.50
90.50
85.22
83.13
1985
Elem Klimov
51
The Apartment
86.48
92.00
84.09
82.99
1960
Billy Wilder
52
The General
86.45
91.45
82.59
83.87
1926
Buster Keaton, Clyde Bruckman
53
Grave of the Fireflies
86.43
95.13
85.85
82.97
1988
Isao Takahata
54
Le Trou
86.41
89.95
85.46
85.14
1960
Jacques Becker
55
The Battle of Algiers
86.37
95.40
82.64
81.24
1966
Gillo Pontecorvo
56
A Man Escaped
86.34
96.50
83.67
82.03
1956
Robert Bresson
57
Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
86.34
95.85
84.37
83.03
1964
Stanley Kubrick
58
Paths of Glory
86.25
92.30
84.97
84.48
1957
Stanley Kubrick
59
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
86.24
88.75
85.61
84.31
2001
Peter Jackson
60
All About Eve
86.23
96.95
83.69
83.20
1950
Joseph L. Mankiewicz
61
Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back
86.21
86.93
87.05
83.29
1980
Irvin Kershner
62
High and Low
86.16
86.55
86.08
84.26
1963
Akira Kurosawa
63
The Great Dictator
86.15
91.10
84.25
85.03
1940
Charlie Chaplin
64
The Silence of the Lambs
86.12
88.68
85.29
84.17
1991
Jonathan Demme
65
2001: A Space Odyssey
86.06
88.35
82.93
81.54
1968
Stanley Kubrick
66
North by Northwest
86.03
96.38
83.17
81.74
1959
Alfred Hitchcock
67
Double Indemnity
85.91
94.38
83.84
83.12
1944
Billy Wilder
68
Ugetsu
85.91
97.25
82.69
81.91
1953
Kenji Mizoguchi
69
Woman in the Dunes
85.91
93.95
84.71
83.77
1964
Hiroshi Teshigahara
70
Sansho the Bailiff
85.88
95.50
84.24
82.21
1954
Kenji Mizoguchi
71
Once Upon a Time in America
85.87
86.10
83.84
85.53
1984
Sergio Leone
72
City of God
85.86
84.08
86.39
84.00
2002
Fernando Meirelles, Kátia Lund
73
Late Spring
85.81
94.75
83.74
82.27
1949
Yasujirō Ozu
74
Barry Lyndon
85.80
87.95
82.44
82.30
1975
Stanley Kubrick
75
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
85.78
88.78
85.00
84.29
2002
Peter Jackson
76
Raging Bull
85.77
90.48
82.01
81.80
1980
Martin Scorsese
77
Chinatown
85.72
94.08
83.32
80.69
1974
Roman Polanski
78
Alien
85.69
91.73
84.76
82.62
1979
Ridley Scott
79
Ran
85.68
94.70
83.93
82.52
1985
Akira Kurosawa
80
The Seventh Seal
85.67
92.10
83.52
82.13
1957
Ingmar Bergman
81
The Kid
85.61
92.85
82.91
84.94
1921
Charlie Chaplin
82
Wild Strawberries
85.51
90.05
83.38
82.24
1957
Ingmar Bergman
83
A Brighter Summer Day
85.50
93.38
84.07
81.01
1991
Edward Yang
84
8½
85.48
91.20
82.59
81.09
1963
Federico Fellini
85
The Pianist
85.38
88.69
83.31
84.80
2002
Roman Polanski
86
The World of Apu
85.38
93.20
84.38
83.09
1959
Satyajit Ray
87
La Dolce Vita
85.37
94.38
81.40
80.48
1960
Federico Fellini
88
Star Wars
85.33
90.03
85.22
81.92
1977
George Lucas
89
The Best of Youth
85.31
88.78
85.31
83.64
2003
Marco Tullio Giordana
90
The Gold Rush
85.29
94.55
81.93
83.59
1925
Charlie Chaplin
91
The Third Man
85.26
96.50
82.91
80.21
1949
Carol Reed
92
The Treasure of the Sierra Madre
85.20
96.68
82.77
81.81
1948
John Huston
93
I Am Cuba
85.18
93.60
82.00
83.44
1964
Mikhail Kalatozov
94
The Lives of Others
85.14
89.03
84.12
82.73
2006
Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck
95
Witness for the Prosecution
85.13
92.65
83.67
84.99
1957
Billy Wilder
96
Touch of Evil
85.11
95.70
81.36
79.65
1958
Orson Welles
97
WALL-E
85.10
92.09
82.82
82.64
2008
Andrew Stanton
98
Scenes from a Marriage
85.02
86.85
84.80
83.06
1974
Ingmar Bergman
99
To Be or Not to Be
84.99
89.58
82.52
83.39
1942
Ernst Lubitsch
100
A Separation
84.92
94.24
83.34
80.90
2011
Asghar Farhadi
101
The Night of the Hunter
84.91
96.93
81.17
79.06
1955
Charles Laughton
102
Three Colors: Red
84.87
96.78
83.32
80.78
1994
Krzysztof Kieślowski
103
Yojimbo
84.87
91.55
83.85
82.99
1961
Akira Kurosawa
104
Back to the Future
84.85
89.38
84.47
81.94
1985
Robert Zemeckis
105
My Neighbor Totoro
84.84
87.53
83.44
83.17
1988
Hayao Miyazaki
106
In the Mood for Love
84.84
83.87
82.55
81.20
2000
Wong Kar-wai
107
Princess Mononoke
84.83
81.18
85.02
84.24
1999
Hayao Miyazaki
108
Saving Private Ryan
84.82
90.35
83.94
82.50
1998
Steven Spielberg
109
Cinema Paradiso
84.78
82.30
84.73
83.43
1988
Giuseppe Tornatore
110
La Jetée
84.75
89.25
83.27
81.80
1962
Chris Marker
111
The Wages of Fear
84.71
94.60
82.99
82.80
1953
Henri-Georges Clouzot
112
Das Boot
84.68
90.13
83.62
82.71
1981
Wolfgang Petersen
113
Fight Club
84.65
71.18
86.39
84.95
1999
David Fincher
114
Nights of Cabiria
84.64
92.25
82.72
83.13
1957
Federico Fellini
115
La Strada
84.61
92.60
80.79
82.78
1954
Federico Fellini
116
Amadeus
84.53
89.55
82.88
82.59
1984
Miloš Forman
117
Forrest Gump
84.50
76.90
83.06
86.12
1994
Robert Zemeckis
118
Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse
84.49
90.41
85.03
81.69
2018
Peter Ramsey, Rodney Rothman, Bob Persichetti
119
The Lion King
84.45
88.28
77.22
84.09
1994
Rob Minkoff, Roger Allers
120
Inception
84.43
82.07
84.18
84.17
2010
Christopher Nolan
121
Whiplash
84.42
89.53
84.87
81.96
2014
Damien Chazelle
122
The Shop Around the Corner
84.40
94.43
80.85
82.37
1940
Ernst Lubitsch
123
Rififi
84.38
92.00
83.03
81.58
1955
Jules Dassin
124
Umberto D.
84.38
92.63
82.20
81.75
1952
Vittorio De Sica
125
Army of Shadows
84.37
95.30
82.98
80.50
1969
Jean-Pierre Melville
126
Blade Runner
84.34
85.85
82.57
80.29
1982
Ridley Scott
127
Samurai Rebellion
84.33
89.05
82.85
83.84
1967
Masaki Kobayashi
128
Close-Up
84.31
85.70
81.99
80.69
1990
Abbas Kiarostami
129
The Circus
84.29
90.35
81.69
83.14
1928
Charlie Chaplin
130
Raiders of the Lost Ark
84.19
89.33
84.31
80.57
1981
Steven Spielberg
131
Grand Illusion
84.18
95.35
81.85
79.78
1937
Jean Renoir
132
A Clockwork Orange
84.18
82.78
82.37
82.51
1971
Stanley Kubrick
133
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
84.07
89.37
83.36
80.57
2004
Michel Gondry
134
A Woman Under the Influence
84.01
87.40
82.51
80.40
1974
John Cassavetes
135
The Cranes Are Flying
84.00
89.30
82.76
82.40
1957
Mikhail Kalatozov
136
Yi Yi
83.91
91.25
82.48
79.64
2000
Edward Yang
137
To Kill a Mockingbird
83.91
89.13
81.98
82.20
1962
Robert Mulligan
138
The Matrix
83.90
77.78
84.54
83.06
1999
Wachowski Sisters
139
The Sting
83.90
85.73
82.71
83.36
1973
George Roy Hill
140
The Mother and the Whore
83.87
94.55
81.24
79.82
1973
Jean Eustache
141
Se7en
83.86
72.15
84.91
84.48
1995
David Fincher
142
Early Summer
83.85
94.45
82.19
82.01
1951
Yasujirō Ozu
143
Werckmeister Harmonies
83.80
91.73
80.89
81.93
2000
Béla Tarr, Ágnes Hranitzky
144
Coco
83.80
86.21
82.73
83.66
2017
Adrian Molina, Lee Unkrich
145
Toy Story
83.76
95.03
82.30
80.15
1995
John Lasseter
146
It Happened One Night
83.76
90.83
81.46
81.76
1934
Frank Capra
147
Reservoir Dogs
83.74
84.68
83.12
81.99
1992
Quentin Tarantino
148
Unforgiven
83.73
88.55
82.24
81.59
1992
Clint Eastwood
149
The Deer Hunter
83.73
87.68
80.57
82.06
1978
Michael Cimino
150
The Young and the Damned
83.72
87.10
82.58
80.82
1950
Luis Buñuel
151
The Best Years of Our Lives
83.68
92.63
81.19
81.20
1946
William Wyler
152
The Leopard
83.66
97.30
79.56
79.57
1963
Luchino Visconti
153
Time of the Gypsies
83.65
86.05
83.31
82.29
1988
Emir Kusturica
154
Ali: Fear Eats the Soul
83.61
96.70
80.51
79.97
1974
Rainer Werner Fassbinder
155
Raise the Red Lantern
83.57
90.25
82.37
81.81
1991
Zhang Yimou
156
Terminator 2: Judgment Day
83.57
82.00
84.11
81.83
1991
James Cameron
157
The Shining
83.55
75.35
84.08
81.80
1980
Stanley Kubrick
158
Viridiana
83.54
92.95
80.68
80.81
1961
Luis Buñuel
159
Portrait of a Lady on Fire
83.52
93.59
83.08
80.02
2019
Céline Sciamma
160
Greed
83.51
97.05
80.65
80.64
1924
Erich von Stroheim
161
Gone with the Wind
83.48
92.90
80.01
81.68
1939
Victor Fleming
162
There Will Be Blood
83.48
89.65
81.91
79.02
2007
Paul Thomas Anderson
163
L.A. Confidential
83.46
91.63
82.08
80.81
1997
Curtis Hanson
164
Paris, Texas
83.46
83.95
82.89
81.66
1984
Wim Wenders
165
Throne of Blood
83.45
91.30
82.18
81.49
1957
Akira Kurosawa
166
Toy Story 3
83.43
93.55
81.61
80.32
2010
Lee Unkrich
167
Memento
83.43
85.20
83.78
80.76
2000
Christopher Nolan
168
On the Waterfront
83.37
93.00
82.23
79.52
1954
Elia Kazan
169
Trip to the Moon
83.37
94.70
79.96
82.83
1902
Georges Méliès
170
The Rules of the Game
83.33
96.55
80.45
78.02
1939
Jean Renoir
171
Red Beard
83.32
74.15
83.41
83.27
1965
Akira Kurosawa
172
The Grapes of Wrath
83.32
95.45
80.42
80.34
1940
John Ford
173
Au Hasard Balthazar
83.29
98.08
77.93
77.54
1966
Robert Bresson
174
Autumn Sonata
83.29
84.85
83.09
82.66
1978
Ingmar Bergman
175
Annie Hall
83.28
93.18
80.58
80.58
1977
Woody Allen
176
The Conformist
83.27
96.68
79.92
78.58
1970
Bernardo Bertolucci
177
Rocco and His Brothers
83.24
84.73
81.95
81.68
1960
Luchino Visconti
178
Dersu Uzala
83.23
74.75
82.35
83.37
1975
Akira Kurosawa
179
Cool Hand Luke
83.21
93.05
82.22
79.83
1967
Stuart Rosenberg
180
Monty Python and the Holy Grail
83.18
91.98
82.96
79.30
1975
Terry Gilliam, Terry Jones
181
Le Samouraï
83.18
92.35
82.45
79.40
1967
Jean-Pierre Melville
182
Aliens
83.18
88.73
83.29
79.61
1986
James Cameron
183
PlayTime
83.16
93.50
80.22
78.80
1967
Jacques Tati
184
The Bridge on the River Kwai
83.14
90.58
81.93
80.24
1957
David Lean
185
The Red Shoes
83.13
93.15
82.82
79.96
1948
Michael Powell, Emeric Pressburger
186
American Beauty
83.10
87.15
81.93
81.13
1999
Sam Mendes
187
To Live
83.10
84.00
82.16
82.46
1994
Zhang Yimou
188
Battleship Potemkin
83.10
95.85
77.81
80.41
1925
Sergei Eisenstein
189
Day of Wrath
83.09
93.40
81.07
81.29
1943
Carl Theodor Dreyer
190
All Quiet on the Western Front
83.07
92.85
80.05
81.48
1930
Lewis Milestone
191
It's Such a Beautiful Day
83.07
91.25
83.62
79.77
2012
Don Hertzfeldt
192
Full Metal Jacket
83.06
81.53
82.21
82.54
1987
Stanley Kubrick
193
The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari
83.05
96.40
79.84
81.83
1920
Robert Wiene
194
Kes
83.03
97.80
79.59
80.55
1969
Ken Loach
195
The Usual Suspects
83.02
80.23
84.08
81.48
1995
Bryan Singer
196
The Cameraman
83.00
93.90
80.77
81.57
1928
Edward Segdwick, Buster Keaton
197
Aparajito
83.00
90.90
81.81
81.20
1956
Satyajit Ray
198
The Elephant Man
83.00
83.00
82.10
81.87
1980
David Lynch
199
Rebecca
82.98
90.08
81.08
80.93
1940
Alfred Hitchcock
200
Make Way for Tomorrow
82.97
95.80
81.72
80.14
1937
Leo McCarey
201
The Great Escape
82.97
87.68
82.29
80.66
1963
John Sturges
202
Your Name
82.97
84.55
84.07
81.29
2016
Makoto Shinkai
203
Limelight
82.92
88.00
79.85
83.02
1952
Charlie Chaplin
204
Breathless
82.92
91.95
78.88
79.10
1960
Jean-Luc Godard
205
Underground
82.91
80.75
81.26
82.64
1995
Emir Kusturica
206
The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
82.88
91.90
81.08
79.53
1962
John Ford
207
Aguirre: The Wrath of God
82.87
94.55
80.46
78.62
1972
Werner Herzog
208
Oldboy
82.86
78.98
84.00
81.27
2003
Park Chan-wook
209
Up
82.84
90.28
81.32
80.86
2009
Pete Docter
210
Anatomy of a Murder
82.84
94.00
80.57
80.02
1959
Otto Preminger
211
The Wild Bunch
82.84
90.35
79.45
80.12
1969
Sam Peckinpah
212
The Hunt
82.75
82.08
82.79
82.62
2012
Thomas Vinterberg
213
Il Sorpasso
82.74
95.75
82.84
79.57
1962
Dino Risi
214
The Last Laugh
82.74
95.25
79.47
81.61
1924
F. W. Murnau
215
A Streetcar Named Desire
82.73
94.60
79.89
80.26
1951
Elia Kazan
216
Life Is Beautiful
82.73
68.45
83.60
85.57
1997
Roberto Benigni
217
A Short Film About Love
82.71
87.10
81.90
81.89
1988
Krzysztof Kieślowski
218
The Shop on Main Street
82.71
94.45
82.15
80.43
1965
Ján Kadár, Elmar Klos
219
Rio Bravo
82.71
92.10
80.46
79.80
1959
Howard Hawks
220
Roman Holiday
82.70
84.55
80.74
82.42
1953
William Wyler
221
Ivan's Childhood
82.69
94.80
81.25
80.37
1962
Andrei Tarkovsky
222
The Exterminating Angel
82.68
91.10
81.66
80.17
1962
Luis Buñuel
223
Trainspotting
82.68
85.20
81.57
81.21
1996
Danny Boyle
224
The Last Picture Show
82.67
94.15
79.90
79.56
1971
Peter Bogdanovich
225
The Truman Show
82.64
89.63
79.70
82.15
1998
Peter Weir
226
Memories of Murder
82.64
82.88
82.68
80.94
2003
Bong Joon-ho
227
Faust
82.62
89.70
80.23
81.94
1926
F. W. Murnau
228
Sans Soleil
82.62
83.90
79.45
80.51
1983
Chris Marker
229
Song of the Sea
82.57
87.63
80.59
82.23
2014
Tomm Moore
230
Léon: The Professional
82.55
67.38
84.05
84.07
1994
Luc Besson
231
Fargo
82.54
87.45
82.36
79.19
1996
Coen Brothers
232
Solaris
82.54
89.95
80.91
79.69
1972
Andrei Tarkovsky
233
Sweet Smell of Success
82.52
96.53
80.81
77.62
1957
Alexander Mackendrick
234
For a Few Dollars More
82.52
79.28
82.38
83.15
1965
Sergio Leone
235
White Heat
82.51
90.65
80.77
81.24
1949
Raoul Walsh
236
Brief Encounter
82.50
88.35
80.81
81.03
1945
David Lean
237
Wings of Desire
82.49
85.70
81.30
80.42
1987
Wim Wenders
238
Diabolique
82.47
90.70
81.27
80.73
1955
Henri-Georges Clouzot
239
An Autumn Afternoon
82.45
91.95
81.68
79.85
1962
Yasujirō Ozu
240
The Tale of the Princess Kaguya
82.44
90.63
81.16
80.43
2013
Isao Takahata
241
Amarcord
82.41
85.95
79.26
80.73
1973
Federico Fellini
242
Heat
82.40
79.08
82.03
81.73
1995
Michael Mann
243
L'Atalante
82.40
95.60
78.32
78.10
1934
Jean Vigo
244
Django Unchained
82.39
83.44
82.23
81.94
2012
Quentin Tarantino
245
Jeanne Dielman, 23 Commerce Quay, 1080 Brussels
82.38
95.50
78.73
79.69
1975
Chantal Akerman
246
Kind Hearts and Coronets
82.38
95.60
80.80
79.72
1949
Robert Hamer
247
Dog Day Afternoon
82.37
88.40
81.11
79.80
1975
Sidney Lumet
248
Forbidden Games
82.37
93.75
80.36
80.99
1952
René Clément
249
The Crowd
82.35
93.35
79.21
81.23
1928
King Vidor
250
Notorious
82.35
96.78
79.96
78.21
1946
Alfred Hitchcock
251
Mary and Max
82.35
88.05
80.95
82.42
2009
Adam Elliot
252
Persepolis
82.34
88.95
80.09
80.77
2007
Marjane Satrapi, Vincent Paronnaud
253
Howl's Moving Castle
82.33
78.71
82.63
83.10
2004
Hayao Miyazaki
254
Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind
82.33
85.10
81.54
82.03
1984
Hayao Miyazaki
255
Safety Last!
82.33
92.25
80.95
81.10
1923
Fred C. Newmeyer, Sam Taylor
256
Rosemary's Baby
82.32
94.78
79.99
78.69
1968
Roman Polanski
257
L'Avventura
82.32
92.10
79.08
78.03
1960
Michelangelo Antonioni
258
The Searchers
82.32
93.90
78.16
76.66
1956
John Ford
259
La Haine
82.30
90.60
82.38
79.56
1995
Mathieu Kassovitz
260
Three Colors: Blue
82.30
88.28
81.55
79.23
1993
Krzysztof Kieślowski
261
Chungking Express
82.30
79.95
82.29
80.73
1994
Wong Kar-wai
262
Inside Out
82.29
93.66
80.27
79.85
2015
Pete Docter
263
Where is the Friend's Home?
82.28
89.25
81.22
80.21
1987
Abbas Kiarostami
264
Cries and Whispers
82.27
85.45
81.02
80.80
1972
Ingmar Bergman
265
Napoleon
82.22
93.25
81.89
78.99
1927
Abel Gance
266
Paper Moon
82.19
83.08
81.37
81.29
1973
Peter Bogdanovich
267
The Spirit of the Beehive
82.17
89.83
79.31
78.91
1973
Víctor Erice
268
A Special Day
82.16
90.20
81.11
81.25
1977
Ettore Scola
269
Nostalghia
82.15
83.00
80.91
81.23
1983
Andrei Tarkovsky
270
Network
82.13
85.45
82.36
79.08
1976
Sidney Lumet
271
L'Eclisse
82.11
84.70
79.78
78.81
1962
Michelangelo Antonioni
272
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
82.09
80.83
81.78
81.15
1939
Frank Capra
273
Sanjuro
82.09
91.90
81.67
80.85
1962
Akira Kurosawa
274
Badlands
82.06
93.38
79.77
77.21
1973
Terrence Malick
275
Vivre Sa Vie
82.06
85.20
80.12
79.83
1962
Jean-Luc Godard
276
Nobody Knows
82.06
87.18
81.12
81.15
2004
Hirokazu Koreeda
277
No Country for Old Men
82.05
90.68
80.56
78.47
2007
Coen Brothers
278
Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter... and Spring
82.05
86.05
80.76
80.62
2003
Kim Ki-duk
279
La Notte
82.04
78.35
81.45
81.11
1961
Michelangelo Antonioni
280
The Celebration
82.04
84.23
81.34
80.08
1998
Thomas Vinterberg
281
In the Name of the Father
82.04
84.90
81.14
81.85
1993
Jim Sheridan
282
I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang
82.02
89.55
80.18
81.56
1932
Mervyn LeRoy
283
Shoplifters
82.01
92.39
80.60
79.31
2018
Hirokazu Koreeda
284
Finding Nemo
82.01
92.60
80.13
78.76
2003
Andrew Stanton, Lee Unkrich
285
Z
81.98
87.55
82.21
79.59
1969
Costa-Gavras
286
The Phantom Carriage
81.96
95.00
80.01
80.32
1921
Victor Sjöström
287
Manhattan
81.95
86.23
80.50
79.81
1979
Woody Allen
288
Rome, Open City
81.94
95.40
80.45
79.27
1945
Robert Rossellini
289
Children of Heaven
81.93
80.15
81.24
82.01
1997
Majid Majidi
290
The Green Mile
81.92
71.93
82.95
84.38
1999
Frank Darabont
291
The Iron Giant
81.91
86.61
80.88
79.95
1999
Brad Bird
292
The Sacrifice
81.90
80.30
80.47
81.37
1986
Andrei Tarkovsky
293
The Philadelphia Story
81.90
94.95
79.79
77.86
1940
George Cukor
294
The Twilight Samurai
81.90
86.10
81.07
81.13
2002
Yôji Yamada
295
Before Sunset
81.88
87.79
81.42
78.41
2004
Richard Linklater
296
Before Sunrise
81.86
84.40
82.24
79.44
1995
Richard Linklater
297
Castle in the Sky
81.85
81.63
81.49
82.06
1986
Hayao Miyazaki
298
The Departed
81.84
86.92
82.82
79.04
2006
Martin Scorsese
299
Brazil
81.83
90.23
80.61
78.37
1985
Terry Gilliam
300
Incendies
81.81
83.85
81.88
80.74
2011
Denis Villenueve
301
The Maltese Falcon
81.81
95.65
80.24
77.28
1941
John Huston
302
The Wizard of Oz
81.77
98.03
79.38
77.17
1939
Victor Fleming
303
Le Cercle Rouge
81.76
90.03
80.81
78.54
1970
Jean-Pierre Melville
304
Monsieur Verdoux
81.76
89.80
78.55
81.34
1947
Charlie Chaplin
305
The Return
81.72
84.85
80.02
80.96
2003
Andrey Zvyagintsev
306
Secrets & Lies
81.71
90.73
80.29
78.66
1996
Mike Leigh
307
The Hidden Fortress
81.70
91.25
80.79
80.72
1958
Akira Kurosawa
308
Pan's Labyrinth
81.69
92.59
81.60
76.08
2006
Guillermo del Toro
309
Amélie
81.69
79.64
81.96
80.27
2004
Jean-Pierre Jeunet
310
Ben-Hur
81.67
86.93
79.86
80.22
1959
William Wyler
311
Fitzcarraldo
81.67
75.80
81.06
81.21
1982
Werner Herzog
312
American History X
81.63
70.13
83.58
83.00
1998
Tony Kaye
313
Ace in the Hole
81.62
79.10
80.88
81.36
1951
Billy Wilder
314
Capernaum
81.62
81.83
80.52
82.18
2018
Nadine Labaki
315
Still Walking
81.61
90.30
80.92
79.48
2008
Hirokazu Koreeda
316
All About My Mother
81.61
88.77
79.56
78.80
1999
Pedro Almodóvar
317
The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie
81.60
92.28
78.82
78.83
1972
Luis Buñuel
318
Platoon
81.60
88.70
79.52
80.45
1986
Oliver Stone
319
Farewell My Concubine
81.60
80.50
80.49
81.04
1993
Chen Kaige
320
Letter from an Unknown Woman
81.59
93.10
79.84
79.31
1948
Max Ophüls
321
The Grand Budapest Hotel
81.58
87.64
80.72
79.19
2014
Wes Anderson
322
The Virgin Spring
81.58
82.45
80.70
80.66
1960
Ingmar Bergman
323
The Red Balloon
81.57
90.20
79.93
80.30
1956
Albert Lamorisse
324
Stagecoach
81.57
94.58
77.69
78.94
1939
John Ford
325
Mulholland Drive
81.56
80.61
79.60
77.87
2001
David Lynch
326
A Matter of Life and Death
81.49
92.60
81.91
76.27
1946
Michael Powell, Emeric Pressburger
327
High Noon
81.48
90.58
79.27
78.94
1952
Fred Zinnemann
328
Orpheus
81.48
96.20
79.88
78.90
1950
Jean Cocteau
329
Life of Brian
81.47
82.98
80.78
79.81
1979
Terry Jones
330
Casino
81.46
74.23
81.54
81.75
1995
Martin Scorsese
331
Kagemusha
81.44
82.93
80.01
80.43
1980
Akira Kurosawa
332
Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid
81.43
76.08
80.53
81.85
1969
George Roy Hill
333
In a Lonely Place
81.43
92.45
80.42
78.77
1950
Nicholas Ray
334
Scarface
81.43
71.30
81.97
82.18
1983
Brian De Palma
335
A Short Film About Killing
81.42
87.35
79.89
80.38
1988
Krzysztof Kieślowski
336
Beauty and the Beast
81.41
92.05
79.28
78.32
1946
Jean Cocteau
337
The Hustler
81.39
92.45
80.43
78.97
1961
Robert Rossen
338
Cléo from 5 to 7
81.38
91.65
80.03
79.11
1962
Agnès Varda
339
Fireworks
81.37
90.15
80.01
79.63
1997
Takeshi Kitano
340
Room
81.36
88.41
80.43
79.48
2015
Lenny Abrahamson
341
Mad Max: Fury Road
81.35
90.39
79.76
77.80
2015
George Miller
342
Steamboat Bill, Jr.
81.32
95.75
79.30
79.23
1928
Charles Reisner, Buster Keaton
343
Judgment at Nuremberg
81.31
71.58
82.24
83.03
1961
Stanley Kramer
344
The Straight Story
81.30
87.15
79.64
79.88
1999
David Lynch
345
Meshes of the Afternoon
81.29
96.25
77.91
79.99
1943
Maya Deren, Alexandr Hackenschmied
346
Alice in the Cities
81.28
86.70
79.60
80.20
1974
Wim Wenders
347
Akira
81.28
80.90
81.12
79.98
1988
Katsuhiro Otomo
348
Good Will Hunting
81.27
79.38
81.97
81.05
1997
Gus Van Sant
349
The Miracle Worker
81.25
85.15
78.88
81.55
1962
Arthur Penn
350
Talk to Her
81.25
87.48
79.33
78.71
2002
Pedro Almodóvar
351
The Graduate
81.24
85.58
78.91
79.97
1967
Mike Nichols
352
Beauty and the Beast
81.22
92.28
79.20
78.77
1991
Gary Trousdale, Kirk Wise
353
The Heiress
81.19
94.45
80.20
79.76
1949
William Wyler
354
Fantasia
81.18
93.03
76.76
79.95
1940
Samuel Armstrong, James Algar
355
Au Revoir les Enfants
81.18
94.25
80.14
78.92
1987
Louis Malle
356
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri
81.18
88.62
79.36
79.90
2017
Martin McDonagh
357
Inglourious Basterds
81.17
79.05
81.06
80.51
2009
Quentin Tarantino
358
Elevator to the Gallows
81.16
90.45
79.31
78.56
1958
Louis Malle
359
Gladiator
81.16
75.39
81.69
81.52
2000
Ridley Scott
360
Through a Glass Darkly
81.15
93.60
81.11
78.86
1961
Ingmar Bergman
361
Million Dollar Baby
81.15
87.41
77.43
80.72
2004
Clint Eastwood
362
Days of Heaven
81.15
90.75
80.19
77.08
1978
Terrence Malick
363
Do the Right Thing
81.15
90.78
80.26
77.04
1989
Spike Lee
364
Out of the Past
81.14
91.40
80.73
77.92
1947
Jacques Tourneur
365
Strangers on a Train
81.11
93.30
80.01
78.68
1951
Alfred Hitchcock
366
Blue Velvet
81.11
83.48
78.98
77.09
1986
David Lynch
367
That Obscure Object of Desire
81.09
89.40
79.59
78.11
1977
Luis Buñuel
368
What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?
81.08
80.23
80.74
80.75
1962
Robert Aldrich
369
My Night at Maud's
81.07
88.15
79.51
79.42
1969
Éric Rohmer
370
The Earrings of Madame de…
81.07
92.15
80.36
77.05
1953
Max Ophüls
371
The Conversation
81.04
89.23
80.03
77.44
1974
Francis Ford Coppola
372
The Killing
81.03
91.50
79.51
79.21
1956
Stanley Kubrick
373
The Servant
81.03
87.83
79.45
78.57
1963
Joseph Losey
374
The Intouchables
81.03
67.15
82.13
84.70
2011
Olivier Nakache, Éric Toledano
375
The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp
81.01
94.15
81.57
75.44
1943
Michael Powell, Emeric Pressburger
376
Jaws
81.01
90.98
79.91
75.70
1975
Steven Spielberg
377
Winter Light
81.01
73.55
81.51
79.95
1963
Ingmar Bergman
378
Love Exposure
81.01
80.88
82.23
79.55
2008
Sion Sono
379
Hiroshima Mon Amour
81.00
92.95
80.13
77.99
1959
Alain Resnais
380
Day for Night
80.98
92.55
80.21
78.27
1973
François Truffaut
381
Ratatouille
80.97
92.73
78.72
78.68
2007
Brad Bird
382
Ghost in the Shell
80.97
81.43
79.98
81.15
1995
Mamoru Oshii
383
Germany Year Zero
80.95
92.00
77.80
80.03
1948
Roberto Rossellini
384
Spotlight
80.93
93.00
79.75
77.55
2015
Tom McCarthy
385
Die Hard
80.93
79.58
81.11
79.43
1988
John McTiernan
386
Laura
80.93
93.80
79.70
78.47
1944
Otto Preminger
387
Sleuth
80.93
89.95
79.16
80.87
1972
Joseph L. Mankiewicz
388
The Diving Bell and the Butterfly
80.92
88.64
79.69
77.84
2007
Julian Schnabel
389
The Handmaiden
80.92
85.99
82.55
77.41
2016
Park Chan-wook
390
Stand by Me
80.90
80.20
81.28
79.54
1986
Rob Reiner
391
Wolf Children
80.90
80.15
80.40
81.27
2012
Mamoru Hosoda
392
Marriage Story
80.88
92.86
79.40
77.75
2019
Noam Baumbach
393
Shoeshine
80.87
93.75
79.02
79.38
1946
Vittorio De Sica
394
Freaks
80.85
84.70
77.66
80.31
1932
Tod Browning
395
Nosferatu
80.85
93.75
78.29
79.14
1922
F. W. Murnau
396
Dial M for Murder
80.84
77.60
81.17
81.31
1954
Alfred Hitchcock
397
Amour
80.81
90.90
77.74
78.19
2012
Michael Haneke
398
12 Years a Slave
80.80
94.00
79.74
76.94
2013
Steve McQueen
399
The Nightmare Before Christmas
80.77
85.38
79.26
79.69
1993
Henry Selick
400
Cabaret
80.77
84.68
77.34
80.69
1972
Bob Fosse
401
Central Station
80.77
83.28
80.91
78.52
1998
Walter Salles
402
Landscape in the Mist
80.74
71.35
80.76
80.28
1988
Theo Angelopoulos
403
1917
80.73
84.37
80.65
79.33
2019
Sam Mendes
404
Intolerance: Love's Struggle Throughout the Ages
80.71
93.98
75.69
78.01
1916
D. W. Griffith
405
Call Me by Your Name
80.71
91.25
79.43
77.87
2017
Luca Guadagnino
406
Midnight Cowboy
80.71
82.98
79.10
79.50
1969
John Schlesinger
407
Shadow of a Doubt
80.70
94.38
79.31
76.04
1943
Alfred Hitchcock
408
Interstellar
80.70
74.16
81.30
82.25
2014
Christopher Nolan
409
Hannah and Her Sisters
80.69
88.95
79.15
77.98
1986
Woody Allen
410
Monsters, Inc.
80.68
85.29
79.37
80.08
2001
Pete Docter, David Silverman
411
The Testament of Dr. Mabuse
80.65
85.85
79.40
79.38
1933
Fritz Lang
412
Downfall
80.64
83.53
81.54
78.55
2004
Oliver Hirschbiegel
413
Being There
80.64
87.30
79.42
78.06
1979
Hal Ashby
414
The Killer
80.63
92.60
79.27
78.66
1989
John Woo
415
My Left Foot: The Story of Christy Brown
80.63
93.23
78.13
79.15
1989
Jim Sheridan
416
Jean de Florette
80.60
88.40
80.18
79.69
1986
Claude Berri
417
The Big Lebowski
80.57
74.80
82.28
78.57
1998
Coen Brothers
418
The King's Speech
80.57
90.86
78.50
78.59
2010
Tom Hooper
419
Whisper of the Heart
80.55
79.98
80.80
80.31
1995
Yoshifumi Kondō
420
E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial
80.54
93.08
77.22
77.82
1982
Steven Spielberg
421
Infernal Affairs
80.54
79.83
79.92
80.22
2002
Andrew Lau, Alan Mak
422
The Prestige
80.54
72.22
82.71
81.38
2006
Christopher Nolan
423
Our Hospitality
80.54
92.85
77.72
79.58
1923
Buster Keaton, John G. Blystone
424
Zootopia
80.53
85.22
78.84
80.18
2016
Byron Howard, Rich Moore
425
Toy Story 2
80.49
92.59
78.51
77.05
1999
John Lasseter, Ash Brannon, Lee Unkrich
426
Klaus
80.48
75.00
81.07
81.41
2019
Sergio Pablos
427
The Big Sleep
80.45
92.10
79.74
77.58
1946
Howard Hawks
428
Ford v Ferrari
80.45
83.94
79.37
80.01
2019
James Mangold
429
Dead Poets Society
80.44
78.70
79.43
80.75
1989
Peter Weir
430
The Terminator
80.43
89.08
78.26
78.13
1984
James Cameron
431
Naked
80.43
84.48
80.39
77.34
1993
Mike Leigh
432
Dangal
80.41
83.00
79.68
80.56
2016
Nitesh Tiwari
433
Kwaidan
80.40
81.80
79.75
79.42
1964
Masaki Kobayashi
434
The Man Who Would Be King
80.40
90.55
78.24
77.79
1975
John Huston
435
Wild Tales
80.38
82.57
80.48
79.22
2014
Damián Szifron
436
Groundhog Day
80.38
80.08
79.31
79.35
1993
Harold Ramis
437
Catch Me If You Can
80.38
83.44
78.74
80.57
2002
Steven Spielberg
438
I Vitelloni
80.36
90.28
77.64
78.06
1953
Federico Fellini
439
The Big Heat
80.35
92.90
79.27
77.87
1953
Fritz Lang
440
The Double Life of Véronique
80.35
82.63
80.19
77.87
1991
Krzysztof Kieślowski
441
Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?
80.35
82.58
80.19
78.43
1966
Mike Nichols
442
Requiem for a Dream
80.33
71.39
81.39
80.93
2000
Darren Aronofsky
443
Rope
80.33
79.20
80.31
79.30
1948
Alfred Hitchcock
444
Love and Death
80.33
89.83
77.55
78.50
1975
Woody Allen
445
The Remains of the Day
80.29
86.88
78.75
78.80
1993
James Ivory
446
Jules and Jim
80.28
93.70
78.30
77.94
1962
François Truffaut
447
The Gospel According to Matthew
80.28
88.30
76.50
78.52
1964
Pier Paolo Pasolini
448
How to Train Your Dragon
80.27
81.97
79.45
80.24
2010
Chris Sanders, Dean DeBlois
449
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2
80.27
88.50
78.81
78.53
2011
David Yates
450
Cat on a Hot Tin Roof
80.26
87.05
79.46
79.79
1958
Richard Brooks
451
The French Connection
80.26
93.35
78.04
76.89
1971
William Friedkin
452
Opening Night
80.25
78.05
80.50
79.25
1977
John Cassavetes
453
Hotel Rwanda
80.24
84.54
79.34
79.40
2004
Terry George
454
4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days
80.22
92.51
77.76
76.22
2007
Cristian Mungiu
455
Tampopo
80.22
92.40
81.20
77.01
1985
Juzo Itami
456
Scarface
80.22
93.50
76.43
79.55
1932
Howard Hawks, Howard Hughes
457
The Face of Another
80.21
87.50
79.61
79.34
1966
Hiroshi Teshigahara
458
The Roaring Twenties
80.21
86.20
77.79
80.68
1939
Raoul Walsh
459
Pickpocket
80.20
93.80
76.41
76.47
1959
Robert Bresson
460
Kiki's Delivery Service
80.20
85.45
79.87
78.84
1989
Hayao Miyazaki
461
A Prophet
80.19
89.61
79.53
76.14
2009
Jacques Audiard
462
Zelig
80.19
90.00
76.50
80.29
1983
Woody Allen
463
Trouble in Paradise
80.18
88.20
79.35
77.62
1932
Ernst Lubitsch
464
Gran Torino
80.17
76.27
78.57
82.36
2008
Clint Eastwood
465
Last Year at Marienbad
80.16
88.25
78.29
77.37
1961
Alain Resnais
466
All the President's Men
80.15
85.95
80.48
76.46
1976
Alan J. Pakula
467
Breaking the Waves
80.15
79.85
78.46
79.55
1996
Lars von Trier
468
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
80.14
74.28
81.44
80.57
1989
Steven Spielberg
469
Divorce Italian Style
80.12
91.00
79.28
78.26
1961
Pietro Germi
470
Edward Scissorhands
80.12
78.65
78.09
80.73
1990
Tim Burton
471
The Thing
80.12
67.98
82.60
79.34
1982
John Carpenter
472
Perfect Blue
80.11
74.05
80.91
80.09
1997
Satoshi Kon
473
Down by Law
80.10
79.03
78.98
79.61
1986
Jim Jarmusch
474
Bringing Up Baby
80.10
90.75
78.25
76.45
1938
Howard Hawks
475
The Phantom of Liberty
80.09
85.10
78.89
78.66
1974
Luis Buñuel
476
Bonnie and Clyde
80.07
85.38
78.16
78.23
1967
Arthur Penn
477
The Incredibles
80.07
89.69
79.77
75.78
2004
Brad Bird
478
Rocky
80.04
79.73
79.17
79.29
1976
John G. Avildsen
479
His Girl Friday
80.03
94.15
79.24
76.72
1940
Howard Hawks
480
Mommy
80.03
80.79
80.39
79.13
2014
Xavier Dolan
481
Mon Oncle
80.03
88.00
78.03
78.76
1958
Jacques Tati
482
My Fair Lady
79.99
91.85
77.53
78.00
1964
George Cukor
483
Charade
79.98
85.55
79.37
78.72
1963
Stanley Donen
484
Stalag 17
79.95
87.13
79.62
77.79
1953
Billy Wilder
485
Boyhood
79.95
97.08
76.08
75.95
2014
Richard Linklater
486
The Secret in Their Eyes
79.95
82.49
81.27
77.67
2009
Juan José Campanella
487
Ninotchka
79.95
90.15
77.99
78.50
1939
Ernst Lubitsch
488
Pierrot le Fou
79.94
81.75
77.84
76.65
1965
Jean-Luc Godard
489
The Enigma of Kaspar Hauser
79.94
89.10
78.30
78.27
1974
Werner Herzog
490
Stroszek
79.94
88.40
79.50
77.77
1977
Werner Herzog
491
A Hard Day's Night
79.93
93.73
76.82
77.08
1964
Richard Lester
492
Onibaba
79.90
74.75
79.42
79.96
1964
Kaneto Shindo
493
Repulsion
79.85
92.68
77.29
76.57
1965
Roman Polanski
494
Like Stars on Earth
79.85
80.50
79.54
79.86
2007
Aamir Khan, Amole Gupte
495
Duck Soup
79.84
92.33
79.01
74.92
1933
Leo McCarey
496
Carlito's Way
79.83
70.28
79.16
82.01
1993
Brian De Palma
497
Nashville
79.82
93.23
76.89
74.92
1975
Robert Altman
498
The Triplets of Belleville
79.82
88.97
76.57
78.66
2003
Sylvain Chomet
499
Dr. Mabuse the Gambler
79.81
85.10
76.88
79.98
1922
Fritz Lang
500
Gone Girl
79.79
83.03
79.32
78.87
2014
David Fincher
If you found this list interesting, I would really appreciate it if you can give my newish Youtube channel a subscribe. It would mean a lot. As always, if you know of or use any other movie website, definitely let me know. Thanks guys.
The Life Of a Professional Slots Player. We’ve all tried slots at one point or another, and there’s no denying that it can be a lot of fun, especially given that there’s a chance we could win some real money back from just investing a few coins at a time. Where do Professional Gamblers Play? Myron Hale November 29, 2017 November 29, 2017 Comments Off on Where do Professional Gamblers Play? Las Vegas in considered by many to be the casino capital of the world, and more high-rollers and professional players flock to Nevada to place their bets than anywhere else. 5 – Poker Profits. Most casino gamblers don’t think about poker as a casino game, but smart gamblers know it’s one of the few games where you can win more than you lose using your skills. Popular poker games like Texas holdem are available in most casinos, and if you build your skills you can win money playing. Professional gamblers know this all too well, and it means they are always playing video poker with the best possible odds, for the maximum possible long-term return. Playing Perfect Strategy. At the same time, house edge is only a factor if you play the perfect game. In some games, like poker for example, you can play the perfect game and This was the time when a new generation of professional gamblers made a significant amount of money. Also, this generation is still very much active. Different from many people’s opinion, we can see that this is a really hard thing to do. Since we are talking about gambling, we are not talking about a steady income job. Professional gambling is not a steady income but you can make a living out of it. Remember that you need to pay taxes on all the income that you make. As long as you have the entry fees for the... The games have been tested and are proven fair, and there are plenty of them including roulette, craps, sic bo and others. If you’re wondering how we picked the casinos below over all the other we could have picked, here’s the way we do it: We play all of the games to make sure they’re safe and fair. One problem with honest play is that, even though you can make more than you lose over a lifetime, the player can still have long streaks where losses exceeds winnings in any game in a casino. Consequently I doubt if you can find many, if any, professional gamblers in a casino. Unlike the others, however, professional gamblers take their hobby very seriously and like to think of it as a profession. They decide beforehand which games to play, they follow a specific strategy and they are always in control of the amount of money and time they spend gambling. Many professional sports gamblers don’t do this well. Can you get $1,000,000 down in bets every month? This is over $33,000 on average every day. And not only do you need to get this much money in play, you have to find enough games that offer value to do it on. 2
This is a BBC documentary on Harry Findlay. It is from 1997! It is before Findlay won and lost millions on events like the Rugby World Cup, and long before he started owning horses such as Denman ... I have been a professional gambler for over a decade. 2019 started out great. I started with a gross profit of over $10,000 in January 2019. I knew this could not last. Which game should I play for point challenge with a $10,000 BR? ... and Richard Munchkin are both authors and professional gamblers. You can learn more about them at gamblingwithanedge.com. Thanks for watching my video on the cost of owning a csgo gambling site! if you hvae any questions please let me know down in the comments plase! Here is the full breakdown fr how much it costs to ... Today, I'd like to talk to you about gambling and some issues that are currently facing professional gamblers. In this video we cover buy-in and rake fees for card players, tokes/tips, and the ... How Do I Become A Handicapper? 4/13/20 ... a suggested video will automatically play next. ... professional gambler and horse racing pundit - Duration: 28:48. oddschecker Recommended for you. please do your own research on the validity of these offers before you play or make any purchase. IF YOU ARE UNDER 18, PLEASE HAVE AN ADULT PRESENT BEFORE MAKING ANY PURCHASE ⚠️ Follow Me On ... What is in play betting? What do I need to know when betting in-game? Is there moneyline and spread betting in-play? How does the betting spread and money line bet change in-game? We answer all ... Brian Tuohy has written several books, including The Fix Is In & Larceny Games, and believes all sports are fixed. He is the world's #1 sports conspiracy theorist. (Archived from 2012) Watch this phone interview with one of our best Professional's Kachatz1 who will be hosting the Baccarat Master Class Thursday September 14th at 8PM EST. Join BeatThe Casino.com Premium Forum to ...
