The Holzhauer Effect

James Holzhauer, a 34-year-old Las Vegas resident, just won his 30th consecutive "Jeopardy" game, bringing his total winnings to more than $2,300,000. Holzhauer's responses are correct more than 95% of the time. He's flawless regarding geography, he's brilliant at everything else, and he's a preternaturally fast thinker. He also knows what he doesn't know. Besides inhuman speed and an enormous data base, Holzhauer appears, to my naïve eye, to be strategically sound with heretofore rarely used tactics. He's on pace to break Ken Jennings' all-time "Jeopardy" winnings record ($2,520,700) within a week. None of this, however, references the true nature of his current impact on American culture. James Holzhauer, you see, is a professional sports bettor.

He's a professional sports bettor shattering records on national television the year after the legalization of sports betting in many states. He has put a name, a face, and a style to the nation's perception of professional sports bettors. And he's making everyone else look stupid.

I know almost nothing about game theory. My limited game theory knowledge, as it were, comes from annually reviewing game theory DVDs from a "Great Courses" collection. I sit and debate with my friends in academia whether Holzhauer increases variance with Daily Doubles in service of reducing variance inherent in Final Jeopardy. Or is he simply always going for maximum earn, and session wins be damned? Obviously, if he gets 95% of his responses correct, variance is his enemy. Or is it? I'm sure Holzhauer would chuckle at our questions. He's undoubtedly pinned down the optimal risks given all contexts. He's beautiful to watch.

That's the effect he's had on me, which is saying something. I cringe with disdain at most trivia contests, probably the result of having been expected to finish in the top one percent of any blessed test I took as a kid. Iowa Basic Skills, IQ, SATs, and on and on -- all exercises in trivia, really. But as much as I despise that kind of testing, I'm rooting for Holzhauer.

Holzhauer has single handedly delivered a compelling vision of what a professional sports bettor looks like and acts like. To this point, civilians have had no idea who we are and what it is that we do, and most of what they imagine is generally wrong. In my personal opinion (fortified by 40 years of doing it), Holzhauer is very much like most of the top sports handicappers. In my estimation, a hundred or so individuals win long term at sports betting in the United States. Most of them are quite similar to this guy, although maybe not quite as sharp at"Jeopardy."

James Holzhauer has come along at the most serendipitous time for those of us who have spent our lives handicapping sports. The last time an alleged sports bettor received this much nationally televised airtime, CNBC managed to absolutely butcher public perception of sports bettors with a horrific so-called reality show featuring "Steve Stevens." Stevens turned out to be Darin Notaro, a guy with some serious telemarketing scams as part of his resume. The 2014 show, "Money Talks," was a hot mess of bad acting and caricatures. Holzhauer's television presence and comportment should wash the CNBC "Steve Stevens" stench from the public domain, just in time for state-by-state legalization.

Holzhauer, of course, has captured considerable media interest with his run. Some have tried to compare him to Chris Moneymaker, who became famous by winning the 2003 WSOP Main Event. I find this comparison very odd, as Moneymaker wasn't really considered an expert poker player, and his victory supported the premise that anybody off the street could conceivably win the Main Event. Holzhauer, however, is displaying a world class data base, a fantastic memory, and tactical processing speeds far beyond those of mortal men. His abilities should make civilians fear the skill sets of professional sports bettors. When Moneymaker won, it demonstrated that anyone could win. With Holzhauer's abilities on display, however, the caveat against normal folk "trying sports betting at home" is loud and clear.

Speaking of caveats, I'll close with one. Despite Holzhauer's "Jeopardy" success, we have no real idea if he's winning at sports gambling or not. We don't actually know if he's a long term threat to sports books. My warning is simply to be aware of the classic Halo Effect. Just because a guy dominates "Jeopardy" doesn't necessarily mean that he wins betting sports. I strongly suspect that Holzhauer does win, however, partly because the skill set that he's shown on television is wonderfully suited for live betting, which has become increasingly popular.

I've often said that I'm not really smarter than other people. I'm just faster, and faster creates the illusion of smarter. Nobody is faster than James Holzhauer. If I were running a sports book, I wouldn't let him touch the live betting. That would put my whole operation in the direst jeopardy. And I certainly wouldn't want that.


Bob Dietz -- May 30