I just saw this thread,
after I posted the question you answer here in Reno's thread above.
Tell me, can it (a good bookmaker) not be defined in the simplest of terms -
the lousy book maker obviously loses $;
the good bookmaker meets the expected, acceptable NP for this particular industry;
the excellent book maker exceeds it?
[This message has been edited by Sonny Palermo (edited 06-16-2001).]