You know the scene. Two characters (usually a somewhat harmless looking protagonist against a burly big tough guy) start to fight. A crowd forms around them.
“5 bucks on the big strong guy.”, says one person in the crowd.
“10 bucks on the obvious winner.”, another crowd member bets on the same.
“100 bucks the underdog main character wins.”, shouts a supporting character also in the crowd. The others look at him in disbelief.
Then the fight happens, underdog wins, and we cut to the supporting character with a wad of cash in hand being really smug.
What’s the logistics of that money exchange? Like, if there was a bookie keeping track of who bet how much on what, and doing the pay outs, that would obviously work. Or if people individually accepted each others bets. But these stories always just display people shouting, and then the winner with the money. Is this shouting style betting actually based in reality, or is it just a nice dramatization for entertainment purposes?
A bookie is needed. Betting requires odds and bookeeping, plus a prize pool guarantor.
The movies either leave the bookie out of shot for dramatic brevity, or, equally likely, have no idea how betting works but just copy other movies.
I can’t speak from real life experience, but one movie that actually handles this really well (as far as I can tell) is The Quiet Man, during a fight.
There’s an example of an impromptu, casual bet between two individuals who are understood to trust one another, where they actually set the odds and agree formally, and it all happens very smoothly and naturally so as not to be boring:
“Five to one on the big chap”
“Given or taken?”
“Given”
“Taken”
Handshake
IIRC, they don’t actually show them agreeing on the wager itself, but a later scene shows the outcome and lets you calculate it for yourself. These characters are established to know one another, so I figure they either have a known amount between them that they default to for casual bets, or they just determined that off camera.
There is also an example of the more chaotic, mass, unplanned betting, where a character who is already established to be a jack of all trades known to the community pulls out a notebook and takes on the role of bookie. I think they even show the odds being adjusted in real time as the fight progresses, but I don’t recall for sure.
I just assume there are spontaneous bookies. I have seen gambling addicts become spontaneous bookies at events. They understand the odds better than most and just build in a big vig to reduce downside liability, espescially if they think there won’t be a lot of transactions.
There’s loads of things in tv shows that just skip the boring, logistical parts. Nobody wants to see a bookkeeper painstakingly taking leaflets and bets in orderly fashion.
Besides, if there’s no record whatsoever, what’s to stop a bookie from taking money from the losers, and telling the winners ‘prove it’? Besides a knuckle sandwich, that is.
Another one is basically any desk job, but particularly IT jobs in TV and movies. Even the most elite hackers don’t just insert a thumb drive in a laptop, hammer the keyboard and yell ‘I’m in’. Mr. Robot is the only show so far where hacking is portrayed somewhat believable, and it’s still mostly social engineering.
As for programming, the only show I’ve ever seen who do a realistic way of describing VC funding and agile project development is Silicon Valley, but even there you’ll find the most boring things are just omitted.
Point is, it’s just difficult to make administrative tasks interesting enough to keep the attention of viewers.
A bookie is stopped from not paying up by reputation- you won’t bet with them again if they don’t pay up.
the bookwork is hard to make interesting though.
Damn you, you started to say that hacking is not portrayed realistically and I was going to reply with Mr. Robot, then you said about programming and I was going to mention Silicon Valley. Which goes to show that those are likely the only two realistic examples out there hahaha
A bet isnt a bet until there are multiple opposing sides matched together. If there is no bookie managing it, then it’s up to the individual participants to do it. If someone says “5 bucks on the big strong guy” it’s not an actual bet until someone comes along and puts money down opposite it.
When the supporting character comes along and says “100 bucks on the other guy whose win moves the plot along”, it’s like he’s saying " I will match all the announced bets on the big guy so far, and everyone else’s up to a total of $100".
They could take the time to show that person taking out a wad of 5’s and physically matching the bets already thrown down, but it’s more expedient to just do the shouting and then cut to the end of it.
In a neighborhood, everyone knows your name. If Joe the Plumber and Fred the Butcher make a bet, everyone has heard it, and the loser has to pay up, or be scorned.
In a bar, the bartender or server holds the bets and pays off the winner, and expects a cut of the pie as a sevice fee/tip.
Don’t Americans do this in real life? That’s what TV taught me.
Well, I know I say it often, but there’s never any money exchanged.
The same source taught me that cops are good and if that’s true, impromptu gambling must be common
shouting style betting
I don’t have the answer to your question at large, but your description reminded me of the old method of how stock trading floors used to work. My understanding is that it involved lots of yelling and hand signals, with video of the whole process likely available online.
Each man knows what’s coming to him. He just goes and gets it.
At least when it’s a tight-knit community, there’s not really any logistics. Everyone knows everyone, including the cheats and liars and deadbeats. If someone takes you up on a bet and they win they’ll come get their money, guaranteed.
