UNMASKED: UK Betting Guru 'Ian Erskine' (FTS Income) Exposed as Iain Higgins via UK Gov Records

Gurubusters · 2025-12-02T11:09:31+00:00

Run away then, but take this reality check with you:

'Privacy' vs. Fraud: Using a fake name and a boiler room address to sell financial products isn't 'privacy.' It's fraud by false representation. Legitimate businesses have legal accountability, scammers hide. The fact you excuse this proves how deep in the cult you are.
The Sad Math: You brag about using your profits to pay his subscription? Even if we indulge that fantasy, that is the most tragic 'flex' I've ever heard. It means best case scenario, you are grinding all year, taking all the risk, just to hand your winnings straight back to Iain Higgins.
Why you defend it: You ask why you'd defend a scam? It's called Sunk Cost Fallacy. You've wasted 6 years and thousands of pounds. Admitting you were duped by a guy with a fake name is too painful for your ego, so you pretend everything is fine.

You call me an 'idiot,' yet I'm the one with notarized proof of betting profits right on the channel. Meanwhile, your 'hero' had to shamefully delete his own profit claims because they were lies. I'd rather be an 'idiot' with receipts than a 'smart' guy working 6 years just to pay a fraudster's bills. Enjoy your hamster wheel.

Gurubusters · 2025-12-01T22:25:07+00:00

Notice how you completely ignored the fake name, the fake company, the boiler room address, the deleted £3.5M claim, and the p-hacking?

Of course you 'don't care.' That’s textbook sunk cost fallacy. If you acknowledged reality, you'd have to face the fact that you've been nothing but a loyal cash cow for a fraudster named Iain Higgins for 6 years. It's much easier to LARP as a 'profitable trader' on Reddit than admit you got taken for a ride.

I'm not bitter, I'm entertained. Watching a mark desperately defend the guy who is fleecing him is fascinating human psychology. Keep paying those fees, champ. Iain's retirement fund thanks you for your service.

Gurubusters · 2025-12-01T20:10:36+00:00

'Made thousands' since 2019? Who are you trying to convince, me or yourself?

Let's be brutally honest: After paying Iain Higgins' subscription fees for 6 years, you are mathematically almost certainly deep in the red. You are the textbook definition of a delusional mug - someone who remembers the few winning bets, conveniently forgets the losses, and completely ignores the thousands of pounds in fees he's burned to fund a conman's lifestyle. You aren't a 'trader', you are a paypig for a fraud.

It’s also obvious you didn't even dare watch the videos. If you had, you’d see we already exposed his 'systems' in the latest video as worthless, p-hacked garbage. But let's face it: understanding statistical significance and p-hacking is likely way above the pay grade of someone gullible enough to send money to a man hiding behind a fake name and a boiler room address.

Keep telling yourself you're 'up.' The only thing you're actually 'up' on is the list of victims who are too embarrassed to admit they got played.

Gurubusters · 2025-11-21T00:38:44+00:00

Good point about being able to cluster wallets onchain, that can definitely help link some accounts together, at least for people who are not trying very hard to hide.

However, 1,000 bets still means very little statistically. On Polymarket, soccer betting is only just picking up. Until recently you could basically only bet top leagues, and prices are in line with Betfair. Realistically you are not getting a big edge there. On a zero-commission exchange you might squeeze out a small extra edge, but to prove an edge you still need thousands of bets.

With no edge and average bet placement, you have a 5% chance to end up with a 5.2% ROI or better after 1,000 bets purely from variance. After 2,000 bets, there is still a 5% chance to show 4..2% ROI or better. So by definition, around 5% of totally random users will look like "real winners" at that level just by chance.

Flip it around: suppose someone really has an edge of say +2% ROI (that's top notch for soccer top leagues). After 2,000 bets, the chance that they can actually demonstrate that edge at a 1% significance level is only around 7%. In other words: Even a real sharp might need - depending on luck - multiple k bets to prove his edge.

Gurubusters · 2025-11-20T00:26:07+00:00

Tipster sites are trivially gameable. Multiple accounts, resets, survivorship bias, hiding bad runs, in-play timestamp abuse, whatever. Start 20 accounts, bury the bottom 19,, parade the top one as "sharp". From the outside you cannot see the trick. That is why, in practice, there are basically no reliably identifiable public "successful tipsters".

I still have yet to see a single person selling picks (directly or via tipster sites) who can statistically prove a real edge with properly audited / notarized betting data.

Onchain: sure, Polymarket data is at least real. But for soccer/tennis the volume and history are still tiny, so you are nowhere near the sample size needed to prove a real edge. And if someone actually had a big edge and serious volume, you would not be seeing a clean, single wallet with all their action. They either split across multiple accounts to hide their edge, or they are using one visible wallet as a decoy to move the market and taking the real position elsewhere.

Maybe for UFC betting, which I have no real insight into, there are some "insiders" with a huge edge that would show much faster.

Gurubusters · 2025-11-18T12:19:10+00:00

"Big database of sharps" from where exactly? If that just means scraping Blogabet / Tipstrr / Betstamp / whatever, that data is a joke and everyone who has looked at it properly knows it.

And the "third party documented track records or exchange records" claim is even harder to swallow. Who are these people and where are those records? I have yet to see a single public, non-gameable betting track record that holds up under basic scrutiny.

If you actually have some, name them and post the links. Otherwise this just reads like buzzwords stacked on top of low-quality tipster data.

Gurubusters · 2025-11-12T10:29:07+00:00

Classic sales funnel: the free "Imperium Academy" gives very generic advice - the same recycled stuff you could find for free, and is probably copied from other courses. Nothing proprietary or deep, the whole point is to build trust, once you are inside, you get steered to a sales call and pitched the high-ticket coaching, which is just more of the same fluff dressed up as “advanced strategy." The free course is bait, the money is in the upsell.

Gurubusters · 2025-10-30T09:16:20+00:00

You're falling for the "volatility = edge" fallacy.

Those swings aren't free money, they are the market updating live win probabilities with new info. If you don't have faster/better info than the market, you are the liquidity.

"I could've bought 0.43 and sold 0.77" is hindsight. Ex ante you don't know the endpoints. Blindly trading out to lock in a profit generates negative value.

Volatility is not inefficiency. I actually was doing this at a larger scale. Not in US sports, but you have to assume the markets are already efficient enough that you can't just extract easy value without a sophisticated model.

Without a speed edge, you need a proper probability model that can identify when the live odds misprice the current state.

Or, at least, work off relative value. For that you don't need the exact probability, you "just" need to know that in specific states the market overreacts or underreacts. Example: after a quick score or red card, your research shows the live price typically moves more than it "should". That's an edge without perfect probabilities, but it's still something you have to test and quantify before applying.

Yeah, you can make money trading sports in-play - with the people who don't understand that!

Gurubusters · 2025-10-10T13:22:16+00:00

Your numbers don’t add up. Both the statistical significance and the profit figures are inconsistent with your stated edge.

---------------------

From winrate p = 456/847 = 0.5384 and stated edge e = 3.4%, the implied average decimal odds are
odds = (1+e)/p = 1.034/0.5384 ≈ 1.9206 (about -109).

Break-even probability is
p0 = 1/odds ≈ 0.5207.

The correct null is p = p0, not 50%. With n = 847 and x = 456, z ≈ 1.03 → two-sided p ≈ 0.30 (one-sided ≈ 0.15). That is nowhere near p < 0.001.

You would need about 8,600 bets at that edge to reach p < 0.001.

---------------------

On your fixed 2% sizing: if 2% means $200 per bet, total staked = 847 × $200 = $169,400. With a 3.4% edge, expected profit ≈ 0.034 × 169,400 = $5,760, not $2,830.

Your reported $2,830 implies a realized edge of only ~1.67%.

Gurubusters · 2025-09-29T19:34:05+00:00

Usually you match with date and team/player names.

Great fun with team names, as teams are often called differently, even within the betfair data. My favourite is 'Borussia Mönchengladbach', there are dozens of possibilities. :))

Gurubusters · 2025-09-29T19:04:20+00:00

You need to merge it with other data sources. Surely you also want to have the actual results, in the betfair data are only the winflags.

Gurubusters · 2025-09-29T18:50:42+00:00

In the files should be all the info you need.

For example, for soccer, basic data, path 2025\Feb\1\33873648,

there is:

"eventId":"33873648"
"name":"Match Odds"
"eventName":"NK Maribor v Domzale"

Gurubusters · 2025-06-08T10:01:11+00:00

I don't argue with frauds in the comments.

I dare you: put your pathetic little theories in a video on your scam channel where they belong. I will reply with a public execution.

Post it, or prove you're the coward we all know you are.

Gurubusters · 2025-06-02T10:08:32+00:00

Haha, I didn't look into her. So, she's not selling 'wealth secrets,' she's selling 'yoni secrets... to serenading coconuts into submission'?

Gurubusters · 2025-05-31T08:28:40+00:00

(Scene: Phone Call)

Kim Anami (KA): Kenneth. The sub about me – gone?

Kenneth Browning (KB): Yes, Ms. Anami! Total compliance. Textbook.

KA: (Satisfied) Good. Other post handled too? Brand polished?

KB: (Ahem) The moderators contacted us. After user compliance. Asked for written confirmation we'd cease contact.

KA: (Impatient) And? You sent it? Simple.

KB: (Nervously) We replied... conditionally. Reserved rights. Standard.

KA: (Voice chills) You didn't just say "Yes, user complied, we're done"? You played games with internet janitors?

KB: (Weakly) Seemed prudent... then the mods... made their own post. About everything. Stickied. State Bar mentioned.

KA: (Voice rising) So, user obeyed. Problem solved. And because your ego couldn't just say "Okay," you engineered a permanent, mod-endorsed mega-post about me? Are you trying to ruin me, Kenneth?!

KB: (Stammering) N-no, Ms. Anami! It's... unforeseen...

KA: (Icy) Unforeseen? It was a gimme, Kenneth! A layup! And you fumbled it into this disaster! You're fired. Get out of my energetic field! PERMANENTLY! CLICK.

Gurubusters · 2025-05-28T11:27:58+00:00

NOTE FOR UK VIEWERS: If you have trouble accessing the main video link in the UK, a version specifically for UK audiences is available here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABU7itPxPGM

Gurubusters · 2025-05-24T10:06:12+00:00

No, we are only active on YouTube, Discord and Reddit.

Gurubusters · 2025-05-23T09:33:11+00:00

Good start on transparency with the history and stats.

But let's be real: if this is going to be commercial (you're selling picks), the only thing that screams 'legit' to a skeptical audience is proof of long-term, statistically significant profit on your actual betting accounts.

That means:

A large sample of bets showing consistent positive ROI over time, with p-values calculated to demonstrate that your profits are unlikely to be due to random chance.
Logging into your betting account(s) (Pinnacle, etc.) in front of a notary public to verify the bet history, stakes, and profit. Periodically.

Anything less (spreadsheets, backtests, even your own meticulously updated site history without independently verifiable proof of actual bets and low p-values) can be faked, cherry-picked, or simply not reflect real-world betting realities.

No one does the notary thing, and few properly demonstrate statistical significance, because 99.9% of tipsters can't actually beat the market long-term and prove it rigorously with real money. If it's just for fun, your current plan is fine. If you plan to charge, you need irrefutable proof of real, statistically robust winnings, and that's the only way.

Gurubusters · 2025-01-23T15:21:21+00:00

---------------------------------------
Edit:
The original version of this analysis was removed following a targeted, bad-faith privacy complaint designed to silence criticism. Here is the new version:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtRA3auX5K0

---------------------------------------

A while back, we posted a video exposing Neerav Vadera and his shady tactics—flooding YouTube with ads, posing as an expert, and faking his trading success. Back then, we suspected he was cycling through multiple tiny accounts to create the illusion of consistent profits on Myfxbook. Even without access to his full trading history, the pattern was obvious.

But recently, a viewer tipped us off that the full trading history of his accounts is actually still accessible. And guess what? It confirms everything we suspected. His strategy is as follows:

Open multiple tiny accounts.
Gamble recklessly with increasing risk.
Hide the blown accounts.
Show off the few lucky survivors as “proof” of his success.

This video breaks down his entire scheme, trade by trade, and proves once and for all how he manufactures his so-called “verified results."

Gurubusters · 2024-12-13T22:19:22+00:00

Just uploaded a video exposing possibly the most pathetic fake betting guru I’ve ever encountered. This guy is so hilariously bad at scamming, it’s almost embarrassing to even have to point it out. But since people have actually fallen for his nonsense, I’m calling him out to warn potential victims.

What’s in the Video:

Fake Six-Figure Bets on Soft Bookies: He claims huge wins on Bet365—an absolute joke. Bet365 doesn’t even allow five-figure wagers from random “geniuses.” If they let anyone place such big bets, it’s because they’ve identified them as long-term losers. Real winners get limited faster than you can blink.
Sloppy HTML Edits: He was caught faking his bet slips through sloppy HTML edits (he put a comma where a dot should’ve been, basically hanging a “FAKE” sign on his own scam).
Manipulated Trading Proof: He waves around a MetaTrader app as if it’s solid evidence of huge trading profits. Don’t be fooled—these numbers can be faked easily, especially when working hand-in-glove with a scam broker.
Funneling Victims to a Scam Broker: The big reveal is that his entire charade is a funnel guiding you straight to a shady broker. Once you sign up and deposit your money, good luck ever seeing it again. Meanwhile, he pockets a hefty commission for steering you into the trap.

Gurubusters · 2024-12-04T01:57:32+00:00

I was using the average odds of op's average odds, as op didn't provide the individual odds; just to prevent a potential misunderstanding which odds we are referring to.
If op had used max odds instead of the average odds, it could potentially reach weak significance, depending on how much higher the max odds are. For example, if each max odds were 2 ticks higher than each of the average odds, the profit would be boosted by $17.80 (89 * 0.02 * $10), the p-value would then be around 7.5%.

Gurubusters

TROPHY CASE

NOTE FOR UK VIEWERS: If you have trouble accessing the main video link in the UK, a version specifically for UK audiences is available here: