The Krackman is getting nervous. Months ago, after the Democratic convention and before the televised debates, the gambling odds for President Bush winning back the White House in today’s election were as bright as the casino lights on the Las Vegas strip.

The president was a 2:1 favorite.

The Krackman, a 36-year-old handicapper and gambler named Bill Krackomberger who works out of a hotel room in the Golden Nugget, said he plunked down $30,000 – Mr. Bush all the way.

But among the thousands of gamblers wagering an estimated millions in bets on Messrs. Bush or Kerry today, odds of the president winning are steadily slipping. (Gambling on presidential elections is illegal in America, but making wagers through offshore gambling Web sites is not.)

Last night, some offshore sites had the president clinging to a slight 7:6 edge over Mr. Kerry. Other sites had election odds dwindling down to an even race.

“I don’t really know about the campaigns, or what they said in the speeches, but I do know something serious is happening,” Mr. Krackomberger said about the shrinking odds.

That something – at least in the gambling world – is the number of large, last-minute bets booked on Mr. Kerry. And should history be any judge, the candidate who typically draws the most bets from gamblers has typically carried the election.

Between the years 1868 to 1940, when gambling on presidential races was legal, there was only one in 19 elections when the president favored by betters did not prove triumphant, according to a report in the Journal of Economic Perspectives by Koleman Strumpf and Paul Rhode, economic professors at the University of North Carolina.

“People have a tendency to put their money where their mouth is,” explained Anthony Curtis, a Las Vegas based gambling expert.

If Mr. Curtis were to pick a winner in today’s race, it would be Mr. Bush, he said, because the president is still favored by handicappers. Moreover, he added, Mr. Bush’s ability to stave off Mr. Kerry in the odds race in recent months also suggests Mr. Bush may hold more ground-support among likely voters.

Another famous gambler, Amarillo Slim, the Texas-based poker champion, pool hustler, and author, has also wagered on Mr. Bush – and a sizable bet, “with whiskers on it.”

“You got to be a tough son of a b–to beat the incumbent,” Mr. Slim, 75, told The New York Sun.

The Krackman agrees. But it’s only one reason the gambler wagered $30,000 on Mr. Bush. He is also secretly rooting for the president to win.

“Sometimes you bet you’re heart,” he said. “It’s always dangerous.”