OT: Is this the result of the marriage between sports betting and sports?

[KingLando]

Sports betting is just like slot machines, the Pennsylvania scratch offs, etc. It is taxation of the stupid. People who think they are going to make money at any of this don't understand the rudiments of statistics. Every single betting scheme (except blackjack with card counting) favors the house. The "law of large numbers" in statistics guarantees that in the long run every better will lose money. Our school system should be teaching the fundamental of statistics but they don't. Sports betters who think they will win money are stupid people.

People can and do make money off sports gambling. It takes time and research plus you can't bet with emotion.

 

[LionJim]

Not totally. One of the charges involved an NBA player (Rozier) who had some prop bet that he would get hurt and leave the game early and he did.

Not exactly. The prop bet wasn’t on Rozier getting hurt, the prop bets were on his total points, rebounds, assists, for that game. Rozier removed himself from the game, saying he was injured. Of course, the under won.

 

[dcf4psu]

I knew a couple of people who failed miserably at gambling. One bet on football and the other craps at the casino. Each was going to win back their losses with a system and beat the house. Both ended up broke.

"The game never ends when your whole world depends on the turn of a friendly card."

Excellent album.

 

[lemonears]

People can and do make money off sports gambling. It takes time and research plus you can't bet with emotion.

In the short term anyone can win. In the long term 99.999% of the betters will lose money at sports betting. The only ones who will win in the long term are those who are mathematically astute and are willing to spend 12 hours a day studying.

If a person is inclined to gamble, a much better way is to swing trade or day trade in the stock market. The gambler is also likely to lose money, but the odds are better than in sports gambling.

 

[JoeBagobagels]

Pretty much everything that he says speaks to my point. He's talking about illegal gambling, getting in trouble with the mob, owing debts that you can't pay and needing to find a way out, etc.

You don't have integrity monitors flagging bets from stuff that the mob is getting down on thru illegal channels. With legalized books, you do. Guys placing these bets at legal US sportsbooks is what uncovered it all. And people making legal bets are posting their $ up front, and not getting into a situation where they owe 6 figures to a bookie and they need to either find a way out of it or deal with threats of violence.

To me, the legality itself isn't an issue...in many ways, it's a solution to bring more checks and balances into play (and raise tax revenue for $ that would otherwise be going offshore or into criminal hands). Aspects of it certainly bring about more issues...the micro-bets, the advertising (I'd certainly be fine with more restrictions on it), etc.

I certainly come at it from a biased point of view (gambling is a source of income), but I think many have such a negative view of gambling that they miss the positives that legalization has today...if the Terry Rozier bets were placed thru Costa Rica, he's likely playing for the Heat tonight and no one knows anything about this.

I see zero positives and more problems . I will side with Franseze here. If I'm king I'd shut it all down .
I do not understand the desire to bet.

 

[JoeBagobagels]

Some is not the right word. You should say Very Few, like one in a million, can make money at gambling in the long run. These people are usually brilliant and mathematically inclined. James Holtzhauer of Jeopardy fame comes to mind. He studies different games day and night and is able to exploit subtle nuances in various games. 99.99% of the betters don't have the time or expertise to do what people like Holtzhauer does. If "normal" people gamble they need to understand that they are paying for entertainment and will lose money.

Once I read that the best of football handicappers, men who do this professionally have a win percentage at around 55% to maybe 60 if I'm not mistaken. And these are the best of the best.

The business is designed to take money from suckers.

 

[JoeBagobagels]

I knew a couple of people who failed miserably at gambling. One bet on football and the other craps at the casino. Each was going to win back their losses with a system and beat the house. Both ended up broke.

There's a reason why the house always wins, and people reset odds and sports are probably some of the brightest mathematicians out there with really complex systems to break it down.

My son is literally a rocket scientist, and I don't know if he has the brain power to figure that kind of stuff out.

 

[JoeBagobagels]

A friend of mine used to place bets with an ex Penn State football player. For what it's worth he told me that he was doing it while he was playing for the team.

Gambling is so integrated in sports that I don't know how you'd fix it.

And this man was taking bets while at PSU and on the team.

 

[ChiefJusticeMarshall]

Not exactly. The prop bet wasn’t on Rozier getting hurt, the prop bets were on his total points, rebounds, assists, for that game. Rozier removed himself from the game, saying he was injured. Of course, the under won.

Yeah that's what I meant. I worded it poorly.

 

[LionJim]

Once I read that the best of football handicappers, men who do this professionally have a win percentage at around 55% to maybe 60 if I'm not mistaken. And these are the best of the best.

The business is designed to take money from suckers.

I’ve seen one of our gambling posters quote 54%, and he says he puts in a ton of work. I imagine it’s a lot more than a hobby.

 

[Erial_Lion]

Once I read that the best of football handicappers, men who do this professionally have a win percentage at around 55% to maybe 60 if I'm not mistaken. And these are the best of the best.

The business is designed to take money from suckers.

To turn a profit, you need to win 52.4% of your bets (when playing at a standard -110 odds). 60% is pretty much unattainable over the long haul (if we're talking what most would consider betting football...not playing the smaller limited FCS games). 55% is more realistic for someone that's really successful. But really, volume is the key player...you'd win more with large volume at 53-54% than being really selective and hitting 57-58%.

And there are some that will turn a profit while taking limited to no risk...simply picking off bad lines, arbing between different books, etc. Don't even need to be brilliant or mathematically inclined (but do need to be willing to work hard and have discipline).

 

[LionJim]

Interesting New Yorker article on the issue.

The Sports-Betting Disaster

How the rise of “prop” bets helped create the conditions for the N.B.A.’s latest gambling scandal.

www.newyorker.com

 

[Erial_Lion]

Plenty of them, especially the offshore books. There were/are some good offshore books that had/have very extensive options when it comes to props.

However, not so much of the “micro” stuff like the result of a pitch, serve, etc. I’m in full agreement that some of the legal books offering that is asking for trouble.

Sounds like books are in agreement…

 

[LionJim]

SIAP:

Baseball Is Compromised. What to Do Now Is Obvious.

The indictments of two major league pitchers are just the clearest examples yet of the scourge of the prop bet.

slate.com