Sports betting legalized (state-by-state basis)!!

[JasonEvans]

The Supreme Court has legalized sports betting in states other than Nevada.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/05/14/supreme-court-strikes-down-ban-sports-betting-new-jersey/1053022001/


The justices ruled 7-2 that a 25-year-old federal law that has effectively prohibited sports betting outside Nevada by forcing states to keep prohibitions on the books is unconstitutional. The ruling could set the stage for other states to expand legalized gambling as a source of government revenue.

"Congress can regulate sports gambling directly, but if it elects not to do so, each state is free to act on its own," Alito said.

The court's action could jump-start action in Congress to pass legislation calling for federal regulation of sports betting -- something the sports leagues would prefer over separate rules from state to state.

-Jason "I bet you will see states jump to get a piece of this income. New Jersey will have this in place fast as you can Thanos your fingers. Lotteries are a huge revenue generator and sports betting could be too" Evans

[devildeac]

Great news, especially for you, richardjackson, Troublemaker, JNort, fdd, etc.

;):rolleyes:

[westwall]

The Supreme Court has legalized sports betting in states other than Nevada.

Well, not quite. The Court held that states CAN legalize betting, but left it up to each state to decide whether to do so. Many, like New Jersey, will.

[camion]

I expect betting will follow the path that lotteries did. Many states that rail against the evils of gambling will add it when they see $$$ going across the border to less virtuous states.

But whither the tribal casinos? or is that a different kind of betting?

[ChillinDuke]

Degenerates rejoice!!!

- Degenerate

[PackMan97]

So, basically EVERYONE can make money from college athletics, except the athlete....interesting. most interesting.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Great news, especially for you, richardjackson, Troublemaker, JNort, fdd, etc.

;):rolleyes:

Breaking news. Supreme Court will only allow pies and beer as betting currency.

[flyingdutchdevil]

So, basically EVERYONE can make money from college athletics, except the athlete...interesting. most interesting.

Not true. Most of our b-ball walk ons come from loaded families ;)

Can we please think of more ways to screw over these kids?

[NSDukeFan]

Great news, especially for you, richardjackson, Troublemaker, JNort, fdd, etc.

;):rolleyes:

I guess I no longer have to report them. ��

[UrinalCake]

Can we please think of more ways to screw over these kids?

I have no doubt that within a couple years we’ll find out that a player was given money to throw a game. It won’t be a OAD, Marvin Bagley type of player. It will be a regular rotation type player who doesn’t have millions of dollars in earning potential in his future.

[AGDukesky]

So, basically EVERYONE can make money from college athletics, except the athlete...interesting. most interesting.

Are you telling me that people actually win money gambling?! That would be a nice change...

[Troublemaker]

Great news, especially for you, richardjackson, Troublemaker, JNort, fdd, etc.

;):rolleyes:

Haha, I am perhaps surprisingly unmoved/ambivalent about the news. I could write an expansive post about this, but the high-level short version is:

(1) No seasoned bettor with accounts at SBR-rated A or A+ offshore books will be ditching those in favor of the new books that will be popping up, even if they pop up within a 5-minute drive. Some of those offshore books have two decades of experience in attracting and keeping customers and blow away Vegas books in terms of what they offer in bonuses, reduced vig (e.g. imagine betting $105 to win $100 instead of $110 to win a $100), betting options/variety, and customer service. The new brick-and-mortar books popping up as a result of this decision will be for newbies to sports gambling, not vets, imo.

(2) I liked the previous slight barrier of entry (fly to Vegas or get an offshore account) to sports betting. Obviously the one advantage of new books popping up in most states will be the convenience to locals who live nearby. The spread of "The Supreme Court made sports gambling legal across the country!" news will intrigue and attract lots of newbies to those books, and the one thing about many newbies is that they don't know when to stop, cut their losses, and avoid tilt. If 1 out every 100 new sports gambler does serious damage to their finances (and I believe 1 out of every 100 to be a low estimate) as a result of ultra-convenient and available sports gambling, it does give me pause.

[DevilHorse]

If you love this or hate this, you can point to one person who was the catalyst for this happening: the ex-governor of New Jersey Chris Christie.

When Christie came into office, he stopped any subsidy that the states gave to the Horse Tracks for their races ($20M per year I recall), thus cutting off a major revenue stream (note that the state gets more back in taxes).
Christie also did not allow New Jersey tracks to allow Casino gambling to occur on premises, which occurs in all of its surrounding states. This is because of the strong lobbying from Atlantic City (who could have had a piece of the Casino pie in all of these places), which wanted exclusive rights to NJ casino gambling.

These so called Racinos (half Racetrack - half Casino) built in other states allowed partial subsidy from the Casino winnings to go into Track purses that attracted horses out of New Jersey and into the surrounding states.
This decimated the state breeding industry (Big sires left as soon as Christie said NO) and purse structures at New Jersey standardbred and thoroughbred tracks. Christie then privatized the tracks so they could sink or swin.
In an effort to find new revenue streams, with Casino Gambling (the lifeline of its competitors in neighboring states) the New Jersey tracks looked toward legalized Sports Betting.
A referendum to allow sports betting was put on the state ballot and passed, but just as the tracks were going to enact Sports Betting, the Federal District Court said no (The suit was by the major sports leagues and the NCAA).
So, an appeal to the Supreme Court resulted; Governor Christie didn't object to what the tracks were doing, led by Monmouth Park, so the appeal of the District Court decision proceeded. Until today.

Las Vegas has been doing it for a while and we are all here to tell the tale.
Monmouth Park has already built a room in preparation for this moment and expects to be taking bets in 2 weeks.
If it is half the hit the Food Trucks are, it will be a winner.

Larry
DevilHorse

[lotusland]

So, basically EVERYONE can make money from college athletics, except the athlete...interesting. most interesting.

Or lose money. My friends always seem to break even or come out ahead in Vegas but that means odds are that your friends are losing their shirts.

[lotusland]

This could start a new trend at the Carolina Cup in Camden where people actually watch the horses instead of the party. Nah. The Palmetto State will likely finish second to last ahead of Mississippi for legal weed and gambling.

[sagegrouse]

So, basically EVERYONE can make money from college athletics, except the athlete...interesting. most interesting.

And basically everyone can LOSE MONEY except the athlete.

[PackMan97]

And basically everyone can LOSE MONEY except the athlete.

After talking with my father-in-law who has fancied himself a semi-professional gambler from when he lived in Vegas, he's only ever won money. Never lost it. I assure you, the only people who lose money in college sports are those that buy Carolina football tickets.

[BLPOG]

Well, not quite. The Court held that states CAN legalize betting, but left it up to each state to decide whether to do so. Many, like New Jersey, will.

We could do with an update to the thread title, IMO.

[madscavenger]

What's next, legalizing the sale of unhedged futures on the Vancouver Exchange? :cool:

[dudog84]

Or lose money. My friends always seem to break even or come out ahead in Vegas but that means odds are that your friends are losing their shirts.

Nobody brags about their losses.

This seems like a no-brainer ruling by the Supreme Court. Though I'm not a fan of state-sponsored gambling. I never see a Jaguar pull up to the 7-11 and the driver run in to buy a lotto ticket. I am a big believer that adults should be able to do what they want. Unfortunately, losers now look to social services for help.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

This could start a new trend at the Carolina Cup in Camden where people actually watch the horses instead of the party. Nah. The Palmetto State will likely finish second to last ahead of Mississippi for legal weed and gambling.

As someone who lived in SC for 11 years, 3 in Camden, I believe it is the Colonial Cup where they watch the horses....the Carolina Cup? Horses? What horses?

[dukelifer]

Nobody brags about their losses.

This seems like a no-brainer ruling by the Supreme Court. Though I'm not a fan of state-sponsored gambling. I never see a Jaguar pull up to the 7-11 and the driver run in to buy a lotto ticket. I am a big believer that adults should be able to do what they want. Unfortunately, losers now look to social services for help.

States will likely have very different rules and taxes on winnings. It seems that many states are already poised to put this in action.

[English]

States will likely have very different rules and taxes on winnings. It seems that many states are already poised to put this in action.

The sports leagues themselves, and other special interests associated with sports gambling, are going to lobby HARD for Congress to establish a federal regulatory structure around it in order to maximize their own position (and revenues created through gambling on their products). Conversely, it's almost certain that there will be plenty of lobbying done at the state level to get out in front for the respective states to capitalize on the SCOTUS ruling before that happens (e.g., NJ is expected to have it's gambling laws established within the month).

[sagegrouse]

As someone who lived in SC for 11 years, 3 in Camden, I believe it is the Colonial Cup where they watch the horses...the Carolina Cup? Horses? What horses?

I think I attended this event a long time ago -- it's in Camden.


84th Running of the Carolina Cup

The Carolina Cup race meeting is a time honored South Carolina tradition that has achieved premier social event status. This annual ‘rites of spring’ draws over 70,000 fans from throughout the Southeast, to enjoy the thrilling sport of steeplechase horse racing amid a flurry of spring fashions and elaborate tailgate parties. From the Corporate Terrace to College Park, old friends meet and new friends are made during the afternoon of six races.

[richardjackson199]

Haha, I am perhaps surprisingly unmoved/ambivalent about the news. I could write an expansive post about this, but the high-level short version is:

(1) No seasoned bettor with accounts at SBR-rated A or A+ offshore books will be ditching those in favor of the new books that will be popping up, even if they pop up within a 5-minute drive. Some of those offshore books have two decades of experience in attracting and keeping customers and blow away Vegas books in terms of what they offer in bonuses, reduced vig (e.g. imagine betting $105 to win $100 instead of $110 to win a $100), betting options/variety, and customer service. The new brick-and-mortar books popping up as a result of this decision will be for newbies to sports gambling, not vets, imo.

(2) I liked the previous slight barrier of entry (fly to Vegas or get an offshore account) to sports betting. Obviously the one advantage of new books popping up in most states will be the convenience to locals who live nearby. The spread of "The Supreme Court made sports gambling legal across the country!" news will intrigue and attract lots of newbies to those books, and the one thing about many newbies is that they don't know when to stop, cut their losses, and avoid tilt. If 1 out every 100 new sports gambler does serious damage to their finances (and I believe 1 out of every 100 to be a low estimate) as a result of ultra-convenient and available sports gambling, it does give me pause.

Agree!

The closest I would come to any real sports betting is betting pie on DBR. Lots and Lots of pie. :cool:

My consistent results in the annual DBR Covers.com contests just reinforce that it would not be profitable. Go get em NYBri!

[devildeac]

Agree!

The closest I would come to any real sports betting is betting pie on DBR. Lots and Lots of pie. :cool:

My consistent results in the annual DBR Covers.com contests just reinforce that it would not be profitable. Go get em NYBri!

Only pie? C'mon now, don't make me search out that beer bet or two you've made in the past. :p

[lotusland]

I think I attended this event a long time ago -- it's in Camden.

That write up sounds way more elegant than what I experience at the cup in bygone years. The crowd looked a lot more disheveled leaving than when they arrived that morning. Lots of poor and impaired decision making as I recall.

[richardjackson199]

Only pie? C'mon now, don't make me search out that beer bet or two you've made in the past. :p

Oh yeah, I meant going forward. I've lost 2 beer bets on DBR + consult fees! ;) And I've lost some attempts at sports bets on some past trips to Vegas. I was no more successful with it there than on DBR. I became much more lucky in Vegas when I quit betting any money on sports and stopped gambling when I was lucky enough to get up a nice amount. Of course the key is to also quit when you're behind, stick to a preset limit, never try to "break even", and cut losses like Trouble said.

I just meant I agree with Trouble - local sports betting access is going to be dangerous for many. More dangerous IMO than scratch-offs and Powerball. But the demand is clearly there. So maybe it's better to have it regulated legally. But maybe not if it means widespread access.

[JasonEvans]

Here is a very good rundown (https://www.legalsportsreport.com/sportsbetting-bill-tracker/) of where various states stand on the legalized gambling thing. Several states (NJ, Penn, NY, Conn, Miss, and WVa) already have laws on the books that make sports gambling legal as soon as federal law allows it (which, as of today, it now does). There is talk NJ will have betting rules in place in time to allow wagering on the NBA finals in a few weeks.

[richardjackson199]

The Market...

"A record $4.8 billion was wagered at Nevada sportsbooks in 2017."

Sound like a lot?

"The American Gaming Association estimates that Americans illegally wager about $150 billion on sports each year." And that's just Americans. Wow.

http://www.espn.com/chalk/story/_/id/23501236/supreme-court-strikes-federal-law-prohibiting-sports-gambling

[Reilly]

source material: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-476_dbfi.pdf


The State of New Jersey wants to legalize sports gambling
at casinos and horseracing tracks, but a federal law,
the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act,
generally makes it unlawful for a State to “authorize”
sports gambling schemes. 28 U. S. C. §3702(1). We must
decide whether this provision is compatible with the system
of “dual sovereignty” embodied in the Constitution.

A sports book should go by the name "Dual Sovereignty."

[Reilly]

more source material: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/3701

The rival sports book should call itself "Field Preemption". Good nickname for a shutdown corner, too.

[richardjackson199]

Fun, short SI Article on the Winners and Losers:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/more-sports/winners-and-losers-from-the-supreme-courts-ruling-on-sports-gambling/ar-AAxgwoB?li=BBnba9I&ocid=mailsignout

my favorite winner-

3. People who are good at betting on sports
While the house usually wins, some bettors are clearly “better” than others. This is true in sport betting, where research, analytics and attention to trends can significantly improve one’s odds.

There are, of course, elements of luck in sports. Players get hurt. Weather forecasts prove wrong. The list goes on. But for talented sports bettors, the Supreme Court’s ruling will eventually open up new opportunities for them to back up their sports predictions with wagers. Their success could also lead them to obtain national profiles and accompanying endorsement deals."

DBR should back NYBri with his first major endorsement deal :cool:

[wncgrad]

more source material: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/3701

The rival sports book should call itself "Field Preemption". Good nickname for a shutdown corner, too.


ANOTHER SOURCE - HISTORICAL For a look at the previous point shaving scandal in the conference involving UNC and NC State, among others nationally, see Ron Morris ACC: An Illustrated History. Today the scandal is usually only mentioned in relation to the end of the Dixie Classic and the ultimate hiring of Dean Smith at UNC. It was much bigger than that.

[Reilly]

ANOTHER SOURCE - HISTORICAL For a look at the previous point shaving scandal in the conference involving UNC and NC State, among others nationally, see Ron Morris ACC: An Illustrated History. Today the scandal is usually only mentioned in relation to the end of the Dixie Classic and the ultimate hiring of Dean Smith at UNC. It was much bigger than that.

Got my signed copy from Ron in the Bryan Center for $40 in late 1980s money ... or the equivalent of five boxes of Uncle Harry's cereal.

Footnote 17 lists these sources:

For example, in 1919, professional gamblers are said to have paid
members of the Chicago White Sox to throw the World Series, an
episode that was thought to have threatened baseball’s status as the
Nation’s pastime. See E. Asinof, Eight Men Out: The Black Sox and the 1919 World Series 5, 198–199 (1963). And in the early 1950s, the
Nation was shocked when several college basketball players were
convicted for shaving points. S. Cohen, The Game They Played 183–
238 (1977). This scandal is said to have nearly killed college basketball.
See generally C. Rosen, Scandals of ’51: How the Gamblers
Almost Killed College Basketball (1978).

[UrinalCake]

So I might be in the minority here, but does anyone else think that allowing gambling on college sports is a bad idea? We're talking about 18-22 year old kids. Even if you ignore the notion of a player betting on or against his own team, and you set aside the idea that a bookie might pay off a player to throw a game... you still have an 18 year old kid playing a game in which millions of dollars are at stake. And I think that's an unfair position in which to put that player. Walking into a road arena in front of a hostile crowd is enough pressure. What happens when a player knows that his team is favored and that people have bet millions of dollars on the game? Or what about the situation that often happens where the game is decided but a meaningless bucket in garbage time affects whether the spread is covered. I'm fine with letting the professionals deal with playing through these situations, but college sports should be off limits IMO.

I know that the counter-argument is that legalizing gambling will allow it to be monitored and regulated. Drastic swings in betting lines will set off alarms, which might not happen in the unregulated, illegal market that now exists. Which is a valid point.

[BigZ]

How did horse racing get around the current law?

[richardjackson199]

So I might be in the minority here, but does anyone else think that allowing gambling on college sports is a bad idea? We're talking about 18-22 year old kids. Even if you ignore the notion of a player betting on or against his own team, and you set aside the idea that a bookie might pay off a player to throw a game... you still have an 18 year old kid playing a game in which millions of dollars are at stake. And I think that's an unfair position in which to put that player. Walking into a road arena in front of a hostile crowd is enough pressure. What happens when a player knows that his team is favored and that people have bet millions of dollars on the game? Or what about the situation that often happens where the game is decided but a meaningless bucket in garbage time affects whether the spread is covered. I'm fine with letting the professionals deal with playing through these situations, but college sports should be off limits IMO.

I know that the counter-argument is that legalizing gambling will allow it to be monitored and regulated. Drastic swings in betting lines will set off alarms, which might not happen in the unregulated, illegal market that now exists. Which is a valid point.

Jim Sumner does. And I think he's right (pie excluded) :eek:

[sagegrouse]

The Market...

"A record $4.8 billion was wagered at Nevada sportsbooks in 2017."

Sound like a lot?

"The American Gaming Association estimates that Americans illegally wager about $150 billion on sports each year." And that's just Americans. Wow.

http://www.espn.com/chalk/story/_/id/23501236/supreme-court-strikes-federal-law-prohibiting-sports-gambling

Uhhh, let's see.. $150 billion divided by US population of 323 million -- equals $464 per person. Divided by the roughly 240 million 20 and over, equals $625.

I guess I am not doing my part.

[LasVegas]

As a las vegan, I’ve seen sports betting ruin lives. I actually had to take my friend in for a few months at one point. It’s evil and I don’t think making it more accessible is a good idea.

[cato]

you still have an 18 year old kid playing a game in which millions of dollars are at stake.

But we already have 18 year old kids playing games in which millions of dollars are at stake.

I am deeply skeptical of gambling, and by no means in favor of gambling on college basketball getting even bigger. But there are already a ton of adults winning and losing money on these kids playing basketball.

[JNort]

As a las vegan, I’ve seen sports betting ruin lives. I actually had to take my friend in for a few months at one point. It’s evil and I don’t think making it more accessible is a good idea.

Yes it can but I'm all for legalizing anything and everything that a consenting adult is willing to participate in as long as it doesnt out right directly harm another human being in the process. That goes for drugs and prostitution all the way down to abolishing seat belt laws.

[gofurman]

As someone who lived in SC for 11 years, 3 in Camden, I believe it is the Colonial Cup where they watch the horses...the Carolina Cup? Horses? What horses?

I live in SC. One horse race is in Camden, SC (Carolina Cup?). A smaller horse race is also in Tryon, NC right across the border from Landrum SC

[English]

So I might be in the minority here, but does anyone else think that allowing gambling on college sports is a bad idea? We're talking about 18-22 year old kids. Even if you ignore the notion of a player betting on or against his own team, and you set aside the idea that a bookie might pay off a player to throw a game... you still have an 18 year old kid playing a game in which millions of dollars are at stake. And I think that's an unfair position in which to put that player. Walking into a road arena in front of a hostile crowd is enough pressure. What happens when a player knows that his team is favored and that people have bet millions of dollars on the game? Or what about the situation that often happens where the game is decided but a meaningless bucket in garbage time affects whether the spread is covered. I'm fine with letting the professionals deal with playing through these situations, but college sports should be off limits IMO.

I know that the counter-argument is that legalizing gambling will allow it to be monitored and regulated. Drastic swings in betting lines will set off alarms, which might not happen in the unregulated, illegal market that now exists. Which is a valid point.

A few things--
1. I doubt you're in the minority around here.
2. This already happens, and it happens A LOT in the various pre- and post-season tournaments. Anecdotally, on one of JJ's latest pods, the one where he did a Q&A, there was a question about whether players (college, then NBA) think and talk about the spread and O/U of the games they're playing. As we know, one of the greatest bad beats happened in a Duke NCAAT game (2004 loss to Emeka) where the spread was Duke +2.5 and Duke was down 4...Duhon hit something like a 40ft 3-pt shot to lose by 1pt on a backdoor cover. That swung hundreds of millions of dollars in wagers on a meaningless shot*. JJ said that the players and coaches in college, and the players in the NBA, didn't really talk about those things, but NBA coaches would openly talk about spreads on their games (like, "Wow, can you believe we're getting 8.5pts at home tonight, that's shameful"). Anyway, to me, this isn't going to change things for the players too much, since the guys that are aware of such things will continue to be aware and the guys that ignore it will continue to do so.
3. At least in the NJ proposal, and likely in other states, there are explicit limitations on legal sports gambling to professional leagues. Betting on college sports may not be legalized across the board, and if Congress gets involved, I'd be a bit surprise if there wasn't some exception made for college sports. Of course, money is money, and betting on college sports would certainly add another significant revenue stream for everyone. I'm not naive enough to think any moral sanctimony would be compelling enough to prevent the decision makers from including college sports betting if it meant they'd line their pockets even deeper.


*http://www.espn.com/espn/sportsbusiness/news/story?id=1775505

[Jeffrey]

I continually gamble. IMO, a prudent gambler invests in stocks (like MGM), bonds (like CZR), and other earning assets. I prefer the odds and games.

[Jeffrey]

I never see a Jaguar pull up to the 7-11 and the driver run in to buy a lotto ticket.

Some people making millions of dollars a year go to 7-11 and buy lotto tickets.

[JasonEvans]

Some people making millions of dollars a year go to 7-11 and buy lotto tickets.

True, because there are no absolutes when it comes to the activities of millions of people, but there is no question that lottery players skew toward the lower income brackets. This study found (https://journalistsresource.org/studies/economics/personal-finance/research-review-lotteries-demographics) that more poor folks tend to play and they tend to buy lottery tickets about twice as often as the middle and upper classes.


Those in the lowest fifth in terms of socioeconomic status (SES) had the “highest rate of lottery gambling (61%) and the highest mean level of days gambled in the past year (26.1 days).” Moreover, there were “very few observed differences in lottery gambling for those in the three upper SES groups — 42–43% gambled on the lottery and the three upper groups averaged about 10 days of gambling on the lottery in the past year.”

[sagegrouse]

Some people making millions of dollars a year go to 7-11 and buy lotto tickets.

Here's an article (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/05/03/magazine/money-issue-iowa-lottery-fraud-mystery.html) from the NY Times Mag about a guy who beat the lottery -- from the inside. He got caught due to appearing on a video camera at a convenience store in Iowa.

[Jeffrey]

Here's an article (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/05/03/magazine/money-issue-iowa-lottery-fraud-mystery.html) from the NY Times Mag about a guy who beat the lottery -- from the inside. He got caught due to appearing on a video camera at a convenience store in Iowa.

Check out this article....

https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/2018/05/08/new-york-ceo-accused-of-stealing-millions-389-30403/?slreturn=20180415133807

Mr. Wong drove "a late-model Mercedes Benz, a Maserati Gran Turismo and most recently, a 2018 Ferrari California T" to spend "$3.5 million of the money he embezzled on New York lottery tickets".

[gofurman]

In the lotteries that rollover (there is a term for these I can't recall) - you used to could scheme the system. The Virginia lottery was beaten this way once the jackpot exceed the number of combination of tickets I recall

Here is an article:

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-one-guy-won-the-lottery-14-times-2016-1

[sagegrouse]

In the lotteries that rollover (there is a term for these I can't recall) - you used to could scheme the system. The Virginia lottery was beaten this way once the jackpot exceed the number of combination of tickets I recall

Here is an article:

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-one-guy-won-the-lottery-14-times-2016-1

The concept is easy. There are just so many lottery tickets, even though the number is astronmical, and when the jackpot exceeds the cost of buying all combinations, you have a sure thing (unless some other person or persons gets the winning number).

[UrinalCake]

The concept is easy. There are just so many lottery tickets, even though the number is astronmical, and when the jackpot exceeds the cost of buying all combinations, you have a sure thing (unless some other person or persons gets the winning number).

But how do you physically purchase the tickets with every single possible combination?

[sagegrouse]

But how do you physically purchase the tickets with every single possible combination?

Maybe this was covered in the link, but an Australian group attempted to do just that in Virginia a few years ago, but only purchased about one-half the tickets before it ran out of time. It did win the lottery, however, and the VA lottery paid off. I don't know whether the rules were later changed.

[cspan37421]

Generally, when jackpots get that big, more people play, and your odds of sharing a jackpot are higher, driving down the expected value of any given ticket. The people already playing buy more tickets too. As a result, the expected value of a ticket is probably always less than 100 cents on the dollar, regardless of jackpot size and combinations.

[Troublemaker]

Generally, when jackpots get that big, more people play, and your odds of sharing a jackpot are higher, driving down the expected value of any given ticket. The people already playing buy more tickets too. As a result, the expected value of a ticket is probably always less than 100 cents on the dollar, regardless of jackpot size and combinations.

Yeah, and then Uncle Sam takes his cut after you win. So you could say that the value of the ticket is rarely more than ~50 cents on the dollar.

[uh_no]

Generally, when jackpots get that big, more people play, and your odds of sharing a jackpot are higher, driving down the expected value of any given ticket. The people already playing buy more tickets too. As a result, the expected value of a ticket is probably always less than 100 cents on the dollar, regardless of jackpot size and combinations.

right, but that's a measurable effect which can be accounted for in a value calculation.

[Jeffrey]

Yeah, and then Uncle Sam takes his cut after you win. So you could say that the value of the ticket is rarely more than ~50 cents on the dollar.

Disagree. There have been games and purchase levels where winning is almost a certainty and paying taxes on those almost certain winnings still generates a solid ROI (~15-20% pre-tax). The math is solid and the government knows.

[sagegrouse]

Disagree. There have been games and purchase levels where winning is almost a certainty and paying taxes on those almost certain winnings still generates a solid ROI (~15-20% pre-tax). The math is solid and the government knows.

In fact, Jeffrey, it almost sounds like you might accept an investment or two from the hoop-land hoi polloi, eh what?

[Jeffrey]

Maybe this was covered in the link, but an Australian group attempted to do just that in Virginia a few years ago, but only purchased about one-half the tickets before it ran out of time. It did win the lottery, however, and the VA lottery paid off. I don't know whether the rules were later changed.

IIRC, that was the early 90's and Virginia changed the rules.

[Jeffrey]

In fact, Jeffrey, it almost sounds like you might accept an investment or two from the hoop-land hoi polloi, eh what?

If the math works, and it's legal, sign me up.

[Troublemaker]

Disagree. There have been games and purchase levels where winning is almost a certainty and paying taxes on those almost certain winnings still generates a solid ROI (~15-20% pre-tax). The math is solid and the government knows.

Oh, my bad. I missed the context of the conversation (buying up all the combos). I thought we were talking about Joe Sixpack buying one ticket. Carry on.

[Jeffrey]

Oh, my bad. I missed the context of the conversation (buying up all the combos). I thought we were talking about Joe Sixpack buying one ticket. Carry on.

With all due respect, missing context is my job.

[MarkD83]

I cringe at all the brain power that will be wasted trying to outsmart the sports betting industry

[Nick]

I cringe at all the brain power that will be wasted trying to outsmart the sports betting industry

I'm hoping there are going to be some good sign-up bonuses for new gambling businesses. Some people made out pretty well from online poker bonuses last decade before that was clamped down on.

As for beating the lottery, a few folks have figured things out. One of them is a woman in Texas who happens to also have a PhD in statistics from Stanford (http://www.businessinsider.com/4-time-lottery-winner-not-exactly-lucky-2011-8). There was also a man in Canada who figured out scratch lottery tickets (https://www.wired.com/2011/01/ff-lottery/).

[Acymetric]

I'm hoping there are going to be some good sign-up bonuses for new gambling businesses. Some people made out pretty well from online poker bonuses last decade before that was clamped down on.

As for beating the lottery, a few folks have figured things out. One of them is a woman in Texas who happens to also have a PhD in statistics from Stanford (http://www.businessinsider.com/4-time-lottery-winner-not-exactly-lucky-2011-8). There was also a man in Canada who figured out scratch lottery tickets (https://www.wired.com/2011/01/ff-lottery/).

I don't quite get the scratch ticket thing (I've seen that article before)...unless it is very different in other states you don't get to look over the ticket before you buy it, you ask for a particular game and the attendant hands you a ticket. Being able to discern which ones are winners without scratching is interesting, but useless unless you can pick and choose which ones to buy (which, as far as I am aware, you can't).

[madscavenger]

I cringe at all the brain power that will be wasted trying to outsmart the sports betting industry

Back in the day, seeing the words wasted and sports betting industry in the same sentence had a tendency to make certain individuals a little nervous.

[OldPhiKap]

In fact, Jeffrey, it almost sounds like you might accept an investment or two from the hoop-land hoi polloi, eh what?

They call them “backers,” I am told.

[Jeffrey]

They call them “backers,” I am told.

Tru dat! We need to back the young minds of America. If the math works, and it's legal, sign me up.

http://archive.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2012/07/31/inspector_general_says_lottery_allowed_gambling_sy ndicates_to_take_over_winfall_game/?page=1

[nmduke2001]

IIRC, that was the early 90's and Virginia changed the rules.

This is an interesting story about a Michigan man that used a flaw in the lottery system to make millions.

"That’s when it hit him. Right there, in the numbers on the page, he noticed a flaw—a strange and surprising pattern, like the cereal-box code, written into the fundamental machinery of the game. A loophole that would eventually make Jerry and Marge millionaires, spark an investigation by a Boston Globe Spotlight reporter, unleash a statewide political scandal and expose more than a few hypocrisies at the heart of America’s favorite form of legalized gambling."

https://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/lotto-winners/

[nmduke2001]

I don't quite understand how a league can charge an "integrity fee" for gambling. Couldn't the state just say "no". What's the league going to do, not play?

[Acymetric]

I don't quite understand how a league can charge an "integrity fee" for gambling. Couldn't the state just say "no". What's the league going to do, not play?

Right, it is interesting that nobody was trying to take a cut of the Vegas books (that I am aware of) but now that it is national they think they should have a piece.

On the other hand, they are probably correct that they should get a cut (whether they could make a legal case for it should the states refuse I couldn't say). I cannot see any reason why "gambling rights" shouldn't be licensed/sold the same way TV rights are. Why should the gambling industry make those massive profits off of other people's product for free? On the other other hand, I don't actually care if any of that money makes it to the leagues or not, I can just see why they would claim they should be in on it.

[JasonEvans]

I don't quite understand how a league can charge an "integrity fee" for gambling. Couldn't the state just say "no". What's the league going to do, not play?

I believe the leagues argue that they will have to hire security and data people to keep an eye on gambling patterns and games to ensure that players are not being influenced to throw games/shave points. The integrity of the games is an essential component of the gambling industry and the leagues are expected to ensure that integrity. They say they should be paid to do that.

-Jason "it is not an altogether awful argument, though if I was a state agency regulating gambling, I would not think it is worth 1% of my revenues to perform this service" Evans

[nmduke2001]

I believe the leagues argue that they will have to hire security and data people to keep an eye on gambling patterns and games to ensure that players are not being influenced to throw games/shave points. The integrity of the games is an essential component of the gambling industry and the leagues are expected to ensure that integrity. They say they should be paid to do that.

-Jason "it is not an altogether awful argument, though if I was a state agency regulating gambling, I would not think it is worth 1% of my revenues to perform this service" Evans

Thanks. That makes sense but what could any of the leagues say if the states simply say no? It's not like the leagues will stop playing.

[Acymetric]

Thanks. That makes sense but what could any of the leagues say if the states simply say no? It's not like the leagues will stop playing.

They would most likely try to employ some kind of legal tactic to force it, although I don't know what that would be or if there is a legitimate legal case to be made.

They could also threaten with economics (all star game hosting or other "penalties" to states who don't fall in line).

[gofurman]

Originally Posted by gofurman View Post
In the lotteries that rollover (there is a term for these I can't recall) - you used to could scheme the system. The Virginia lottery was beaten this way once the jackpot exceed the number of combination of tickets I recall

Here is an article:

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-o...4-times-2016-1



"The concept is easy. There are just so many lottery tickets, even though the number is astronomical, and when the jackpot exceeds the cost of buying all combinations, you have a sure thing (unless some other person or persons gets the winning number).
Sage Grouse"

right, easy in theory.. very hard to implement - you have the logistics of filling out EVERY ticket w every possible permutation. But, yes, to someone else's post - it was the Virginia Lottery which was beaten' with this. The term I couldn't recall was "progressive jackpot". Same could happen at a slot machine - if it wins every 1 out of 50 pulls (pull cost 1 dollar) and the jackpot climbs up to $150 dollars it's worth your while.. even w taxes. The difference would be there is no guarantee you will actually hit the slot machine. The lottery (should you really fill out every ticket) you WILL WIN.. but the flip side is there may be other winners so you lose money... as some prior posters noted on here

[Acymetric]

right, easy in theory.. very hard to implement - you have the logistics of filling out EVERY ticket w every possible permutation. But, yes, to someone else's post - it was the Virginia Lottery which was beaten' with this. The term I couldn't recall was "progressive jackpot". Same could happen at a slot machine - if it wins every 1 out of 50 pulls (pull cost 1 dollar) and the jackpot climbs up to $150 dollars it's worth your while.. even w taxes. The difference would be there is no guarantee you will actually hit the slot machine. The lottery (should you really fill out every ticket) you WILL WIN.. but the flip side is there may be other winners so you lose money... as some prior posters noted on here

You would also have to have the money up front to buy up all those ticket combos, which is probably more of a logistical problem than filling out all the combinations for most.