Is this some sort of reverse ad where I’m supposed to realize the rest of my generation is stupid but that I’m the only one who is good at sports betting?
IMO it’s crazy that we went from gambling on sports being major plot lines of the Sopranos and destroying Pete Rose’s legacy to being the main driver of the NFL’s rising salary cap.
The explosion of digital betting markets was too fast for regulators to keep in check and this administration has demonstrated a complete disregard for holding corruption back when it means they can get in now while they are the ones who would be regulating.
An entire societal understanding of the dangers of gambling thrown away in a generation thanks to greed.
Humans just love repeating the same core mistakes from the past, without feeling the pain and experiencing the problem we build no understanding. Doesn’t help that some people are looking to exploit this for their own personal gain.
We need Dems like Talerico to start going after these companies under the guise of 'greedy corporations are taking advantage of human vice to exploit and harm people'
Same with all these shady companies selling dubiously legal gas station drugs like Kratom.
I follow some sports betting subs and IMO there is a heavy amount of Astro turfed ads in there. It’s either people winning ridiculous long shot parlays. Like turning $5 in $150,000 or people losing out by a minute margin. I would not be surprised if the gambling companies weren’t pushing these narratives because parlay bets are where they make a lot of profit.
Look it up, insurance is literally reverse gambling. Your premiums are like buy-ins on a bet against yourself. It pays out when you have an accident or something
This sounds like something someone with a gambling problem would say. Just like people addicted to drugs say, something’s going to kill ya. Yeah but I don’t have to up the odds lol. Driving without insurance or living without health insurance is risky behavior just like drug use and gambling.
No youre not? Youre paying for a service. Just because there's a statistical chance associated with something happening or not happening doesn't make it gambling. You pay a monthly premium so that in the event of a catastrophic financial obligation you're covered for that amount. It's a guardrail in place to protect real actual assets and livelihoods, not whether you think the Detroit Lions cover the spread.
That's like saying you're "gambling" if you buy a plumbing valve because code requires it because it helps in the chance of failure
I always said that basically if you can use the same brokerage (app) that you can buy index funds and stock but that same app will let you bet on sports games like 1/2 the population will not understand the difference
To them its just symbols and numbers on the screen that go up and down.
This frame of thought is exactly what causes idiots to believe they can make money. Most people gain caution and reluctance with expertise/information. The type of person who “understands” the stock market probably has a simple investment strategy for long term profit and isn’t gambling on tech stocks
You mean the guys who lost all their money in 2008? Like AIG, Lehmann, Bear Sterns? They were very, very smart, and knew everything about financial markets, but at the same time they blind to what was going on.
And you will find plenty of gambling addicts who will argue the same thing about sports betting.
There are differences in the two, but individual knowledge is over hyped in both. The real difference for the individual is that you can go long on investments and ride out shorter downturns, it is less susceptible to Gambler's Ruin
Crypto trading (particularly memecoins), single stock leveraged ETFs, options and prediction markets further blur the line, especially with the rise of 0dtes and Polymarket and Kalshi pretending to be news sources by reposting actual journalism with 'BREAKING' added to the title.
All of them rely on the same principle as sports betting - the average Joe believing they have an edge over the market consensus that they overwhelmingly don't.
I mean years ago you had to apply for options at most brokerages. You would have to call the trading desk and some broker would quiz you to make sure you new what you were doing
Then they would give you level 0 options (covered calls, cash secured puts) and tell you to play around with those and call back in six months
Then you would get quizzed again then get level 1 options (long calls and long puts) for six months
Then you would call back and get quizzed again and get level 2 options (spreads / boxes)
Now anyone who is 18 gets level 2 options with out question
Is there a reason you’re spamming this sub with articles about Gen Z gambling? This is the third one you’ve posted in three hours. They all basically say the same thing.
If we can’t ban it outright, we need to treat sports gambling like we treat smoking. Ban advertising, and taxes should be visible on the point of sale as a visible form of juice.
Imagine how people will react when they see their parlays grow their cost and tax bill bill faster than their winnings?
Investment is a big big stretch.... the only time I've seen sports betting have actual tangible use was like a restaurant hedging that their home team would lose to recoup potential losses of then winning and needing to travel which drives less business to their doors or vice versa
That sounds more like sports insurance than sports gambling, like how in some places with traditions of buying a round for the whole clubhouse if you land a hole in one you can buy "hole in one insurance"
Now the line between insurance and gambling is always a little fuzzy but if the structure is for it to cover losses then it leans to the insurance side of the grey area.
I used it in a similar way. I wanted to see a specific country in the Rugby World Cup and got tickets for the two QFs they could be in, so I bet against them making QFs.
I gambled on sports ever since I was in Hs in the mid 90’s.
When I found out my state required us to pay income taxes on “winnings” in without factoring in losses I stopped. Really tilted the odds too much out of my favor. Think the state has changed it, but I have not looked back.
Also the nonstop adds/taking over sports coverage has the opposite impact on me. It makes me hate it!
Bring back the good old days where I had to find a shady bookie!
Do you realize you just loosely described the plot of Casino? People that are bad gamblers with access to capital paying somebody else to find an edge or just be better at setting sports odds and or gambling, to generate an outsized return.
Well 20% of the country is statistically the bottom 20% of our intelligence so this checks out to me perfectly. I’d be concerned if it was higher but this number seems par for the course for the mentally challenged among us.
This is just blatantly false and idiotic. We have extremely good evidence that there are an enormous amount of really smart people who don't get to live up their potential due to their socioeconomic circumstances. And it's really fucking obvious that this is idiotic: a lot of smart people are born into poverty, a lot of stupid people are born into wealth; there are immense barriers to overcoming that
Jesus, do you not think for more than a quarter second before forming such strong opinions?
The bottom 20%, regardless of how relatively smart they are, are still the dumbest 20%, regardless of how poor or wealthy they are, which you bizarrely added as a factor here, in addition to weird "potential" due to socioeconomic factors. Really weird.
Sounds like you may be one of the 20% throwing away money.
My son often says I have life changing money on this game or this player, only to show me later that it was like $8 or less and he does it only to keep his interest going in the event. I think I’ve used him to bet for me twice in my life. I also don’t like casinos. Boys and girls, save your money, it’s not investing.
I kinda wish that betting platforms were stated owned so that this could serve as a sort of “idiot tax” and the money could be funneled back to the government, hopefully for more productive spending. I know Florida uses lottery proceeds to fund a scholarship for students who do well enough on the SAT.
Remember that if you regularly beat the spread, your account WILL be throttled by these sites. They will cap your bets at $5 so at best you can only wring them for chump change.
If you think you are a good gambler, and the sports betting app has not capped your bets, then you are not a good gambler.
Gambling and prediction markets should face the same advertising regulations as cigarettes.
And prediction markets should clearly be regulated the same as gambling. Just because people set the odds in a prediction market, doesn’t make it any different than gambling.
I know kalshi has these examples where an ice cream shop hedges their potential lost sales due to weather by betting that it will be cloudy/rainy (or whatever) but it’s still just gambling.
I know I sound like a boomer, but I hate how rampant gambling ads are right now. I think it’s very bad for society.
Its the same as trading, obviously returns are different but so is the audiance. If you put a broker or trader in front of kalshi or polymarket, and give them the data and analytical tools for it they'll be profitable. The issue is people betting on sports go by gut not trends, have no financial discipline, and almost never straight bet. I run an invesment company and we've moved heavily into prediction markets so we cant be limited. I bet if you put these same people who bet just to bet infront of the market or any brokerage platform theyd still lose it all. Its not about the market its about whos behind the position.
This is simply not true because companies like DraftKings will limit your bets if you win too much. The higher your betting limit, the more likely you are to be a loser. Something like 90% of people who bet on sports are losers. Yeah, you can use data analytics to win money, but it's not worth your time or effort if you can only bet $2 to make $5.80.
We use markets like Kalshi and Polymarket so we arent limited. We also work with clients who are putting thousands of dollars into each position so i get what you mean when you say its not worth it at that point. I agree that if you dont have money to put into those markets like that you shouldnt. Same with trading no one should start with such a little amount, but if you have money to invest it is an incredibly easy market to break through
I think you're misunderstanding my point. Sports betting apps will ban or limit wagers placed by consistent winners, who they call "advantaged players" but will increase wager limits of consistent losers. It's a model nicknamed "ban or bankrupt", which basically means you only let losers play to ensure the house always wins.
Excerpt from a CBS article:
>When Massachusetts launched sports gambling in 2023, Mike Manning signed up with every sports gambling app available. Manning — a full-time professional bettor, or what they call a "sharp" bettor — doesn't bet on intuition. He uses a mathematical approach with analytical models.
>Manning says he was winning on nearly every app. Then, one by one, the platforms began limiting his bets. On DraftKings, he said he was limited to $25 per bet. On BetMGM, he started betting $1,000-$5,000 per game, but soon, he said, he was only able to bet $5.
>Limiting caught the attention of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission in 2024. The regulator required gambling companies to answer questions and provide data on how they limit their bettors. After an investigation last year, the Commission found a trend: Winning gamblers have their betting limit decreased while gamblers who lose have their limit increased.
>"It's that whole 'ban or bankrupt' model," said Gadoon Kyrollos, a professional sports bettor whose bets are often limited.
>...
>Matthew Litt, a New Jersey attorney who works on gambling cases, says the practice is legal as long as gambling companies are not discriminating against customers based on protected characteristics such as race or religion.
>Massachusetts became the first state to require gambling companies to notify gamblers who had been limited and to stipulate why they were being limited. FanDuel wrote to Manning that he was restricted because of "an assessment of your overall wagering patterns and their impact on our long-term risk position…"
>DraftKings told Manning it took action "for internal risk management purposes."
I'm not sure what this has to do with being profitable or viewing it as an invesment. How casinos run their business isnt my business. If you dont want to be limited for being consistent then use a peer to peer market like novig or others
Marijuana_Miler | 9 hours ago
Is this some sort of reverse ad where I’m supposed to realize the rest of my generation is stupid but that I’m the only one who is good at sports betting?
IMO it’s crazy that we went from gambling on sports being major plot lines of the Sopranos and destroying Pete Rose’s legacy to being the main driver of the NFL’s rising salary cap.
WhenTheLightHits30 | 8 hours ago
The explosion of digital betting markets was too fast for regulators to keep in check and this administration has demonstrated a complete disregard for holding corruption back when it means they can get in now while they are the ones who would be regulating.
An entire societal understanding of the dangers of gambling thrown away in a generation thanks to greed.
african_cheetah | 7 hours ago
Trump Jr has been a board member for Kalshi and Polymarket.
This is something the admin wants since it’s so lucrative.
Inverse robinhood - transfer of wealth from poor to the fat rich.
Unkechaug | 7 hours ago
Humans just love repeating the same core mistakes from the past, without feeling the pain and experiencing the problem we build no understanding. Doesn’t help that some people are looking to exploit this for their own personal gain.
Chris_HitTheOver | 7 hours ago
“…too fast for regulators to keep in check…”
I’m sorry, what? Nearly half of the states in the union have proactively passed new laws or changed existing statutes to allow for digital wagers.
It wasn’t “too fast”. Nobody tried to stop it at all.
___forMVP | 5 hours ago
We actively worked to tear down the protections that existed, even in liberal California.
Can’t be holding back new revenue streams now can we!!
artbystorms | 4 hours ago
We need Dems like Talerico to start going after these companies under the guise of 'greedy corporations are taking advantage of human vice to exploit and harm people'
Same with all these shady companies selling dubiously legal gas station drugs like Kratom.
BLT_Trade_r | 8 hours ago
Ya maybe its like those mobile game ads where they show a person clearly screwing up. Then people arw like I can do that and go download the game.
Marijuana_Miler | 7 hours ago
I follow some sports betting subs and IMO there is a heavy amount of Astro turfed ads in there. It’s either people winning ridiculous long shot parlays. Like turning $5 in $150,000 or people losing out by a minute margin. I would not be surprised if the gambling companies weren’t pushing these narratives because parlay bets are where they make a lot of profit.
marzenmangler | 7 hours ago
Gambling apps pick their gamblers via data analytics.
If you have a high limit you’re probably a net loser.
Good gamblers get drummed out and they continually lower their betting limits.
All the stacked odds of a casino and they restrict the guest list.
Should still be illegal.
DeliciousPangolin | 3 hours ago
The same country that sleepwalked into an opiode crisis learned absolutely nothing and walked boldly face-first into a gambling addiction crisis.
grio | 5 hours ago
Idiots.
In the theoretical "fair" world you would still have average win chance LESS than 50%. Which by definition is not an investment.
And gambling is one of the least fair industries in the world. Scammer paradise from top to bottom.
Distinct-Tonight-858 | 5 hours ago
If you buy insurance you’re also gambling lol
spacedout | 4 hours ago
What exactly are you gambling?
CatLord8 | 4 hours ago
I bet you $200 at 8:1 I’ll have a car accident in the next month
spacedout | 4 hours ago
If you drive around without insurance isn't that gambling that you won't have an accident?
CatLord8 | 2 hours ago
Depending on what your insurance covers.
Distinct-Tonight-858 | 4 hours ago
Look it up, insurance is literally reverse gambling. Your premiums are like buy-ins on a bet against yourself. It pays out when you have an accident or something
spacedout | 4 hours ago
Isn't reverse gambling the opposite of gambling? Wouldn't not buying insurance be gambling?
Distinct-Tonight-858 | 3 hours ago
They’re both gambling, and in the case of reverse gambling you’re still gambling, you just collect if you lose vs if you win
BullytheBulIies | 2 hours ago
This sounds like something someone with a gambling problem would say. Just like people addicted to drugs say, something’s going to kill ya. Yeah but I don’t have to up the odds lol. Driving without insurance or living without health insurance is risky behavior just like drug use and gambling.
awildjabroner | 4 hours ago
unless its health insurance then it doesn't payout and you're still fucked. 'MURICA!
Willster328 | 4 hours ago
No youre not? Youre paying for a service. Just because there's a statistical chance associated with something happening or not happening doesn't make it gambling. You pay a monthly premium so that in the event of a catastrophic financial obligation you're covered for that amount. It's a guardrail in place to protect real actual assets and livelihoods, not whether you think the Detroit Lions cover the spread.
That's like saying you're "gambling" if you buy a plumbing valve because code requires it because it helps in the chance of failure
Distinct-Tonight-858 | 3 hours ago
It’s gambling, good gambling, but gambling. It even has a negative EV like other kinds of gambling, or the insurance companies would not profit
Momik | 3 hours ago
If you’re treating insurance like a windfall rather than a reimbursement after a disaster, you might be doing insurance fraud lol
SirGlass | 8 hours ago
I always said that basically if you can use the same brokerage (app) that you can buy index funds and stock but that same app will let you bet on sports games like 1/2 the population will not understand the difference
To them its just symbols and numbers on the screen that go up and down.
MausoleumNeeson | 7 hours ago
I think a large percentage of people losing by gambling on sports would also be losing gambling on stocks and trades
vitringur | 2 hours ago
Because that is not investing, that is gambling.
vinyl1earthlink | 6 hours ago
This is why those who actually understand what they are doing can make a lot of money in the stock market.
RYNNYMAYNE | 4 hours ago
This frame of thought is exactly what causes idiots to believe they can make money. Most people gain caution and reluctance with expertise/information. The type of person who “understands” the stock market probably has a simple investment strategy for long term profit and isn’t gambling on tech stocks
ColdAnalyst6736 | 3 hours ago
arguably tech stocks are one of the best long term investment strategies.
my dads vested shares in tech companies have probably made him more money than anything else in his life.
granted it’s part of his compensation structure over his life, but still.
vinyl1earthlink | 4 hours ago
I have been investing for 40 years. There are lots of ways to make money - the main thing is to have self-discipline.
dust4ngel | 3 hours ago
agree, anybody who can single-handedly defeat multi-billion-dollar investment firms on nights and weekends can do really well.
the real question is why they aren't themselves a multi-billion-dollar investment firm, given their superhuman ability.
vinyl1earthlink | 3 hours ago
You mean the guys who lost all their money in 2008? Like AIG, Lehmann, Bear Sterns? They were very, very smart, and knew everything about financial markets, but at the same time they blind to what was going on.
SirGlass | 3 hours ago
Those are investment banks, he is talking about quant trading firms like Citadel , Jane Street , Two Sigma.
These are not investment banks
dust4ngel | 3 hours ago
if you are smarter than multi-billion-dollar investment firms, i strongly implore you to start a competitor.
willstr1 | 2 hours ago
And you will find plenty of gambling addicts who will argue the same thing about sports betting.
There are differences in the two, but individual knowledge is over hyped in both. The real difference for the individual is that you can go long on investments and ride out shorter downturns, it is less susceptible to Gambler's Ruin
Halbaras | 6 hours ago
Crypto trading (particularly memecoins), single stock leveraged ETFs, options and prediction markets further blur the line, especially with the rise of 0dtes and Polymarket and Kalshi pretending to be news sources by reposting actual journalism with 'BREAKING' added to the title.
All of them rely on the same principle as sports betting - the average Joe believing they have an edge over the market consensus that they overwhelmingly don't.
SirGlass | 6 hours ago
I mean years ago you had to apply for options at most brokerages. You would have to call the trading desk and some broker would quiz you to make sure you new what you were doing
Then they would give you level 0 options (covered calls, cash secured puts) and tell you to play around with those and call back in six months
Then you would get quizzed again then get level 1 options (long calls and long puts) for six months
Then you would call back and get quizzed again and get level 2 options (spreads / boxes)
Now anyone who is 18 gets level 2 options with out question
Adventurous-Roof488 | 9 hours ago
Is there a reason you’re spamming this sub with articles about Gen Z gambling? This is the third one you’ve posted in three hours. They all basically say the same thing.
Hectorscosmicnyza | 9 hours ago
I can't see the others. Can you share them?
Adventurous-Roof488 | 9 hours ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/s/oPpEk6o5K9
https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/s/UKQSHzT4HV
DrinkCorrect7655 | 5 hours ago
You folded to a stiff breeze.
johnknockout | 6 hours ago
If we can’t ban it outright, we need to treat sports gambling like we treat smoking. Ban advertising, and taxes should be visible on the point of sale as a visible form of juice.
Imagine how people will react when they see their parlays grow their cost and tax bill bill faster than their winnings?
CommonProfilePicture | 6 hours ago
Investment is a big big stretch.... the only time I've seen sports betting have actual tangible use was like a restaurant hedging that their home team would lose to recoup potential losses of then winning and needing to travel which drives less business to their doors or vice versa
willstr1 | an hour ago
That sounds more like sports insurance than sports gambling, like how in some places with traditions of buying a round for the whole clubhouse if you land a hole in one you can buy "hole in one insurance"
Now the line between insurance and gambling is always a little fuzzy but if the structure is for it to cover losses then it leans to the insurance side of the grey area.
CommonProfilePicture | an hour ago
True, but thats because hedging and insurance are the same thing. Its just the medium in which that insurance is based is sports gambling
fdar | 6 hours ago
I used it in a similar way. I wanted to see a specific country in the Rugby World Cup and got tickets for the two QFs they could be in, so I bet against them making QFs.
Namaste421 | 7 hours ago
I gambled on sports ever since I was in Hs in the mid 90’s.
When I found out my state required us to pay income taxes on “winnings” in without factoring in losses I stopped. Really tilted the odds too much out of my favor. Think the state has changed it, but I have not looked back.
Also the nonstop adds/taking over sports coverage has the opposite impact on me. It makes me hate it!
Bring back the good old days where I had to find a shady bookie!
IvoryTowerResident | 8 hours ago
The funny thing is there are literally ETFs you can buy that is someone doing the gambling for you.
100% Uncorrelated to the US indices and World indices. You are putting your money in someone else's hand to try and beat the books. Pretty outrageous.
I think its a fine form of entertainment but i get the self control part can be hard.
herlanrulz | 8 hours ago
Do you realize you just loosely described the plot of Casino? People that are bad gamblers with access to capital paying somebody else to find an edge or just be better at setting sports odds and or gambling, to generate an outsized return.
IvoryTowerResident | 8 hours ago
i just described reality lol.
puffdragon | 5 hours ago
It's not a zero sum game
Valuesauce | 7 hours ago
Well 20% of the country is statistically the bottom 20% of our intelligence so this checks out to me perfectly. I’d be concerned if it was higher but this number seems par for the course for the mentally challenged among us.
Wigglebot23 | 6 hours ago
How does such a tautology prove anything about this?
RashmaDu | 7 hours ago
This is just blatantly false and idiotic. We have extremely good evidence that there are an enormous amount of really smart people who don't get to live up their potential due to their socioeconomic circumstances. And it's really fucking obvious that this is idiotic: a lot of smart people are born into poverty, a lot of stupid people are born into wealth; there are immense barriers to overcoming that
Jesus, do you not think for more than a quarter second before forming such strong opinions?
too_oh_ate | 5 hours ago
The bottom 20%, regardless of how relatively smart they are, are still the dumbest 20%, regardless of how poor or wealthy they are, which you bizarrely added as a factor here, in addition to weird "potential" due to socioeconomic factors. Really weird.
Sounds like you may be one of the 20% throwing away money.
slow-mickey-dolenz | 5 hours ago
The irony of you lecturing someone on simple statistics is hilarious. Found a bottom 20%er.
Bmartin_ | 7 hours ago
Rich and poor people sports bet. What’s the problem?
as1126 | 7 hours ago
My son often says I have life changing money on this game or this player, only to show me later that it was like $8 or less and he does it only to keep his interest going in the event. I think I’ve used him to bet for me twice in my life. I also don’t like casinos. Boys and girls, save your money, it’s not investing.
OldPostageScale | 4 hours ago
I kinda wish that betting platforms were stated owned so that this could serve as a sort of “idiot tax” and the money could be funneled back to the government, hopefully for more productive spending. I know Florida uses lottery proceeds to fund a scholarship for students who do well enough on the SAT.
AngryRepublican | 3 hours ago
Remember that if you regularly beat the spread, your account WILL be throttled by these sites. They will cap your bets at $5 so at best you can only wring them for chump change.
If you think you are a good gambler, and the sports betting app has not capped your bets, then you are not a good gambler.
pperiesandsolos | an hour ago
Gambling and prediction markets should face the same advertising regulations as cigarettes.
And prediction markets should clearly be regulated the same as gambling. Just because people set the odds in a prediction market, doesn’t make it any different than gambling.
I know kalshi has these examples where an ice cream shop hedges their potential lost sales due to weather by betting that it will be cloudy/rainy (or whatever) but it’s still just gambling.
I know I sound like a boomer, but I hate how rampant gambling ads are right now. I think it’s very bad for society.
TaxLawKingGA | 4 hours ago
The fact that people believe this is more of an indictment of the stock market than online betting.
Fact is, for most Americans, stock investing is a casino, and seems to be a rigged game just like casinos.
Turbulent_Beat_2992 | 6 hours ago
Its the same as trading, obviously returns are different but so is the audiance. If you put a broker or trader in front of kalshi or polymarket, and give them the data and analytical tools for it they'll be profitable. The issue is people betting on sports go by gut not trends, have no financial discipline, and almost never straight bet. I run an invesment company and we've moved heavily into prediction markets so we cant be limited. I bet if you put these same people who bet just to bet infront of the market or any brokerage platform theyd still lose it all. Its not about the market its about whos behind the position.
iAwesome3 | 5 hours ago
This is simply not true because companies like DraftKings will limit your bets if you win too much. The higher your betting limit, the more likely you are to be a loser. Something like 90% of people who bet on sports are losers. Yeah, you can use data analytics to win money, but it's not worth your time or effort if you can only bet $2 to make $5.80.
Turbulent_Beat_2992 | 5 hours ago
We use markets like Kalshi and Polymarket so we arent limited. We also work with clients who are putting thousands of dollars into each position so i get what you mean when you say its not worth it at that point. I agree that if you dont have money to put into those markets like that you shouldnt. Same with trading no one should start with such a little amount, but if you have money to invest it is an incredibly easy market to break through
iAwesome3 | 4 hours ago
I think you're misunderstanding my point. Sports betting apps will ban or limit wagers placed by consistent winners, who they call "advantaged players" but will increase wager limits of consistent losers. It's a model nicknamed "ban or bankrupt", which basically means you only let losers play to ensure the house always wins.
Excerpt from a CBS article:
>When Massachusetts launched sports gambling in 2023, Mike Manning signed up with every sports gambling app available. Manning — a full-time professional bettor, or what they call a "sharp" bettor — doesn't bet on intuition. He uses a mathematical approach with analytical models.
>Manning says he was winning on nearly every app. Then, one by one, the platforms began limiting his bets. On DraftKings, he said he was limited to $25 per bet. On BetMGM, he started betting $1,000-$5,000 per game, but soon, he said, he was only able to bet $5.
>Limiting caught the attention of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission in 2024. The regulator required gambling companies to answer questions and provide data on how they limit their bettors. After an investigation last year, the Commission found a trend: Winning gamblers have their betting limit decreased while gamblers who lose have their limit increased.
>"It's that whole 'ban or bankrupt' model," said Gadoon Kyrollos, a professional sports bettor whose bets are often limited.
>...
>Matthew Litt, a New Jersey attorney who works on gambling cases, says the practice is legal as long as gambling companies are not discriminating against customers based on protected characteristics such as race or religion.
>Massachusetts became the first state to require gambling companies to notify gamblers who had been limited and to stipulate why they were being limited. FanDuel wrote to Manning that he was restricted because of "an assessment of your overall wagering patterns and their impact on our long-term risk position…"
>DraftKings told Manning it took action "for internal risk management purposes."
Source:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/online-betting-apps-losers-perks-limiting-winners/
Turbulent_Beat_2992 | 4 hours ago
I'm not sure what this has to do with being profitable or viewing it as an invesment. How casinos run their business isnt my business. If you dont want to be limited for being consistent then use a peer to peer market like novig or others