Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The rising human cost of sports betting

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 337 posts

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#221

Post by imrankhan17 »

SilasX wrote: post #184
vgeek wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.theringer.com/2019/6/5/18644504/sports-betting-b... This is a long read, but is really insightful on how the industry really works. If you're a consistently winning bettor, you're going to get blocked pretty quickly when you're betting against the house. Why would a casino want to play a game where they don't have odds in their favor when they can just ban the sharps and feast on the casuals? With parimut…

Why can’t they switch to a user driven system where they don’t place bets at all but just receive bid/asks from users, like the prediction markets do? Then they don’t have to worry about bettors being better predictors than they are and can just take a cut of the flow.

That's exactly what the exchanges are e.g. Betfair. More popular in UK/Europe though.

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#222

Post by thebean11 »

nemo44x wrote: post #211
thebean11 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Thank you for conceding my point against the ridiculous argument that "prohibition is ineffective" It depends what you mean by effective and ineffective. Nuking San Fransisco would prevent tons of drug use, but is not an effective way of solving society's ills. > This only matters in some utilitarian conception where all net suffering or utility or whatever is created equal. Drug laws not only hurt drug users, but…

> I wonder what you think of other countries which have much lower rates of drug abuse yet don't impose punishments as harsh as the US? It’s because their currencies aren’t as powerful. Drugs are a commodity sold in USD like oil. The USA has the easiest access to USD so drugs come here as the product-market fit is optimal for both distributors and users.

Plenty of countries without reserve currencies have similar or higher rates of drug use..

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#223

Post by FanaHOVA »

slap_shot wrote: post #46

I'm pretty Laissez-Faire about things, but a recent interaction with gambling is making me reconsider: My friend got a lot of free credits from the major sports books and wrote some code that he felt could generate a profit. We all threw in a little bit of money and let the program do what it does. Within a month we started doing 1k a day in profit on 3k wagered. Right as we approached 30k in profit, every major book…

Beards/runners have been a thing in sports gambling for like decades. Laying bets is harder than actually picking the sides when you get to the top of the market. You should follow Spanky on Twitter and listen to his podcast.

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#224

Post by noxvilleza »

handoflixue wrote: post #203
Pet_Ant wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>([I] think you should be able to do pretty much whatever the eff you want with your body and money). ... The decision to let the exist is as arbitrary as the decision to allow them to only play when they [win]. How do you square that with giving people autonomy? You can do what you want with your money, but you can't play if you don't feel like you are gonna win... there is an inherent contradiction there.

> How do you square that with giving people autonomy? The Libertarian Free Market answer is that both parties need to be fully informed. Casinos would be required to post maximum win rates and otherwise fully detail their "we throw out anyone that wins" policy up-front, in a clear and easily understood format. If the casino writes a bad, exploitable policy, they go bankrupt being exploited and this encourages future…

The maximum win rates part is normally clear by the game (for example, for Roulette or Blackjack you can see odds) or otherwise regulated by local/government laws (e.g. for games of pure chance like slot machines).

> and otherwise fully detail their "we throw out anyone that wins" policy up-front

They can just ask the gambler to leave the premises - I cannot imagine some 'libertarian free market' solution which would force casinos to allow anyone to enter the premises and gamble (provided it's not clear discrimination). Being able to count cards isn't some sort of protected class, right?

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#225

Post by gnopgnip »

Pet_Ant wrote: post #94
slap_shot wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly my point. I'm not against outlawing casinos (i think you should be able to do pretty much whatever the eff you want with your body and money). BUT if we are going to allow them, should we allow them to only let people play when they lose? The decision to let them exist is as arbitrary as the decision to allow them to only play when they when.

>([I] think you should be able to do pretty much whatever the eff you want with your body and money). ... The decision to let the exist is as arbitrary as the decision to allow them to only play when they [win]. How do you square that with giving people autonomy? You can do what you want with your money, but you can't play if you don't feel like you are gonna win... there is an inherent contradiction there.

If you are a business open to the public, you can't discriminate based on gambling skill the same way you can't discriminate against other types of customers.

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#226

Post by blacksqr »

lnxg33k1 wrote: post #159
babypuncher wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that should be illegal. If we are going to allow casinos to operate at all, then we shouldn't allow them to discriminate against potential customers on the basis that said customers are better at the game. If that means their business model is no longer viable, then that is their problem.

Well, I think I mostly agree with you in theory. But I was just thinking about something else, let's say that algorithms giving secure wins and counting cards at blackjack are allowed, people starts winning and casino start losing, they have loss and let's say that it's not convenient anymore to have a casino, and they go out of business, country loses a revenue stream for taxes, people loses their jobs, and an indus…

Then why not cut out the middleman and just have the poor write checks directly to the rich?

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#227

Post by Jensson »

thebean11 wrote: post #222
nemo44x wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wonder what you think of other countries which have much lower rates of drug abuse yet don't impose punishments as harsh as the US? It’s because their currencies aren’t as powerful. Drugs are a commodity sold in USD like oil. The USA has the easiest access to USD so drugs come here as the product-market fit is optimal for both distributors and users.

Plenty of countries without reserve currencies have similar or higher rates of drug use..

Are you sure? To me it seems like USA has the highest rate of drug abuse and the higher rate of drug deaths and drug abuse disorders in the world. It is possible more people use drugs in other countries, but in that case they use it more responsibly, or their overdose deaths aren't properly registered, either way there is no evidence that other countries have a bigger drug problem than USA.

https://ourworldindata.org/drug-use

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#228

Post by jeffreyrogers »

throwawaynay wrote: post #173
robrenaud wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's unclear that the numbers are in your favor. As far as I can tell, as of 2018, the US had 600 opiate users per 100k, Portugal had 250, and Singapore had 30. https://www.apa.org/monitor/2018/10/portugal-opioid https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/singapore-is-winning...

So Portugal has twice as less addict than the US, even though drug users don't risk anything legally, while in the US using drugs once can mean decades in jail. "Singapore has the world's highest percentage of millionaires, with one out of every six households having at least one million US dollars in disposable wealth." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore Singapore is a 5 million people country. Prohibition isn'…

Singapore wasn't always rich, but it's always had harsh laws with regards to drugs.

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#229

Post by mythrwy »

lapetitejort wrote: post #197
nsxwolf wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people buy lotto tickets so they can spend a few minutes in blissful daydream before they come crashing back down to their financial reality. It's like a very cheap drug. It makes them feel good, so it serves a purpose. Feeling good is good.

Having read horror stories of people winning the lottery, I can't even daydream about being rich. I would much rather be an average wage-earner than have my life be destroyed by money.

Unlike you I'd be willing to take my chances with life destruction in this case.

(mostly because I think it would avoid many of the life destroying parts)

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#230

Post by Spivak »

lapetitejort wrote: post #197
nsxwolf wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people buy lotto tickets so they can spend a few minutes in blissful daydream before they come crashing back down to their financial reality. It's like a very cheap drug. It makes them feel good, so it serves a purpose. Feeling good is good.

Having read horror stories of people winning the lottery, I can't even daydream about being rich. I would much rather be an average wage-earner than have my life be destroyed by money.

Can't you just do literally nothing with the money? I think my "being rich" dream is just having my current life but instead of working living off the interest.
Post reply on HN