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

261–270 of 337 posts

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#261

Post by akiselev »

jeffreyrogers wrote: post #228
throwawaynay wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

"Always" as in 1972 - after nearly a century of suffering the aftereffects of the opium wars. The Singapore Economic Development board predates the harshest drug laws by a decade and when the law came into effect, Singapore was already well into its economic miracle.

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#262

Post by HWR_14 »

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…

I'm not familiar with libertarians who are uncomfortable with hidden information. In fact, the ones I know would consider requiring casinos to post such information to be government intrusion.

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#263

Post by HWR_14 »

handoflixue wrote: post #251
noxvilleza wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> The maximum win rates part is normally clear by the game (for example, for Roulette or Blackjack you can see odds) That's the AVERAGE win rate. The maximum win rate is "if you make more than $10,000 in profit, we'll throw you out", and I've never heard of that being made explicit. The point is that if you're going to throw out people who win more than a certain amount, you're not actually offering a fair game. Ther…

Casinos are just fine with big payouts. They know if you run a lottery, you're going to write some checks. And besides, winners are great PR.

They are not fine with playing a game that does not advantage them.

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#264

Post by rdw »

User23 wrote: post #216
vgeek wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This type of thing isn't exclusive to sports betting, either. Card counting isn't cheating, but is typically prohibited (when executed successfully) in most casinos due to the edge it gives players (which has been practically eliminated with shift to 7 decks, autoshufflers, etc.). When players figure out other edges, such as imperfections in the playing card printing process that gives them an edge in games like bacc…

Most strip casinos don't care at all about individual counters. They will cool you though if they see you wonging or other evidence of team play. But an individual? They really don't care. I've counted playing two hands and swinging my bets by a factor of 8 at the Bellagio. I might has well have been wearing a hat that said "Make Counting Great Again" I was so obvious. And the pit boss only asked if I'd like somethin…

> Incidentally I didn't really win much

I've heard it said that the casinos encourage bad card counters, because someone who has a "system" that doesn't really work for them is going to lose even _more_ money playing. It's only when you start really winning that they care. The fact that you were obvious about it just made it easier for them to identify you once you won anything significant.

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#265

Post by HWR_14 »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #181
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…

Isn't this how every major betting operation works? I'm not counting lotteries because although you could argue that you are "betting" on some numbers anyone with a 6th grade education that there is no difference in expected outcomes if you choose different numbers. Why would bookmakers ever take bets from someone they don't expect to make money from?

> Why would bookmakers ever take bets from someone they don't expect to make money from?

Well, bookmakers like to minimize their risk. So, suppose Person X is going to bet on team A, but most people have already bet on team B. The bookmaker thinks team A is far more likely to win, but he still takes the bet. Then he goes from being a gambler to having a balanced book and making a known profit regardless of who wins.

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#266

Post by animal_spirits »

mardifoufs wrote: post #188
animal_spirits wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Idk people say its hard to draw the line but it doesn't seem like it would be. Here's the line: no advertising for cigarettes, alcohol, gambling, e-cigs. Why this line? these are pretty obviously unhealthy for people. Why not some other line? Well lets take a poll and see what we are willing to do. And then if people think it is important to ban other types of advertising then that can be a new line drawn later.

E-cigs? If you don't use shady THC oil juice from overseas, there is absolutely no proof that they are more dangerous than, say, smoking weed or even obesity. The lung injury incidents that made the news 2 years ago were due to illegally imported juice that was contaminated with vitamin E IIRC.

Many middle schoolers are becoming addicted to nicotine because they think smoking a juul is "cool" because of the sleek Apple-like advertising they have put out over the past 5 years. That is why I think they should be banned from advertising. It is the exact same thing as what happened with cigarettes in the 60s and 70s.

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#267

Post by missedthecue »

babypuncher wrote: post #79
shipman05 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has been my position for a while on so called "vices". Prohibition is ineffective and often does more harm than good, but allowing companies to advertise these products to young people and those who are susceptible to abuse is a net negative for society. Worst of all are government run lotteries. A state run lottery may be preferable to one run by organized crime, but running millions of dollars worth of ads wit…

State lotteries are a means to shift tax burden from the wealthy to the poor. Every time one is implemented to "support education", it is always followed by a tax break for the upper class, resulting in a net 0 increase in school budgets.

I don't think you can prove that this happens.

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#268

Post by missedthecue »

lupire wrote: post #161
kesselvon wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poor people don't buy lotteries because they're a good investment, they buy them because its fleeting hope that they'll escape their circumstances. Probability is like...a Grade 5-6 concept.

6th grade math ability is above median for adults.

I'm surprised it's that high. I don't think I could do a long division problem using pen and paper if you put it in front of me right now.

Re: The rising human cost of sports betting

#269

Post by rdtwo »

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…

I don’t get it you guys are smart enough to do this but not smart enough to bypass a simple ban? If your system is that good it should be simple to recruit proxy betters in mass to use their accounts to beat the system. Like there are whole discord communities of resellers that do that and sell their tools for really good money
Post reply on HN