171–180 of 311 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
First rule of statistics: don’t compare percentages unless they have the same denominator.
I didn't do that, did I ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm surprised that people seem to just now realize that sports betting is a bad idea. As you said, the worst aspect is the large amount of marketing and advertising these platforms receive; I wouldn't care if they weren't pushed so heavily.
Gambling is the only way for some of us to make Sportsball interesting, and attempt to fit in with the absurdist normie culture in which we live. Realistically, there's nothing particularly interesting about the Dallas Frackers versus the Washington Rentseekers. But if you have money on the outcome, watching a game (with a sufficient supply of alcohol) is actually bearable. Edit: I'm explaining a real, actual reason…
The fact that ESPN itself has a sports betting app tells you all you need to know about the perversion of sports now that gambling is blessed by the government. I think I can live with the legalization of sports betting if there are strong restrictions against marketing and advertising. If you want to ruin your life that's your decision, and you can always just take the same amount of money and bet it on the stock ma…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
First rule of statistics: don’t compare percentages unless they have the same denominator.
I didn't do that, did I ?
You can start speculating on the relationship between age and hair status because they're both based on the same population: the inhabitants. Older people are more likely to be bald is a fair hypothesis.
But if you start trying to make guesses about how many bald men are in the building, you have a problem, because you're making a common bad assumption that all bald people are male, but also now you're comparing a stat about the whole population to one about 48% of the population, which you don't do.
When you're doing scientific experiments and you want to know these things, you set up the cohorts ahead of time to test your hypotheses. For instance a test group that's 100% men or 100% women. Or only people with blue eyes. That way any two correlations you're looking at are based on the exact same number of samples.
And in this case as someone else already explained, the % is relative to total bankruptcies not the entire population, and the other is about the entire population.
The fact that ESPN itself has a sports betting app tells you all you need to know about the perversion of sports now that gambling is blessed by the government. I think I can live with the legalization of sports betting if there are strong restrictions against marketing and advertising. If you want to ruin your life that's your decision, and you can always just take the same amount of money and bet it on the stock ma…
It has a terrible potential to corrupt sport. When you can bet a lot of money on how long a college players plays, or how many points they get in a particular game, what's to stop them from having a relative make a bet and they just fake a cramp? The stock market is heavily regulated. I don't think you should ban sports betting, because like many vices it's easier to control if it is legal. According to Nate Silver,…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It has a terrible potential to corrupt sport. When you can bet a lot of money on how long a college players plays, or how many points they get in a particular game, what's to stop them from having a relative make a bet and they just fake a cramp? Or get assaulted or murdered, internet death pool style? All kinds of really fucked up incentives are created by these legalized betting apps.
I wonder how many people out there would take an assault charge to win a bet. Since there’s a market you could even get investors. Get $10million together, bet it with high odds, take 25% cut, spend 10 years in jail, live out the rest of your life in comfort. Is any of that illegal besides the assault itself?
I'm sure an actual attorney could come up with even more reasons this is illegal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Bookmakers can always lay the odds so that there’s equal money on each side No they can't. Large ones can, but the small ones sometimes cannot because they have to match the large ones but in a smaller pool. If everyone knows which team is going to win, diehard fans of the losing team will still bet on their team - large players capture that in their odds and break even. Small players don't have the same mix of cus…
Forgive me… This is not an area. I have much knowledge of… … But I thought even a small sports book could balance things properly by setting an appropriate pointspread? my parent has described a risk for the sports book that seems too assume the simple picking of winners and losers and not a pointspread?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Yet, somehow, the NCAA (which is wage theft on a truly industrial scale) is morally okay. It's weird. Outside of top men's basketball and football programs, there is no real wage theft occurring. These minor sports are avocations for student athletes, and not businesses for the universities.
Outside of the places where money is being made, money is not being made. Edit: but even when money is being made, the athletes don't get it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Outside of the places where money is being made, money is not being made. Edit: but even when money is being made, the athletes don't get it.
No, but many of them are getting a free or discounted education. Is that not something of value?
Student-athletes in the serious football and basketball programs spend a lot of their time at practice. During the season, travel to away games eats up much of their free time. They're "encouraged" to take only easy courses. There are reports of grading corruption so their GPA is high enough to remain eligible to play.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>If the players aren't employed by their teams, provided with healthcare and pensions and all the rest, then it absolutely is. Why? They are being paid, fed, housed, and educated in exchange for playing sports at nearly the highest level. Where is the injustice? They live lives of opulence and leisure that kings of previous ages could not even dream of.
They aren't being educated. Outside of Stamford and the Ivies, I'd wager that most players, especially in football, are taking easy classes (and in some cases having tests taken for them) and even then, things are quite easy for them. They aren't taking physics, economics, etc.. that actually prepare students for the real world. There's not enough time for that. I saw it for myself at a big D1 football program. You t…