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

Pro bettors disguising themselves as gambling addicts

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 311 posts

Re: Pro bettors disguising themselves as gambling addicts

#271

Post by CyberDildonics »

rjbwork wrote: post #253
CyberDildonics wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think that might be a little extreme? Where is a legal betting app allowing people to bet on that?

If you bet a player gets 0 points in a game and then you shoot them in the leg...you've essentially bet on them being shot in the leg!

If you make a bet on a performance and the athlete doesn't show up at all, the bet is voided. Why would you think this is a plausible scenario?

https://helpcentre.sportsbet.com.au/hc/en-us/articles/187169...

https://www.sportsbettingdime.com/guides/how-to/no-contest-b...

Can you show me any time what you're saying has happened?

Re: Pro bettors disguising themselves as gambling addicts

#272

Post by zahlman »

glitcher wrote: post #108
bentt wrote: post #53

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…

Similarly as Lewis Black likes to point out, we're one of only 2 countries that advertises drugs to ourselves.

... What's the other one?

Re: Pro bettors disguising themselves as gambling addicts

#273

Post by zahlman »

computerdork wrote: post #173
highwayman47 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

hmm, what post did you get that impression from?

I've only been here a month and a half but it already seems to me like the appropriate response to any "the majority opinion of HN on [non-technical topic] is [confidently stated speculation]" comment is to flag it.

Re: Pro bettors disguising themselves as gambling addicts

#274

Post by scrivna »

not2b wrote: post #266
Enginerrrd wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd think you'ď be VERY hard pressed to bet $10 million dollars, but I don't know that.

Pretend to be 1,000 people, and each sock puppet bets $10k.

Who’s taking the other side of the bet though? No smart bookie will dig themselves in such a hole, it would obviously be fraud and they’d stop accepting bets

Re: Pro bettors disguising themselves as gambling addicts

#275

Post by datavirtue »

darth_avocado wrote: post #87
ronsor wrote: post #61

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.

This. There’s plenty of things in society that are similarly bad, legal, but have restrictions on how you can sell them. There’s nothing inherently different about sports betting than options trading on a brokerage platform. But only one of them is advertised in every commercial break during a sports event.

Options are genius trading instruments. A sports wager doesn't even deserve a comparison.

Re: Pro bettors disguising themselves as gambling addicts

#276

Post by datavirtue »

caeril wrote: post #167
ronsor wrote: post #61

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…

Pure gold.

Re: Pro bettors disguising themselves as gambling addicts

#277

Post by datavirtue »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #66
HDThoreaun wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most gamblers are casuals. I spend $5-10 a week during football and usually am down like $10 at the end of the year. It provides a lot of entertainment, sucks that some people can’t control themselves but I shouldn’t be punished for that. Agree that heavily regulating and perhaps banning advertising needs to be done.

> Most gamblers are casuals. I spend $5-10 a week during football and usually am down like $10 at the end of the year An annual cap of $500 on bets per social security number seems reasonable. At the very least, 10% of state's median income (a whopping $4,222 nationally [1]). [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA646N

They should be subject to KYC just like banks.

Re: Pro bettors disguising themselves as gambling addicts

#278

Post by achierius »

gcanyon wrote: post #56
hermannj314 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked at a biotechnology company, we had thousands of clients but five of them were 80% of our revenue. In your world, should that business not exist as well? I don't understand the princple that revenue should be uniformly distributed as a condition for existing. How would you enforce this?

I’m not claiming revenue must be even. And I’m assuming that the five customers actually benefitted from your company’s work? If so, then they’re not really comparable to gambling addicts, alcoholics, and gun fanatics, right? We already (poorly) enforce (weak) laws requiring casinos not to prey on addicts. We already (poorly) enforce (weak) laws requiring bars not to over-serve and alcoholics to get treatment sometim…

Kinda weird to shoehorn in the last one, isn't it? People who own four guns aren't ruining their lives any more than someone who owns four laptops is. So long as they're not using them to commit crimes it's basically just a hobby, and the sort of person who needs a shed to store AR-15 accessories is actually going to be significantly less likely to misuse it than someone with only one or two guns.

Re: Pro bettors disguising themselves as gambling addicts

#279

Post by makeitdouble »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #248
makeitdouble wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At some point there is enough money triggered for a specific outcome of the game. If hurting someone credibly increases the odds, it's not if but when will people cross the line.

"Revenue in the Online Gambling market is projected to reach US$97.15bn in 2024" https://www.statista.com/outlook/amo/online-gambling/worldwi... There is already $97 billion USD/year. Where is the evidence for what you're saying?

You're right. As david_shi also points out, there's so many other less bothersome ways it makes little sense to recourse to violence on online bets.

Looking into it, the vast majority of incidents are the player themselves betting against their team or losing on purpose, the same of ways matches have been fixed since the dawn of betting. Paying someone is just so much easier than fighting them.

Re: Pro bettors disguising themselves as gambling addicts

#280

Post by bentt »

bityard wrote: post #204
bentt wrote: post #53

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…

> you can always just take the same amount of money and bet it on the stock market. I can't tell if you are promoting the stock market as a better or worse alternative to gambling? If you meant the latter, you couldn't be further from the truth. The stock market, as a whole, represents the combined productivity of all the publicly traded firms in the country. Day to day, the stock market is unpredictably volatile. Bu…

I meant more like stock picking, day trading, etc. I don't think there are too many gambling addicts that would choose a whole market Vanguard ETF over, say, TSLA. :)
Post reply on HN