No, I think it is you who totally missed the point.
The reporter was asking if the fact that fantasy sports are legal makes it crazy that betting on the game isn't legal. You can make your own team of fantasy players and wager on it - but you cant wager on the teams on the field??? That is crazy to most people.
So the law that was passed in 2006 that tried to outlaw sports betting that at the same time allowed fantasy sports betting - is basically the law that 10 years later will allow sports betting to become legal.
And don't give me the BS about fantasy sports being a game of skill. That is laughable. Handicapping a winner is not skill? Please.
I did not say that capping is not a game of skill. Fantasy sports is definitely a game of skill where luck can play a big part. There are guys who are EV + in big money leagues in season long fantasy football that can consistently earn a positive ROI because they have a certain level of skill, preparation and activity.
There are scoring formats in season long where if you finish in the top 2 in total points during the first 12 weeks or so you will earn a positive ROI on the entry fee. Competition is a major part of fantasy sports. If you play in leagues where the managers don't know the sport that well and are not that diligent a highly skilled manager and place in the money probably at a high rate. Same as in competitive leagues.
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:
No, I think it is you who totally missed the point.
The reporter was asking if the fact that fantasy sports are legal makes it crazy that betting on the game isn't legal. You can make your own team of fantasy players and wager on it - but you cant wager on the teams on the field??? That is crazy to most people.
So the law that was passed in 2006 that tried to outlaw sports betting that at the same time allowed fantasy sports betting - is basically the law that 10 years later will allow sports betting to become legal.
And don't give me the BS about fantasy sports being a game of skill. That is laughable. Handicapping a winner is not skill? Please.
I did not say that capping is not a game of skill. Fantasy sports is definitely a game of skill where luck can play a big part. There are guys who are EV + in big money leagues in season long fantasy football that can consistently earn a positive ROI because they have a certain level of skill, preparation and activity.
There are scoring formats in season long where if you finish in the top 2 in total points during the first 12 weeks or so you will earn a positive ROI on the entry fee. Competition is a major part of fantasy sports. If you play in leagues where the managers don't know the sport that well and are not that diligent a highly skilled manager and place in the money probably at a high rate. Same as in competitive leagues.
The real question is how will this effect current gamblers will it make it easier to wager? I doubt it. Will it give us more variety and greater line variety. No Way. Will the result be every gambler goes on a government list and all wagers are taxed and all gamblers get extra focus on possible tax cheating. Absolutely!
Be careful of what you wish for!
If you use marijuana laws as an example Yes it's legal in some states but is it better for users and growers. VERY DEBATABLE ! Cost to consumers is higher, return to growers is lower. Public exposure is unavoidable and users are social outcasts in many circles that previously ignored usage because it was not so public. Schools,clubs,churches,employers all now have easy access to who uses and who doesn't.
Putting things in governments hands does not necessarily make things better and I would argue hardly ever does.
The real question is how will this effect current gamblers will it make it easier to wager? I doubt it. Will it give us more variety and greater line variety. No Way. Will the result be every gambler goes on a government list and all wagers are taxed and all gamblers get extra focus on possible tax cheating. Absolutely!
Be careful of what you wish for!
If you use marijuana laws as an example Yes it's legal in some states but is it better for users and growers. VERY DEBATABLE ! Cost to consumers is higher, return to growers is lower. Public exposure is unavoidable and users are social outcasts in many circles that previously ignored usage because it was not so public. Schools,clubs,churches,employers all now have easy access to who uses and who doesn't.
Putting things in governments hands does not necessarily make things better and I would argue hardly ever does.
i could say weed would be legal in canada in approx 5 years and probably be right. maybe dont worry about gamblind and worry about that 20 trillion in debt thats about to get way worse
i could say weed would be legal in canada in approx 5 years and probably be right. maybe dont worry about gamblind and worry about that 20 trillion in debt thats about to get way worse
I also think we underestimate the power of Nevada Lobbyists.
You are partly correct... but it has nothing to do with Nevada. Lawmakers are often influenced by many powerful people in the area that are currently running the books for the area. Money certainly helps the elected representatives to decide where they stand when they vote NO to legalization of sports gambling.
As for the corporate owned Nevada casinos... they say please just legalize it already!!! Sportsbooks are a break-even at best, and a loss leader to many casinos. They don't want the sports betting world revolving around them (and it has not been that way since the mass use of online books).
Quote Originally Posted by TheGoldenGoose:
I also think we underestimate the power of Nevada Lobbyists.
You are partly correct... but it has nothing to do with Nevada. Lawmakers are often influenced by many powerful people in the area that are currently running the books for the area. Money certainly helps the elected representatives to decide where they stand when they vote NO to legalization of sports gambling.
As for the corporate owned Nevada casinos... they say please just legalize it already!!! Sportsbooks are a break-even at best, and a loss leader to many casinos. They don't want the sports betting world revolving around them (and it has not been that way since the mass use of online books).
The real question is how will this effect current gamblers will it make it easier to wager? I doubt it. Will it give us more variety and greater line variety. No Way. Will the result be every gambler goes on a government list and all wagers are taxed and all gamblers get extra focus on possible tax cheating. Absolutely!
Be careful of what you wish for!
If you use marijuana laws as an example Yes it's legal in some states but is it better for users and growers. VERY DEBATABLE ! Cost to consumers is higher, return to growers is lower. Public exposure is unavoidable and users are social outcasts in many circles that previously ignored usage because it was not so public. Schools,clubs,churches,employers all now have easy access to who uses and who doesn't.
Putting things in governments hands does not necessarily make things better and I would argue hardly ever does.
I hear what you are saying Bluefin, and it is a tough position to debate.
I just think that legalization will make competition, and will eventually lead to better and more widely available lines.
As for pot - I wish I could drive down the street and buy pot in a store. In the same way - finding ways to send and receive money overseas is risky and tiresome - and a lot of times I wish that it would all just be easier and potentially better.
We will see I guess.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
Quote Originally Posted by Bluefin:
The real question is how will this effect current gamblers will it make it easier to wager? I doubt it. Will it give us more variety and greater line variety. No Way. Will the result be every gambler goes on a government list and all wagers are taxed and all gamblers get extra focus on possible tax cheating. Absolutely!
Be careful of what you wish for!
If you use marijuana laws as an example Yes it's legal in some states but is it better for users and growers. VERY DEBATABLE ! Cost to consumers is higher, return to growers is lower. Public exposure is unavoidable and users are social outcasts in many circles that previously ignored usage because it was not so public. Schools,clubs,churches,employers all now have easy access to who uses and who doesn't.
Putting things in governments hands does not necessarily make things better and I would argue hardly ever does.
I hear what you are saying Bluefin, and it is a tough position to debate.
I just think that legalization will make competition, and will eventually lead to better and more widely available lines.
As for pot - I wish I could drive down the street and buy pot in a store. In the same way - finding ways to send and receive money overseas is risky and tiresome - and a lot of times I wish that it would all just be easier and potentially better.
The main thing I think is the ability for pro betters to make a secondary or primary living. If you don't live in Vegas you are limited in how much you can get down.
A pro better now can play full time. I don't know if there would be a strict limit to how much one can get down in the event of legal sports betting. What happens if you are a pro and you are making a lot, would they just shut you down or really limit you so now you can't make much of a living?
I could see a situation where the NBA creates it's own betting product online. If sports betting is legal, could there be large online sports betting books? Would they care if someone is winning a lot online?
The main thing I think is the ability for pro betters to make a secondary or primary living. If you don't live in Vegas you are limited in how much you can get down.
A pro better now can play full time. I don't know if there would be a strict limit to how much one can get down in the event of legal sports betting. What happens if you are a pro and you are making a lot, would they just shut you down or really limit you so now you can't make much of a living?
I could see a situation where the NBA creates it's own betting product online. If sports betting is legal, could there be large online sports betting books? Would they care if someone is winning a lot online?
The main thing I think is the ability for pro betters to make a secondary or primary living. If you don't live in Vegas you are limited in how much you can get down.
A pro better now can play full time. I don't know if there would be a strict limit to how much one can get down in the event of legal sports betting. What happens if you are a pro and you are making a lot, would they just shut you down or really limit you so now you can't make much of a living?
I could see a situation where the NBA creates it's own betting product online. If sports betting is legal, could there be large online sports betting books? Would they care if someone is winning a lot online?
In the United States that is. I have high limits at Pinnacle. As well as better odds than in Vegas.
Quote Originally Posted by Fantasysports1:
The main thing I think is the ability for pro betters to make a secondary or primary living. If you don't live in Vegas you are limited in how much you can get down.
A pro better now can play full time. I don't know if there would be a strict limit to how much one can get down in the event of legal sports betting. What happens if you are a pro and you are making a lot, would they just shut you down or really limit you so now you can't make much of a living?
I could see a situation where the NBA creates it's own betting product online. If sports betting is legal, could there be large online sports betting books? Would they care if someone is winning a lot online?
In the United States that is. I have high limits at Pinnacle. As well as better odds than in Vegas.
U.S Representative Barney Frank ( now retired ) proposed this several years ago. Why ? Does anyone think Representative Frank knew anything about gambling ? Is he the guy who "gets it" about why gambling should be legalized ? Of course not ! What he did understand is what all liberal Democrats understand-------the expansion of the tax base. This is particularly meaningful at a time when recession tax revenues have not kept up with the graft and corruption that prosperous times provided our "public servants". So, for all of you who are just dying to see state sponsored gambling, be careful what you wish for. Check out how much the state takes out of your parimutuel wagering at the racetrack. What kind of vig do you think the state is going to take out of your Steelers wagers ? Me, I'll take the 5% you can get without the government rake. Leave it alone. Please.
Repeat: Be careful what you wish for.
Quote Originally Posted by 1129ken:
It would shock me if this is wrong.
U.S Representative Barney Frank ( now retired ) proposed this several years ago. Why ? Does anyone think Representative Frank knew anything about gambling ? Is he the guy who "gets it" about why gambling should be legalized ? Of course not ! What he did understand is what all liberal Democrats understand-------the expansion of the tax base. This is particularly meaningful at a time when recession tax revenues have not kept up with the graft and corruption that prosperous times provided our "public servants". So, for all of you who are just dying to see state sponsored gambling, be careful what you wish for. Check out how much the state takes out of your parimutuel wagering at the racetrack. What kind of vig do you think the state is going to take out of your Steelers wagers ? Me, I'll take the 5% you can get without the government rake. Leave it alone. Please.
So now what would the win rate need to be on top of the standard 10% vig to breakeven? What would be the point of sports betting if a lot less people are able to be long term winner after government juice?
So now what would the win rate need to be on top of the standard 10% vig to breakeven? What would be the point of sports betting if a lot less people are able to be long term winner after government juice?
So now what would the win rate need to be on top of the standard 10% vig to breakeven? What would be the point of sports betting if a lot less people are able to be long term winner after government juice?
This is the reason no honest gambler even PRETENDS to make money at the track.
Quote Originally Posted by Fantasysports1:
So now what would the win rate need to be on top of the standard 10% vig to breakeven? What would be the point of sports betting if a lot less people are able to be long term winner after government juice?
This is the reason no honest gambler even PRETENDS to make money at the track.
This is the reason no honest gambler even PRETENDS to make money at the track.
Or government can just tax the profits. I don't think it would be wise if the vig is so high where hardly anyone can profit compared to the amount of people that can now.
It is possible the vig could be lowered as sports betting becomes more mainstream and accepted.
There would be any site that could lower the rate and then everyone else would have to or they would not get business.
Quote Originally Posted by 1129ken:
This is the reason no honest gambler even PRETENDS to make money at the track.
Or government can just tax the profits. I don't think it would be wise if the vig is so high where hardly anyone can profit compared to the amount of people that can now.
It is possible the vig could be lowered as sports betting becomes more mainstream and accepted.
There would be any site that could lower the rate and then everyone else would have to or they would not get business.
Or government can just tax the profits. I don't think it would be wise if the vig is so high where hardly anyone can profit compared to the amount of people that can now.
It is possible the vig could be lowered as sports betting becomes more mainstream and accepted.
There would be any site that could lower the rate and then everyone else would have to or they would not get business.
There is no chance the government will structure this in a way anyone will be able to win on a regular basis. None. Look at their GUARANTEED take on any lottery. At any racetrack. When you add another participant to this sports betting equation AND that participant is the government, there will be no chance to win regularly.
Quote Originally Posted by Fantasysports1:
Or government can just tax the profits. I don't think it would be wise if the vig is so high where hardly anyone can profit compared to the amount of people that can now.
It is possible the vig could be lowered as sports betting becomes more mainstream and accepted.
There would be any site that could lower the rate and then everyone else would have to or they would not get business.
There is no chance the government will structure this in a way anyone will be able to win on a regular basis. None. Look at their GUARANTEED take on any lottery. At any racetrack. When you add another participant to this sports betting equation AND that participant is the government, there will be no chance to win regularly.
This is the reason no honest gambler even PRETENDS to make money at the track.
Forget about betting a "static" line. Legalization is about creating a derivatives market on every iteration of sport.
IF sports gambling goes above the board for good, then I have no interest in taking Nebraska -4 @ Miami.........I genuinely do not care...
Do you know why????? Because I have a larger position on Nebraska under 8 wins for the season in the Live futures market, and I may get a great deal on my investment IN THE SECOND QUARTER of the ballgame.
Gentlemen..........it is time to think passed cashing a ticket....it is time to become savvy in the timing department, and understand that speculation, in its nature, is FLUID.
I am baffled by how many guys would lay the Neb -4 pts at kickoff and then stick with it when Miami has a 3 pt lead in the second quarter. WHO CARES????!!!!! You can now get Nebraska -120 on the ML...In my opinion the bet at kickoff is dead. The question becomes, how do I earn NOW??? After 22 mins 30 seconds, the wager on the pregame bet is decided.... stick around and hope if you want, but unless you are playing a "2nd half" squad then go pack sand.....or at least double up at half....but you won't, because it is "what losers do".
The only reason guys bet full games is that they don't want to deal with the swings of the live market.
I say bring it on!!!!!!!!! Lets dance....every dead ball make a market...fluid markets between quarters, and at half.......
And guess what else???? The books will love it..........they will structure in a commission on every bet; just like wallstreet. They will make more money getting you to pull the trigger than they ever did on the old -110.
Just imagine the live markets on the morning of a college football Saturday.....I could make more money before kickoff than I ever could waiting for Oregon St to blow a double digit lead at home.
Lets go!!!!! It is time to evolve.
Never Make A Winner A Loser. Never.
Quote Originally Posted by 1129ken:
This is the reason no honest gambler even PRETENDS to make money at the track.
Forget about betting a "static" line. Legalization is about creating a derivatives market on every iteration of sport.
IF sports gambling goes above the board for good, then I have no interest in taking Nebraska -4 @ Miami.........I genuinely do not care...
Do you know why????? Because I have a larger position on Nebraska under 8 wins for the season in the Live futures market, and I may get a great deal on my investment IN THE SECOND QUARTER of the ballgame.
Gentlemen..........it is time to think passed cashing a ticket....it is time to become savvy in the timing department, and understand that speculation, in its nature, is FLUID.
I am baffled by how many guys would lay the Neb -4 pts at kickoff and then stick with it when Miami has a 3 pt lead in the second quarter. WHO CARES????!!!!! You can now get Nebraska -120 on the ML...In my opinion the bet at kickoff is dead. The question becomes, how do I earn NOW??? After 22 mins 30 seconds, the wager on the pregame bet is decided.... stick around and hope if you want, but unless you are playing a "2nd half" squad then go pack sand.....or at least double up at half....but you won't, because it is "what losers do".
The only reason guys bet full games is that they don't want to deal with the swings of the live market.
I say bring it on!!!!!!!!! Lets dance....every dead ball make a market...fluid markets between quarters, and at half.......
And guess what else???? The books will love it..........they will structure in a commission on every bet; just like wallstreet. They will make more money getting you to pull the trigger than they ever did on the old -110.
Just imagine the live markets on the morning of a college football Saturday.....I could make more money before kickoff than I ever could waiting for Oregon St to blow a double digit lead at home.
I don't think sports betting will be legalized now or anytime soon, pot didn't have to worry about the NFL and the NCAA, both of these are deeply opposed to any form of organized, legalized gambling in any form and they would block betting on their sport(s) to the full extent of any laws available to them.
I don't think sports betting will be legalized now or anytime soon, pot didn't have to worry about the NFL and the NCAA, both of these are deeply opposed to any form of organized, legalized gambling in any form and they would block betting on their sport(s) to the full extent of any laws available to them.
Pot legalization/supply had to compete from what mostly came in from outside the US borders.
The NFL and NCAA would be best served to keep up with whomever finds it's interest best served whether by viewership, ticket sales or any other types of merchandise sale due to a change to the current laws.
All will gladly adapt IMO...Not like they're going to boycott and fold up the tents so to speak.
Pot legalization/supply had to compete from what mostly came in from outside the US borders.
The NFL and NCAA would be best served to keep up with whomever finds it's interest best served whether by viewership, ticket sales or any other types of merchandise sale due to a change to the current laws.
All will gladly adapt IMO...Not like they're going to boycott and fold up the tents so to speak.
If the vig the government takes on sports betting is so high, what would the incentive be for people to bet? If only a small percentage can win at 10% vig and pros cannot win at the supposely higher rate, there would be no reason to bet on sports.
I am pretty sure there will be alternatives whether online or state where the vig will be beatable like it currently is.
If the vig the government takes on sports betting is so high, what would the incentive be for people to bet? If only a small percentage can win at 10% vig and pros cannot win at the supposely higher rate, there would be no reason to bet on sports.
I am pretty sure there will be alternatives whether online or state where the vig will be beatable like it currently is.
I hear what you are saying Bluefin, and it is a tough position to debate.
I just think that legalization will make competition, and will eventually lead to better and more widely available lines.
As for pot - I wish I could drive down the street and buy pot in a store. In the same way - finding ways to send and receive money overseas is risky and tiresome - and a lot of times I wish that it would all just be easier and potentially better.
We will see I guess.
You could always move to Vegas with 30K and get -110 lines from here to Kalamazoo if you'd like.
C-Notes right in your hand!!!
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:
I hear what you are saying Bluefin, and it is a tough position to debate.
I just think that legalization will make competition, and will eventually lead to better and more widely available lines.
As for pot - I wish I could drive down the street and buy pot in a store. In the same way - finding ways to send and receive money overseas is risky and tiresome - and a lot of times I wish that it would all just be easier and potentially better.
We will see I guess.
You could always move to Vegas with 30K and get -110 lines from here to Kalamazoo if you'd like.
it's just wrong.
Hot Forum Topics
