Legalizing Sports Gambling Was a Huge Mistake. “The rise of sports gambling has caused a wave of financial and familial misery, one that falls disproportionately on the most economically precarious households.”
Advertise here with Carbon Ads
This site is made possible by member support. ❤️
Big thanks to Arcustech for hosting the site and offering amazing tech support.
When you buy through links on kottke.org, I may earn an affiliate commission. Thanks for supporting the site!
kottke.org. home of fine hypertext products since 1998.
Discussion 13 comments
Simple math tells us that legalized gambling is a bad idea. We have known for years that a certain percentage (doesn’t matter what) of gamblers will develop an addiction. For the sake of argument, let’s say 3%. If you have 100,000 gamblers, 300 will become addicted. If you have 100 million gamblers, you will have 3 million addicts. I bet (pun intended) that legal gambling has produced at least 3 million addicts.
That should be 3000 not 300. Simple math, indeed.
I was like "Wow, that second commenter was really rude", and then I re-read the names of the commenters. Simple reading comprehension indeed.
In hindsight, this is obvious, but I was one of those people that thought it was dumb that sports betting was illegal. After years of desensitization to it by ESPN in general, and Bill Simmons in particular, I just thought of it as a harmless side event to sports. I never thought it would completely engulf the culture like it is, and I now know several people that are addicted to gambling, including a coworker who got divorced because he spent so much gambling.
The article states the obvious, that we should ban sports betting, but I really don't see that $10B genie is going back in the bottle. For now I'd be ok with Senator Blumenthal's bill that would put limits on advertising and monitoring.
We also could've looked to places like the UK where sports betting's always been legal or at least has been for a long time, and learned some lessons--especially regarding advertising as Sen Blumenthal's bill addresses. It's always been truly bizarre to me how many teams are directly sponsored by betting outfits and so forth. And the social effects should've been obvious.
Kinda the same deal when a lot of states legalized recreational marijuana. AZ and CA are overrun w/ weed billboards.
I am sorry to say that the British tradition of highly-regulated betting fell apart some time ago. We are now overrun with betting sponsorships and the poverty and social harm that comes from addiction to various kinds of instant gambling (spread betting, slot machines, etc). And new billionaires, such as this one, profiting from all that misery.
Seriously, gambling's made watching/listening to sports commentary fully unbearable for me. I don't gamble, and am not have never been tempted to, so all the talk of it is pretty annoying.
I do still watch games themselves, but commentary/analysis is so overrun with gambling and fantasy (2 sides of the same coin unfortunately) talk that I just don't engage it at all. On the plus, never watching sportscenter anymore has probably saved me some time.
I so strongly agree with this!
I think how sports betting has ruined coverage is an example of the broader problem with sports betting. What makes sports great is that they have no real stakes. The idea that allowing sports betting just adds something for a few people who want to participate is the lie that animates the whole enterprise. Instead, allowing sports betting robs everyone of the shared no-stakes allegiances that make sports a constructive social enterprise.
This is on the ballot here in Missouri. I'm voting NO. This stuff preys on people and ruins the enjoyment of the sport.
And the worst part is that it's being sold as a way to fund schools...
Yes, it's sold as a way to fund schools, but the money is always diverted somewhere else--like to build a new stadium. If gambling and lotteries funded schools, they wouldn't need to sell mattresses. (Do schools have mattress sales in other parts of the country? I'm in Maryland. It's creepy.)
I don't understand the appeal of long-odds gambling. I can do a raffle at a fund raiser or a 50/50 at an event but that's about it. State and Regional lottery, casinos, sports betting, etc. none of it appeals to me at all. The odds are so overwhelmingly against you I can't find joy in even trying it.
Sports betting is not the same as long-odds gambling games like the lottery. Of course there are the long shots, but in the case of betting on games there's often a 50% chance of winning. And, you can find opportunities where winning is very likely, so betting $10 only nets $1.
As for the legality of it all, I don't have a strong opinion either way. I know people in my community who's lives were destroyed by gambling debt when it was illegal.
It's like any vice. See also, alcohol or drug use. Legal or illegal there will be problems. I tend to lean towards legality with regulation, transparency, and resources available to folks who want to get better control of these addictive behaviors, rather than criminalizing it all.
Hello! In order to leave a comment, you need to be a current kottke.org member. If you'd like to sign up for a membership to support the site and join the conversation, you can explore your options here.
Existing members can sign in here. If you're a former member, you can renew your membership.
Note: If you are a member and tried to log in, it didn't work, and now you're stuck in a neverending login loop of death, try disabling any ad blockers or extensions that you have installed on your browser...sometimes they can interfere with the Memberful links. Still having trouble? Email me!
In order to leave a comment, you need to be a current kottke.org member. Check out your options for renewal.
This is the name that'll be displayed next to comments you make on kottke.org; your email will not be displayed publicly. I'd encourage you to use your real name (or at least your first name and last initial) but you can also pick something that you go by when you participate in communities online. Choose something durable and reasonably unique (not "Me" or "anon"). Please don't change this often. No impersonation..
Note: I'm letting folks change their display names because the membership service that kottke.org uses collects full names and I thought some people might not want their names displayed publicly here. If it gets abused, I might disable this feature.
If you feel like this comment goes against the grain of the community guidelines or is otherwise inappropriate, please let me know and I will take a look at it.
Hello! In order to leave a comment, you need to be a current kottke.org member. If you'd like to sign up for a membership to support the site and join the conversation, you can explore your options here.
Existing members can sign in here. If you're a former member, you can renew your membership.
Note: If you are a member and tried to log in, it didn't work, and now you're stuck in a neverending login loop of death, try disabling any ad blockers or extensions that you have installed on your browser...sometimes they can interfere with the Memberful links. Still having trouble? Email me!