How does everyone feel about this.
Will this be good or bad for the sports?
It was a 7-2 vote for the ban to be over ruled
Breaking: The U.S. Supreme Court has struck down a federal anti-sports gambling law, giving states the go-ahead to allow betting on sports. pic.twitter.com/7fWnAX4pbG— SportsCenter (@SportsCenter) May 14, 2018
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
This is awesome. I want a sports book somewhere inside or near the MGM National Harbor, like tomorrow. I would sit in a bar, eat and drink with sports bet sweats all weekend.
Is this an argument for or against it?
It depends on if you ask me or my wife.
Exactly. And we know who is always right.
yes
Will this be good or bad for the sports? - Good. Will lead to a fairly large uptick in sports viewership. And I think at this point we have enough analytical minds watching the games to be able to pick up on anyone trying to influence final scores in regards to spreads. With Vegas getting the NFL and NHL, it was only a matter of time before sports betting became sanctioned nationwide.
I doubt it'll be nationwide, since the matter will be up to each individual state now -- as it should be, along with some other items I won't mention here. I imagine there will be states where sports betting is illegal still and that's fine with me, just as it's fine with me if they permit it.
If anything, I'm happy because this is a win for the Tenth Amendment and states rights.
Now that I think about it, assuming the viewership does go up, all the eyes watching the game should be able to spot out someone or some team influencing the game if that ever happened.
My future:
via GIPHY
I got 3 dollars that Dickinson is going to smoke Salisbury, Who's Down??? (Spread: Salisbury: -5)
I didnt' click the link and I said to myself "who smoke's salisbury streak, is it any good?" I am a dumbass
How bout 30 turkey legs?? 😂
Yeah, what's the exchange rate on turkey legs?
about the same as schrute bucks
So, I'm going to owe money if I cash them in?
if you have enough you can make a pretty penny (literally a penny)
Damnit. I was trying to get away from the whole Ford to PSU thing and you go and post a gif from this episode./s
First instinct: Bad.
Emphasizes the wrong elements of sports, and encourages the dark money side of college sports.
However, the actual result will likely be Federal regulation of sports betting, which would certainly be a good thing.
If the dominoes fall as expected, you will have federal, state, AND local regulation of sports betting. And... all of those guys are going to have their hand in the cookie jar.
I'll probably just stick to my water cooler side action at Leonard Inc.
Will be interesting to see which states allow it, how this impacts places like Vegas who already allowed it, how online gambling places are impacted.
West Virginia will jump on the bandwagon pretty quickly. I like to play poker at the casino outside Charleston from time to time and they've been waiting on this decision for months. I got the impression from the poker room manager that they've had the plans in place for a while now, and were just waiting on the legal issues to get sorted out.
There is no doubt in my mind that they are prepped and ready for it.
States that keep a ban won't have much power to prevent online gambling from another state, so it would be wise for them to ensure they get their taxes, even if the casino/book is another state.
The bigger question, imo, is how Congress and the President react. Iwould guess Congress, if it wants to restrict it, will want to act quickly to get some federal laws and or regulations in place, but the current President is obviously pro gambling as a casino owner . This might create a super interesting issue where a law and or regulation would have a huge impact directly on the president, even more so than the tax law.
Impact to Vegas will be minimal. Only about 10% of the bets made in a casino on the strip happens at the book.
I've seen people saying 20 are in line, but most states are near the end of session or in recess so it could be about a year before some states get it. I believe Virginia's recess starts in June or July
New Jersey is ahead of the game wrt to other states on this. I've seen reports that casinos in Atlantic City should be able to take bets on NBA finals, which start May 31.
Hell fucking yea
Personally, I am excited about this. However, the ethics of whether this is a good thing is an enormous debate with a lot of layers. Making it easier to do something that can be incredibly, incredibly self-destructive is always going to have two sides to the story. I personally enjoy some sports betting and gambling in general, I am also pretty good at controlling myself and knowing when to quit. On the flip side, I also have an uncle that got hundreds of thousands of dollars into debt through sports betting and started embezzling money (he was a CPA) from his company to try and pay it off and completely destroyed his immediate family and his in-laws family (who he was also stealing from) and my grandfather ended up spending a ton of his own money to get him out of serious trouble. So I have seen both sides of the coin, to say the least. My uncle is not a unique example either, gambling addiction is a real thing and because it usually involves large sums of money, it can really, really destroy lots of peoples' lives and cause a wide radius of collateral damage.
I'm sorry to hear about your uncle, and I can relate with relatives who have similar stories but with alcohol. However, I feel like you cannot legislate based on self-control and I am happy to see this become open and hopefully can be regulated appropriately. Also hopefully states use this new income for more greater good than the potential personal destruction for some individuals. But that is always iffy.
We're definitely on the same page and I hate to hear that about your family with alcohol, that's the first thing I think of as a comparison. I think proper regulation will be crucial.
There is a compelling reason to "legislate self control" where an individual's judgment may not be in his own interest. Law related to drugs, alcohol, and gambling come to mind, where even if a person isn't hurting someone else, they may be hurting themselves (and ultimately hurting those around them).
I used to think that everyone should be allowed to do anything they wanted, as long as they didn't hurt someone else, but I now see the value of some of this legislation, as everyone affects everyone else with their actions in a society.
Some rules would be fairly easy to implement, such as capping the frequency, amount, and value of bets I could make at any one sports book in a given time period. Maybe you'd need to place bets and collect winnings in-person rather than doing all of it electronically. There are definitely ways to legislate some inconvenience there to at least make it (nominally) more difficult for someone to ruin themselves.
I'm generally opposed to regulation, but in this instance, I think a very simple solution to helping avoid overwhelming gambling debts is to prohibit betting on credit. No cash, no bet.
I don't think your idea of capping frequency and value of bets would be possible to effectively implement, though. How much is too much depends on too many factors (like income, family, debt, etc.) to legislate. And if you happen to be one of the few who's good enough at this to make a successful living at it, you'd have the problem of the government artificially capping your income potential. I don't see any way that would hold up in court if challenged.
That's also how they do it for the lottery. You have to pay in cash if you want to play
And they just recently expanded to taking debit cards and pre-paid gift cards as well as checks and cash in VA. Not sure about other states.
I think the government wouldn't be deciding "how much is too much", but rather "how much do we want to legally allow". If it's framed like that from the get-go. Maybe have some sort of deal with the casino control commission or something. It should be pretty easy for a state to refuse to pass legislation implementing this without some sort of caps in place, etc.
Having said that, you raise a good point and that probably wouldn't fly in many or most states. Cash-in-hand is a good way to help limit wagers too.
Does this mean we'll be buried in DraftKings and FanDuel commercials again?
I saw on Twitter somewhere that the likeliest outcome of this is that we see gobs of advertisements for betting services during sporting events.
Interestingly, Australia banned that very practice because almost every commercial was for a betting service.
Would not be shocked if that's Step 2 of this whole thing. I mean we already banned ads for smoking.
More than likely, Draftkings and Fanduel are also heading into the sports betting direction.
"Heading"? They straight-up are sports gambling.
Previoulsy they tried (and failed) to convince various court things that it was a game of skill and not of chance. ie, the whole "hey neat you can make money off being good at fantasy football!!" idea rather than "hey look, we're G A M B L I N G"
now there's no need to pretend
So, I wonder if we will see the big sports networks like ESPN, Fox Sports, etc. jump back into partnerships like they did when the whole thing first exploded.
A good site to keep up with Supreme Court decisions is http://www.scotusblog.com/
A direct link to their analysis of the sports gambling decision is here: http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/05/opinion-analysis-justices-strike-down-...
I can guarantee some poor intern at MLB had to listen to several angry fans asking how today's decision affects that mans HOF status
I'm pretty sure that betting on your own team still won't be allowed for coaches and players.