INDUSTRY FORUM

Comments

  • First

    http://www.espn.com/chalk/story/_/id/24425026/gambling-bookmakers-growing-us-legal-betting-market-allowed-ban-bettors

  • tippycat

    Very interesting article, thanks for posting it.

  • First

    No problem

  • tippycat

    “In the rare situation where we do prohibit someone from wagering with us, there are a variety of reasons why. They include the sharing of accounts (usually tied to someone who previously has been banned), betting on behalf of third parties, screen scraping and other efforts to ‘game’ the system, as well as compliance reasons or being offensive to staff and/or other customers.

    -What is ‘screen scraping”?

  • 2Slik

    • Ranked #11

      RG Tiered Ranking

    Good article that is a simple reminder that the grass isn’t always greener on the other side. At the end of the day the house has to make money and we can complain about rake all we want but as DK and FD get into sports betting they will take whatever means to make a steady profit similar to what they have made in DFS. If the system is easy to beat, it won’t be for long. I could see a few game twists on the traditional betting line in our future which users compete with other users and the sites charge a fee on the action so they can let the userbase fully fund the pot and have no risks in managing lines. DK/FD hit me up if you’re interested…

  • sethayates

    @2Slik said...

    Good article that is a simple reminder that the grass isn’t always greener on the other side. At the end of the day the house has to make money and we can complain about rake all we want but as DK and FD get into sports betting they will take whatever means to make a steady profit similar to what they have made in DFS. If the system is easy to beat, it won’t be for long. I could see a few game twists on the traditional betting line in our future which users compete with other users and the sites charge a fee on the action so they can let the userbase fully fund the pot and have no risks in managing lines. DK/FD hit me up if you’re interested…

    You know what easily fixes this problem? Betting exchanges. One person posts their desired line, amount and side. Someone who wants the other side of that action picks it up. The house holds a very small amount for running the exchange. They have no risk (other than fraud/chargebacks) nor do they care which person wins. Pretty simple solution if you ask me and it ultimately means no one ever gets banned.

    EDIT: I didn’t read the second half of your comment. We both said the same thing. Betting exchanges are the future. It is the form of sports gambling that will be able to offer the lowest rake because it won’t involve any risk on the part of the house.

  • Stewburtx8

    • 2012 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    @sethayates said...

    You know what easily fixes this problem? Betting exchanges. One person posts their desired line, amount and side. Someone who wants the other side of that action picks it up. The house holds a very small amount for running the exchange. They have no risk (other than fraud/chargebacks) nor do they care which person wins. Pretty simple solution if you ask me and it ultimately means no one ever gets banned.

    EDIT: I didn’t read the second half of your comment. We both said the same thing. Betting exchanges are the future. It is the form of sports gambling that will be able to offer the lowest rake because it won’t involve any risk on the part of the house.

    While betting exchanges provide less risk to the books, it also limits their upside. Over the years the sportsbooks have been increasingly more willing to take on risk if they feel they are on the right side of the action (against the public). They often now move lines “on air” based on movement at the big offshore books even if they have not taken action on that side or have more action at their specific book on the other side.

  • tippycat

    @2Slik said...

    Good article that is a simple reminder that the grass isn’t always greener on the other side. At the end of the day the house has to make money and we can complain about rake all we want but as DK and FD get into sports betting they will take whatever means to make a steady profit similar to what they have made in DFS. If the system is easy to beat, it won’t be for long. I could see a few game twists on the traditional betting line in our future which users compete with other users and the sites charge a fee on the action so they can let the userbase fully fund the pot and have no risks in managing lines. DK/FD hit me up if you’re interested…

    Since written history humans have loved to gamble. If sport betting is a place everyone wins, which is the mass of poster believe on this board. Then Bookies and Vegas would be have been long vanished. Keep in mind, for someone to win, someone must lose.

  • JTSnow4091

    @Stewburtx8 said...

    While betting exchanges provide less risk to the books, it also limits their upside. Over the years the sportsbooks have been increasingly more willing to take on risk if they feel they are on the right side of the action (against the public). They often now move lines “on air” based on movement at the big offshore books even if they have not taken action on that side or have more action at their specific book on the other side.

    Completely agree. It is well-known that different sportsbooks take different approaches to balancing their action, some are more willing to accept risk than others.

    Mayweather vs. McGregor was a stellar example. The line closed around -300 to -400 for many books IIRC, but you can bet many books were rooting for Mayweather to win given the risk they assumed on him. It paid off.

    That was the lock of the century, not sure if we’ll see anything like that again for a while.

  • tippycat

    @JTSnow4091 said...

    Completely agree. It is well-known that different sportsbooks take different approaches to balancing their action, some are more willing to accept risk than others.

    Mayweather vs. McGregor was a stellar example. The line closed around -300 to -400 for many books IIRC, but you can bet many books were rooting for Mayweather to win given the risk they assumed on him. It paid off.

    That was the lock of the century, not sure if we’ll see anything like that again for a while.

    That was the lock of the Century, as long as the Irish were betting on McGgregor…then one could make money. Balance the money. He had no chance, yet the money came in. Very few ‘locks’ come in. life. Bitcoins and its offspring are not fairing well as was Beanie Babies. Humans want the easy fix. The risk and rewards are out there. Now the Bookmakers don’t want ‘angle players’ taking money from them, yet will take the money from the idiots.

  • X Unread Thread
  • X Thread with New Replies*
  • *Jumps to your first unread reply

Subforum Index

RotoGrinders.com is the home of the daily fantasy sports community. Our content, rankings, member blogs, promotions and forum discussion all cater to the players that like to create a new fantasy team every day of the week.

If you or someone you know has a gambling problem, crisis counseling and referral services can be accessed by calling 1-800-GAMBLER (1-800-426-2537) (IL). Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER (NJ/WV/PA/MI), 1-800-9-WITH-IT (IN), 1-800-522-4700 (CO), 1-800-BETS OFF (IA), 1-888-532-3500 (VA) or call/text TN REDLINE 1-800-889-9789 (TN).