The legalization of sports betting just makes it possible to catch people who are doing this.

We'll see more cases, but I don't think that necessarily means it's happening more, rather that the infrastructure exists to regulate and monitor sports betting in a way that brings this activity to light.

I believe that DraftKings and the like require users to enable location access on their phone. Bet that these guys were making bets from campus and maybe even athletics facilities. Pretty sure that's how at least one of the NFL suspensions was flagged.

The legalization of sports betting just makes it possible to catch people who are doing this.

We'll see more cases, but I don't think that necessarily means it's happening more, rather that the infrastructure exists to regulate and monitor sports betting in a way that brings this activity to light.

A somewhat related tangent: I remember in the early 1970s when the Ohio constitutional amendment was on the ballot to allow for the creation of the Ohio Lottery, there were those who said it would only shift illegal betting to legal betting (which seemed like a good idea to me), but others warned that it would increase the number of people betting (which seemed like a bad idea to me). I could not decide which was more likely, so I left that line on the ballot blank. Knowing what I know today, I would have voted against it. What I didn't comprehend at the time was that the state lottery would run all kinds of deceptive ads encouraging folks to bet. The number of people gambling today in Ohio is astronomically higher than before the lottery was created, and many of those who do so are those who can least afford it. As someone once put it, the lottery is a tax on ignorance. [/QUOTE]Yes, I think the lottery preys on those who can least afford it and I agree that, for the most part, it can be called a tax on ignorance. To a slightly lesser extent so can sports betting. Unlike the lottery there actually is some skill involved but almost nobody has the skill to beat the house. This is actually almost more of a trap for the ignorant than the lottery because the most ignorant people are often the most prone to actually believing that the one to beat the house is going to be them without much justification of that belief. And why I say "for the most part" is there are some that are not ignorant and choose to play anyway with the understanding that they are nearly certain to lose money over time. When I go to the movies I expect to lose money. I make that decision purely for entertainment. It is possible to gamble solely for the sake of entertainment, know that you are going to lose money, budget for and be able to afford that loss, and not get addicted. But it often doesn't work like that in the end.

But I think you are also mostly harming yourself and the argument doesn't come down to just is it harmful. Even in the case where something is harmful to others and not just to yourself we also have to consider personal freedom. I mean I think that is is wrong to not call your mother but I don't think that means you should be legally required to do so. If it is only harmful to yourself then I think that it has to be very destructive before we would start limiting your ability to make your own decisions. Yes, I understand that also doesn't mean the government has to promote poor decision making themselves and that this poor decision affects your family and to a smaller extent others.

[QUOTE=Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame]
But generally, we agree about the lottery. At least in some states it funds education.

If you are a kicker and you take the under that almost feels like betting against your team. He was 0-1 on Field Goals and 1-1 on XP. The FG he missed was 48 yards and would have sent it into OT.

I got it wrong in my earlier post. ISU won that game 10-7. The O/U on this game was 39 so it was really never in doubt but who know what happens if there are a bunch of overtimes. 39 is really low but I don't think anywhere near as low as it would have been if played a few weeks later and Vegas had a better indication of just how abnormal these two teams were. I'm pretty sure it would have easily set the record or the lowest O/U in college history and would have been in the twenties.

Betting is so common with some of these kids today that you'd hope that this wasn't an amount any more than his other bets and he just did it hardly thinking about it and maybe it didn't even cross his mind while on the field. Still, no matter what this sort of thing just can't be allowed. I've heard people wonder how committing a felony is often a lesser suspension than betting. But a crime is against society and society will punish you far more than the game will. Betting is a crime against the game and it can destroy the game.

EDIT: I was wrong once again. The game in question is the 2021 game in which he did not play.

"The affidavit alleges Dekkers was under 21, the legal betting age in Iowa, when most of the bets were placed but that he disguised his identity with the help of his parents, Scott and Jami Dekkers."

This part....is just sad.

Who needed a fake ID in Athens? We just walked right into the bars as freshmen (1979). I had the same pleasant experience at the State Liquor Store.