Could be in any context. I do it a little on UFC fights but that’s a relatively low amount and I can afford I to lose any time I do. It seems like it’s becoming a really wide spread problem though, at least in the US. At the same time I don’t see why it should be illegal. Granted I also don’t think any drug should be illegal.

  • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    Unless I’ve got some insider information on specific athletes or I’ve done enough statistical analysis to gain a statistical analysis to gain an advantage over the house, I don’t see myself getting positive expected value.

    Also, it is in the interest of sports books for a rumor like that to propagate.

    • thebestaquaman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      it is in the interest of sports books for a rumor like that to propagate.

      Oh, definitely. I’m not sure about this at all, please don’t take it as fact.

      I completely agree with you. My point is just that with sports betting the playing field is actually fair, in the sense that anything can happen and that the bookies and the betters are considering the odds based on the same publicly available information. That differs significantly from games where the house is mathematically guaranteed to win in the long term, while the gamblers are guaranteed to lose.

      • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Except that the payout for those bets are generally done so that the house takes a cut of the overall action. The vig is baked into the payout for sport outcomes; betting on all the outcomes equally isn’t going to probabilistically give you the payout equal to what you’d buy in.

        • thebestaquaman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          betting on all the outcomes equally isn’t going to probabilistically give you the payout equal to what you’d buy in.

          Exactly. That’s why I’m differentiating between games of skill (i.e. sports) and purely statistical “casino games”. It’s possible to beat the house in sports betting, but only if you are genuinely better than the house at considering the odds. Of course, the house will always try to set the odds in their own favour, but it’s impossible for them to know the exact odds. Thus, a well informed player can, in principle, identify the games where the house has under-valued an outcome and exploit those.

          This basically boils down to the fact that in a casino game, the probability of every possible outcome is known exactly, so the house can trivially set a payout that benefits them. In sports, it’s impossible to know the exact probability of a given outcome, so the house can make mistakes.