[HN Gopher] Online sports betting: As you do well, they cut you off
___________________________________________________________________
Online sports betting: As you do well, they cut you off
Author : PaulHoule
Score : 87 points
Date : 2025-06-06 20:21 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (doc.searls.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (doc.searls.com)
| arrosenberg wrote:
| If a casino or sportsbook allow unlimited losers, they shouldn't
| be able to cut off winners. Conversely, if they cut off winners,
| they should be required to reimburse loses above a statutory
| limit.
|
| In a healthy economy "Tails I win, heads you lose" businesses
| should not be allowed to succeed.
| rightbyte wrote:
| Ye well there is room for improvements.
|
| I have done sports betting like three times, when I realized
| the odds were bonkers, and retrieving the money after winning
| was an extreme hazzle that took weeks with photocopies of
| passports and gas bills and what not. Paying the bets took a
| minute.
|
| I mean, online betting is a shady business. Physical casinos at
| least have some sort of brick wall to bang your head against.
| dist-epoch wrote:
| > retrieving the money after winning was an extreme hazzle
| that took weeks
|
| that has nothing to do with sports betting. it's the same
| with trading stocks/forex/..., it's KYC/AML
| paxys wrote:
| Yup I have used these apps, and it takes 10 seconds to
| deposit and withdraw money. They have every incentive to
| make it as seamless as possible, otherwise they aren't
| going to get repeat customers.
| PaulHoule wrote:
| Was watching the Kentucky Derby at a party, thought it might
| be a hoot to bet the favorite to show [1] on my phone but I
| didn't quite do it. I would have won but it could have been a
| hassle to get paid.
|
| [1] A heuristic to minimize your losses, because favorites
| are underbet, if you have minimal information
| david422 wrote:
| I don't disagree - but also realize that the other option is
| not to play.
| mlinhares wrote:
| That doesn't work for vices in general, there has to be an
| externally imposed limit.
| gaze wrote:
| This is such an old moral argument. Do you think society
| should protect people from the nearly unlimited downside
| inherent to having bugs in human behavior exploited or do you
| think that doing this is wrong and that it's in fact immoral
| to stop people from being punished by their own bad
| decisions, because that's what they deserve.
| personjerry wrote:
| To play devil's advocate, why do you get to decide what's a
| "bug in human behavior"? If they're happy about it... ?
| aquariusDue wrote:
| Is water addicting? /s
|
| We can endlessly debate morality, ethics and all that
| regarding lots of things, but in my humble opinion
| gambling could be reduced to:
|
| "Would people still engage in those games of chance if
| there was no monetary aspect to it?"
|
| And then how many of those people who would still engage
| with them are "notorious" gamblers on whom those games
| had a clear negative impact (in most people's eyes).
| Teever wrote:
| This sounds like a productive path to take the
| conversation but it isn't.
|
| Let's demonstrate that by just jumping to the end of this
| reasoning -- severely mentally retarded adults -- can
| they consent to sex? Why or why not?
| singleshot_ wrote:
| I think society should protect me (degree in mathematics,
| non-gambler) from harm caused by betting companies in the
| form of increased bankruptcy filings for problem gamblers.
|
| I think it's immoral to allow their bad decisions to raise
| costs for those of us who do not care who wins the Big
| Game.
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| If someone goes into it eyes wide open, sure let them hand
| over the paycheck meant to buy new clothes for their kids.
| (Or not?)
|
| When, as has been pointed out in this thread, people are
| instead being deceived and told the playing field is level,
| yeah, no we should not allow that.
| 1970-01-01 wrote:
| We're just doing it wrong with all-cash betting. We need to
| change the game to include goods. Don't like your shirt? Go bet
| it at the casino. If you lose, the casino takes it and goes to
| sell it at auction. If you win, you get some cash to go buy and
| own a new shirt.
| parpfish wrote:
| If you bet your shirt, you should only be allowed to win
| other shirts. Or maybe a matching pair of pants.
| SketchySeaBeast wrote:
| I feel like you've just invented extremely unwieldy chips.
| jplrssn wrote:
| Insurance companies are supposed to operate in this way, but
| some are happy to take your money as long as they believe they
| can profit and only start enforcing policy violations etc once
| you've become a net liability.
| skippyboxedhero wrote:
| That isn't what is happening.
|
| Earlier this year, sportsbooks lost a lot due to punter-
| friendly outcomes (a series of favourites winning), and they
| didn't cut people off. Doing this is extremely bad for business
| because: people won't come back, and you aren't giving
| customers the opportunity to lose that money back to you.
|
| So what you are seeing when people are limited is not this but
| arbing line moves between bookmakers, people bearding for
| someone else, etc.
|
| One of the articles mentions stuff relating to player behaviour
| - for example, if you bet on Australian Rules Football, you bet
| every game for multiple weeks then it doesn't matter if you win
| or lose, there is going to be a limit - there is a grey area,
| but the majority of people being limited don't fall into this
| category. They are just people doing stupid stuff (I have done
| this, I used to arb line moves 20 years ago in the UK, I have
| been banned everywhere, it is stupid and I should have been
| banned).
| sharkweek wrote:
| It has taken over the lexicon of most major sports to the point I
| can barely stand watching most of them now...
|
| NFL broadcasts lean so heavily into betting odds, parlays, prop
| bets, everything... it's so obnoxious hearing about X player
| hitting the over, only to go to a commercial offering some free
| money if you place a certain sized bet.
|
| I really hope (but am not holding my breath given how much money
| is involved at this point) they ban sports betting advertising in
| the future.
| gffrd wrote:
| I'll go further: I hope they ban sports betting altogether.
|
| It was a mistake, and we should accept that.
| lenerdenator wrote:
| You can't ever truly ban it; there's always a guy who's
| willing to operate a racket. The question is, can you reduce
| the harms?
|
| We went wayyyyy too permissive with sports betting by
| allowing it online. It should be something that you can do at
| a casino, but on your phone, at home, alone? That's just
| begging for serious harm to the addicted.
| triceratops wrote:
| They were talking about banning gambling advertisements,
| not gambling itself. Banning gambling is a terrible idea.
| parpfish wrote:
| It feels like gambling talk has largely replaced fantasy team
| talk on most broadcasts, and I wonder what role fantasy sports*
| played in all of this.
|
| Did fantasy sports have a causal role as a gateway that slowly
| normalized gambling, or were they just reflecting that there
| has always been a latent thirst for gambling and fantasy sports
| were the only socially acceptable way to scratch that itch?
|
| * not talking about "daily fantasy" stuff which was just
| blatant gambling pretending to be fantasy sports to exploit a
| loophole
| bartread wrote:
| I would guess this is not true for betting exchanges where
| backers and layers are directly connected to eachother and the
| exchange takes a small cut of every transaction regardless of
| which side wins or loses. I wouldn't have thought it would matter
| to them if you were a consistent winner because your repeat
| business helps to provide liquidity to the exchange.
| dist-epoch wrote:
| This might come as a surprise to you, but the more volume you
| trade, the higher commission you pay (in percentage terms) on
| sports betting exchanges.
|
| BetFair calls it the Expert Fee :))
|
| If you make more than $100k profit, you pay 40% extra Expert
| Tax on it :)
|
| https://support.betfair.com/app/answers/detail/expert-fee-fa...
| tough wrote:
| lol how is that legal
| joezydeco wrote:
| I thought the same thing, and that's typically how pari-mutuel
| betting works (horsetracks, Jai-Alai, etc).
|
| But if some whale comes in and wants to drop a large bet, I
| suppose the house doesn't want to sit around and wait for the
| same amount of action on the other side before they take the
| bet or the game starts. And now they're exposed if the whale
| wins.
| skippyboxedhero wrote:
| This is how Asian books work, they move prices early, and make
| it back on volume (this is not a wholly geographical
| designation, Pinnacle Sports is also an Asian book but operates
| in the Caribbean...iirc).
|
| The problem in the US is that it is a highly competitive market
| so you have to acquire your customer base every weekend, and
| these customers don't actually care so much about prices. So
| having weaker prices is a more effective way to deliver the
| product. In addition, US gamblers like parlays, parlays are
| more profitable, have lower volume per bet, and (so far) the
| economics of the Asian book don't work for this market (i.e.
| get syndicates to bet your lines early).
| blinded wrote:
| Hard agree. Would never work for a gambling or gambling adjacent
| company.
| parpfish wrote:
| Too many people are willing to do sketchy stuff if you can
| frame it as solving fun math/ML problems, and I have to admit
| that a sports gambling company would have a lot of fun data to
| play with.
|
| But too often the ability to turn everything into a math
| problem lets you easily abstract away the reality of what
| you're doing
| jeffbee wrote:
| But would you invest in one? The VC firm for which this orange
| site is the public mouthpiece has backed lots of them.
| jaoane wrote:
| I remember seeing here posted years ago an article written by
| someone who worked at a casino as a croupier or something
| similar, talking about how you will lose your money there no
| matter what... Anybody knows what I'm talking about? I tried
| looking for it and I came back empty-handed.
| elpocko wrote:
| Isn't this common knowledge? The statistical odds are always in
| favor of the casino, otherwise there would be no casinos. You
| can only win short-term, if you're lucky; long-term, the bank
| always wins.
| hshdhdhj4444 wrote:
| In a physical betting space, usually located in casinos, I can
| also get free drinks. There's also other stuff to do and it
| requires actual physical effort to be there and bet all the time.
|
| Online sports betting is a mug's game.
|
| I made a few hundred dollars and have quit for a couple of years
| now once I learnt that they can kick you out for doing too well.
| chasing wrote:
| I mean, no shit? Casinos aren't in it for fair play and
| sportsmanship.
| pastor_williams wrote:
| Another good article about sports betting: "The Online Sports
| Gambling Experiment Has Failed"
| https://thezvi.substack.com/p/the-online-sports-gambling-exp...
| ChrisArchitect wrote:
| Some related discussions here:
|
| _The Online Sports Gambling Experiment Has Failed_
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42110194
|
| _Legalizing Sports Gambling Was a Mistake_
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41659458
|
| _Should Sports Betting Be Banned?_
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41665630
| dismalaf wrote:
| This is why I never gambled against the house...
|
| If you play poker against other players, the house will never cut
| you off (they take their rake and are happy). And as long as you
| give some action and are social, the whales keep playing you too
| (they're rich enough).
| Apreche wrote:
| ~~online sports~~ betting is for losers
| paxys wrote:
| Over the last few years watching sports (in the USA at least) has
| been unbearable. Every other ad is for gambling apps.
| Broadcasters show live betting odds on TV alongside the game.
| Announcers and analysts are constantly talking about their
| favorite parlays. All athletes have endorsement deals with
| bookmakers and encourage young fans to participate. Sports
| leagues themselves have close partnerships with the largest
| gambling companies.
|
| And who ensures everything is happening above board and there is
| no fixing? Don't worry, self regulation works.
| zem wrote:
| the fact that having your game constantly interrupted by ads
| didn't in and of itself make watching sports unbearable just
| shows how bad the downward pressure on what is considered
| acceptable is. gambling ads will probably become the new normal
| in a couple of years.
| skippyboxedhero wrote:
| There was match fixing in the US before legalization. In fact,
| the US is one of the only places where you have had major
| sports events being fixed due to gambling, despite gambling
| being legal in many other places.
|
| One of the greatest incentives to stop match fixing comes from
| having regulated operators who will report unusual betting
| behaviour. For example, the massive problems with match-fixing
| in low-ranked tennis has been tackled by bookmakers.
|
| There is an issue with advertising but that is unrelated to the
| match-fixing one. The latter is one of the absolute oldest
| lobbying lines the Republicans used when they were getting all
| their money from Adelson (it was accompanied with some mad
| intellectual gymnastics about how sports betting at casinos was
| also magically unaffected by this, same with underage
| gambling).
| anthomtb wrote:
| In the pre-online sports betting days, was there a legal way to
| bet on a game besides going to a casino and visiting the sports
| book? I remember newspapers publishing odds but still have no
| idea how people made wagers (other than physically visiting a
| casino).
| paxys wrote:
| Yup those odds were for entertainment purposes only _wink wink_
| pjc50 wrote:
| UK used to do this via bookmakers, who ran either high street
| shops or at the race being bet on.
|
| Football betting had "the pools", betting by post across a
| number of fixtures. Most famous was run by a retailer.
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Littlewoods
|
| See also https://www.onlinebetting.org.uk/betting-
| guides/football/his...
| lenerdenator wrote:
| There's basically no redeeming value to online gambling.
|
| When gambling was legalized in my area in 1990s it brought at
| least some working-class jobs and tax dollars. Now, those tax
| dollars were funded by people with an addiction, but they at
| least went somewhere local. And you can still go gambling
| occasionally and get a good meal and some drinks and maybe see a
| show. Worst comes to worst, at least in my state, you can sign an
| affidavit banning yourself from the casino floor.
|
| Online gambling is just a Skinner box designed to take money out
| of _severely_ addicted people 's pockets. That's it. You can
| speed run racking up losses because the games are shorter and can
| be done faster. The sites operate out of jurisdictions that have
| loose regulations on the games. For all you know they could be
| making it not only unlikely, _but impossible_ , to win.
|
| Watch a few YouTube docs on a streamer named BossManJack if you
| want to see just how consuming it can get.
| skippyboxedhero wrote:
| There is redeeming value: it is fun and harmless for most of
| the population.
|
| The same people that I have seen rage against other people
| gambling will also argue in favour of legalising drugs which
| are more addictive and can cause psychosis.
|
| In addition, making it illegal does not stop actual addicts
| gambling. You can go offshore and get completely unregulated
| services, that comply with no regulators on harm prevention.
| The US was the largest sports betting market in the world when
| it was illegal in every state bar Nevada.
|
| Also, online providers maintain lists of self-excluded people
| with state regulators (to be clear, the state holds the list,
| people put themselves on the list and are banned everywhere).
| Casinos are significantly less regulated in this area because,
| due to the nature of the product, is not possible to put in
| limitations to the product (for example, reality checks, loss
| limits, giving you access to data on your usage).
|
| All regulated sites have third-party verification of their
| games by specialist testers and state regulators. Every change
| to every line of code that touches a regulated service is
| reported. It is not possible for operators to lose at casino
| games because of the scale, and you think they are willing to
| destroy it all to get your $10 faster?
|
| The issue with online gambling is: some people cannot resist
| telling what other people (usually people poorer than them)
| what to do, and some people have not thought the alternatives
| through.
| epolanski wrote:
| I don't know, I see your point but I personally know few
| people addicted to gambling, the damage they do themselves
| and their families is the worst I've seen of any addiction,
| including drugs.
|
| If a family father gets addicted to some drugs it's bad, but
| somewhat limited in impact, if it comes to gambling, those
| people ruin their families, very quickly.
| skippyboxedhero wrote:
| Most countries in the West have hordes of homeless people
| everywhere...is it the gambling?
|
| Saying a drug addiction has a "somewhat limited" impact is
| delusional. Particularly as addiction is an inherent
| property of taking drugs, that is not the case for
| gambling.
| epolanski wrote:
| Maybe I wasn't clear, and please understand both my
| parents suffered of addictions.
|
| If my father or mother got high or drunk every evening I
| did not. Terrible, pitiful, psychological nightmare,
| sure.
|
| But I was not intoxicated.
|
| On the other hand, I've seen the impacts of ludomania.
| When parents go broke or accumulate unpayable debts
| that's something you cannot recover with rehab and that
| will have insane implications for the whole family for
| decades.
|
| I hope you understand now what I mean.
|
| One of my best friends SO suffers of ludomania, a court
| has ordered his salary to be paid to her, and she gives
| him an 80EURs monthly allowance. They got lucky, another
| family I know got completely ruined in the course of few
| weeks.
|
| By the way, I'm polish/Italian, and we don't have hordes
| of homeless people, I don't think I've ever seen a single
| homeless person in my life in Poland.
| sokoloff wrote:
| > debts that will last generations
|
| That's something that should be banned.
|
| Debts should die as part of settling the decedent's
| estate. (The US got this right, and I thought most of the
| world did as well.)
| skippyboxedhero wrote:
| Okay...but they are still alive? Poland has tens of
| thousands drug and alcohol-induced deaths, you can lose
| your money doing anything: gambling, women, bad business,
| job loss, etc. Many, many more people will have lost all
| their money because of alcohol in Poland than
| gambling...you only care about one of these things. The
| only explanation is that you care about people losing
| money in ways you don't approve of.
| epolanski wrote:
| > The only explanation is that you care about people
| losing money in ways you don't approve of.
|
| I don't see a way for this discussion to find a middle
| ground.
|
| Ludomania is classified as a mental disorder and a very
| real illness.
|
| I've seen it's effects along the effects of other
| addictions and my two cents is that it can be more
| devastating to people surrounding the addict than others.
|
| Misery is misery regardless of the disorder, addiction or
| illness, we don't need to have a competition between it.
|
| But it is very important to underline that gambling is
| not only increasingly legal but increasingly deregulated
| too.
| EnPissant wrote:
| If you knew for a fact that gambling was a significant net
| negative to society (ie, even when you take into account
| illicit gambling etc), would you support its ban?
| skippyboxedhero wrote:
| That is like saying if you knew heroin was good then would
| you support giving it to children?
|
| Asking this question is a sign that you aren't interested
| in the answer.
| sokoloff wrote:
| I believe that alcohol and tobacco are significant net
| negatives to society.
|
| Yet, I do not support a ban on alcohol and I suspect that
| an outright ban on tobacco would be worse than simply
| having high taxes on it.
|
| Sports betting is probably closest to alcohol in this
| regard: lots of people get moderate enjoyment from it from
| time to time and some people have their lives significantly
| harmed or even ended, meaning the overall net is negative,
| even though many people experience a small positive.
|
| I wouldn't ban sports betting for the same reason I
| wouldn't take away your glass of red wine with dinner.
| coolestguy wrote:
| There are a lot of things that are a net negative to
| society but since we're not slaves, we're allowed to do
| things that can be fun but -ev if we choose to
| EnPissant wrote:
| Are you opposed to any or all of the following things?
|
| - Seat belt laws
|
| - Prescription requirements for drugs (whether that be
| Oxytocin or blood pressure medication)
|
| - Building codes
|
| - Minimum wage
| rectang wrote:
| Do you support any regulation of anything, or any laws for
| that matter?
| ryoshoe wrote:
| >Also, online providers maintain lists of self-excluded
| people with state regulators (to be clear, the state holds
| the list, people put themselves on the list and are banned
| everywhere).
|
| There's and ongoing lawsuit alleging sports betting platforms
| sent promotions targeted to users on the exclusion list to
| encourage a relapse in their gambling addiction.
|
| https://www.espn.com/espn/betting/story/_/id/44520842/baltim.
| ..
| gruez wrote:
| >There's and ongoing lawsuit alleging sports betting
| platforms sent promotions targeted to users on the
| exclusion list to encourage a relapse in their gambling
| addiction.
|
| >https://www.espn.com/espn/betting/story/_/id/44520842/balt
| im...
|
| Your linked article doesn't say anything about that claim?
| skippyboxedhero wrote:
| No, that lawsuit doesn't allege that, as the article
| explains. Self-exclusion lists are not maintained by
| gambling companies, so there is no way to market to them
| (and also, the lawsuit is being brought by a city...not an
| authority responsible for regulation). Just generally,
| there is no upside to doing this either. It makes literally
| zero sense if you apply rational thought.
|
| What the lawsuit alleges is that at-risk users with
| promotions. This is undoubtedly true because people who
| have gambling addictions use gambling products and there is
| no way to identify someone with a gambling addiction prior
| to them using the product (contrary to what the article
| says, there is no way for companies to identify these users
| either, there are multiple third-party vendors in the
| industry who claim to have developed ML models to identify
| at-risk behaviour...none of them work).
|
| The lawsuit does not identify whether these users opted-out
| of promotions (every regulated provider has this
| option...if you don't want these promos, just turn them
| off). And does not identify what aspect of existing
| regulation is insufficient (as I just explained, if you are
| a gambling addict, you have the option of being unable to
| open an account at any regulated provider).
|
| In other words, this is the equivalent of Baltimore suing
| Budweiser because alcoholics drink their beer. It
| misunderstands at a very fundamental level how society
| should operate and tells you everything about US society
| where companies are expected to have a social role (and
| btw, what is most odd about this is that MD has a state
| gambling regulator, Baltimore is complaining about things
| that government already has the power to fix...I suspect
| the issue is that this revenue source is not being
| distributed their way, govt officials need to eat too).
| delichon wrote:
| It facilitates the flow of capital from less to more
| intelligent, disciplined and foresighted allocators.
| Der_Einzige wrote:
| My favorite kind of "brainrot" content is "gamer rage" videos
| where you watch people destroy their setups (or attack
| mannequin dummies like Pchooly) after getting wrecked on a
| video game.
|
| BossManJack and his reactions are still worse - because he's
| built a whole twitch/discord empire around it with his
| "juicers". When he was in rehab he'd spend the 1 hr with his
| phone he was allowed per day streaming and losing money online.
| triceratops wrote:
| I remain amazed that we managed to ban tobacco advertising but
| alcohol and gambling, also harmful and addictive vices,
| continue to be advertised.
|
| Both have very little societal value, other than alcohol's
| traditional role as a lubricant of social interaction, and
| there's no reason to actively promote them.
|
| FWIW I love alcohol. I don't gamble because I don't enjoy it,
| but I have nothing against gambling.
| Wobbles42 wrote:
| Tobacco because a trendy social cause. Alcohol did once too
| but that was 100 years ago or so.
| paulbjensen wrote:
| I recently read about a story in my local newspaper (Colchester
| UK) about someone who stole PS13,000 from his girlfriend's phone
| via her banking app so that he could fund his gambling addiction.
| He was found guilty of theft and sent to prison.
|
| I wonder if there is any merit in building an app that helps
| gambling addicts by letting them play the same games that they
| would play on their phones, with a few caveats:
|
| 1 - It's all virtual money, just like a demo account on a stock
| trading service where you can test it out without real money
| being involved. You don't use real money, and the app is free to
| download and play. The goal isn't to make money from the app,
| it's to help treat gambling addiction.
|
| 2 - Where the games would tempt you to place another bet and say
| "better luck next time?" or "so close" and tempt the player to
| make another bet, this game would do something different:
|
| - When a player loses on their go, it would say "if you'd staked
| real money, that would have cost you PS2 etc". - It would also
| remind you of the total balance, and say "if you'd played for
| real, then you would be down PS200 tonight, but because you
| played this game instead, you've saved yourself PS200." - When a
| player wins on their go, it would say "congratulations on
| winning, that was your first win in the previous 6 go's".
|
| The idea is to change the cognitive behaviour of the player so
| that a) they get to play a game that they enjoy playing and find
| addictive to play, but crucially b) they don't lose any money,
| and because they are shown the reality of what gambling is like
| from an accounting perspective, their cognitive association with
| gambling is changed.
|
| It's better to play a fun game for free then to play a game that
| drains you of all your money.
|
| How is that idea. Good, bad?
| pjc50 wrote:
| Such things exist, but for the gambler the crucial thing is the
| possibility of _winning_ real money. Also apps that don 't make
| money don't pay for advertising themselves.
|
| (Compare vs gatcha, which doesn't allow you to cash out.
| Predictably there's also gatcha simulators if you just want to
| roll for things meaninglessly)
| PaulHoule wrote:
| ... when I got a real smartphone I wanted to try _Fate /Grand
| Order_ because I was a fan of the fanart but when I saw the
| summon screen it used the same visual language as slot
| machines and I lost interest.
| sokoloff wrote:
| For a while, advertising for-money online poker was not legal
| in some jurisdictions. So "ParadisePoker.com" (a real money
| site) couldn't advertise.
|
| Free-to-play/play money site paradisepoker.net however
| somehow found the money to advertise extensively. It was a
| real mystery...
| dole wrote:
| Virtual money doesn't mean anything, gamblers will bet the max
| knowing they're not losing anything.
| HK-NC wrote:
| Some people just want to piss their money away. I know people
| that spend hundreds, thousands even on opening magic boxes in
| games which have "rare" items in them, the games dont even have
| a marketplace to make the money back.
| paxys wrote:
| Plenty of such apps exist. In fact before gambling was legal
| _all_ apps had to use fake money. And no one used them. Unless
| you can replicate the rush that comes with winning real cash
| you aren 't really providing an alternative.
| bdangubic wrote:
| they cut me off I sign up my Pops, they cut him off I sign up my
| wife, they cut her off I sign up my Sis... by the time I out of
| family members I'm sipping Pina Coladas in the Carribean :)
| devonsolomon wrote:
| I had deep-access to this industry in a past career - the way
| online sportbooks talk about their customers in private is all
| you need to know to know that this isn't business, it's
| predation.
| Akasazh wrote:
| Care to share stories?
| 1024core wrote:
| One spring I wanted to checkout the parks near Vegas: Valley of
| Fire, Hoover Dam, etc. But I stayed in Vegas because the cheapest
| hotels were there.
|
| Every evening, after a day of hiking, I would walk into a casino,
| sit down at the gambling machine, insert a $20 bill, and hit
| "drink service". A few minutes later a free beer emerged, and I
| promptly hit "cash out", collected my $20 and walked away (after
| a stop at the free popcorn machine too).
|
| I think I may have come away with more than 80% of their
| clientele.
| codr7 wrote:
| After just having tech lead a team for a month at one of the
| bigger providers of online casinos and sports betting; because I
| simply couldn't find anything else at that point in time and I
| had already struggled for quite some time without an income; I
| can only agree with most in this thread.
|
| I wouldn't mind if we made the whole thing illegal, it's like a
| giant leech on society.
|
| And I've never before in my career come across a company so
| stacked with narcissist assholes on the management side.
|
| https://github.com/codr7/yolo
| chistev wrote:
| Is it possible to be a profitable bettor long term? By long term
| I mean thousands of bets?
|
| For example, guy like Picks office on Twitter is profitable, but
| I don't know if that's a large enough sample size.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-06-06 23:01 UTC)