Betting Sports Works Great for NFL QB's Model Wife
Tom Brady's wife, supermodel Gisele Bundchen, has reportedly won $1 million in the last three months gambling on soccer matches.
The National Football League may have a policy to oppose all sports gambling, and even online casinos which do not handle sports betting, but one prominent player is richer, due to his wife's wagering on sports. Tom Brady's wife, supermodel Gisele Bundchen, has reportedly won $1 million in the last three months gambling on soccer matches.
The Metropolitan Post says Mrs. Brady is a fan of Italian championship team Internazionale Milano, and has already pocketed $1 million in winnings if Inter continues its winning ways. Gisele apparently has future bets placed on Inter repeating as winners of the Scudetto, the "little shield" that signifies the champion of Serie A, Italy's premier soccer league.
Bundchen, according to the Post, is placing weekly bets on Inter, and will collect if the team wins the Scudetto, a likelihood as it enjoys a comfortable lead.
The NFL contends any gambling at all, let alone sports betting, creates corruption and a loss of integrity for its games. Yet soccer suffers no loss in public confidence or prestige by sports gambling, even though Bundchen has a connection to Inter Milan.
Before marrying Brady, Bundchen dated former Inter player Fancesco Coco. She also professes complete faith in coach Jose Mourinho, another personal acquaintance.
No comment has yet been released from the offices of the NFL about the sports gaming habits of the wife of Brady, one of the best-known players in the league. The New England Patriots quarterback is not alleged to have placed bets of his own.
One wit suggests that the NFL might want to lock up Gisele in the same cell as Janet Jones-Gretzky, also noted for her looks and gambling hobby. "Then," the wag said, "we could experience one of those women-behind-bars movies come to life."
Betting Sports Works Great for NFL QB's Model Wife
Saturday, May 9, 2009
Facts Versus Faith Dominate Online Betting Sports Debate
Facts Versus Faith Dominate Online Betting Sports Debate
By Christopher Nole
General Online Casino News
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition! In this supposedly enlightened age, many US citizens still claim their right to believe articles of faith, even when all scientific investigation and existing facts prove otherwise. The argument over legalized online gambling falls in the center of this phenomenon, as baseless assertions are refuted by scientific study, yet many continue to spread the falsehoods as beliefs beyond impeachment.
"It [Internet gambling] is so seductively habit-forming that individuals can in short order lose their homes and jobs and, indeed, their families and futures. And the effects on individuals rebound into society," says Former US Representative Jim Leach.
But objective scientific study finds otherwise.
“On a theoretical level, online gaming’s increased accessibility should make it more dangerous than traditional gaming. But... it does not seem to be the reality,” says Professor Dan Ross, director of research at the National Responsible Gambling Program in South Africa.
"The very first thing we learned (studying Internet gambling patterns), which we didn't expect, was that the vast majority, the overwhelming majority of gamblers online gamble in a very moderate and mild way," says Dr. Howard Shaffer after conducting a two-year study as director of the Division of Addictions at Harvard Medical School.
NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy said, "However, we can exercise our right to oppose Internet betting on our games. ... Gambling on our games -- online or off line -- threatens the integrity of our games and all the values they represent."
But years of legal Las Vegas sports gambling have not hurt the NFL, and European sports leagues have found cooperation with online casinos essential to prevent corruption and undue influence.
Professor Earl Grinois of the Baptist school Baylor University says social ills of casino gambling do more damage than the revenue produced offsets. Grinois says introducing a casino into a neighborhood causes crime to increase five to eight percent, with the primary jump in violent crime like burglary and murder.
But actual facts show otherwise. Casinos were brought to Bossier City, Louisiana, fifteen years ago. "There were fears, even from all of us, about the crime," Bossier City Police Chief Mike Halphen said. "But, so far, crime (in Bossier City) has actually dropped."
In the meantime, Bossier City has beautified itself, redone infrastructure, funded social aid programs, seen decreased unemployment, and created a trust fund with over $30 million for future civic needs.
In Florida, Hallandale Representative Joe Gibbons testified in front of Grinois that casinos had come to his district two years earlier. `And in those last two years, our crime rate has gone down.''
Grinois responded that crime rates go up starting in the third year.One witness guessed if Gibbons had said four years, Grinois would have said five is the measure.
Michelle Combs of the Christian Coalition lobbies for the UIGEA, saying, "We’re not saying people shouldn’t go to Las Vegas. But when it’s in your home, it’s too easy. It breaks up families.”
Yet every bit of evidence is that this is not so. Dr. Shaffer's and Dr. Ross's research shows play at online gambling sites to be controlled and budgeted by the overwhelming majority of patrons. Religious groups like to relate horrible anecdotal stories of a single incident, disregarding the statistical insignificance of the occurrence. According to statistician Frederick Felson, "Saying Internet gambling caused one horror story and is therefore evil and must be barred is the equivalent of banning cell phones because one person was beaten with a cell phone."
US Representative Spencer Bachus tried to use scientific proof to back up his belief that Internet gaming leads to mental issues by asserting a survey proved that one in four teenagers who gambled online attempted suicide. Unfortunately for Bachus, the author of the study denounced his interpretation, saying he had totally misrepresented the facts. That seems to be a common position for religious right-wingers opposing online gambling.
Facts Versus Faith Dominate Online Betting Sports Debate
By Christopher Nole
General Online Casino News
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition! In this supposedly enlightened age, many US citizens still claim their right to believe articles of faith, even when all scientific investigation and existing facts prove otherwise. The argument over legalized online gambling falls in the center of this phenomenon, as baseless assertions are refuted by scientific study, yet many continue to spread the falsehoods as beliefs beyond impeachment.
"It [Internet gambling] is so seductively habit-forming that individuals can in short order lose their homes and jobs and, indeed, their families and futures. And the effects on individuals rebound into society," says Former US Representative Jim Leach.
But objective scientific study finds otherwise.
“On a theoretical level, online gaming’s increased accessibility should make it more dangerous than traditional gaming. But... it does not seem to be the reality,” says Professor Dan Ross, director of research at the National Responsible Gambling Program in South Africa.
"The very first thing we learned (studying Internet gambling patterns), which we didn't expect, was that the vast majority, the overwhelming majority of gamblers online gamble in a very moderate and mild way," says Dr. Howard Shaffer after conducting a two-year study as director of the Division of Addictions at Harvard Medical School.
NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy said, "However, we can exercise our right to oppose Internet betting on our games. ... Gambling on our games -- online or off line -- threatens the integrity of our games and all the values they represent."
But years of legal Las Vegas sports gambling have not hurt the NFL, and European sports leagues have found cooperation with online casinos essential to prevent corruption and undue influence.
Professor Earl Grinois of the Baptist school Baylor University says social ills of casino gambling do more damage than the revenue produced offsets. Grinois says introducing a casino into a neighborhood causes crime to increase five to eight percent, with the primary jump in violent crime like burglary and murder.
But actual facts show otherwise. Casinos were brought to Bossier City, Louisiana, fifteen years ago. "There were fears, even from all of us, about the crime," Bossier City Police Chief Mike Halphen said. "But, so far, crime (in Bossier City) has actually dropped."
In the meantime, Bossier City has beautified itself, redone infrastructure, funded social aid programs, seen decreased unemployment, and created a trust fund with over $30 million for future civic needs.
In Florida, Hallandale Representative Joe Gibbons testified in front of Grinois that casinos had come to his district two years earlier. `And in those last two years, our crime rate has gone down.''
Grinois responded that crime rates go up starting in the third year.One witness guessed if Gibbons had said four years, Grinois would have said five is the measure.
Michelle Combs of the Christian Coalition lobbies for the UIGEA, saying, "We’re not saying people shouldn’t go to Las Vegas. But when it’s in your home, it’s too easy. It breaks up families.”
Yet every bit of evidence is that this is not so. Dr. Shaffer's and Dr. Ross's research shows play at online gambling sites to be controlled and budgeted by the overwhelming majority of patrons. Religious groups like to relate horrible anecdotal stories of a single incident, disregarding the statistical insignificance of the occurrence. According to statistician Frederick Felson, "Saying Internet gambling caused one horror story and is therefore evil and must be barred is the equivalent of banning cell phones because one person was beaten with a cell phone."
US Representative Spencer Bachus tried to use scientific proof to back up his belief that Internet gaming leads to mental issues by asserting a survey proved that one in four teenagers who gambled online attempted suicide. Unfortunately for Bachus, the author of the study denounced his interpretation, saying he had totally misrepresented the facts. That seems to be a common position for religious right-wingers opposing online gambling.
Facts Versus Faith Dominate Online Betting Sports Debate
New Jersey Residents Overwhelmingly Want Legal Sports Betting
New Jersey Residents Overwhelmingly Want Legal Sports Betting
The poll, conducted by Farleigh Dickinson University, shows that people living in New Jersey support bringing legal sports gambling to Atlantic City casinos by a spread of better than two to one.
A new survey of public thinking has found that residents of the state of New Jersey favor legalizing sports gambling by a decisive margin. The poll, conducted by Farleigh Dickinson University, shows that people living in New Jersey support bringing legal sports gambling to Atlantic City casinos by a spread of better than two to one.
Sixty-three percent of residents says sports books should be legal at AC casinos. The same number supported allowing horse tracks to take sports bets, while opposition fell even lower, from thirty-two to thirty percent.
The numbers fell to roughly even as to whether to permit sports betting at off-track betting venues. Forty-eight percent said yes, while forty-three percent said no, just outside the poll's four percent margin of error.
New Jersey state Senator Ray Lesniak and the Interactive Media Entertainment and Gaming Association have filed a lawsuit against the US Department of Justice, alleging that the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act unconstitutionally treats four states differently than the rest in outlawing sports gambling in most of the US.
"Here is an issue in which the voice of the public has clearly spoken. Any politician who votes against his constituents must surely be seen as serving special interests, any claim to the contrary notwithstanding,“ says legislative observer Thomas Riordan.
New Jersey Residents Overwhelmingly Want Legal Sports Betting
The poll, conducted by Farleigh Dickinson University, shows that people living in New Jersey support bringing legal sports gambling to Atlantic City casinos by a spread of better than two to one.
A new survey of public thinking has found that residents of the state of New Jersey favor legalizing sports gambling by a decisive margin. The poll, conducted by Farleigh Dickinson University, shows that people living in New Jersey support bringing legal sports gambling to Atlantic City casinos by a spread of better than two to one.
Sixty-three percent of residents says sports books should be legal at AC casinos. The same number supported allowing horse tracks to take sports bets, while opposition fell even lower, from thirty-two to thirty percent.
The numbers fell to roughly even as to whether to permit sports betting at off-track betting venues. Forty-eight percent said yes, while forty-three percent said no, just outside the poll's four percent margin of error.
New Jersey state Senator Ray Lesniak and the Interactive Media Entertainment and Gaming Association have filed a lawsuit against the US Department of Justice, alleging that the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act unconstitutionally treats four states differently than the rest in outlawing sports gambling in most of the US.
"Here is an issue in which the voice of the public has clearly spoken. Any politician who votes against his constituents must surely be seen as serving special interests, any claim to the contrary notwithstanding,“ says legislative observer Thomas Riordan.
New Jersey Residents Overwhelmingly Want Legal Sports Betting
Monday, May 4, 2009
Betting Forum Sports: Florida may gamble on casinos for revenue
Betting Forum Sports: Florida may gamble on casinos for revenue
BY CHARLIE PATTON
Beginning in 1978, Florida voters three times rejected constitutional amendments that would have made forced the state to allow casino gambling.
But Florida’s political leaders have allowed legal gambling to gradually increase throughout the state anyway. Now the Legislature is debating whether to authorize full-scale casino gambling in Tampa and in South Florida.
“People say Florida isn’t a gambling state,” said state Sen. Jim King, R-Jacksonville. “That’s a nice thing to say but it isn’t backed by the facts.”
Since the 1930s, the state has had legal betting on horse races, dog races and jai alai. Poker is now legal in most of those facilities.
In the early 1980s, cruise ships began operating out of Florida ports like Mayport, making day trips for gamblers into international waters.
In 1986, the year voters defeated casino gambling for the second time, they approved a different form of legalized gambling, the Florida lottery.
Slot machines have been legal in Miami-Dade and Broward counties for more than a decade.
And for more than year, as a result of an agreement Gov. Charlie Crist made with the Seminole tribe in 2007, casino games like blackjack and baccarat have been played in the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel and Casino in Tampa and in Hollywood.
Although, the state Supreme Court ruled last summer that such games aren’t legal in Florida, the games go on, even as the Legislature debates changing the law. Despite the court ruling, the state has not attempted to stop the Seminole casinos from offering the games but instead has asked the Legislature to allow them to continue.
The Tampa Hard Rock is like “a little Las Vegas,” said Howard Korman, president of the Jacksonville Greyhound Club.
With the state facing a severe budget crisis, Crist told reporters last week he has worked out a revised proposal that will accelerate some of the tribe’s payments to the state if the Legislature approves a gambling compact. That would bring about $1.1 billion going into state coffers in the next two years, he said.
In 2007, Crist argued the deal was needed in order to ensure that Florida got a share of Indian gambling revenues. Under federal law, Indian tribes are exempt from taxation unless a specific arrangement is made. Some legal experts believe the Seminoles can offer Las Vegas-style casino games even without the state’s agreement.
“If we don’t give the Seminoles a compact, they’re going to continue to operate and we’re going to continue to get nothing,” King said.
State Sen. Steve Wise, R-Jacksonville, noted that if the Seminoles do end up operating Vegas-style casinos, which he doesn’t want, it will be partly because of past sins against them. “We took their land and it is coming back to haunt us,” he said.
In this spring’s Legislative session, which is scheduled to end Friday, the House and Senate have approved different versions of a bill that would expand legal gambling in the state.
The House version would change things slightly. It would require the Seminoles to stop offering games like blackjack while allowing them to continue to offer Las Vegas-style slot machines. It would ban slots from the rest of the state, except Broward and Miami-Dade. The bill calls for the Seminoles to pay $100 million to the state annually in exchange.
The House bill would also expand the hours and the betting limits at facilities like the two poker rooms operated by the Jacksonville Greyhound Club.
The Senate version calls for more dramatic change. It gives the Seminole tribe full-fledged casinos, including roulette, craps, slot machines, blackjack and other banked card games as well as poker without limits in return for at least $400 million annually. It would give Miami-Dade and Broward counties blackjack and other casino card games as well as Vegas-style slots. Horse and dog tracks and jai alai frontons would get video lottery terminals.
King said the decision to give the Seminoles the opportunity to run full-scale casinos was made with the idea they would become tourist destinations the way casinos in Nevada are tourist destinations. He believes if the Senate bill is approved, the state could eventually realize $1 billion a year in new revenue.
Wise, who sits on the Senate committee that deals with gambling, said he thinks the Senate passed an expansive version of the bill in order to establish a bargaining position. Their version actually gives the Seminole casino more new games than Crist’s compact did, including roulette and craps.
“The guys threw in the kitchen sink just to be able to give up something,” said Wise, who opposes gambling on moral grounds.
Both Wise and King said it’s unclear which version or what compromise will ultimately emerge.
Anything that expands gambling in the state will disappoint some people.
“From a biblical perspective” gambling is not a good thing, said Tom Messer, pastor of Trinity Baptist Church.
He said that while researching a sermon, he found a report that Americans were spending more money gambling than on movies, theme parks, cruises and spectator sports combined.
“That would tell me we have a problem,” said Messer, who added he is particularly bothered by the Florida lottery.
“The lottery is nothing more than a tax on poor people.”
Paul Mason, a University of North Florida professor who has studied the economics of lotteries and casino gambling, said he agrees that legalized gambling is not the solution to the state’s economic woes.
“I don’t believe that the Legislature should try to raise tax dollars by any form of gambling,” he said, noting that such revenues are unreliable.
Besides there is no guarantee that creating Vegas-style casinos would generate more revenue for the state, he said.
“If they can draw people into the state ... who would not have otherwise come, it could have an impact,” he said. “But if people go to the casino and spend $500 instead of going to Disney World and spending $500, you haven’t gained anything.”
While many of the gambling facilities in South and Central Florida have complained their business is being damaged by the Seminole casinos, Korman said the Jacksonville Greyhound Club continues to do well.
Competition from Tampa shouldn’t be any more of a threat than the competition from South Florida or from the casinos in Mississippi, he said.
“This isn’t as important to us as some people think,” he said. “I only feel threatened if exclusivity comes in. The thing we are most concerned about is any deal that excludes us from doing anything new.”
Jacksonville Suns executive Peter Bragan Jr., who describes himself as a serious poker player, said he believes legalized gambling leads to a “less civil the society.”
“But when the state is laying off teachers, I’d say any kind of unusual proposal is worth a look,” he said.
Betting Forum Sports: Florida may gamble on casinos for revenue
BY CHARLIE PATTON
Beginning in 1978, Florida voters three times rejected constitutional amendments that would have made forced the state to allow casino gambling.
But Florida’s political leaders have allowed legal gambling to gradually increase throughout the state anyway. Now the Legislature is debating whether to authorize full-scale casino gambling in Tampa and in South Florida.
“People say Florida isn’t a gambling state,” said state Sen. Jim King, R-Jacksonville. “That’s a nice thing to say but it isn’t backed by the facts.”
Since the 1930s, the state has had legal betting on horse races, dog races and jai alai. Poker is now legal in most of those facilities.
In the early 1980s, cruise ships began operating out of Florida ports like Mayport, making day trips for gamblers into international waters.
In 1986, the year voters defeated casino gambling for the second time, they approved a different form of legalized gambling, the Florida lottery.
Slot machines have been legal in Miami-Dade and Broward counties for more than a decade.
And for more than year, as a result of an agreement Gov. Charlie Crist made with the Seminole tribe in 2007, casino games like blackjack and baccarat have been played in the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel and Casino in Tampa and in Hollywood.
Although, the state Supreme Court ruled last summer that such games aren’t legal in Florida, the games go on, even as the Legislature debates changing the law. Despite the court ruling, the state has not attempted to stop the Seminole casinos from offering the games but instead has asked the Legislature to allow them to continue.
The Tampa Hard Rock is like “a little Las Vegas,” said Howard Korman, president of the Jacksonville Greyhound Club.
With the state facing a severe budget crisis, Crist told reporters last week he has worked out a revised proposal that will accelerate some of the tribe’s payments to the state if the Legislature approves a gambling compact. That would bring about $1.1 billion going into state coffers in the next two years, he said.
In 2007, Crist argued the deal was needed in order to ensure that Florida got a share of Indian gambling revenues. Under federal law, Indian tribes are exempt from taxation unless a specific arrangement is made. Some legal experts believe the Seminoles can offer Las Vegas-style casino games even without the state’s agreement.
“If we don’t give the Seminoles a compact, they’re going to continue to operate and we’re going to continue to get nothing,” King said.
State Sen. Steve Wise, R-Jacksonville, noted that if the Seminoles do end up operating Vegas-style casinos, which he doesn’t want, it will be partly because of past sins against them. “We took their land and it is coming back to haunt us,” he said.
In this spring’s Legislative session, which is scheduled to end Friday, the House and Senate have approved different versions of a bill that would expand legal gambling in the state.
The House version would change things slightly. It would require the Seminoles to stop offering games like blackjack while allowing them to continue to offer Las Vegas-style slot machines. It would ban slots from the rest of the state, except Broward and Miami-Dade. The bill calls for the Seminoles to pay $100 million to the state annually in exchange.
The House bill would also expand the hours and the betting limits at facilities like the two poker rooms operated by the Jacksonville Greyhound Club.
The Senate version calls for more dramatic change. It gives the Seminole tribe full-fledged casinos, including roulette, craps, slot machines, blackjack and other banked card games as well as poker without limits in return for at least $400 million annually. It would give Miami-Dade and Broward counties blackjack and other casino card games as well as Vegas-style slots. Horse and dog tracks and jai alai frontons would get video lottery terminals.
King said the decision to give the Seminoles the opportunity to run full-scale casinos was made with the idea they would become tourist destinations the way casinos in Nevada are tourist destinations. He believes if the Senate bill is approved, the state could eventually realize $1 billion a year in new revenue.
Wise, who sits on the Senate committee that deals with gambling, said he thinks the Senate passed an expansive version of the bill in order to establish a bargaining position. Their version actually gives the Seminole casino more new games than Crist’s compact did, including roulette and craps.
“The guys threw in the kitchen sink just to be able to give up something,” said Wise, who opposes gambling on moral grounds.
Both Wise and King said it’s unclear which version or what compromise will ultimately emerge.
Anything that expands gambling in the state will disappoint some people.
“From a biblical perspective” gambling is not a good thing, said Tom Messer, pastor of Trinity Baptist Church.
He said that while researching a sermon, he found a report that Americans were spending more money gambling than on movies, theme parks, cruises and spectator sports combined.
“That would tell me we have a problem,” said Messer, who added he is particularly bothered by the Florida lottery.
“The lottery is nothing more than a tax on poor people.”
Paul Mason, a University of North Florida professor who has studied the economics of lotteries and casino gambling, said he agrees that legalized gambling is not the solution to the state’s economic woes.
“I don’t believe that the Legislature should try to raise tax dollars by any form of gambling,” he said, noting that such revenues are unreliable.
Besides there is no guarantee that creating Vegas-style casinos would generate more revenue for the state, he said.
“If they can draw people into the state ... who would not have otherwise come, it could have an impact,” he said. “But if people go to the casino and spend $500 instead of going to Disney World and spending $500, you haven’t gained anything.”
While many of the gambling facilities in South and Central Florida have complained their business is being damaged by the Seminole casinos, Korman said the Jacksonville Greyhound Club continues to do well.
Competition from Tampa shouldn’t be any more of a threat than the competition from South Florida or from the casinos in Mississippi, he said.
“This isn’t as important to us as some people think,” he said. “I only feel threatened if exclusivity comes in. The thing we are most concerned about is any deal that excludes us from doing anything new.”
Jacksonville Suns executive Peter Bragan Jr., who describes himself as a serious poker player, said he believes legalized gambling leads to a “less civil the society.”
“But when the state is laying off teachers, I’d say any kind of unusual proposal is worth a look,” he said.
Betting Forum Sports: Florida may gamble on casinos for revenue
Fantasy Sports and Betting Sports Overlap Tremendously
Fantasy Sports and Betting Sports Overlap Tremendously
“It's just a fantasy. It's not the real thing. But sometimes a fantasy is all you need.” That is what Billy Joel tells us. I thought it was Kenny Rogers who was the gambler.
Yes, it can remunerate to be a fantasy/rotisserie geek because it is a good dry run for excelling in the more important pursuit of gambling. I know our good friend Rick Ballou of Sportingnews Radio does not play fantasy sports because he does not want to have that rooting brain-teaser of betting on one side and having a player on the other side to applaud.
The cheering conflict of interest aside, the make-believe general manager can get a lot of insight from the fantasy world. In the ancient times before the World Wide Web, I found that fantasy football had been analyzing from an extraordinarily different and favourable viewpoint than before I met gambling’s cousin.
I had situations like having Emmitt Smith in his prime when he was the inimitable running back in the league. I can for example remember one week when two offensive linemen were out and the pokes were on the road. Plus I had Chris Warren when he was in Seattle and he was playing a team without their two best run stoppers. Should I consider benching the world’s best running back because his match-up in not favorable? For the record, I stuck with Emmitt, but scrutiny like that actually refined me into dissecting games like few handicappers had ever before.
Fantasy sports managing helped me breakdown big match-up mismatches that occur in sports betting. It especially facilitated my acumen when it came to betting overs/unders. Quite often imprudent handicappers deduce that an injury to a key offensive player may mean fewer points or a key defensive player more points.
But in my fantasy breakdowns it became quite apparent that if a run blocker on the offensive line was hurt, it might mean the team has to pass more. Kindred to that if a team’s leading rusher were out and his backup were an ample drop-off. Often teams to compensate will have to fiddle with their game plan and in such examples open up their offense.
A depreciated offense does not mean lower scoring. So many sports speculators and general football fans fall prey to the myth that the better an offense is, the more points they will number.
One of my favorite all-time examples was in 2001, once Edgerrin James went down for the Colts. It glaringly repressed their offense, but with a great weapon in WR Marvin Harrison and QB Peyton Manning, there clearly was one way to offset his loss: throw more often. Suckers determined losing such a weapon would mean lower scoring games. I knew while it depleted their offense, it meant they would have to be much more high-octane. They exceeded the total in 14 of 16 regular season games.
Let us say that a defense is lacking their two best run stoppers because of injuries and the total is high, I further investigate to see if it correlates to their opponent having motivation to run more. If so, the end result would be longer possessions, which also means fewer possessions. Fewer possessions mean fewer scoring opportunities.
Luckily though in the hypothetical state of affairs, the total is likely posted higher because of the injuries.
A better offense is not necessarily a high scoring offense and to a lesser extent a superior defense is not inexorably going to give up more points. A great defense, whose strength is stopping the run, may force the opponent to take more risks. A bad defense that has a decent secondary may be run against more often. Ergo the posted totals would be over-adjusted.
Hence the top fantasy sports advice sites can be priceless tools for sports cognation. Rotowire.com is the oldest and still the best all-around. Consummate in all sports, their judicious view for the roto player can also be incalculable for us.
Footballinjuries.com is also fantastic for the NFL. Many sites do stupendous jobs of player against team or often better yet, player against coach career statistical examinations. For example Bill Belichick coached teams have such done extremely well shutting down certain quarterbacks. We have found that player history statistics can be of great handicapping value as so long as one also analyses how much the parameters have or have not changed. Everything in handicapping must be taken in its proper framework.
In fact, now every major sports site, from ESPN to Yahoo has fantasy information of some kind. For the most part, if it is of value to the fantasy player, a handicapper should take note.
But there are compelling contrasts, too. The world’s best fantasy player could be a dreadful handicapper, and visa versa, if one probes them as one and the same.
We handicappers must explore games one at a time, while the fantasy players must query long-term performances. Really this seems to happen more in baseball with hotshot pitchers up from the minor leagues, but can also apply in football. Joey Harrington may be great for your keeper league, but there will be peaks and valleys along the way. Actually a head-to-head league in which a participant changes his line-up is more conducive to handicapping than the rotisserie style leagues, but both are sources of knowledge.
Using fantasy sports and the foremost sites dedicated to such can make a winning football betting season more than just a fantasy. That’s the real thing.
Fantasy Sports and Betting Sports Overlap Tremendously
“It's just a fantasy. It's not the real thing. But sometimes a fantasy is all you need.” That is what Billy Joel tells us. I thought it was Kenny Rogers who was the gambler.
Yes, it can remunerate to be a fantasy/rotisserie geek because it is a good dry run for excelling in the more important pursuit of gambling. I know our good friend Rick Ballou of Sportingnews Radio does not play fantasy sports because he does not want to have that rooting brain-teaser of betting on one side and having a player on the other side to applaud.
The cheering conflict of interest aside, the make-believe general manager can get a lot of insight from the fantasy world. In the ancient times before the World Wide Web, I found that fantasy football had been analyzing from an extraordinarily different and favourable viewpoint than before I met gambling’s cousin.
I had situations like having Emmitt Smith in his prime when he was the inimitable running back in the league. I can for example remember one week when two offensive linemen were out and the pokes were on the road. Plus I had Chris Warren when he was in Seattle and he was playing a team without their two best run stoppers. Should I consider benching the world’s best running back because his match-up in not favorable? For the record, I stuck with Emmitt, but scrutiny like that actually refined me into dissecting games like few handicappers had ever before.
Fantasy sports managing helped me breakdown big match-up mismatches that occur in sports betting. It especially facilitated my acumen when it came to betting overs/unders. Quite often imprudent handicappers deduce that an injury to a key offensive player may mean fewer points or a key defensive player more points.
But in my fantasy breakdowns it became quite apparent that if a run blocker on the offensive line was hurt, it might mean the team has to pass more. Kindred to that if a team’s leading rusher were out and his backup were an ample drop-off. Often teams to compensate will have to fiddle with their game plan and in such examples open up their offense.
A depreciated offense does not mean lower scoring. So many sports speculators and general football fans fall prey to the myth that the better an offense is, the more points they will number.
One of my favorite all-time examples was in 2001, once Edgerrin James went down for the Colts. It glaringly repressed their offense, but with a great weapon in WR Marvin Harrison and QB Peyton Manning, there clearly was one way to offset his loss: throw more often. Suckers determined losing such a weapon would mean lower scoring games. I knew while it depleted their offense, it meant they would have to be much more high-octane. They exceeded the total in 14 of 16 regular season games.
Let us say that a defense is lacking their two best run stoppers because of injuries and the total is high, I further investigate to see if it correlates to their opponent having motivation to run more. If so, the end result would be longer possessions, which also means fewer possessions. Fewer possessions mean fewer scoring opportunities.
Luckily though in the hypothetical state of affairs, the total is likely posted higher because of the injuries.
A better offense is not necessarily a high scoring offense and to a lesser extent a superior defense is not inexorably going to give up more points. A great defense, whose strength is stopping the run, may force the opponent to take more risks. A bad defense that has a decent secondary may be run against more often. Ergo the posted totals would be over-adjusted.
Hence the top fantasy sports advice sites can be priceless tools for sports cognation. Rotowire.com is the oldest and still the best all-around. Consummate in all sports, their judicious view for the roto player can also be incalculable for us.
Footballinjuries.com is also fantastic for the NFL. Many sites do stupendous jobs of player against team or often better yet, player against coach career statistical examinations. For example Bill Belichick coached teams have such done extremely well shutting down certain quarterbacks. We have found that player history statistics can be of great handicapping value as so long as one also analyses how much the parameters have or have not changed. Everything in handicapping must be taken in its proper framework.
In fact, now every major sports site, from ESPN to Yahoo has fantasy information of some kind. For the most part, if it is of value to the fantasy player, a handicapper should take note.
But there are compelling contrasts, too. The world’s best fantasy player could be a dreadful handicapper, and visa versa, if one probes them as one and the same.
We handicappers must explore games one at a time, while the fantasy players must query long-term performances. Really this seems to happen more in baseball with hotshot pitchers up from the minor leagues, but can also apply in football. Joey Harrington may be great for your keeper league, but there will be peaks and valleys along the way. Actually a head-to-head league in which a participant changes his line-up is more conducive to handicapping than the rotisserie style leagues, but both are sources of knowledge.
Using fantasy sports and the foremost sites dedicated to such can make a winning football betting season more than just a fantasy. That’s the real thing.
Fantasy Sports and Betting Sports Overlap Tremendously
Sports Betting Forum: NFL Declares War on Poker
Sports Betting Forum: NFL Declares War on Poker
By Dan Boone
(Columnist)
The gambling known as business looks with austere disfavor upon the business known as gambling.—Ambrose Bierce
Mark Twain once wrote that nothing needs reforming more than other people's habits.
And the NFL wants to reform your online habits.
The NFL, always a bright beacon of morals in a blighted land, has decided to self-righteously step into the public morals debate. The NFL does not want a bill allowing online gambling, that is a current bill legalizing poker, to pass.
The NFL behemoth is so against people playing online poker that they have hired a high priced Washington Lobbyist, opened a DC office, and set up a PAC Donation committee to help its noble cause.
So that's where ticket increase money goes. That's why the stadium beers are nine bucks and the exhibition games are full priced flops. Perhaps that explains the PSL's. The league needs just craves some spare change to pay some politicos for favors.
Nah, the PSL's are pure greed. Nothing more nothing less.
But give it to Roger Goodell, a senator's son, who knows the Beltway better then the ball field. And he does not want folks wagering on the internet on his football games.
The NFL has thrown its vast wealth and political power into the anti-poker fray.
The old battle cry, of course, is to maintain the integrity of the game. Online Poker will be the straw that breaks the NFL camel's back. Corruption will take hold across our fair land and shame our national game.
But the battle to set the public morals has made some mighty strange bedfellows for the NFL.
Fearing that the evils of online gaming are sapping its failing strength in a fading economy, the NFL has found a strong moral ally in North American and Native American tribal casinos.
Both casino organizations throw a lot of money, and junkets, at the politicos trying desperately block online gaming.
Online poker is, of course, a severe threat to the core values of America.
A sleeper cell buried on the internet.
And everyone knows the boys in Vegas and Atlantic City have always been men highly concerned with the moral makeup of American society...
The last gambling threat to so shake the foundations of the NFL were likely the frogmen who took Baltimore Colts/LA Rams owner Robert Irsay for his last swim or maybe the bookies that took San Francisco 49ers owner Eddie Debartolo's weekly massive 49er bets.
The politicians agree. The integrity of the scared game itself is at stake. It's time for a stand.
It's time for Johnny Unitas to go for six and the cover and skip the easy three and the win.
Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, a friend of the casino boys in Vegas, fights immoral online poker with one hand, and with the other, lobbies hard for a tax payer built Vegas Mob Museum.
The long awaited Vegas Mob Museum!
No poker on the computer in your basement, boys, but for $15, we will show the kids where Bugsy Siegal's brains were scattered in Vegas. Frank Costello says keep your mind off the showgirls, kids.
How about the real story of Tony "the Ant" Spilotro and the Stardust and Circus Circus? Child, did you ever hear of a man monikered Mad Sam DeStefano?
Look kids: This is where the bomb lifted Lefty Rothenstein out of his car. This is the very seat that saved him. Want to sit on it for a $5 picture?
Put in $5, press the play button, and hear the sad song of Sonny Liston.
Charming, eh?
Maybe.
I'd go to it. It certainly is no worse, morally, then online poker. But neither should be monitored or made by the government.
The old ale soaked scribe at the bar once scribbled that the government that governs best governs least.
Another odd NFL poker ban pal is the Christian Coalition.
The congressman most concerned about the effect of poker and football betting on the morals of America is the honorable Bob Goodlatte of Virginia, via Massachusetts.
Congressman Goodlatte, a member of the Christian Coalition, loves his cyber security task force, perhaps because they give him a secret Dick Tracey badge or watch. The congressman is a powerful member of the Agriculture Committee.
Oddly enough, he can combine his pair of politico power toys.
See, Senator Goodlatte also loves the slaughter of horses, but he denounces online poker as a threat to the very soul of America.
I guess he missed Gable and Monroe in The Misfits.
Goodlatte, after securing lots of donations from casino owners and their ilk, raged against internet gambling.
The same folks that sent Senator Bob piles of cash also have a vested interest in some racetracks and thoroughbred operations around the nation.
Some of those folks like selling their used up race horses to slaughter. Some of these same folks also do not want gaming competition for their casinos. Some of those same folks still have some skim and swag to spend to set their agenda.
So Senator Bob also became a key player in supporting horse slaughterhouses around the United States. He actually personally blocked a law banning slaughtering horses, while still leading the fight against internet poker.
And what would the restless ghost of Colonel Mosby think of a carpet-bagging Yankee promoting horse killing and poker slaying in his home state of Old Virginia?
Goodlatte, in these trying economic times, is a man with serious issues on his brain and in his billfold. I mean, in this terrifying economic tempest, it's good to know a stern man of morals in Washington is bravely fighting to stop poker and start horse slaughterhouses.
Someday, likely outside a seedy second rate casino with a rundown sleazy track, someone might build a bird shit-stained statue of the moral law maker.
Then sacrifice a healthy horse under it.
Still, the good senator has formed an odd alliance with the NFL, the Christian Coalition, Casino Owners, Donald Trump, Donald Trump's hair, and the gambling tribes of North America.
Who would have thought the linear descendants of Francis Lightfoot Lee, Cotton Mather, Elmer Layden, George Halas,Tecumseh, Neamathla, PT Barnum, Bugsy Siegel, Frank Costello, and a dead, dyed, rotting raccoon (the closest thing I could think of for Trump's hair) would join hands to battle online poker?
Granted, greed unites, politics have no relation to morals and, of course, the covetous are always in want, but that's still a strange brew to be passing the peace pipe and moaning about the loose morals of online gaming, or of anything for that matter.
Other politicos, with, apparently, not much else on their plate, have also stepped into the fray.
Iowa republican Jim Leach called online gaming "a double-whammy for society. It is so seductively habit-forming that individuals can in short order lose their homes and jobs and, indeed, their families and futures. And the effects on individuals redound into society."
At first I thought Senator Leach meant crack cocaine or the stock market. Somehow I did not know internet poker or a football bet threatened the very fabric of the republic.
Currently, banks must regulate credit card transactions to assure that the money is not being used for online gambling.
Banks can't even regulate the billions of bailout bucks they have ravenously gobbled up, and now they are the online gaming morals cops?
And really, don't banks have enough to worry about besides bets on poker or football?
Sure, sweet Sir J. Allen Stanford, that crooked Texas banker man, stuck a lot of banks in Antigua. Offshore banks that handle a lot of poker and gambling action.
But is that gambling action worse than Wall Street speculation? Surely, Sir J. Allen Stanford dealt with some shady characters with Slavic accents, but perhaps Sir J. Allen will learn the meaning, at long last, of buy the ticket, take the ride.
Why not say good-bye to all that nonsense and legalize it and tax it.
States are desperate for revenue. What's the difference between betting on a horse or a numbers drawing and wagering on football or poker, except that your odds are better?
Sports gambling is accepted throughout Europe, Asia, and exotic Canada.
Why must Americans cling to Puritan morals and make it illegal? Why must we protect the cash flow of a cartel of special interests groups, Vegas, Atlantic City, tribal casinos, the NFL, and corrupt politicians?
Why not legalize it and tax it?
And why outrage over poker, which is the quiescent American pastime?
And why does Roger Goodell care if I play online poker? Why must the NFL interfere with our lives? Why is it using fan generated money against its fan base?
Presidents as diverse as US Grant, Warren Harding, Harry Truman, Richard Nixon, and Barack Obama enjoyed poker.
At the funeral of Chief Justice William Rehnquist, jokes were made about his fondness for his monthly poker games and gambling with the other Supremos and select DC insiders.
The states run various lotteries, rip off tickets, race tracks, casinos, slot parlors, dice games, and keno.
All are worse bets then wagering on sports or playing poker.
Betting lines of NFL games are published in papers nationwide. Betting on NFL games is mentioned on most NFL pregame shows and on countless Web sites.
Poker and football betting are two of the most popular American pastimes. Well, they were anyway, when folks still had jobs.
Each year the Super Bowl is the most highly wagered on event nationwide.
Why not make it all legal?
And again, why doesn't the NFL and Goodell mind their own damn business about people's private poker habits?
Why doesn't a revenue starved state take a wild leap and legalize sports betting?
Delaware: I'm talking to you.
What's Goodell going to do to Delaware, anyway? Take away its NFL Sunday Ticket? Invade and vandalize it with his Visigoth-like Cincinnati Bengals?
Or will the NFL just be outraged?
Folks are very good at outrage these days. But can't they find something else to be outraged about than poker?
And can't Roger Goodell find something better to do with his time and the fan's money?
But most of all, Mister Goodell, why don't you mind your own damn business?
Sports Betting Forum: NFL Declares War on Poker
By Dan Boone
(Columnist)
The gambling known as business looks with austere disfavor upon the business known as gambling.—Ambrose Bierce
Mark Twain once wrote that nothing needs reforming more than other people's habits.
And the NFL wants to reform your online habits.
The NFL, always a bright beacon of morals in a blighted land, has decided to self-righteously step into the public morals debate. The NFL does not want a bill allowing online gambling, that is a current bill legalizing poker, to pass.
The NFL behemoth is so against people playing online poker that they have hired a high priced Washington Lobbyist, opened a DC office, and set up a PAC Donation committee to help its noble cause.
So that's where ticket increase money goes. That's why the stadium beers are nine bucks and the exhibition games are full priced flops. Perhaps that explains the PSL's. The league needs just craves some spare change to pay some politicos for favors.
Nah, the PSL's are pure greed. Nothing more nothing less.
But give it to Roger Goodell, a senator's son, who knows the Beltway better then the ball field. And he does not want folks wagering on the internet on his football games.
The NFL has thrown its vast wealth and political power into the anti-poker fray.
The old battle cry, of course, is to maintain the integrity of the game. Online Poker will be the straw that breaks the NFL camel's back. Corruption will take hold across our fair land and shame our national game.
But the battle to set the public morals has made some mighty strange bedfellows for the NFL.
Fearing that the evils of online gaming are sapping its failing strength in a fading economy, the NFL has found a strong moral ally in North American and Native American tribal casinos.
Both casino organizations throw a lot of money, and junkets, at the politicos trying desperately block online gaming.
Online poker is, of course, a severe threat to the core values of America.
A sleeper cell buried on the internet.
And everyone knows the boys in Vegas and Atlantic City have always been men highly concerned with the moral makeup of American society...
The last gambling threat to so shake the foundations of the NFL were likely the frogmen who took Baltimore Colts/LA Rams owner Robert Irsay for his last swim or maybe the bookies that took San Francisco 49ers owner Eddie Debartolo's weekly massive 49er bets.
The politicians agree. The integrity of the scared game itself is at stake. It's time for a stand.
It's time for Johnny Unitas to go for six and the cover and skip the easy three and the win.
Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, a friend of the casino boys in Vegas, fights immoral online poker with one hand, and with the other, lobbies hard for a tax payer built Vegas Mob Museum.
The long awaited Vegas Mob Museum!
No poker on the computer in your basement, boys, but for $15, we will show the kids where Bugsy Siegal's brains were scattered in Vegas. Frank Costello says keep your mind off the showgirls, kids.
How about the real story of Tony "the Ant" Spilotro and the Stardust and Circus Circus? Child, did you ever hear of a man monikered Mad Sam DeStefano?
Look kids: This is where the bomb lifted Lefty Rothenstein out of his car. This is the very seat that saved him. Want to sit on it for a $5 picture?
Put in $5, press the play button, and hear the sad song of Sonny Liston.
Charming, eh?
Maybe.
I'd go to it. It certainly is no worse, morally, then online poker. But neither should be monitored or made by the government.
The old ale soaked scribe at the bar once scribbled that the government that governs best governs least.
Another odd NFL poker ban pal is the Christian Coalition.
The congressman most concerned about the effect of poker and football betting on the morals of America is the honorable Bob Goodlatte of Virginia, via Massachusetts.
Congressman Goodlatte, a member of the Christian Coalition, loves his cyber security task force, perhaps because they give him a secret Dick Tracey badge or watch. The congressman is a powerful member of the Agriculture Committee.
Oddly enough, he can combine his pair of politico power toys.
See, Senator Goodlatte also loves the slaughter of horses, but he denounces online poker as a threat to the very soul of America.
I guess he missed Gable and Monroe in The Misfits.
Goodlatte, after securing lots of donations from casino owners and their ilk, raged against internet gambling.
The same folks that sent Senator Bob piles of cash also have a vested interest in some racetracks and thoroughbred operations around the nation.
Some of those folks like selling their used up race horses to slaughter. Some of these same folks also do not want gaming competition for their casinos. Some of those same folks still have some skim and swag to spend to set their agenda.
So Senator Bob also became a key player in supporting horse slaughterhouses around the United States. He actually personally blocked a law banning slaughtering horses, while still leading the fight against internet poker.
And what would the restless ghost of Colonel Mosby think of a carpet-bagging Yankee promoting horse killing and poker slaying in his home state of Old Virginia?
Goodlatte, in these trying economic times, is a man with serious issues on his brain and in his billfold. I mean, in this terrifying economic tempest, it's good to know a stern man of morals in Washington is bravely fighting to stop poker and start horse slaughterhouses.
Someday, likely outside a seedy second rate casino with a rundown sleazy track, someone might build a bird shit-stained statue of the moral law maker.
Then sacrifice a healthy horse under it.
Still, the good senator has formed an odd alliance with the NFL, the Christian Coalition, Casino Owners, Donald Trump, Donald Trump's hair, and the gambling tribes of North America.
Who would have thought the linear descendants of Francis Lightfoot Lee, Cotton Mather, Elmer Layden, George Halas,Tecumseh, Neamathla, PT Barnum, Bugsy Siegel, Frank Costello, and a dead, dyed, rotting raccoon (the closest thing I could think of for Trump's hair) would join hands to battle online poker?
Granted, greed unites, politics have no relation to morals and, of course, the covetous are always in want, but that's still a strange brew to be passing the peace pipe and moaning about the loose morals of online gaming, or of anything for that matter.
Other politicos, with, apparently, not much else on their plate, have also stepped into the fray.
Iowa republican Jim Leach called online gaming "a double-whammy for society. It is so seductively habit-forming that individuals can in short order lose their homes and jobs and, indeed, their families and futures. And the effects on individuals redound into society."
At first I thought Senator Leach meant crack cocaine or the stock market. Somehow I did not know internet poker or a football bet threatened the very fabric of the republic.
Currently, banks must regulate credit card transactions to assure that the money is not being used for online gambling.
Banks can't even regulate the billions of bailout bucks they have ravenously gobbled up, and now they are the online gaming morals cops?
And really, don't banks have enough to worry about besides bets on poker or football?
Sure, sweet Sir J. Allen Stanford, that crooked Texas banker man, stuck a lot of banks in Antigua. Offshore banks that handle a lot of poker and gambling action.
But is that gambling action worse than Wall Street speculation? Surely, Sir J. Allen Stanford dealt with some shady characters with Slavic accents, but perhaps Sir J. Allen will learn the meaning, at long last, of buy the ticket, take the ride.
Why not say good-bye to all that nonsense and legalize it and tax it.
States are desperate for revenue. What's the difference between betting on a horse or a numbers drawing and wagering on football or poker, except that your odds are better?
Sports gambling is accepted throughout Europe, Asia, and exotic Canada.
Why must Americans cling to Puritan morals and make it illegal? Why must we protect the cash flow of a cartel of special interests groups, Vegas, Atlantic City, tribal casinos, the NFL, and corrupt politicians?
Why not legalize it and tax it?
And why outrage over poker, which is the quiescent American pastime?
And why does Roger Goodell care if I play online poker? Why must the NFL interfere with our lives? Why is it using fan generated money against its fan base?
Presidents as diverse as US Grant, Warren Harding, Harry Truman, Richard Nixon, and Barack Obama enjoyed poker.
At the funeral of Chief Justice William Rehnquist, jokes were made about his fondness for his monthly poker games and gambling with the other Supremos and select DC insiders.
The states run various lotteries, rip off tickets, race tracks, casinos, slot parlors, dice games, and keno.
All are worse bets then wagering on sports or playing poker.
Betting lines of NFL games are published in papers nationwide. Betting on NFL games is mentioned on most NFL pregame shows and on countless Web sites.
Poker and football betting are two of the most popular American pastimes. Well, they were anyway, when folks still had jobs.
Each year the Super Bowl is the most highly wagered on event nationwide.
Why not make it all legal?
And again, why doesn't the NFL and Goodell mind their own damn business about people's private poker habits?
Why doesn't a revenue starved state take a wild leap and legalize sports betting?
Delaware: I'm talking to you.
What's Goodell going to do to Delaware, anyway? Take away its NFL Sunday Ticket? Invade and vandalize it with his Visigoth-like Cincinnati Bengals?
Or will the NFL just be outraged?
Folks are very good at outrage these days. But can't they find something else to be outraged about than poker?
And can't Roger Goodell find something better to do with his time and the fan's money?
But most of all, Mister Goodell, why don't you mind your own damn business?
Sports Betting Forum: NFL Declares War on Poker
A New Chance for Online Betting Sports in the U.S.
A New Chance for Online Betting Sports in the U.S.
By ERIC PFANNER
PARIS — Is online gambling coming in from the cold?
When the U.S. Congress cracked down on Internet betting in 2006, the big, publicly traded European companies that had dominated the business closed up shop in the United States. Growth in the booming industry shifted away from these companies, once the darlings of the stock market, to private operators in offshore locations like Antigua and the Isle of Man.
But now, executives of some of the European companies whisper excitedly that they may soon get a second chance in the United States. Meanwhile, a number of European countries that have long maintained barriers are moving, under pressure from regulators, to legalize, and tax, online gambling.
“There’s still a lot of gambling going on, where there’s no revenue coming in to the governments,” said Gavin Kelleher, an analyst at the research firm H2 Gambling Capital in Ireland. “They realize they could use the revenue.”
The biggest potential change would be in the United States, where, perhaps this month, Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts, is expected to introduce legislation aimed at overturning the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act.
“He supports the repeal and wants to move forward on it,” said Steve Adamske, communications director for the House Financial Services Committee, of which Mr. Frank is chairman.
Mr. Frank tried and failed to do so once before, in 2007. But advocates of liberalization think they might get a friendlier hearing in Washington this time around. President Barack Obama, they note, boasted of his poker prowess during the election campaign. And the Democrats, who are seen as less hostile to Internet gambling than the Republicans, have tightened their grip on Congress.
A study by PricewaterhouseCoopers says the U.S. government could raise more than $50 billion over 10 years from taxes on legalized online gambling.
“I’d be amazed if it didn’t happen over the next two or three years,” said Clive Hawkswood, chief executive of the Remote Gambling Association, a trade group based in London. “It’s just a question of what exactly the regulations will say.”
Some analysts say that may be getting a little bit ahead of the game. Opponents of a repeal, including the Christian Coalition of America and the National Football League, have vowed to fight any new effort to end the ban.
Michele Combs, a spokeswoman for the Christian Coalition, said the group was gearing up for a “massive campaign” of letter-writing and lobbying to try to prevent any loosening of the law.
“We’re not saying people shouldn’t go to Las Vegas,” she said. “But when it’s in your home, it’s too easy. It breaks up families.”
U.S. sports leagues, meanwhile, worry that the ease of online betting increases the chances of game-fixing. Even the most bullish advocates of online gambling acknowledge that Internet sports betting — as opposed to poker or casino games — is highly unlikely to be legalized.
“There’s a better chance now for some sort of gaming legislation to be approved,” said Nick Batram, an analyst at KBC Peel Hunt, a brokerage firm in London. “But it took longer than expected to put anti-gaming legislation in place, and it will probably will take longer than expected to remove it.”
Since the 2006 law was passed, North America, once the biggest market, has been passed by Europe and Asia, according to figures from H2 Gambling Capital. The law makes it illegal for financial institutions to handle payments to online gambling sites. But enough people have found ways around it, some by using overseas payment processors, to ensure that online gambling remains a thriving business. H2 says online gambling generated revenue of $6 billion last year in North America, more than a quarter the global total of $22.6 billion, up from $17.6 billion in 2006.
Pulling out of the United States cost PartyGaming about three-quarters of its business. Its position as the biggest online poker provider has been taken over by PokerStars, a privately held operator based on the Isle of Man.
This month, PartyGaming agreed to a $105 million settlement with the U.S. attorney’s office in New York, involving the period before 2006, when it acknowledged that its activities had been “contrary to certain U.S. laws.” In turn, the U.S. authorities agreed not to prosecute the company, which is listed on the London Stock Exchange, or its executives.
The agreement fueled speculation that PartyGaming might be trying to position itself for a return to the U.S. market, if online gambling were legalized.
Analysts say one possibility for European companies like PartyGaming, should the ban be lifted, would be to form partnerships with American casino operators. That would allow the European companies to share their online expertise. Operating alone, they might struggle to obtain licenses, given their history of run-ins with U.S. law enforcement, analysts said.
“It’s my feeling that even if the market were opened up, the U.S. government, in a palatable way, would probably find a way to give local companies a favorable position,” Mr. Batram said.
So far, Las Vegas executives have maintained a cautious stance about legalization of online gambling. Steve Wynn, chief executive of Wynn Resorts, said in an e-mail message that he thought it would be “impossible to regulate.”
“Even though it would be a benefit to our company, we are strongly opposed,” he said.
But speculation that Las Vegas casino operators were looking into the possibilities was fueled by recent reports that Harrah’s Entertainment, which owns Caesars Palace and other casinos, recently hired Mitch Garber, former chief executive of PartyGaming, for an unspecified role. Harrah’s did not return calls.
Mr. Ryan said that PartyGaming planned to focus on acquisition opportunities to increase its market share in Europe and elsewhere, something that was difficult as long as investors were worried about the U.S. litigation. “We think Mr. Frank’s efforts are quite meaningful to the sector,” he said.
Several other online gambling companies whose shares are traded in London, including 888 Holdings and Sportingbet, are still in talks with the U.S. Justice Department. Analysts expect them, along with companies like Bwin International, whose stock is traded in Vienna, to be involved in a round of consolidation in the industry — along with a possible eventual move back into the United States.
As they await developments in Washington, online gambling companies are looking for growth in Europe and Asia. Under pressure from regulators in Brussels, several European Union members, including France, Italy, Spain and Denmark, have been moving to legalize some kinds of online gambling, turning it into a regulated and taxed business. Britain was the first big European country to do so, in 2005.
Other countries, like Germany, Greece and the Netherlands, continue to hold out, though, in what the European Commission sees as an effort to protect government-sponsored gambling monopolies from private competition.
The commission in March published a report arguing that the United States was violating World Trade Organization rules by keeping out European online gambling companies, given that online betting on horse racing is permitted in the United States. But the commission said that it favored negotiations, rather than legal action, to end the dispute.
Also in March, however, the European Parliament adopted a separate measure supporting the right of individual E.U. member states to make their own rules on online gambling.
“It’s interesting that the European Commission is telling the U.S. it’s persecuting European companies when it can’t even get its own house sorted out,” Mr. Batram said.
A New Chance for Online Betting Sports in the U.S.
By ERIC PFANNER
PARIS — Is online gambling coming in from the cold?
When the U.S. Congress cracked down on Internet betting in 2006, the big, publicly traded European companies that had dominated the business closed up shop in the United States. Growth in the booming industry shifted away from these companies, once the darlings of the stock market, to private operators in offshore locations like Antigua and the Isle of Man.
But now, executives of some of the European companies whisper excitedly that they may soon get a second chance in the United States. Meanwhile, a number of European countries that have long maintained barriers are moving, under pressure from regulators, to legalize, and tax, online gambling.
“There’s still a lot of gambling going on, where there’s no revenue coming in to the governments,” said Gavin Kelleher, an analyst at the research firm H2 Gambling Capital in Ireland. “They realize they could use the revenue.”
The biggest potential change would be in the United States, where, perhaps this month, Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts, is expected to introduce legislation aimed at overturning the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act.
“He supports the repeal and wants to move forward on it,” said Steve Adamske, communications director for the House Financial Services Committee, of which Mr. Frank is chairman.
Mr. Frank tried and failed to do so once before, in 2007. But advocates of liberalization think they might get a friendlier hearing in Washington this time around. President Barack Obama, they note, boasted of his poker prowess during the election campaign. And the Democrats, who are seen as less hostile to Internet gambling than the Republicans, have tightened their grip on Congress.
A study by PricewaterhouseCoopers says the U.S. government could raise more than $50 billion over 10 years from taxes on legalized online gambling.
“I’d be amazed if it didn’t happen over the next two or three years,” said Clive Hawkswood, chief executive of the Remote Gambling Association, a trade group based in London. “It’s just a question of what exactly the regulations will say.”
Some analysts say that may be getting a little bit ahead of the game. Opponents of a repeal, including the Christian Coalition of America and the National Football League, have vowed to fight any new effort to end the ban.
Michele Combs, a spokeswoman for the Christian Coalition, said the group was gearing up for a “massive campaign” of letter-writing and lobbying to try to prevent any loosening of the law.
“We’re not saying people shouldn’t go to Las Vegas,” she said. “But when it’s in your home, it’s too easy. It breaks up families.”
U.S. sports leagues, meanwhile, worry that the ease of online betting increases the chances of game-fixing. Even the most bullish advocates of online gambling acknowledge that Internet sports betting — as opposed to poker or casino games — is highly unlikely to be legalized.
“There’s a better chance now for some sort of gaming legislation to be approved,” said Nick Batram, an analyst at KBC Peel Hunt, a brokerage firm in London. “But it took longer than expected to put anti-gaming legislation in place, and it will probably will take longer than expected to remove it.”
Since the 2006 law was passed, North America, once the biggest market, has been passed by Europe and Asia, according to figures from H2 Gambling Capital. The law makes it illegal for financial institutions to handle payments to online gambling sites. But enough people have found ways around it, some by using overseas payment processors, to ensure that online gambling remains a thriving business. H2 says online gambling generated revenue of $6 billion last year in North America, more than a quarter the global total of $22.6 billion, up from $17.6 billion in 2006.
Pulling out of the United States cost PartyGaming about three-quarters of its business. Its position as the biggest online poker provider has been taken over by PokerStars, a privately held operator based on the Isle of Man.
This month, PartyGaming agreed to a $105 million settlement with the U.S. attorney’s office in New York, involving the period before 2006, when it acknowledged that its activities had been “contrary to certain U.S. laws.” In turn, the U.S. authorities agreed not to prosecute the company, which is listed on the London Stock Exchange, or its executives.
The agreement fueled speculation that PartyGaming might be trying to position itself for a return to the U.S. market, if online gambling were legalized.
Analysts say one possibility for European companies like PartyGaming, should the ban be lifted, would be to form partnerships with American casino operators. That would allow the European companies to share their online expertise. Operating alone, they might struggle to obtain licenses, given their history of run-ins with U.S. law enforcement, analysts said.
“It’s my feeling that even if the market were opened up, the U.S. government, in a palatable way, would probably find a way to give local companies a favorable position,” Mr. Batram said.
So far, Las Vegas executives have maintained a cautious stance about legalization of online gambling. Steve Wynn, chief executive of Wynn Resorts, said in an e-mail message that he thought it would be “impossible to regulate.”
“Even though it would be a benefit to our company, we are strongly opposed,” he said.
But speculation that Las Vegas casino operators were looking into the possibilities was fueled by recent reports that Harrah’s Entertainment, which owns Caesars Palace and other casinos, recently hired Mitch Garber, former chief executive of PartyGaming, for an unspecified role. Harrah’s did not return calls.
Mr. Ryan said that PartyGaming planned to focus on acquisition opportunities to increase its market share in Europe and elsewhere, something that was difficult as long as investors were worried about the U.S. litigation. “We think Mr. Frank’s efforts are quite meaningful to the sector,” he said.
Several other online gambling companies whose shares are traded in London, including 888 Holdings and Sportingbet, are still in talks with the U.S. Justice Department. Analysts expect them, along with companies like Bwin International, whose stock is traded in Vienna, to be involved in a round of consolidation in the industry — along with a possible eventual move back into the United States.
As they await developments in Washington, online gambling companies are looking for growth in Europe and Asia. Under pressure from regulators in Brussels, several European Union members, including France, Italy, Spain and Denmark, have been moving to legalize some kinds of online gambling, turning it into a regulated and taxed business. Britain was the first big European country to do so, in 2005.
Other countries, like Germany, Greece and the Netherlands, continue to hold out, though, in what the European Commission sees as an effort to protect government-sponsored gambling monopolies from private competition.
The commission in March published a report arguing that the United States was violating World Trade Organization rules by keeping out European online gambling companies, given that online betting on horse racing is permitted in the United States. But the commission said that it favored negotiations, rather than legal action, to end the dispute.
Also in March, however, the European Parliament adopted a separate measure supporting the right of individual E.U. member states to make their own rules on online gambling.
“It’s interesting that the European Commission is telling the U.S. it’s persecuting European companies when it can’t even get its own house sorted out,” Mr. Batram said.
A New Chance for Online Betting Sports in the U.S.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
