Today, Explained - The case against legal sports betting
Episode Date: December 23, 2024Sports betting is a costly mistake, says addiction researcher Charles Fain Lehman. He and NBA great Danny Green discuss how it's changed sports for the worse, and whether there's a way to fix it. This... episode was produced by Hady Mawajdeh, edited by Matt Collette, fact checked by Laura Bullard with help from Victoria Chamberlin, engineered by Andrea Kristinsdottir, and hosted by Sean Rameswaram. Special thanks to Steven Delaney, host of Fantasy or Reality? The Gambling Problem Podcast. Transcript at vox.com/today-explained-podcast Support Today, Explained by becoming a Vox Member today: http://www.vox.com/members Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Transcript
Discussion (0)
Remember when sports betting wasn't everywhere you looked in this country?
Back in the 90s, Congress passed a pretty sweeping ban on sports betting across the United States.
This is a pretty universally popular law. It passes overwhelmingly. All the sports leagues speak out in favor of it.
It's the law of the land between 1992 and 2018.
It wasn't until 2018 that the Supreme Court stepped in and basically undid that law.
Since then, almost all of the states have gone ahead and legalized sports betting.
The American Gaming Association estimates that last year, Americans bet over $100 billion on sports.
Something like one in three Americans now bets on sports.
It's everywhere. It's on your phone. It's on TV.
ESPN, which is to say Disney, now runs its own sports book.
Mickey Mouse is now a bookie.
That's completely correct.
Pay up or I'll break your knees.
Charles here says legalization was a terrible mistake.
He's going to tell us why on Today Explained.
BetMGM, authorized gaming partner of the NBA, has your back all season long.
From tip-off to the final buzzer, you're always taken care of with a sportsbook born in Vegas.
That's a feeling you can only get with Bet MGM.
And no matter your team, your favorite player, or your style,
there's something every NBA fan will love about Bet MGM.
Download the app today and discover why bet MGM is your basketball home
for the season raise your game to the next level this year with bet MGM a sports book worth a slam
dunk and authorized gaming partner of the NBA bet MGM.com for terms and conditions must be 19 years
of age or older to wager Ontario only please play responsibly if you have any questions or concerns about your
gambling or someone close to you please contact connex ontario at 1-866-531-2600 to speak to an
advisor free of charge bet mgm operates pursuant to an operating agreement with i gaming ontario
listen up it's today explained Listen up. It's Today Explained.
Charles Fane Lehman wrote a piece for The Atlantic this year titled
Legalizing Sports Gambling Was a Huge Mistake.
We got holidays coming up. There's lots of sports to watch.
Felt like a good time to ask him why he wrote that.
When you do the sort of cost-benefit math,
gambling looks like any other addictive substance,
which is that most of the people who participate in it
get some small sort of utilitarian hedonic benefit.
They get some fun out of it.
And then a smaller subset of those people
will become seriously addicted
and do serious harm to themselves, to others, and potentially ruin their lives.
You know, I'd stop for a week or a month or whatever it was,
and then I'd realize I still have this credit card bill to pay,
or I can't believe what I did.
I have to win this money back, or I have to keep playing.
Gambling addiction is associated with all sorts of terrible outcomes,
including loss of your home, loss of family,
loss of life through personal action.
And so we've created this enormous concentrated social harm.
And in return, we've gotten some kind of anemic tax revenue
and a bunch of ads everywhere.
It just doesn't seem like a worthwhile trade-off to me.
Wow, it sounds like you really don't like it, though.
I don't. I don't. And I don't like it for the reasons that I'm skeptical of a lot of
vice goods. And I think we tend to systematically underrate their harms, but the problems are the
same in every case, which is that they concentrate in a small number of users who will do the overwhelming majority of the using and will experience the overwhelming majority of the harm.
And everybody else is sort of benefiting off of their backs, which is an alarming arrangement to me.
Do we actually have any receipts, Charles, of the widespread legalization of sports gambling increasing how many lives are ruined due to legal sports
betting in this country. Yeah, absolutely. You know, and I think at this point, many Americans
know somebody who's been affected by this. Many Americans know people in the whole. I was at a
wedding recently and a friend of mine from college told me about a friend of his back home in Erie,
Pennsylvania. He works at the post office, not, you know not a well-off guy who's $28,000 in the hole on sports betting.
Just a tremendous problem.
The interesting thing about gambling legalization, we have information on this, mostly from the UK's experience.
The UK's experience is pretty grim.
There's one estimate that says 8% of all completed suicides in the UK are attributable to sports gambling addiction.
Yikes.
That's not great.
But the thing about the U.S. context is to sort of try to simplify it,
because gambling was legalized in different states at different times,
economists can use a fairly specific set of methods to isolate the causal effect of sports gambling,
not just sort of the correlates of sports gambling,
really what sports gambling causes on a number of different outcomes.
One of the studies that I point to from economists at Northwestern University
estimates that for every dollar spent on sports gambling,
households put $2 less into investment accounts.
There are big increases in the risk of overdrafting a bank account
or maxing out a credit card.
There's another paper from economists at UCLA and USC
looking specifically at online sports gambling.
And they find that legalization increases the risk of bankruptcy by 25% to 30%,
which is a big relative risk increase against a small baseline, but still.
And the other thing that really sticks out in those studies is that the harms tend to concentrate among the most economically precarious,
right? The people with a history of overdraft end up overdrafting more. There is sort of ecological
evidence that the harms tend to concentrate in the areas with highest levels of poverty,
that they also tend to concentrate among young men who are already at risk for all sorts of, frankly, not great financial decision making. And so it seems like it's not just that,
you know, gambling harm befalls some people, it's that gambling harm befalls often the people who
can least afford to have it come down on them. Like the guy I was talking about earlier, who's,
you know, nearly 30 grand in the hole, working at the post office.
Do we know how much money on average people are losing versus, say, they're winning?
Yeah, actually.
So there's another study from folks at Southern Methodist University
where they have a panel of 700,000 sports bettors.
And they show a couple of really interesting things.
So only about 5% of people in the panel withdrew more from the apps than they
deposited. So 95% of people are losing money. Wow. That's actually not the interesting thing.
The really interesting thing is that about 3% in their estimate, about 3% of bettors drive 50%
of sports gambling profits. And this, just to go back to the conversation earlier, is what you see
in all markets in addictive goods. They follow what's sometimes called a Pareto distribution or power law distribution.
Five to 10% of the people who are doing the consuming will do 80 to 90% of the consuming.
And that's pretty clearly true here as well.
How much does the amount people are losing, the amount people are betting, the amount people are gambling altogether have to do with
how much gambling has changed with the little devices that we keep in our pockets.
It's a big part of the story in more ways than one. You know, one component of it is just it's
much more readily available, which is to say, if I have to go to a casino to gamble, I may not want to take the time out of my day.
I may not make the effort at the margin.
I may not get drawn in.
And so over the long run, you generate fewer people who are addicted because they never get exposed in the first place.
This is the virtue of keeping gambling in Las Vegas is you have to go to Vegas to do it.
Remember what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas.
But then I think, to my mind, the much more alarming thing is that app-based gaming facilitates algorithmic discrimination
on the part of the sportsbook provider.
They can tell, it's actually trivial to tell with modern methods,
who the people are who are going to spend the most.
They know when you check your bets in the middle of the night. They know when you are watching the
game. They know what you are doing and how much you are betting. And then what they can do is
algorithmically reinforce that. They can make you offers. They can assign you a personal concierge
who encourages you to bet more. This is actually what they do at casinos in Vegas.
If you're a whale, a big spender, you'll get all sorts of good stuff comped.
But instead of that happening in sort of a dingy hotel or even a glamorous hotel,
that's happening on your phone all day, every day, until they get all of your money.
It's quite clear from speaking with you, Charles, that there's a lot of harm
being introduced to this entire country, but certainly states across the country,
from legal sports betting. And it's especially hitting young men. But it was legalized with
the promise that it was going to bring a lot of benefits to the states
that approved it you seem to believe that isn't paying off yeah and you know i think that there
were a few arguments here one is tax revenue and that's a big selling point yeah and the reality
is that the tax revenue has been pretty anemic um if you look at the census figures from QTAC, say,
you look at the 38 legal states in their most recent count,
together, gambling is generating about half a billion dollars a quarter,
which is not nothing, but is a drop in the bucket
compared to not just most state revenue needs,
but also substantially less than you get from alcohol, tobacco,
or marijuana, which is legal in fewer states. So it's not even a particularly revenue generating
syntax. Another argument is that you would reduce the reach of the offshore gambling sites.
That doesn't really appear to be happening. There's a survey, I think, out of Massachusetts
where they found that bettors were just as likely
to use unauthorized betting sites after legalization.
But it makes sense.
If you're an active sports bettor,
you're betting on multiple sportsbooks.
You're trying to get as much action as possible.
And so the offshore sites are just compliments.
They aren't substitutes.
And then the third argument is one that I think we should take seriously, which is like the hedonic benefits and the sort of individual liberty benefits.
But as I talked about earlier, you know, A, we didn't like live in a terrible dictatorship in 2017.
If you and I made a bet together, neither of us was at any risk of going to jail.
Right. That was it was not illegal for us
to make up an interpersonal bet.
The thing that was illegal was for big businesses
and states to get involved in the action.
And, you know, I'm just not that upset
about restricting the liberty of, like,
the state of Georgia or Fluttershy
to get involved in your and my bets.
So I, you know, that argument doesn't hold
a lot of water with me either.
Charles Fane Lehman.
He mostly writes about drugs but makes exceptions for gambling.
He's a fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a contributing editor at City Journal, city-journal.org.
All the sports betting isn't just changing the experience for fans.
It's changing the experience for athletes, it's changing the experience for athletes too.
We're going to hear from a pretty good one
when we're back on Today Explained.
Support for Today Explained comes from Noom.
Noom wants to remind you that the end of the year is on the horizon. And so
if you made a New Year's resolution back in, you know, Jan, like, it's crunch time, they say. And
yes, maybe you cheated. Maybe you lost track. We're all human. But Noom wants you to know that,
you know, if you started rebounding with junk food on that diet you resolved to, you know,
commit to, it may have less to do with discipline and more to do with psychology.
Ask Phoebe Rios, one of our colleagues here at Vox, who tried Noom herself.
I feel like the plan Noom created was catered to my individual needs.
It was very thorough.
I felt like the questions they asked, I hadn't even asked myself,
like what time I get out of bed in the morning morning and if I eat with my phone in my hand.
It was very helpful and very, very educating of how I spend my day.
Stay focused on what's important to you with Noom's psychology and biology-based approach.
Sign up for your trial today at Noom.com.
Support for today explained comes from Hydro. Most of our home workout dreams crash and burn after a few months, says Hydro. You end up with a pile of unused dumbbells, perhaps,
a treadmill that's too heavy to move, and a bag full of those multi-colored
stretchy bands you never actually tried. But what if there were a piece of equipment out there that
could help you get a full body workout at home? Allow me to introduce you to the Hydro Rowing
Machine. You can give the gift of a full body workout all from the comfort of home
with Hydro. Head over to hydro.com and use the code EXPLAINED to save up to $475 off your Hydro.
That's H-Y-D-R-O-W.com, code EXPLAINED, to save up to $475, hydro.com code EXPLAINED.
Support for today's show comes from Vanta.
Whether you're starting or scaling your company's security program,
demonstrating those top-notch security practices and establishing trust is more important than ever.
Vanta says they can automate compliance for SOC 2, ISO 27001, and so much more,
saving you time and money, helping you build customer trust.
Plus, Vanta says you can streamline security reviews by automating questionnaires
and demonstrating your security posture.
Sit up straight with a customer-facing trust center all powered by Vanta AI.
According to Vanta, over 8,000 global companies
like Atlassian, Flow Health, and Quora
use Vanta to manage risk and provide security in real time.
You can get $1,000 off Vanta
when you go to vanta.com slash explained.
That's vanta.com slash explained for $1,000 off.
Today, Explained is back. today explained it's back and i'll be back too for my money danny green didn't just win one nba championship he won three with three different teams including
my toronto raptors for which i had to thank him. No thanks necessary. It was my pleasure.
All that winning served as inspiration when it came time to name his son.
His name is Wynn.
Wynn?
Yeah.
Like W-I-N?
Yes, like I win, you lose.
So yeah, he's part of the brand. It's us on brand.
And he was a celebration himself because we weren't sure if we were able to have him naturally.
And he did happen
naturally. So he was a win.
Danny's got time to spend with Wynn and talk to us because he just retired from professional
basketball. But he played in the NBA for 15 years and witnessed the boom in sports betting
firsthand from the court. And it was a far cry from what he saw when he was starting out as a
college player almost 20 years ago. Very illegal. Everything was illegal. There was no NIL. There
was none of that. Everything was illegal. By the time Danny's ready to retire from the NBA,
he's not just getting yelled at by an opposing player or his coach. There are fans who are mad
about their parlay getting messed up. So you messing up someone's parlay or messing up someone's gambling bet on you
is that they took you for usually over a certain amount of points,
rebounds, or assists, or all the above together.
And it's like, all right, sometimes a parlay may be,
Boston is going to win by plus six and a half,
and then so-and-so is going to lose by minus four and a half,
and then this player is going to get over 10 rebounds.
This player is going to get over six assists.
This person is going to get over two and a half three-pointers made.
That's usually I'm one of those guys.
At least one and a half three-pointers made.
And if you win or if you get hit on all these people that you gamble on risk, it's a big payout.
And they might get nine out of the 10.
And if you're the one out of the 10 that doesn't get that one and a half threes
or two and a half threes for them,
they're going to cuss you out.
And, you know, because they were this short
of turning $5 into $25,000.
You know what I'm saying?
So that's ultimately what a parlay is.
So tell me when you're playing
towards the end of your career
and sports betting has become
a daily part of
the conversation when you think back to those days which aren't that long ago did you ever get
the impression on the court that someone was mad at you for a given play or for some yes 100% like
if you score at the end of the game you you might mess up the spread. You turn the ball over or whatever it is.
Or if you lose a game that you were favored in, we are more aware of it and it's brought to our attention.
Do we care?
No.
But my initial reaction, to be honest, is down, down, down!
So players aren't scared of that?
They're not worried about fans and their various bets?
No.
It's a risk.
It's called a gamble for a reason.
If you want to risk your house or your life or your life savings on something,
obviously our job is to play basketball.
It's a physical performing type of game.
And as much as we want to play well,
we can't control every night that we're going to play great.
It's a very unpredictable, and most sports are very unpredictable,
in terms of who's going to win, the outcome, who's going to get hurt, who's not,
or how well you're going to play, how well you're going to feel when you're in that,
or how the coach is going to play you, or how the team is going to guard you.
A lot of those things are out of your control.
We go out every night trying to do our best.
Of course, we try to win.
Nobody tries to perform terrible unless you're betting the unders on yourself
and you're trying to win some money.
Which is illegal, apparently.
Yes, very illegal.
So none of us are going out there trying to get the unders or trying to play bad.
We want to win. We want to play well.
Ultimately, because us playing well gets us the contract we want.
Danny Green committing to the Lakers on a two-year deal.
He's a career 40-plus percent.
We get more money. We get more looks.
We get to stay in this profession longer.
We get a chance to do what we love and play more minutes.
So nobody wants to play bad.
Nobody wants to do under what they're expected.
You know, players like Kevin Durant and Kyrie Irving
have complained about the harassment
and said, you know, it's distracting from their game.
Gambling and sports betting
has completely taken the purity away
and the fun away from the game at times.
I'm going to just be honest with y'all.
I could imagine on that level.
I mean, they're superstars,
so I'm sure it's a...
I was a role player, and I got it.
So I can imagine on a superstar level
how much DMs...
I mean, it's give and take.
Advantage is advantage.
I'm sure they get a lot of
opportunities for sponsorships money and people will want to have access to them that they
would love to meet or they look up to or you know what i hang out with or kick it with
or do business with another flip side of it is people flooding your dms with with bs too so like
it's a give and take it's a gift and a a curse on both sides of it. Did the opposite ever happen?
Did it ever feel good to get off the court and hear from someone that you made them like $10,000 or something like that?
Yeah.
I mean, sometimes it's cool.
Not that you're going to get a cut, but it's like, oh, that's cool, man.
I'm glad I did.
I used to bet on you all the time.
And some people are like, I lost a lot of money too, man.
Trust me.
If I played better, I probably would have made more money.
And it's like, you know, but when you make the money, you ain't going to give me the money,
so why, you know?
There was one time Floyd won big money.
We beat the Lakers.
He gambled on us beating them.
I was in San Antonio.
Hit a big shot.
Undefeated boxer Floyd Mayweather.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
And people are like, oh, he ain't send you a cut.
No, absolutely not.
Why would he?
It's his money.
He risked it, but no.
He sent me a little
you know money team back like gift small thing we connected it was cool good people but
I ain't gonna see the money so as great as it feels it's not like I'm getting to really share
that with you it's like oh that's cool but I really don't care but I'm happy for you I'm
happy you won money on my behalf you know you've talked about how the athletes aren't betting themselves and, you know, they don't have money riding on the games.
But, of course, earlier this year, we saw former now Toronto Raptors player Jontae Porter got kicked out of the league for betting.
Toronto Raptors forward Jontae Porter has been banned from the NBA for life. The NBA says Porter committed several serious violations
that include betting on games,
providing confidential information to bettors,
and worse, limiting his own participation in games.
It's cardinal sin, you know,
that what he's accused of in the NBA
and the ultimate extreme option I have
is, you know, to ban him from the game.
There is nothing more serious.
What did you think when you saw what happened to John Day?
What did you make of that?
I mean, they had to make an example of something so rightfully so.
I mean, like, what do we do?
Like, come on, man.
Like I said, if you're going to better yourself, at least bet the overs and try to make it happen. But to bet the unders and then hurt your own career,
be sick or get hurt mid-game and call out or purposely not take shots or try to miss shots,
that's just something I can't fathom.
I just don't understand it.
In the realm of being a basketball player and a competitor,
I just can't understand why you would ever set yourself up for failure
on both sides.
You're risking getting kicked out and you're risking not getting a contract or being picked up by another NBA team by playing bad and being hurled so like it's a double negative a double
L in my in my eyes so it's like man bad way to go out but you know and got punished rightfully so you know and they within good reason
and they had to make example somebody so that nobody else comes along and tries to do it again
do you think there's any chance instead of getting the periodic reminder that you know you're not
allowed to do this so another athlete's getting banned from the league do you think there's a
chance that gambling sports betting becomes so pervasive and so detrimental to the game that actually we dial
it back and say, you know what, we're not going to allow X kind of betting. We're not going to
allow Y kind of betting to preserve the sanctity of the game. Or do you think the cat's out of the
bag? Cat's out. It's never going back. Too much money involved. It's always everything in business
is money, right? When money's involved in this is bringing so much money into the world,
into the sports and every industry,
I honestly think it'll go the other way where they'll start saying,
we'll allow guys to bet on their respective sports, but all right, listen,
you can't bet on your own sport.
That's the lead, but I'm sure they're going to,
guys are going to be betting on other sports openly at some point.
NBA players have been on football, football, NBA, MLB, hockey, whatever it is.
But once it's open, once it's hard to go backwards, you know, once you go,
you can be strict early and set the rules.
But once you lighten up, you can't go back.
You know what I'm saying?
Like, all right, we're going to go back to this.
It's like trying to tell NBA players, we're going to insist on the drug rule again,
you know, the marijuana drug rule
again. And they'll be like, what the hell?
So I just don't see
it happening. Anything's possible.
Anything's possible!
But I just don't see that happening.
We asked Charles from earlier
in the show the same question. You'll
recall he hates sports betting.
We told him Danny said the genie's not going back in the bottle, and Charles. You'll recall he hates sports betting. We told him Danny said
the genie's not going back in the bottle and Charles had a counter argument.
I mean, look, we say that and my response to that is 1992 is not a million years ago, right? It's
not a different universe. Joe Biden was an important political figure in 1992 and he's
an important political figure today. i will make the argument for the
virtues of prohibition and the argument for it is in essence that prohibition is big and dumb and
it works when you try to set up a regulatory system you run into the risk of what's called
regulatory capture or in less fancy terms the entities that are being regulated will have a
lot of incentive to spend as much money as possible influencing the regulators.
Prohibition seemed to work pretty well, and it avoided precisely the problems that regulatory capture can bring up.
That said, I think we could certainly do a heck of a lot better than we're doing right now.
You could ban advertising.
You could severely restrict the usage of or
altogether ban app-based betting. You could try to limit the ability of sportsbooks to discriminate
against that 5% of players who are taking money out because that ends up being obviously unfair.
You could put caps on how much they're allowed to solicit deposits or other targeting methods for
sort of
bringing in those addicted users. The thing is that I think all of those would make a difference.
And also because I think they'd make a difference, I suspect that the sports gambling
corporations will fight them tooth and nail. And the current political track record is that they
will win. You know, there's the sort of strong argument for the prohibitionist position is trying to reach a half measure may actually be harder than just going all the way.
If you can convince people that sports gambling legalization isn't worth it.
Whether or not you can convince people, I don't know.
But I'm trying.
That was Charles.
You know Charles.
Before that, Danny Green Champ.
He has a podcast. It's called Inside the Green Room.
Get it?
This episode was produced by Hadi Mawagdi.
It was edited by Matthew Collette.
Fact-checked by Laura Bullard.
Mixed by Patrick Boyd and Andrea Christen's daughter.
I'm Sean Ramos-Vurum. This is Today Explained.
Merry Christmas to all who celebrate. Happy Hanukkah is Today Explained. Merry Christmas to all who celebrate.
Happy Hanukkah to all who celebrate.
Happy Monday to all who celebrate.
Today Explained is back in your feeds on Boxing Day. you