One federal judge blasted people who use a so-called prediction market to bet on sports.
Colleen McMahon, Senior Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, said in a new court filing involving the Sydney Sweeney-backed Novig that users are “suckers.”
“Novig makes its money, not off the sucker who places a losing bet on a sports event, but by charging two suckers a fee for the privilege of betting against each other on its platform,” Judge McMahon wrote.
Zooming Out
She is the same judge who sentenced former WFAN personality Craig Carton to 42 months in federal prison (less than what prosecutors sought) for a multimillion-dollar fraud scheme tied to his gambling debts.
Judge McMahon, appointed by Bill Clinton in the late 1990s, may have some strong opinions on sports gambling-related harm. For what it’s worth, the federal government passed a prohibition on state-sanctioned sports betting in the 1990s, only for the Supreme Court to strike down the law in 2018.
Her comments are remarkable for their generalization and blunt tone, but they still point to a central truth: over time, most sports bettors lose money, whether house-banked or peer-to-peer.
Is ‘Sucker’ Too Harsh?
Putting the legal case involving Novig aside, the question is whether McMahon’s comments were too harsh for users of a prediction market like Novig.
Yes and no.
Sucker can be a problematic word if it stigmatizes users of these platforms, which are relentlessly advertised, especially to young people. Everyone has the capacity to ignore potentially harmful advertising, but it will obviously be effective on some people.
We can’t blame people for falling prey to an inundation of ads. Likewise, if someone started using a prediction market due to peer pressure.
If someone develops problem gambling using a prediction market, they should consider seeking support and possibly therapy. Calling people suckers doesn’t help with an addiction that very few people seek help for.
Polling shows that many people think sports betting is skill-based, and more troubling with prediction markets, a potential source of “investment.” That, of course, is absurd.
In some ways, yes, sports bettors who try to make money can fit the definition of a sucker because they are very unlikely to win in the long run.
A Kentucky lawmaker also recently used the word “sucker” to describe sports bettors—all of them. Warren Buffett has used similar language to refer to gamblers.
Bottom line: “Sucker” seems acceptable when referring to the structural dynamic of sports betting or gambling in general. But it shouldn’t be used to refer to people who have problems controlling their play.
Image via Wikimedia Commons.
