SCOTUS legalizes sports gambling - new pool sponsors?

alstl

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Supposedly that was the plan for the IPT - profit from betting would fund it. Then congress intervened.

I wonder how much this will hurt Vegas.
 

Johnnyt

Burn all jump cues
Silver Member
This could be very good to bring a lot more fans will watch pool...if thy can bet on it. First U.S pool needs an org. with real rules and ban players that try and fix games. Not many will bet on pool if it can't be trusted. It could be what saves pool in the U.S...if handled right. Johnnyt
 

LeonD123

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
This could be very good to bring a lot more fans will watch pool...if thy can bet on it. First U.S pool needs an org. with real rules and ban players that try and fix games. Not many will bet on pool if it can't be trusted. It could be what saves pool in the U.S...if handled right. Johnnyt

212.jpg

Pool needs him !
 

ghost ball

justnum survivor
Silver Member
This could be very good to bring a lot more fans will watch pool...if thy can bet on it. First U.S pool needs an org. with real rules and ban players that try and fix games. Not many will bet on pool if it can't be trusted. It could be what saves pool in the U.S...if handled right. Johnnyt

Two words, "Buddy Hall".
 

Ill Gotten Gain

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
And folks have fixed Baseball games, horse races, boxing matches, basketball games, point shaving schemes in major colleges, etc, and they all survived it. Each and everyone one of them.

Pool does not even compare to those sports listed. Those sports survived because they are watched by a much wider audience.

I love pool and billiards but let's be realistic. Pool does not appeal to the general population. It's not a major sport. Fringe sport is more like it
 

Celophanewrap

Call me Grace
Silver Member
Is betting on Pool in Las Vegas illegal or is it casino policy?
It would seem that nothing has really changed there, it would still be simple to
fix a pool match
 

SouthernDraw

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Atm you can only bet in casinos ?

I believe that the court struck down a federal law that was about gambling in casinos. However, the rationale is that the federal government doesn't have power to stop gambling. But it (being Congress) can regulate gambling. So, if Congress fails to regulate gambling, the individual states must regulate it themselves. It is somewhat of a states rights argument. But it has not being relayed this way. I assume because liberal judges are now using the argument push their own agendas in other areas.

At any rate, this could potentially open up internet gambling and that would change pool in the states. How? I don't know. I suppose a lot of unintended consequences.

BTW, many states like NJ have been scurrying to make laws to govern gambling within their states. Maybe we have some lawyers that could shed light on this subject for us. I remember a lawyer that Jay Helfert had a couple of years ago about a similar subject but forgot his name.
 

JC

Coos Cues
Gold Member
The last time Vegas gave odds on pool the players dumped thus killing the goose that laid the golden egg.

Not going to change a thing.

JC
 

measureman

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Living in Colorado we already have Casino gambling,concealed carry and legal pot.

Now we might have legal sports gambling?
It just keeps getting better.
Just more winning.
Fire up a joint,play the slots and bet on the Broncos.
 

skip100

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Las Vegas might have been learned its lesson, but that won't stop some other state from trying it at some point.
 

MitchAlsup

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I believe that the court struck down a federal law that was about gambling in casinos. However, the rationale is that the federal government doesn't have power to stop gambling. But it (being Congress) can regulate gambling. So, if Congress fails to regulate gambling, the individual states must regulate it themselves. It is somewhat of a states rights argument. But it has not being relayed this way. I assume because liberal judges are now using the argument push their own agendas in other areas.

SCOTUS ruled that a ban on gambling is not regulation of gambling.
*.gov is allowed to regulate gambling but not ban gambling.

I wonder if Captain Obvious made an appearance in court during oral arguments.
 

jojopiff

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Well the Wire Wager Act is still in effect which essentially (to my understanding) bans wagering across state lines. So unless you’re in the same state as said event, it’s still going to be illegal. And I’d guess that whatever entity is running the book it’ll take only one time (or zero times if they’re familiar with the characters of pool) to have someone dump *cough cough Buddy Hall* and they won’t take any pool action.

So for the above reasons I do not believe pool will benefit from this, maybe Calcutta’s which are sometimes not done cause they’re illegal in at least some states.
 

Island Drive

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I was talking with Harry Plattis, Seattle Lawyer at Derby city this years. He's been instrumental in getting this done. He told me at this years DCC event, that he's been working on this for 7 years....I'd love tah bet on pool matches in any state of the union. He told me, Vegas was the culprit, keeping this under the hat and controlling gambling from NV, not now. Cats out of the bag.
 

Forbin

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
SCOTUS ruled that a ban on gambling is not regulation of gambling.
*.gov is allowed to regulate gambling but not ban gambling.

***I have not read the Court's opinion. The following is based on summaries of the opinion in the news.***

The Court did not legalize sports gambling, it did not rule that "a ban on gambling is not regulation", and it did not rule that the government is not allowed to ban gambling. If the court had ruled that a ban is not regulation, not only would that reasoning lead to legalization of sports gambling but also all prohibited drugs (which are prohibited by the federal government pursuant to it power to regulate interstate commerce).

The Court struck down a law that prohibited any more states from legalizing sports gambling. When the law was passed, Nevada already had legal sports gambling and the law allowed them to continue. It also gave the other states one year to legalize sports gambling, but none did. The Court ruled that this awkward law forced the state governments to implement federal policy, rather than the federal government implementing its own policy. Such practice has long been deemed unconstitutional. If the federal government chose to pass a law that outright bans sports gambling in all 50 states, that would still be allowed.

Thus, the Court's ruling does not legalize sports betting - it allows the states to do so. Apparently, New Jersey and a couple of other states are either well on their way to doing so or already have. Analysts seem to think many other states will do so within the next year or so.
 
Top