Sportsbetting in AC casinos

jaygruden

Well-Known Member
#2
Interesting.......but I don't see this coming to fruition. Feds won't allow it, especially with all of the well publicized corruption already present in college sports. There will be strong opp. to allowing legal books in yet another state, IMHO.
 
#3
Allow sports betting, but don't allow bets on sports involving teams within 100 miles of AC. That excludes NYC and Philly pro and college teams, Rutgers, Delaware, etc.

There are so many online sportsbooks and illegal bookies that any cheating is already occurring. Maybe capping the betting in AC would keep the dirty element out, while still allowing people to bet for entertainment, but it would also shut out the professionals.
 

ChefJJ

Well-Known Member
#4
alwayssplitaces said:
Allow sports betting, but don't allow bets on sports involving teams within 100 miles of AC. That excludes NYC and Philly pro and college teams, Rutgers, Delaware, etc.
I don't even know if excluding pro teams is really necessary. But, yes, this is probably all pie in the sky talk. Delaware allows sports betting, but there's no issue with wagering on those teams in the region.
 
#5
It's a ridiculous premise, that sports betting in NJ will increase cheating (they can go to Nevada to cheat) or that not taking bets on NJ college teams will prevent cheating (they can go to Nevada to cheat.) Football now gives the appearance of a rigged game, probably nothing that can be done about it.
 

zoomie

Well-Known Member
#6
Not in our lifetimes

New Jersey voters had one chance to legalize sports betting under a federal law passed decades ago. They had to pass a referendum within one year. There was no referendum because the Republican legislature feared a big inner-city turnout that would defeat Christy Todd Whitman. That was the window, and it is, I believe, forever closed. :mad::mad:
 
#7
Sports betting would be improved in so many ways if they switched to the parimutuel system instead of betting against the house. For one, the casinos wouldn't have to worry about taking losses or refusing any action, being they are getting a fixed cut of all action, and they could treat sports AP's like they do poker AP's, kind of indifferently.

It would also clean up the games a little bit because placing large action on a rigged game would be more discernible to the other players like inside information becomes discernible in an options market. And if you bet too much in parimutuel on a single event, you end up betting against your own money.
 
#8
zoomie said:
New Jersey voters had one chance to legalize sports betting under a federal law passed decades ago. They had to pass a referendum within one year. There was no referendum because the Republican legislature feared a big inner-city turnout that would defeat Christy Todd Whitman. That was the window, and it is, I believe, forever closed. :mad::mad:
The way referendums work in my state is you have to obtain enough signatures to get it on the ballot. Then come election day you vote and that decides it. I don't know if it works differently in NJ. If it doesn't work differently someone fed you a lie.

In the link below a non binding referendum is initiated by the government. It is non binding and therefore meaningless. A binding initiative and referendum is instituted by the people in the form of a petition. If passed by a vote it over rides the decision of the municipality. Most NJ municipalities don't have initiative and referendum. It is unclear to me from skimming the article if AC has initiative and referendum.


http://cityofatlantic.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/ir_counties_municipalities.pdf
 

zoomie

Well-Known Member
#9
tthree said:
The way referendums work in my state is you have to obtain enough signatures to get it on the ballot. Then come election day you vote and that decides it. I don't know if it works differently in NJ. If it doesn't work differently someone fed you a lie. [ . . . ]
tthree, you are a good friend of a friend, so I will not yield to testosterone. :) Let's just say it is not a lie. That's the way it went down. And now NJ casinos are screwed with their piddling little race books. Ridiculous and sad. :flame:
 
#10
zoomie said:
tthree, you are a good friend of a friend, so I will not yield to testosterone. :) Let's just say it is not a lie. That's the way it went down. And now NJ casinos are screwed with their piddling little race books. Ridiculous and sad. :flame:
Zoomie you left out the part of my post that had to do with NJ and how it does work differently. I was ignorant to how NJ handled referendum until I researched it after I wrote the first paragraph. It looks like most jurisdictions don't trust the populous with binding initiative and referendum which is the NJ equivalent of my states referendum process as I understand it and as you quoted above. It looks like only 25% of NJ municipalities' citizens have the right to BI&R. Check the link in my post. I am not sure were AC falls but the odds suggest the safe bet is they don't have BI&R. Sorry if I failed to adequately communicate what I had to say.
 

zoomie

Well-Known Member
#11
tthree said:
Zoomie you left out the part of my post that had to do with NJ and how it does work differently. I was ignorant to how NJ handled referendum until I researched it after I wrote the first paragraph. It looks like most jurisdictions don't trust the populous with binding initiative and referendum which is the NJ equivalent of my states referendum process as I understand it and as you quoted above. It looks like only 25% of NJ municipalities' citizens have the right to BI&R. Check the link in my post. I am not sure were AC falls but the odds suggest the safe bet is they don't have BI&R. Sorry if I failed to adequately communicate what I had to say.
That's cool, tthree.

The law in question was U.S. Senator Bill Bradley's Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992. One source gives this account:

"This federal law was designed to prevent any new sports betting of any kind, with one exception. The casinos in New Jersey had enough political clout to get Congress to give them one year to get sports betting legalized in that state. But, Sen. Bradley, who also was from New Jersey, had even greater political power. He single-handedly prevented the issue of legalizing sports betting from even being put on the ballot; so the citizens of New Jersey never got to vote on the question." http://www.gamblingandthelaw.com/columns/57-146antisportsbettinglaw.html (Archive copy)

My source for attributing to Republicans the failure to put a referendum on the ballot was a very senior, very political, and very savvy guy who was there at the time He should know. But that doesn't really matter. What matters is that this federal law takes sports betting out of the states' hands. Until the feds relax it, there can be no non-racing sports betting in NJ. :flame:
 
Top