Gatot Kacas Fury

How to play Gatot Kacas Fury

Financial advisors continue to urge consumers to view sports wagering strictly as entertainment and to only risk funds they can afford to lose.

Research from Stanford University published in April concluded that sports bettors remain “overoptimistic,” generally expecting to break even despite losing an average of 7.5 cents on every dollar wagered.

“Overoptimism is largest among bettors who partake in a complex type of bet known as a parlay,” the Stanford researchers wrote. “Compared to other forms of betting, parlays are more likely to be driven by bias.”

How to play Gatot Kacas Fury

Just eight years after the state of New Jersey successfully petitioned the US Supreme Court to repeal the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, which opened the floodgates of sports betting expansion across the country, the Garden State has again petitioned the high court, this time to defend its sports betting jurisdiction against the rise of prediction markets and sports event contracts.

On Wednesday, New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport announced that her office had filed a petition for writ of certiorari following an appeals court verdict from earlier this year that went in favour of prediction markets. That 2-1 verdict from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals was handed down in April, and New Jersey had until Thursday to petition the high court.

The petition poses the question of whether the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which was enacted in 2010 in the aftermath of the Great Recession, “preempted states from regulating sports bets that occur within their jurisdictions if those bets are offered on markets registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission”. Prediction markets have argued that their event contracts are financial derivatives regulated by the CFTC whereas many states contend that they are simply sports bets by another name.

How to play Gatot Kacas Fury

“People will lose money faster on exchanges for lots of reasons,” Marantelli says. “It inherently increases spend, volatility, lots of things. And you’re playing against a sharper audience than you’re playing against at the DraftKings sportsbook.”

He compares the effect with sportsbook cash-out features, which gave customers more apparent control over their bets but may also have encouraged greater spending. The crucial difference is that an exchange customer can be facing a specialist whose entire business is identifying inaccurately priced contracts.

Kendrick sees a warning in the history of betting exchanges. In their early growth phase, there was sufficient retail liquidity for numerous market makers to profit. As that retail pool weakened, the sharper firms increasingly found themselves trading against one another.