On a federal basis at least. No need to travel to Vegas to make that Super Bowl bet if you can do it across town, or online.

http://www.espn.com/chalk/story/_/id...ports-gambling

Not all States will move to proactively keep that revenue within their borders. After all, living in a State where there is still a religious objection to casino operations despite the fact that the casinos just over the State line in a few directions have more Texas plates than local plates, I daresay we don't have a chance in hell of seeing sports betting legalized anytime soon.

Some jurisdictions just refuse to see the revenue they punt to other States...

The other variable here is just what percentage of travels to Vegas are specifically to place sports bets. I would guess very little...the trip may be timed to coincide with the big events, but part of the reason for going is the overall experience. I don't see that being replicated with a hole-in-the-wall betting counter. Sports bettors are more apt to want to sit and drink while hoping and praying their team(s) win...

Agreed... Us Texans will be last to see this or the marygeewannas legalized.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

Not sure how much damage this will actually cause Vegas. People that want to bet bad enough can already fairly easily place a bet online or via a bookie. It will definitely bring in new occasional gamblers, but who knows what that number is....

What I do hope this brings to Vegas, although it's probably wishful thinking, is that this will expand the types of bets offered in the casino sportsbooks to be more in line with what is available online. For instance, I should be able to walk into any casino and place a bet on any golfer for that weeks PGA tournament or place a Top 5 bet on them. Currently, I cant do that. Which is pathetic.

Zero. The answer is zero.

Minimal ... possibly help Vegas sports books.

I think you are right. If anything it will cause them to be more competitive and offer more options.

Win, all the way around.

The Vegas Casinos will gain a windfall; the casinos in the states are , in the main, connected to the major Las Vegas casinos. The sports books(Vegas casinos) will and should become center for the placing off of bets whether large or small; they will become the insurance agents of the entire process.

Big win !

If it makes you feel better, Louisiana and Oklahoma are supposed to be among the states considered likely to move on a bill this year.

Maybe. I don't pay a lot of attention to that stuff. In my state, only one is a CET casino and there are no MGM, Boyd, Stations, etc casinos. In California, I think there is one CET and one Stations, and all the rest have no connection to the big Vegas operations.

Besides, some states may set it up so it's like off-track betting that some states have, and not have to be in casinos at all.

Ok, but what will the impact be on Vegas for events like March Madness, the Super Bowl, or a huge fight?

Next to none, at least in the short term. People still want to go to Vegas and gamble, it's fun. Not everyone is a hardcore gambler looking to find every tenth of a percent of edge, most people just like to have fun.

I live in PA, how much fun do you think the weather is in March? Here's a hint, it sucks ass. Even though it looks like PA will be one of the first states to take a bet outside of Nevada don't think for one second I wouldn't rather be in Vegas making that bet.

Vegas is still mostly vacationers and not regs. I know this statement won't make sense, but people go to Vegas to vacation, not just to gamble.

If anything I still believe Vegas will see a bump because to the new laws. More people interested in sports betting will peak their interest and want to see what Vegas is all about.

MM or Super Bowl, I think a lot of people stay home, or visit states that are closer to home to make bets. Vegas room prices skyrocket then. A lot depends on what nearby casinos do. If your state legalizes sports betting and a nearby casino opens a nice big sports book, a lot of people would rather stay home or maybe stay in that casino for a couple days than spend thousands to go to Vegas.

For a fight that's in Vegas, most people will still travel, hoping to get a glimpse, etc.

The Rhode Island Governor's budget assumes bets can be placed beginning Oct. 1, 2018 and there seems to be little resistance to making that happen in the state house / senate. The only remaining question is who will be authorized to take the bets and the obvious answer is Twin River (our casino).

This adds to trend of LV visitors coming for reasons other than gambling.

The biggest impact will probably be further downsizing of LV books, but with some books focusing more on non-gambling experience and differentiation.

I agree. Bettors will still go to vacation, but not as often as they did when they went to bet/vacation. Hopefully visitor traffic continues to go down and some casinos are forced to greatly reduce/eliminate fees to attract visitors.

Estimates are that sports betting in the US is a $150b/year business, with only 3% of that being legal (meaning 97% call-your-bookie, and not in Vegas). This ruling addresses the 97%, not the 3% which should survive just fine. Even if it dropped off and it becomes 2.5%, it's a meaningless difference. Sports betting is so far down the list of primary reasons people visit Vegas.

The law was struck down because of fairly obscure reasoning about the way it was (poorly) written, not exactly prohibiting betting, but forcing the states to prohibit it. The congress could pass a new law basically doing the same thing. Don't know if they want to though, and haven't even seen speculation about it. Does anyone think they will?

All this means is that Sports Bettors not in Vegas will now have a lot less money to visit Vegas with.

The only one this new law is going to hurt is the bookies, they will only be able to take bets on people that can't pay. States and casinos want the bet up front, not next Tuesday like Wimpy says, i'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a Cheese burger today. People come to Vegas for the experience, you still can't get that in Kansas.

Not me. A new law like that would be just as unConstitutional as the old one.

I think Congress's appetite for passing legislation that doesn't have a clear partisan winner has steadily dropped since the mid-90s.

The best chance legislation had of passing was probably in late 2010 when the lame duck Senate was led by a Senator from Nevada. Poker players objected to the various proposals specifically because of the blackout provisions for online poker and the conflation of poker and sports betting.

Nah, they will just have to get more competitive with pricing. I think nearly every state has a daily number/pick 3 that pays 500-1 and you can get those tickets legally at almost every convenience store around. The local bookie (at least here) still gets illegal action on the daily number because he pays 550-1.

Who knows what the juice will be on legal wagers, might be more than -110 and don't forget, those legal winnings will all be taxable.

The local guy will adjust, and survive.

When the bad Mafia was running number in the 70's you got paid on a 60/40 split true odds are 999/1.

Now the good safe government took it over and they are taking a 50/50 split so the same number with the mob you got $600 now the state is involved and you get $500 and they say the Mafia was ripping you off. smh

very much this-bad day for bookies, pretty much everything else remains the same for Vegas