Last night I tuned into Action the new 4-part sports gambling documentary that premiered on Showtime.
Overall I found it a good, if not great, introduction to a series that has the potential to highlight some important bits of a shady industry, but one that I fear, based on the first episode, is going to fall short.
Still, introducing this to people, many of whom have never placed a sports bet in their lives, is a tough ask. Because the producer's realized this the "Betting 101" segment was probably a bit to simplistic for "hard-core" (or those that think they're hard core) gamblers but was one that I thought was pretty well done. They explained the basics, did not take up a large portion of the show, and moved on. If you're reading this blog you probably already know what the spread is, what a money line bet is, and how to read the tote board, but there are many who did not.
A LOT of reviews that I've read online have clearly been done by people who have both a) seen the entire series and b.) don't know much about sports gambling. That's a problem because the general public has not seen A, and in most cases falls under the B category. What you are seeing from the media is almost 100% incorrect.
First, the Supreme Court did not rule that "gambling is legal in all 50 states." That is a falsehood. What the Supreme Court ruled is that it's unconstitutional for the Federal government to prohibit state from establishing sports betting within their borders. Therefore it is up to the States to either enact their own laws and regulatory framework, or not to at all.
I live in Texas, the SCOTUS decision does not mean that I can bet on sports here.
If you get that pretty large detail 100% wrong then there's very little reason for me to pay attention to anything else you write. Nor should I be all that concerned if you find the following to be surprising:
1. A LOT of gamblers are shady people. Some our downright dishonest.
2. People can get addicted to gambling and it can ruin lives.
3. There is a potential for corruption.
4. The legalization of sports gambling doesn't mean that gambling all of the sudden exists.
In fact, it was one of the last segments, the shrouded interview with the bookie, that I consider to be the most interesting part of the piece. His business is not suffering (per him) because of the new outlets, he offers bets on credit, he's not above using violence to collect on those bets.
Bookies will evolve and adapt to the new sports betting world to keep things afloat. What legalized gaming will do is bring the honest players into regulated markets. I would be very surprised to find a sports scandal originate from the regulated markets.
The biggest flaw that I found was the somewhat curious inclusion of Dave "Vegas Dave" Oancea and providing him a platform (basically free advertising) without examining many of his claims. Yes, there was some industry push back against his 76% "winners" claim, that's highly unlikely, but none of the doubt surrounding the validity of his business claims were explored at all, nor was his infamous plea deal which let him basically walk on fraud charges. He may have been able to explain this away, but it should have been mentioned regardless. A better documentary maker might have put a little more effort into verifying his win claims, but there are still 3 episodes to go so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.
Of the other main characters I thought Kelly Stewart came off looking OK, as did Bill “Krack” Krackomberger, a professional gambler who, thought obviously driven, seemed content in life and happy in his marriage.
Less flattering was the story of Todd Wishnev, an obvious gambling addict who looked overweight, unhealthy, and whose life the teasers for episode 2 revealed we're going to take a closer look at. Based on early evidence it's not going to be flattering.
One big mistake I think the show is making is focusing on too many industry professionals, and not enough on the $20-$100/game betters, like Wishnev, who make up the base of casinos profits. These people are the real stories, and the cautionary tales for society as a whole.
Going forward then: More Wishnev, less Oancea.
If you've spent any time in a sports book at all you've met many of the types of people you saw in episode 1. Some people who sports bet are very nice, great people, some are just average Joe's out trying to have a good time, and some have the people skills of concrete. Sadly, there are more Oancea's in sports betting than their are Brent Musbergers and there's way more sexism than one could believe. It's an industry that's been underground for so long, that there are going to be many growing pains as it matures.
From that perspective "Action" did just about as good a job as you could expect given the insecurities of the industry. Whether or not they can grow and continue to develop these stories will be seen over the remaining three episodes.
