Overview of The bet that's ruining sports (Vox — Today, Explained)
This episode examines how the explosion of legal, online, in-play sports betting — especially micro “prop” bets on individual plays or players — has changed fandom, enabled new types of game-fixing, and produced harassment and criminal cases that threaten sports’ integrity. Reporter/author Danny Font walks through recent scandals (notably MLB indictments), how legalization happened, the economics driving live betting, and what regulators, leagues, and the NCAA are doing (and not doing) about it.
Key takeaways
- Live, in-game “micro” prop bets (e.g., whether a particular pitch will be a ball or strike, or the speed of a pitch) create easy, high-value opportunities for manipulation because single players can directly affect those outcomes.
- The industry has shifted rapidly since the 2018 Supreme Court decision that opened the door to state-level legalization; now most wagering is online and in-play, enabled by smartphone apps.
- About $150 billion is legally wagered annually in the U.S.; roughly 30% of that is on props (which generate ~60% of sportsbooks’ revenue). Micro-prop volume is a major profit source for sportsbooks.
- Recent high-profile legal actions: Cleveland Guardians relief pitchers Emmanuel Clase and Luis Ortiz were criminally charged in the Eastern District of New York for allegedly coordinating specific pitches to benefit bettors; prosecutors say bettors won at least ~$400,000 on those plays.
- Leagues and sportsbooks are unlikely to voluntarily curtail in-play props because they are highly lucrative; regulators, the NCAA, and some state legislatures have begun to push back in limited ways (e.g., MLB’s $200 cap on single-pitch bets).
- Broader harms include: a rise in harassment and threats toward athletes tied to lost bets, potential increases in gambling addiction, and growing public distrust (YouGov: ~65% of Americans believe athletes alter how they play to help gamblers win).
- Possible “wake-up” events that could force serious reform: large-scale public-health crises from addiction, a championship-level fixing scandal, or violent outcomes tied to betting-related harassment.
Recent scandals and examples
- MLB indictments (EDNY): Relief pitchers Emmanuel Clase and Luis Ortiz accused of throwing specific pitches (balls/strikes, pitch speed) to help bettors win prop bets. Prosecutors allege bettors won roughly $400,000 between 2023–2025 on these coordinated actions.
- Other incidents in college and professional sports: multiple college players have been banned amid allegations of rigging games; earlier cases and allegations (e.g., a player leaving a game with a “phantom” injury) illustrate the range of manipulations tied to props.
- Real-time communication and smartphone betting were central to the alleged fixes: players texting or otherwise signaling specific play intentions to bettors.
How we got here (legal and commercial timeline)
- Long history: gambling has been tied to U.S. sports since the 19th century; the 1919 Black Sox scandal cemented fears about corruption.
- 1992 federal law (PASPA) largely banned state-sponsored sports betting except for Nevada.
- New Jersey challenged the ban; the Supreme Court’s 2018 decision (Murphy v. NCAA / Christie v. NCAA) effectively allowed states to legalize and regulate sports betting — which rapidly expanded legalization.
- Leagues publicly opposed legalization but simultaneously negotiated and partnered with gambling companies behind the scenes. Sports leagues now have extensive commercial relationships with sportsbooks.
- The gambling companies and leagues helped push state-level model legislation favorable to sportsbooks; regulatory frameworks vary by state.
Economics & mechanics that enable abuse
- Online/mobile betting: over 90% of bets are placed online — enabling real-time wagering during games.
- Micro-prop proliferation: sportsbooks offer thousands of live micro-bets per game, which encourages frequent, small bets (and higher lifetime spend per bettor).
- Profit model incentive: live props increase customer engagement and revenue, so sportsbooks have little commercial incentive to limit them.
- Illegal market persists: legalization did not eliminate offshore or illicit bookies; those operators still attract bettors seeking anonymity, crypto payments, or higher/unregulated limits.
Responses, reforms, and limits under discussion
- NCAA: pushing states to ban individual player props on college sports to reduce manipulation risk and player harassment.
- MLB: reached agreements with sportsbooks to cap single-pitch bets at $200 (reduces ease of making large sums from one manipulated play).
- Legal enforcement: federal prosecutions (as in the Clase/Ortiz case) are happening and could become a key deterrent.
- Other potential measures discussed by experts: tighter betting limits, slower market updates for very granular props, better monitoring and data-sharing between leagues and sportsbooks, stronger player education and support, more aggressive policing of threats and harassment.
Notable quotes / memorable lines from the episode
- “Too wealthy to be corrupted — what a phrase.” (On the flawed claim that modern athletes’ salaries would prevent corruption.)
- “Betting every 10 seconds versus every two hours — it’s a very different experience.” (On how live-micro bets increase addiction risk and engagement.)
- “One player can very easily influence the outcome of one of these prop bets.” (Explains the structural vulnerability of micro-props.)
- YouGov finding: 65% of Americans believe professional athletes alter how they play to help gamblers win.
Risks and what to watch next
- Watch for further federal or state prosecutions — criminal cases and indictments will shape enforcement and deterrence.
- Regulatory changes: expansion of bans on player-based props (especially for college) or broader caps by leagues/states could reduce certain abuse vectors.
- Industry behavior: whether sportsbooks voluntarily limit ultra-micro props or change pricing/limits in response to scandals.
- Public sentiment: growing distrust (surveys showing large majorities suspect manipulation) could reduce viewership/engagement or push policymakers to act.
- Public-health trends: a rise in gambling addiction-related harms may spur stronger regulation.
Practical recommendations (what stakeholders might do)
- Leagues & sportsbooks: adopt stricter limits on single-player and single-play props, slow down market updates for vulnerable micro-markets, increase transparency and real-time monitoring, and set enforceable anti-collusion rules.
- Regulators & lawmakers: consider statewide bans for college player props, impose caps on highest-risk micro-bets, require better data-sharing and auditing, and enforce criminal penalties where collusion is proven.
- Teams & players: expand education about gambling risks, prohibit player communication about in-game actions, provide mental health and legal support for players facing harassment, and strengthen internal integrity units.
- Fans: be aware of the harms of in-play prop betting and the potential integrity issues; treat extreme harassment of players as unacceptable and report threats.
Credits & episode context
- Host: Ested Herndon (Today, Explained — Vox).
- Guest: Danny Font, author of Everybody Loses: The Tumultuous Rise of American Sports Gambling.
- The episode reviews recent reporting, federal indictments (EDNY), industry economics, and league/regulatory responses.
This summary captures the episode’s main arguments, evidence, and the practical stakes for sports, fans, players, and regulators as live prop betting grows.