Tweet
About 25 percent of males placing illegal sports bets
By David Strow
LAS VEGAS SUN
Copyright 2000 Las Vegas Sun
As allies of the National Collegiate Athletic Association push legislation that would ban wagering on college sports, a new study found that one out of every four male student-athletes may be engaging in illegal sports betting -- and that one in 20 places bets directly through illegal bookies.
And though prevalent among student-athletes, the study found that sports wagering activity is higher among ordinary students -- 39 percent among male nonstudent-athletes. Author Jeremiah Weinstock, a graduate student in psychology at the University of Memphis, attributes this to the NCAA's mandate against sports betting by student-athletes.
There wasn't any statistical difference, however, between athletes and nonathletes and their involvement with bookies.
"Student-athletes are very similar to students (in gambling behavior)," said James Whelan, a professor of psychology at the University of Memphis and co-director of the university's Institute for Gambling Research. "We're not looking at something that's a problem for them just because they're student-athletes ... it's something that's an issue for older adolescents and younger adults.
"We need to look at what this means for people in this age group, not just to punish people and make prohibitions just because they happen to be athletes."
Though the findings are similar to studies conducted elsewhere, such as at the University of Cincinnati and the University of Michigan, the scope of Weinstock's study is broader than any previous look at the wagering of student-athletes -- and drew a particularly heavy response rate from athletes at participating universities.
The study surveyed 648 student-athletes and 1,035 students, both male and female, at three midwestern universities. Fully 70 percent of the student-athletes at the three universities were surveyed, though the names of the universities was kept confidential.
The average age of respondents was 20 years old, below the legal age of gambling in the states where the survey was conducted.
The study also found that 12 percent of male student-athletes -- roughly the same portion as nonathletes -- showed signs of problem gambling. About 5 percent of the overall athlete sample demonstrated signs of pathological gambling disorders, Weinstock said.
"Five percent (of student-athletes betting with bookies) ... that to me is a little scary," Weinstock said. "It only takes one student-athlete to get in trouble (with gambling debts) to corrupt a college sports contest."
Sports wagering was higher among student-athletes in the so-called "revenue-generating" sports of football and basketball than among student-athletes in other collegiate sports, the study noted. While 18 percent of "nonrevenue" athletes admitted to sports wagering, the figure was 28 percent among football and basketball players.
One factor in weighting these numbers, Weinstock said, was a single team where virtually every player had placed bets with a bookie that knew one of the players.
"If one guy gets started, it's very easy to draw everyone else into this," Weinstock said.
Sports betting was far less prevalent among females -- just 8.6 percent of all females reported betting on sports, with no statistical difference between student-athletes and nonstudent-athletes. None of the female student-athletes reported any involvement with a bookie.
Overall, the study found that gambling of all forms is actually more prevalent among athletes than students. Eighty-one percent of male student-athletes said they had gambled since starting college, compared to 71 percent of male students. Among female student-athletes, 72 percent admitted some form of gambling activity, compared to 57 percent of female students.
However, students gambled more frequently than student-athletes -- 18 times per year on average, compared to an average of 11 times per year among student-athletes.
"Student-athletes are engaged in risk-taking behavior more often, so they're kind of drawn to these activities to try them," Weinstock said.
Because the surveys were conducted in the Midwest, American Gaming Association President Frank Fahrenkopf sees the study as yet another sign that proposed legislation banning collegiate sports wagering -- now legal only in Nevada -- would be ineffective.
"It substantiates what we've been saying ... that the problem is on college campuses across the country, and not in the state of Nevada," Fahrenkopf said. "These young people are gambling on campus with bookies. They're not traveling to Nevada and betting at the legal sports books.
"Nevada's legal wagering is a minute, minuscule part of the problem on campuses."
Bill Saum, the NCAA's director of agent and gambling activities, said the NCAA is well aware of the problem of sports wagering by student-athletes, but took offense to the argument that it wasn't Nevada's problem.
"The casino industry will not recognize the fact that in the last two sports betting cases (at Arizona State University and Northwestern University), money was bet legally at Nevada sports books," Saum said. "If those individuals had to do it (lay off bets) illegally, I'm not sure those sports betting cases would have occurred."
Moreover, Saum said, Nevada's books send a "mixed message" to student-athletes that encourages betting.
"If they're getting mixed messages, it puts them more at risk," Saum said. "If we can say there's no place where you can gamble (on college sports), it's a component to (controlling on-campus betting)."
But Whelan draws a different conclusion. He believes a more effective solution is to incorporate gambling issues into "life skills" sessions that NCAA member schools offer to their student-athletes to help them deal with such problems as alcohol or drug use.
"If they really want to seriously address gambling, they shouldn't be passing laws making sports books illegal," Whelan said. "They should be taking a look at these individuals as students, and seeing what about these activities draws students.
"In some ways, having bans on things doesn't explain why they're occurring, and doesn't help them develop skills to deal with them."