Wyoming has recognized the importance of addressing gambling-related harassment against young athletes but may explore solutions other than banning college prop bets. Prop betting in college sports has been a contentious issue in the US, with experts debating whether prohibiting this type of wager could mitigate harassment concerns. The NCAA has been a vocal advocate for banning prop bets to protect college athletes, urging states to adopt such measures.

Wyoming Weighs Alternatives to Banning College Prop Bets to Combat Harassment

WGC’s Deliberation

The Wyoming Gaming Commission (WGC) has deliberated on the matter but has yet to reach a consensus. While commissioners see potential benefits in banning college player props, they also acknowledge that such a ban might not fully eliminate harassment. The commission discussed the broader industry impact, including the risk of pushing bettors to the black market. Scott Ward, a lobbyist for the Sports Betting Alliance (SBA), argued that offshore operators would not adhere to the ban, possibly attracting those looking to place such bets.

Considering Banning College Athlete Props

The WGC explored two main approaches: the Ohio Solution, which involves a comprehensive ban on college prop bets, and the Iowa Solution, which restricts such wagers only on in-state college athletes. Operations manager Michael Steinberg presented these options, emphasizing the need for action but expressing doubts about the effectiveness of a ban in curbing harassment.

NCAA Discussions and Market Impact

Steinberg mentioned discussions with the NCAA earlier this year, where the association, despite lacking specific data, claimed that Ohio’s ban on college props has positively impacted the market. He also referred to a meeting with University of Wyoming representatives, who pointed out that not all harassment cases are betting-related.

Exploring Alternative Measures

The WGC concluded that a ban on college athlete props might not be the optimal solution. Commissioners are considering alternative measures, such as implementing rules directly addressing harassment, similar to policies in Ohio and West Virginia. These could include taking action against individuals who harass athletes.

Monitoring the Situation

Ultimately, Wyoming commissioners decided to monitor the situation before making a final decision. They remain committed to finding an effective way to protect young athletes from gambling-motivated harassment, whether through a ban on college prop bets or other regulatory measures.

Wyoming remains dedicated to ensuring the safety and well-being of young athletes while balancing the interests of the betting industry and addressing the complexities of gambling-related harassment.

FAQs About Wyoming’s Consideration of College Prop Bet Ban

1. What is the issue Wyoming is addressing?

Wyoming is addressing the issue of gambling-related harassment against young athletes and is exploring potential solutions.

2. What are prop bets in college sports?

Prop bets in college sports are wagers placed on specific events or performances of individual players, rather than on the overall outcome of a game.

3. Why is the NCAA advocating for a ban on college prop bets?

The NCAA advocates for a ban on college prop bets to protect college athletes from harassment and undue pressure related to gambling.

4. What are the two main approaches the Wyoming Gaming Commission (WGC) is considering?

The WGC is considering two approaches: the Ohio Solution, which involves a full ban on college prop bets, and the Iowa Solution, which restricts such wagers only on in-state college athletes.

5. Why is there concern about pushing bettors to the black market?

There is concern that a ban on college prop bets could drive regular bettors to offshore or black market operators who do not adhere to the ban, potentially increasing illegal gambling activities.

6. What did Scott Ward from the Sports Betting Alliance (SBA) argue?

Scott Ward argued that offshore operators would not follow the ban on college prop bets and might attract bettors looking to place such wagers, undermining the ban’s effectiveness.

7. Did the WGC reach a consensus on banning college prop bets?

No, the WGC did not reach a consensus on banning college prop bets. They are still deliberating and considering the potential impacts and effectiveness of such a ban.

8. What did Michael Steinberg from the WGC mention about the NCAA’s position?

Michael Steinberg mentioned that the NCAA could not provide specific data but claimed that Ohio’s ban on college prop bets has had a positive effect on the market.

9. Are all cases of harassment against athletes betting-related?

No, not all cases of harassment against athletes are betting-related. This point was highlighted in a meeting with University of Wyoming representatives.

10. What alternative measures is the WGC considering?

The WGC is considering alternative measures such as implementing rules to directly address harassment, similar to policies in Ohio and West Virginia.

11. What is the current stance of the Wyoming Gaming Commission on this issue?

The Wyoming Gaming Commission has decided to monitor the situation and see how it develops before making a final decision on banning college prop bets or implementing other measures.