Most bet Super Bowl ever?
Chad Millman
ESPN INSIDER
I am jetting to New Orleans as I write this, busting it in a tin can flying nose-first into 130 mph winds (you should have seen how this sentence looked before the turbulence stopped). To my left is a guy with a pen, making notes in the column of his USA Today. It looks as if he scribbled something with pluses and minuses on a picture of Ray Rice. For the purpose of this column, he was making final calculations before placing a bet.
To my right, someone is reading the New York Post, which is splashed with this headline on the back page: "Big Game Bettors' Guide."
Inside are several pages of picks, predictions, breakdowns, all against the point spread and the total. Mainstream betting coverage of the Super Bowl. If the axiom about journalism is true, that the tabloids do it, are derided, and then everyone follows, well, by golly, it won't be long now before The Economist hires me as its (unbylined) full-time betting expert.
The Super Bowl, as we know, is the biggest betting event of the year. The question this year is: Will it be the biggest one ever?
<offer></offer>
All week, I have been reading about Nevada bookmakers making this prediction. That included Ed Salmons of the Las Vegas Hotel, on my podcast this past Wednesday. "There seems like a lot more money coming to the counter on these games," Ed told me. "The playoffs felt different this year than last year; the money is coming in. I definitely think we will break a record this year for the handle on the game."
Vegas is a strange barometer for our collective financial fortunes. For years, after the economy went in the tank, Vegas was still doing OK. People's attitude in bad times, for a little while at least, becomes, "Let's spend all of our cash before the stock market takes it!" Or they are thinking, "We've got $100 left to our name, it's time to let it ride and see what happens."
But when the economy starts to come back, the lagging indicators in Vegas get flipped into leaders, as people who are feeling pretty good about things being on the upswing take a little bit of a break and go to Vegas because they are so happy to be, for a moment, feeling flush again. In Nevada, the rebound began last year, as you can see from the chart below. It was the first time since 2008 that total Super Bowl handle on the game in the state cracked the $90 million mark, settling at $93.89M, which was the highest it had been since 2006. Here's a breakdown of year-by-year handle for the previous 10 years (year indicates when the game was played, not the season):
<!-- begin inline 1 -->
<thead>
</thead><tbody>
</tbody>
<!-- end inline 1 -->If you're like me, you look at this chart and feel like Nate Silver in a numbers factory. First of all, let me tell what you can't see: 2003 was the last year in which the Nevada handle of the Super Bowl was as low as $71M. In fact, it was the last year in a string of years that settled in the high-60-/low-70-million-dollar range. That next year saw a leap of epic proportions (or at least a double-digit percentage rise). Personally, I credit that to the Internet, so thank you, Al Gore. By the late 1990s, online sports books were popping up with more regularity. But they were still in the vein of the renegade. The face of the industry was math genius Jay Cohen, who was made famous as the founder of WSEX.com (world sports exchange), based in the islands; he came back to the United State to fight federal charges that he had violated the 1961 Wire Act. He lost and went to jail.
Meanwhile, other books, such as Bodog, sprung up and blew up. From a completely anecdotal perspective, the horizon between when the Internet sites started becoming commonplace and when handle started increasing is about five years. In the same way poker on TV drove more people to enter the WSOP, the convenience and comfort of betting online made Vegas an even more desirable destination for Super Bowl weekend.
The other number from that chart that piqued my interest was the $94M wagered on the Steelers and Seahawks in 2006. Those were good days, rich days, in America. People felt full and indulgent. I remember going to that Super Bowl and ordering two desserts from room service one night (the key lime pie and the chocolate cake) because I was living large. But I was surprised that the Super Bowl beat out Bears-Colts and Giants-Patriots in the following years. Public teams drive betting interest, the rule goes. The Steelers are among the most public teams in the NFL, and the fans travel better than anyone. But the Seahawks, for the love of Mike Holmgren's mustache, are locally adored at best. The rest of us dip in with interest when it's appropriate. The Bears, any year, are up there with the Steelers in the eyes of the public. The Colts, when Peyton Manning was there, were just as popular nationally. The Giants and Pats fall into the public category, too. So, was that game an aberration? Do Steelers fans like to bet more than anyone else? Was America particularly loaded that year? It's hard to pinpoint an answer.
That's why this weekend's game is a potentially interesting barometer. Bookmakers believe it will be the most bet in Super Bowl history. But neither team historically is public. If it does set that new mark, what does it say about the world today? Is the economy back? Is betting more acceptable than ever? Do the Ravens and Niners have more of an impact on the public than we thought?
Now you understand why this is so big.
Chad Millman
ESPN INSIDER
I am jetting to New Orleans as I write this, busting it in a tin can flying nose-first into 130 mph winds (you should have seen how this sentence looked before the turbulence stopped). To my left is a guy with a pen, making notes in the column of his USA Today. It looks as if he scribbled something with pluses and minuses on a picture of Ray Rice. For the purpose of this column, he was making final calculations before placing a bet.
To my right, someone is reading the New York Post, which is splashed with this headline on the back page: "Big Game Bettors' Guide."
Inside are several pages of picks, predictions, breakdowns, all against the point spread and the total. Mainstream betting coverage of the Super Bowl. If the axiom about journalism is true, that the tabloids do it, are derided, and then everyone follows, well, by golly, it won't be long now before The Economist hires me as its (unbylined) full-time betting expert.
The Super Bowl, as we know, is the biggest betting event of the year. The question this year is: Will it be the biggest one ever?
<offer></offer>
All week, I have been reading about Nevada bookmakers making this prediction. That included Ed Salmons of the Las Vegas Hotel, on my podcast this past Wednesday. "There seems like a lot more money coming to the counter on these games," Ed told me. "The playoffs felt different this year than last year; the money is coming in. I definitely think we will break a record this year for the handle on the game."
Vegas is a strange barometer for our collective financial fortunes. For years, after the economy went in the tank, Vegas was still doing OK. People's attitude in bad times, for a little while at least, becomes, "Let's spend all of our cash before the stock market takes it!" Or they are thinking, "We've got $100 left to our name, it's time to let it ride and see what happens."
But when the economy starts to come back, the lagging indicators in Vegas get flipped into leaders, as people who are feeling pretty good about things being on the upswing take a little bit of a break and go to Vegas because they are so happy to be, for a moment, feeling flush again. In Nevada, the rebound began last year, as you can see from the chart below. It was the first time since 2008 that total Super Bowl handle on the game in the state cracked the $90 million mark, settling at $93.89M, which was the highest it had been since 2006. Here's a breakdown of year-by-year handle for the previous 10 years (year indicates when the game was played, not the season):
<!-- begin inline 1 -->
| Year | Teams | Handle |
|---|---|---|
| 2012 | Giants-Patriots | $93.89M |
| 2011 | Packers-Steelers | $87.4M |
| 2010 | Saints-Colts | $82.7M |
| 2009 | Cardinals-Steelers | $81.5M |
| 2008 | Giants-Patriots | $92.05M |
| 2007 | Bears-Colts | $93.06M |
| 2006 | Seahawks-Steelers | $94.5M |
| 2005 | Eagles-Patriots | $90.7M |
| 2004 | Panthers-Patriots | $81.2M |
| 2003 | Bucs-Raiders | $71.6M |
<thead>
</thead><tbody>
</tbody>
<!-- end inline 1 -->If you're like me, you look at this chart and feel like Nate Silver in a numbers factory. First of all, let me tell what you can't see: 2003 was the last year in which the Nevada handle of the Super Bowl was as low as $71M. In fact, it was the last year in a string of years that settled in the high-60-/low-70-million-dollar range. That next year saw a leap of epic proportions (or at least a double-digit percentage rise). Personally, I credit that to the Internet, so thank you, Al Gore. By the late 1990s, online sports books were popping up with more regularity. But they were still in the vein of the renegade. The face of the industry was math genius Jay Cohen, who was made famous as the founder of WSEX.com (world sports exchange), based in the islands; he came back to the United State to fight federal charges that he had violated the 1961 Wire Act. He lost and went to jail.
Meanwhile, other books, such as Bodog, sprung up and blew up. From a completely anecdotal perspective, the horizon between when the Internet sites started becoming commonplace and when handle started increasing is about five years. In the same way poker on TV drove more people to enter the WSOP, the convenience and comfort of betting online made Vegas an even more desirable destination for Super Bowl weekend.
The other number from that chart that piqued my interest was the $94M wagered on the Steelers and Seahawks in 2006. Those were good days, rich days, in America. People felt full and indulgent. I remember going to that Super Bowl and ordering two desserts from room service one night (the key lime pie and the chocolate cake) because I was living large. But I was surprised that the Super Bowl beat out Bears-Colts and Giants-Patriots in the following years. Public teams drive betting interest, the rule goes. The Steelers are among the most public teams in the NFL, and the fans travel better than anyone. But the Seahawks, for the love of Mike Holmgren's mustache, are locally adored at best. The rest of us dip in with interest when it's appropriate. The Bears, any year, are up there with the Steelers in the eyes of the public. The Colts, when Peyton Manning was there, were just as popular nationally. The Giants and Pats fall into the public category, too. So, was that game an aberration? Do Steelers fans like to bet more than anyone else? Was America particularly loaded that year? It's hard to pinpoint an answer.
That's why this weekend's game is a potentially interesting barometer. Bookmakers believe it will be the most bet in Super Bowl history. But neither team historically is public. If it does set that new mark, what does it say about the world today? Is the economy back? Is betting more acceptable than ever? Do the Ravens and Niners have more of an impact on the public than we thought?
Now you understand why this is so big.
