MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7110003542 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.17849599

Navigating 2025 Sports-Betting Rules Profit Paths & Compliance Traps

2025· article· W7110003542 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSports Analytics and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnforcementMonopolyRevenueDuopolyProfit (economics)Tax revenueConsolidation (business)Punitive damages

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research examines the global sports betting regulatory landscape as of late 2025, analyzing the strategic shift from growth-focused expansion to sustainable profitability. The study focuses on critical developments in taxation policy, market structure, responsible gambling technology, and enforcement mechanisms across major jurisdictions including the United States, Europe, Canada, Brazil, and Australia. Key findings include: (1) the consolidation of the U.S. market under a FanDuel-DraftKings duopoly controlling 67% of combined online sports betting and iGaming revenue; (2) the Netherlands' tax increase to 37.8% by 2026 creating a €200 million revenue shortfall demonstrating the 'Laffer curve' effect; (3) Ontario's open-licensing model achieving 86% channelization versus 11% in monopoly provinces; (4) the UK's implementation of frictionless financial vulnerability checks at £150 net deposit threshold; and (5) Brazil's enforcement blocking over 18,000 illegal domains since October 2024. The analysis demonstrates that regulatory models fostering competition with moderate tax rates (15-25% of GGR) achieve superior channelization and sustainable tax revenue compared to restrictive monopolies or punitive tax regimes. The research emphasizes the critical role of advanced responsible gambling technology and coordinated enforcement in maintaining market integrity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.888
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.007

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.216 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicSports Analytics and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207