- The American Gaming Association is warning leagues to avoid creating partnerships with Kalshi and other prediction markets as states stake their claim to what is legal sports betting.
- A Colorado judge denied two tribes in Colorado their right to offer sports betting based on the hub and spoke model, which drew massive controversy in Florida years ago.
DENVER – News from the sports betting world this week focuses on getting past regulations. On one end, Kalshi and other prediction markets are under fire for being unregulated gambling while still earning partnerships with sports leagues.
As states with sports betting continue to attempt to push out the contract traders, the American Gaming Association has jumped in.
Further, in Colorado, a judge’s ruling goes against a previous ruling in Florida that impacts how online sports betting works.
AGA Tells Pro Sports To Avoid Kalshi Deals
The American Gaming Association sent letters to the NFL, NBA, and MLB urging them to avoid deals with prediction market operators Kalshi and Polymarket.
Calling them “insufficiently regulated”, the warning follows the NHL’s new partnership with the two platforms.
AGA President Bill Miller cautioned that aligning with such firms could damage league integrity and regulatory credibility. This mindset extends to states that are pushing back on the companies’ grabbing a market share of legal sports betting in their area.
Most recently, the Illinois Gaming Board cautioned that any licensee involved in such activity (even outside the state) could jeopardize its Illinois sports betting license. In Arkansas, Attorney General Tim Griffin issued a similar opinion, declaring that operators like Kalshi are offering unlicensed gambling and they aren’t shielded from enforcement.
While many other states have given these warnings, court cases have proven to be on the side of the prediction markets, not affecting their ability to operate.
Colorado’s vs Florida’s View On Hub and Spoke
A Colorado district judge ruled that sports bets occur where the bettor is located, not where the Colorado sportsbook servers are housed.
This is the opposite of the “hub and spoke” model argued by the Southern Ute and Ute Mountain tribes. The tribes claimed their gaming compacts allowed statewide mobile wagering since sports betting is legal elsewhere in Colorado, but the court disagreed.
The ruling contrasts with Florida sports betting, where the Seminole Tribe’s compact explicitly defines bets as occurring on tribal land by locating servers there. That distinction was key to upholding the Seminole model, while Colorado’s decision reaffirms that without such legal language, courts view the bettor’s physical location as the true site of wagering activity.
