Note: The following piece is a syndication article that initially ran on The Closing Line, If you want fresh analysis of the U.S. gambling industry every week from someone who has been covering the industry for a decade, please check out Dustin’s site.

So it looks like ESPN riled up some people in the gambling industry today with a tweet* from its PR account about the betting record of on-air personality Erin Dolan

As we know from the past, it’s not even guaranteed that Dolan was actually placing these bets at ESPN Bet. But I digress.

• Should we care only about “Best Bets?” What is her record for other bets, and other sports? (More on that in a bit.) Transparency should be a two-way street if you’re in betting content. If you want to take a victory lap because Dolan is doing well in NFL, you should be giving us ALL the data, not just some cherry-picked numbers. And how are the rest of your handicappers doing, while we’re at it? Which brings us to…
• There is actually a Twitter account that tracks all of the “Best Bets” offered on ESPN Bet Live. I presume this to be accurate, and certainly there’s not much reason for the account to make up results. (The picks are posted when ESPN Bet airs, and then the account “grades” the bet as a winner or loser afterward.) Per that account, Dolan is 97-78 and up 6.4 units for 2024. That’s pretty good! If we aggregate the reported ESPN number (29-10, +17.2 units on NFL plays since the start of 2023-2024 playoffs) and these tracked numbers, we can come up with 68-68 (-10.8 units) on all her other “Best Bets”. That’s not as good. And let’s remember that not every betting pick she is giving out is a “Best Bet.” She gives out other plays on ESPN and social media. If you want to give her more credit for saying it’s a “best bet,” fair enough.

• Some people don’t believe the record. I won’t go there, without actually doing an accounting of all her bets. I’ll assume ESPN got this right unless I see evidence to the contrary. By my quick count, the Best Bet tracking account I linked above appeared to have her at 27-12 on NFL plays since the start of the playoffs, which is at least close to what ESPN PR reported. But, again, she’s clearly not offering or betting only these NFL bets, this is just what gets the “best bet” designation.
• If you were to tail only Dolan’s NFL bets (assuming this record is correct) and/or were up 40 units over 120-some bets on a single sport over three years, I think there’s some chance ESPN Bet would limit you.

In any event, I think it’s true she’s done well on this bucket of NFL bets — how much of that is variance and how much of that is good handicapping, that’s up to you to decide. And some of the complaining about this is probably much ado about nothing.

Here is the part I do take issue with: Why is ESPN’s official PR account doing this? If Dolan were to tout her record on the NFL, sure whatever, that’s fine. If other ESPN accounts (like the show itself) do it, again, I don’t have a problem with that. It’s not great, but it’s also not anything to get that upset about.

When it becomes corporate PR that’s highlighting (or cherry-picking) only good data, then I start to have a problem with it. This isn’t just some run-of-the-mill sports betting tout that’s trying to get you to sign up for a handicapping package. This is the communications department of the largest sports media brand in the United States that is also the marketing arm for a regulated sportsbook.

It doesn’t sit well with me. I don’t think I have ever seen an official communication or press release about someone’s betting record from a major company in my time in US sports betting, although it’s at least possible I have missed some. I’d argue there’s a pretty massive difference between a company’s brand account and its PR division communicating this kind of information.

ESPN PR is implying that if you tail Dolan’s NFL plays, you’re going to win money. Again, that might be true if you have tailed ONLY her NFL “Best Bets” up to this point in time. But the implication is that Dolan’s winning percentage here (69%) is somehow sustainable (it’s not), while leaving out lots of other picks she hands out (if you find the “best bet” designation to be meaningful rather than just creating a smaller sample size, you’re welcome to that opinion).

Lots of sportsbooks (and fantasy sports apps for that matter) and their marketing partners put out betting-tip content and talk about how their bets fare. That’s nothing new, and I am not gonna get bent out of shape about it, although I always hope all of them are fully transparent with their records.)

But what would you think if FanDuel or DraftKings put out a press release about the record of a personality that bets on their platform showing them winning on some subsection of their bets? Wouldn’t we universally think that’s gross?

Let’s make it a better or more specific comp. Let’s say Dave Portnoy went on a heater with bets on the NBA. Then Barstool PR (I am pretty sure they don’t do official PR or comms, but humor me) or DraftKings News or PR put out something about how Portnoy was 40-10 over his last 50 NBA bets. We’d all laugh and destroy them for that.

Anyway, I don’t love it. We don’t need major sports media outlets doing PR work touting how their personalities are “winning” at sports betting. That’s a pretty narrow criticism, but I think it’s one that matters.

Need help with gambling content, navigating the North American gaming industry, communications/PR, or research and analysis? I have a consultancy to help in gaming and beyond. Learn more about CLC here.