In late May, while the French Open unfolded in Paris, a reporter based in New York City opened a fresh DraftKings account and deliberately behaved like a compulsive bettor. Over ten weeks the experiment produced more than $12,500 in losses, a cascade of VIP invitations, and a steady stream of promotional alerts that seemed to drown out the platform’s self-claimed responsible-gaming tools.
The test began with a BET & GET push notification that promised a profit boost for tennis wagers. Within two hours the reporter had placed 64 bets on the clay courts, ranging from a $75 guess on a tiebreak point to a $300 wager on a first-game outcome. The rapid succession of bets reflected a familiar pattern: after each loss, the next wager grew larger, a classic sign of problem gambling.
From Self-Imposed Limits to Aggressive Promotions
When the account’s 24-hour loss total neared $4,500, DraftKings displayed a responsible-gaming banner that read, “Take a loss? Now take a beat.” The reporter clicked through, set a two-hour daily limit and capped deposits at $100 per 24 hours. These settings, DraftKings claims, are a cornerstone of its responsible-gaming strategy. Yet thirty minutes later another push screened, advertising a new betting opportunity and effectively nudging the user back into action.
Throughout the trial, the platform repeatedly sent “BOOST” promotions, especially for micro-bets and parlays. For example, after a night of chasing losses at Yankee Stadium, a notification offered a 20% profit boost on live micro-bets up to $250. The same day, the reporter received a VIP invitation titled “DraftKings VIP Showcase,” a three-week trial that promised tier-based perks such as free bets, merchandise, and even personalized video messages from athletes.
VIP Treatment and the Economics of Losing Customers
Within a week of the invitation, the reporter’s account was enrolled in the VIP program after depositing $5,800. The assigned concierge promised “tailored opportunities” and “responsible-gaming reminders,” yet the primary incentives were larger credit matches and exclusive promotions designed to keep high-volume losers engaged. As the reporter’s expert panel explained, a small group of very active losers can generate a disproportionate share of sportsbook revenue—similar to the “1.8% of problem gamblers accounting for 51% of betting revenue” finding from a 2024 Connecticut study.
DraftKings’ chief responsible-gaming officer, Lori Kalani defended the model, stating, “I think as a business, as an industry, we’re doing a good job of educating people, of raising awareness, of making tools and resources available, of monitoring accounts.” However, when pressed about how often accounts are closed for problem-gambling behavior, the company declined to provide specifics.
Regulatory Landscape and Industry Pushback
Since the 2018 Supreme Court decision that allowed states to legalize sports betting, Americans have wagered more than $600 billion with betting now legal in 39 states and Washington, D.C. The rapid growth has sparked concern: a Siena Research Institute survey conducted this year found that roughly 25% of active sportsbook users reported losses that jeopardized their ability to meet basic financial obligations.
In response, several states—including Colorado and Massachusetts—are considering stricter consumer protections. Meanwhile, DraftKings and its rival FanDuel argue that their in-app tools are sufficient. FanDuel, for instance, claims its “Reality Check” alerts and third-party risk-assessment partners provide early intervention, though the company does not disclose how often accounts are actually limited or closed.
During the experiment, the reporter also attended a symposium hosted by the Public Health Advocacy Institute at the Northeastern University School of Law in Boston, where addiction specialist Matthew Gaskell noted that “losers like me are precisely the customers that sportsbooks rely on for profit,” and that machine-learning models are used to target these users with tailored promotions.
Design Choices That Undermine Safeguards
The app’s user interface incorporates several so-called “dark patterns.” Deposit buttons default to $500, $750, and $950, making large transfers a single tap away. In the blackjack module, a prominent “Double” button lets users instantly double their stake, encouraging rapid loss-chasing. Time-reminder pop-ups appear only briefly, and can be dismissed with a swipe, limiting their impact.
Even after the reporter invoked a three-day “cool-off” period—a tool meant to block login access—the platform quickly re-enabled promotional alerts once the lockout ended, offering additional DK Dollars for new deposits. The pattern demonstrated that while responsible-gaming prompts exist, they are easily overridden by aggressive product design.
Takeaways and the Future of Online Betting
The experiment illustrates a stark tension: DraftKings publicly champions responsible-gaming safeguards, yet its revenue model thrives on enticing high-frequency, high-loss players through VIP tiers, micro-bets, and relentless promotions. As legislators contemplate deposit limits and tighter advertising rules, the industry’s reliance on data-driven nudges may clash with public-health goals.
For gamblers, the lesson is clear: alerts and self-set limits can be quickly sidelined by a platform that rewards risk-taking. For regulators, the evidence suggests that relying on voluntary tools is insufficient; mandatory design changes and transparent enforcement may be needed to protect vulnerable bettors.
