Why I (Eventually) Turned Down Polymarket

The Ragebait Era of Sports Betting Content

With apologies to Substack, I’m going to talk about Substack partner Polymarket. I’m apologizing because I don’t want to appear ungrateful. After that partnership was finalized, people at Substack reached out to me about doing a brief advertisement on House of Strauss. I received what was, to my mind, a considerably generous offer just to mention a Winter Olympics prediction market.

I took the money, which was quite welcome this tax season. I had some reservations about a partnership with a prediction market, but I prefer PMs to sportsbooks, where the game is always rigged. These days I occasionally use prediction markets, whereas I don’t use sportsbooks. I love sports prediction as a nerdy hobby, which informs why I’m partnered with Sports Predict, a non gambling platform. No, the point of this post isn’t to pump Sports Predict at Polymarket’s expense, though yes, I do love SP.

Anyway, I just received a larger offer from Polymarket, which I was on the precipice of signing. “Hey let’s buy a new car,” was a fun conversation to have in my household. But, as I look over the documents this morning, I just don’t think I can do it. The problem for me isn’t even the traditional moral questions that people discuss when it comes to prediction markets. My main issue isn’t that gambling is addictive, or that PMs create incentives for insider trading, or even that the presence of such markets might inspire real life transgressions. I mean, none of these aspects are good, but I can potentially rationalize them if pressed.

Instead my stumbling block is a content problem. The Prediction Markets are now involved in the sports discourse, in a bizarre negative way that fascinates me. I want to talk about it, and if I maintained a partnership, I’d avoid discussion. I’m not a hero (Remember, I took a deal from these people?). I’m just someone who needs this space to discuss many topics of sports media interest. And I want to talk about this.

Just what the hell is this and why is it happening?

Scott Galloway has popularized the phrase, “enragement is engagement,” which sounds a bit like a modern spin on a Johnnie Cochran courtroom rhyme. It’s obviously true in many instances, depending on platform. I became aware of the Jokić example in the lead up to my conversation with Ryen Russillo on how NBA discourse has recently grown less generous to past winners.

The Polymarket Hoops post is misleading, by the way. The Jokić Nuggets did beat a 50 win team and they had postseason triumphs over squads that would have won more than 50 but for Covid prematurely ending the season.

Those are minor details maybe and it’s completely fair to have criticisms of the three-time MVP. His Nuggets do appear to struggle against the Minnesota Timberwolves. Jokić, for all his offensive brilliance, has sometimes faded against Rudy Gobert.

But the Polymarket Hoops account isn’t making any specific observation about Nikola Jokić. I don’t even know what this Polymarket Hoops person, if it is a person, thinks about Jokić. Is Nikola a fraud? That seems to be the implication. There’s no case made here though, no broader point. This is just negativity-based engagement farming, and boy does it travel. X says that this post has been viewed 2 million times.

The post fit perfectly into an X discourse that had grown weary of Jokić praise. Various prominent NBA media figures had heralded the Denver center as arguably history’s greatest offensive player (There’s a case for that, to be clear). Vocal fans of other players and teams had come to believe Jokić benefits from a double standard in NBA media. There was a racial component to the debate, a dash of, “What’s with all these White media nerds slobbering over this guy?” Even if taciturn Jokić isn’t exactly an obvious lightning rod, he’d become one in these spaces. The post was probably constructed to draft off that controversy.

What I’m saying is, this looks like an awareness building strategy. As a Niner follower, I also bristled at this post from the Polymarket Football account:

I’m not including the full image of this very long list that includes 2026 selections. Yes, the 49ers have had a lot of draft disappointments, but it’s odd to include a bunch of guys who’ve yet to even have a practice. Similar to the Jokić tweet, this post is somewhat misleading. Guys on the list have played valuable roles on the Niners, even if they didn’t become pro bowlers. For example, offensive lineman Dominick Puni started every game for San Francisco since he was drafted in 2024.

But whatever, I doubt the point of the post was to be strictly accurate. There’s a fertile Internet debate over whether the Niners are screwing up the draft by taking guys too high. This tweet is designed to draft off that conversation. If the post has obvious flaws, perhaps that’s even better. It means more responses and more engagement.

And then there’s this. Just what is this from a prediction market account?

It’s a riff on scandal-besieged Mike Vrabel getting cheered by Patriots season ticket holders, in contrast to Pats running back TreVeyon Henderson getting flak from his coach over quoting bible verses in response to the Jaden Ivey story. Fair cultural commentary, I guess, though a little convoluted? It’s an odd focus for a sports prediction site, but the post reverberates on X.

Even stranger is this post, screenshotted above, on number 1 overall pick and new Raiders quarterback Fernando Mendoza.

Fernando Mendoza admits he was an "A-hole" to his teammates sometimes.

Is he still a good role model for kids?

Mendoza’s persona is basically Catholic Ned Flanders, so it’s a bit funny to see this self assessment from him. It reminds me of Ned believing he’d done something horrible because by his standards, the most minor transgressions qualify as sinful. It’s pure rage baiting to ask, “Is he still a good role model for kids?” as though Mendoza is “Mendozaaaaa!!!!”

This sort of slop pollutes the online sports discourse, but appears to be effective as an advertising strategy. I suppose it’s not so divorced from the general approach of asking House of Strauss to help the Polymarket brand build awareness. On the quite literate Substack platform, the desired currency is creator social proof. On the quite literal X platform, the desired currency is ragebait. The medium is the message.

I’m reminded of a recent incident that has nothing to do with Polymarket or sports betting. The massive Dude Perfect platform blatantly stole a viral NFL Draft skit from Lil Sasquatch of Barstool Sports. Dude Perfect posted the sketch on TikTok, where many of the respondents noted the obvious heist. If there was an apology from Dude Perfect, I haven’t seen it. Sure, you could argue that the guys at Dude Perfect had sacrificed credibility by committing this shameless theft. But maybe they weren’t after credibility, or even popularity. They were probably seeking engagement, and a stolen piece of art that offends the sensibilities of thousands sure gets a lot of reactions.