DraftKings is urging U.S. high schools to add gambling education because its reporting — and state data — show that age-verification systems alone are failing to stop minors. Regulators and operators detect thousands of underage registration attempts and suspended accounts, yet most responses remain limited to bans rather than stronger enforcement or prevention measures.
How big the gap is: numbers that contradict the “verification works” assumption
Industry filings and company disclosures show a persistent gap between KYC systems and real-world access. DraftKings reported 4,807 underage registration attempts and 243 suspended illegal accounts in Massachusetts in 2024; in Ohio, the company tallied 620 underage reports tied to $2.78 million in wagers in 2023. At the same time, the broader market expanded: U.S. legal sports-betting losses reached nearly $17 billion in 2025, and DraftKings handled $8.6 billion in bets in New York during fiscal 2024–25. Those magnitudes make the underage figures small relative to total handle but large enough to suggest repeated exposure of minors.
Concrete examples underscore the problem that numbers imply. Investigations and company statements point to common circumvention methods: minors betting through relatives’ accounts, using stolen identities, or converting participation in legal fantasy contests (age 18) into sportsbook usage (age 21). A reported case of a 16-year-old using his father’s credentials to place wagers illustrates how identity and credential sharing defeat automated checks.
Where verification falls short and what operators are doing instead
Sportsbooks rely on KYC data, automated monitoring, and post‑event account reviews, but those tools typically detect circumvention only after wagers occur. Enforcement most often takes the form of account suspension; prosecutors rarely pursue criminal charges. Regulators differ by state: Massachusetts publishes quarterly underage-betting data, while other states either do not require disclosure or keep filings confidential, complicating cross-jurisdictional oversight.
Industry programs aim to fill the gap in different ways. DraftKings’ call for school-based education sits beside operator-led parent outreach: FanDuel operates a “Trusted Voices” program that trains parents to spot signs of problem gambling. These measures change who receives the message (students and families) rather than only tightening front-end identity checks.
Comparing prevention options: technology, education, and regulation
| Approach | What it does | Limits and trade-offs |
|---|---|---|
| KYC & monitoring | Checks IDs, flags suspicious activity in real time or retroactively. | Often reactive; can be bypassed by shared/stolen credentials. |
| Operator education (parent programs) | Trains caregivers to recognize and block risky behavior (e.g., FanDuel’s Trusted Voices). | Depends on parent engagement; uneven reach across communities. |
| School-based curricula (proposed by DraftKings) | Aims to teach moderation, legal differences, and how to avoid exploitation. | Requires curriculum approvals and consistent implementation across districts. |
| Regulatory transparency & enforcement | Mandates reporting; enables prosecutions or fines for repeat failures. | Varies by state; political and legal barriers slow uniform adoption. |
Practical steps for schools, parents, and regulators — checkpoints to watch
DraftKings’ proposal anchors one realistic starting point: introduce age-appropriate gambling literacy in high school curricula that addresses how apps work, legal age differences (fantasy vs sportsbook), and the social tactics minors use to access accounts. Schools should pair lessons with resources to refer students to counseling if problematic behavior appears. Timing: pilot programs during Problem Gambling Awareness Month (March) would align with existing outreach cycles and make data easier to compare year over year.
For parents and operators, watch for these stop signals: repeated registration attempts tied to one household, use of family credentials, and bets that deviate sharply from a household’s normal spending patterns. Regulators’ next checkpoints are whether more states require public underage-betting reports and whether enforcement moves beyond suspensions into financial penalties or prosecutions for chronic failures to block access.
Short Q&A
Q: Will education replace better age verification?
A: No. DraftKings and others present education as complementary — it addresses demand and awareness while KYC targets technical access control.
Q: What indicates a program is working?
A: Decreases in underage-registration attempts logged by operators, fewer suspended illegal accounts, and lower problem-gambling help searches in states with pilots (benchmarked over 12–24 months).
Q: Who should act first?
A: School districts can begin pilot lessons; operators should expand parent outreach; regulators should standardize reporting requirements to create comparable data.
