Report labels 7 sports bettor "personas"

At the Betting on Sports America conference in late April, Eilers & Krejcik Gaming presented a study/report that grouped sports bettors into 7 personas/categories:

• Sharps: Medium- to high stakes bettors at highest frequency, motivated mainly by profit; Sharps consider themselves professionals and win more than they lose; still, they can bring value to the sports book by attracting High Rollers and Would-be Pros
  
  

• High Rollers: Highest-stakes bettors, with low to medium frequency, who bet for fun or ego; will gamble in other forms, most likely poker and table games; generally profitable to sports books; high-stakes betting make them valuable, but they are expensive to court.
  
  

• Would-be Pros: Low- to medium-stakes bettors at medium to high frequency; motivated by profit and lifestyle, but lack bankroll and dedication of a Sharp; will gamble in casino, preferring skill or edge-based casino games but willing to try chance-based game; generally profitable to sports book but likely to complain and require consistent promotions.
  
  

• Action Chasers: Medium-frequency, medium-stakes bettors who enjoy gambling in many forms, particularly action games such as craps; generally profitable to sports books with good cross-sell potential, but also higher risk of problem gambling.
  
  

• Superfans: Low-stakes bettors at low to medium frequency, primarily on favorite teams; generally profitable to sports book with limited cross-sell potential.
  
  

• Status Seekers: Low- to medium-stakes bettors at medium to high frequency; driven by public recognition, such as winning a bracket contest or touting wins on social media; generally profitable to sports book, with low cross-sell potential.
  
  

• Casual dabblers: Low-frequency, low-stakes bettors seeking novelty or going along with friends; profitable for sports book; although not likely to gamble otherwise, this group offers opportunity to cross-sell.

What I want to know is this: What do you guys (actual sports bettors) think of these personas? Are they accurate? Where do you see yourself?

I think they're a big whack off. I've been doing this for a long tine  and have always thought the term "sharp" the cheesiest  and most misused term in sports wagering. It's a buzzword for half-arsed touts to try to sell you their services. With that said, at a glance, this groupings aren't terrible, though they are rather arbitrary and loosely based. Kind of like Malcolm Gladwell writing a best selling book that basically says, "You have to practice to be good at something....but you also have to be lucky to be successful." Not untrue but still it's like, "Really dude?! 10,000 hour rule, huh?"

I guess what i'm saying is these aren't bad loose groupings but the whole premise of their study is kind of unnecessary. They are a research firm though. And research is a product to them. And products aren't to be sold. And that's what they are doing. Ask yourself this. Do you think there's a sportd book on the planet that does not already know their customer base and how said customers are grouped? So what's really even the purpose of a study like this? So "casual dabblers" can strive to be "would be pros" and "would be pros" can strive to be "sharps".

The whole notion of a Gaming sports whatever conference is comical in it's self. It's like a porn convention. You see, most conferences are attended solely by people in said business. Law enforcement conferences are full of cops. Tech conferences are full of people in the tech industry. Porn conventions are full of pervs who like porn. I'm guessing wagering conferences are full of punters, full of "would bes" who consider themselves "sharps". Just my take though.

Agree with some of above post...sharp is an over-used term that is way too broad.  Professional gamblers...full-time gamblers...industry guys/girls all generally encompass the same group of people.  I fall into Would-be-pro/Action Chaser/a touch of Status Seeker.  I'm not a "sharp" or a high roller...don't have the financial backing for that.  I'm also not just blindly betting on my favorite teams and every bet I place is prefaced by a decent amount of research.  Would be interested to see what professions have the most amount of gamblers in them and what the average size of the bets are rather than just groupings.

I'm somewhere between sharp and would be. I've been capping for cheers, put a lot of work an analysis into it, and i'm very profitable. I consider capping both a business and a trade. A skillset just like being a CPA or a plumber. I just don't wager enough to consider myself what they label a "sharp". I've wagered 20k once. 10k a bunch of times but most of my football (NCAA) wagers are in the $500 to $5,000 range. Basketball $200 to $2,000.

The point is I know what I am and what I know. And I don't need assurances of any of it from Eiler and Krejcik. And I guarantee no booking house in the world needs customer profile analysis from them either. They know who their customers are and what groups they belong in. This whole thing is a joke.