Read my comment again. It's the *submission* I was complaining about, not the paper. And no, I'm not American. Furthermore, I'm a statistician, which is partially why I was interested enough to click on the link in the first place; I have no issues with the content of the paper itself, or its readability.
Parse this sentence:
In their paper 'How to gamble if you're in a hurry,' they present algorithmic strategies and reclaim the world of gambling, which they say has up till recently flourished on the continuous Kolmogorov paradigm by some sugary discrete code that could make us hopefully richer, if not wiser.
Up until the "world of gambling", it's reasonable, but beyond there it ceases making any sense. If the submitter had broken the sentence down into a couple of discrete thoughts, they might have gotten their synopsis across.