Ok, that title is misleading. This blog is about sports book rules.
I think every avid sports bettor has experienced the frustration of dealing with the inconsistencies in rules, whether among U.S. books, among offshore books, or between U.S. and offshore books. While some obscure situations can arise in any event that aren’t covered in any book’s rules, offered bets should have easily found, specific rules that cover most situations.
The impetus for this blog is a situation that occurred in this year’s just-completed Masters. I had bet a few futures (on a player to win) several weeks before the Masters, on Jason Day, Lanto Griffin, and some others at Westgate and MGM. (I also had Scotty Sheffler at 24-1!) The night before the Masters started, I bet on Paul Casey at long odds on the Circa Las Vegas app.
Both Lanto and Jason failed to qualify for the tournament. I assumed I’d l lost those, as my understanding of futures has always been that all bets have action in any sport (or race, such as the Kentucky Derby), whether the player (or horse) participates or not. COVID has had long-ranging effects on a lot of things, including the sports betting business. I think the situation where games were canceled or players tested positive and were forced to sit out changed the way books handled futures, among other things. I’d had another situation during the height of COVID at Westgate where a futures bet was refunded shortly before the event.
Casey withdrew from the tournament on Thursday morning shortly before his scheduled tee time, citing an injury. While I assumed I’d lost the futures I bet weeks before, I thought the Casey bet would reasonably be canceled. I went to Circa’s published rules that I could find, but they’re fairly sparse and this situation wasn’t addressed.
On Monday morning, I checked my accounts and was pleasantly surprised to find that both MGM and Westgate had refunded my bets, but Circa had graded Casey a loser! I found their customer-service email and wrote to them to question the grading. To my surprise, a couple of hours later, my phone rang and it was a manager from Circa (I wish I’d written down his name) who told to me that the Casey loser was a mis-grade and they would credit my account. We chatted for a few minutes and he explained that their rule is that once the field in any tournament is finalized, player withdrawals will be graded as no action, and my account and that of others who’d had the same bet would be credited. I don’t know how many others had the Casey bet or if anyone else questioned the grading. If not and I hadn’t contacted them, the mis-grade likely would not have been corrected. This is why it’s important to check your graded wagers and questions anything you think are mis-grades. Humans are fallible and mistakes happen.
This has been a long lead-in to the real point of this blog, which is that there needs to be a standardized rule book that covers every foreseeable situation for all bets offered by sports books. If a book wants to deviate from the standard rule (such as the new “no listed pitchers” rule adopted by some books), it simply needs to be spelled in their published rules and perhaps elsewhere easily seen. And all books need to have easily found rules.
The model for this is poker tournaments. As poker tournaments were growing in popularity and the industry was maturing, as U.S. sports books are now, poker-tournament directors from around the world got together several years ago and put together a standardized rule book to cover every conceivable situation. They also meet regularly to address unusual situations that might have arisen that weren’t covered in the current rule book.
A standardized rule book would be a great step forward for the fragmented but maturing U.S. sports betting industry. Offshore books are an important part of the sports betting industry (a discussion for another time) if for no other reason than, outside of Nevada, they’ve been at it longer than U.S. books and have learned from mistakes. In my upcoming book, All About Sports Betting, I refer readers to offshore leader Pinnacle sports book’s rules as a reference. I would much rather be able to point to U.S. books’ rules if they were complete and standardized. I asked Robert Walker, Director of Sports Book Operations for USBookmaking, how he handles unusual situations that occur and he said he includes them in his own rule book at USBookmaking (Robert’s Rules?), but that doesn’t do much for the rest of the industry.
Whether offshore books would participate in a convention to put together a standardized rule book is unknown, but I have a feeling at least the leading offshore books and pay-per-heads would, as the lion’s share of their business comes from the U.S.
The last thing I want to do is denigrate the sports book at Circa. I think it’s a great and innovative book that is helping lead the industry in the U.S. I think the way they handled the Casey situation and the level of customer service was admirable. If they truly want to be an industry leader in the U.S., perhaps they could use their clout to put the drive toward a standardized rule book in motion.
Never miss another post
I always thought a player needs to tee off on the first hole for there to be action, anything else is a hand out to the book, especially in the case of The Masters and other majors with complicated qualification. The US Open is tricky, some big name Tour players have to play crowded Sectional qualifiers to get in, books offer US Open bets pretty far in advance. I agree that rules should be universal, I get frustrated at card clubs because the rules are not the same, and i feel that the human element comes into play when emotions run hot, the fella yelling and screaming sometimes wins because the manager just wants to defuse the situation and eat lunch. I closely follow the PGA Tour, I watch almost every round on TV, the betting possibilities are amazing, you have huge fields with numerous contenders. Not since Tiger Woods heyday has a player like Schelffler emerged, four wins in a short time, and he seems unflappable. When he chipped in on the 3rd hole right in Cam Smith’s face I was floored, tournament over at that point. Congrats on cashing a golf future book bet, it’s a huge feat, and there is nothing like the melodrama of having a contender in a four day golf tournament, it’s an amazing journey…
Michael,
As I see it, futures are broken down into two categories, which aligns with Circa’s policy. In far-out futures, offered before the fields are set, whether in races such as the Derby, or golf tournaments pre-qualifying such as you site, part of the reason bettors get really long odds is that they are gambling on whether the person or horse they are betting on will even be in the event. In those cases, I’ve always understood that my bet had action regardless. That’s why I was surprised Westgate and MGM refunded my bets.
Once the field is set, I don’t think an unexpected withdrawal should be penalized. A prime example of when this rule was tested was in the 2017 Masters, when Dustin Johnson actually was on the 1’st tee when he withdrew. Because there was so much bet on Johnson, some, but not all, sports books refunded Johnson future bets, mainly for PR purposes.
Once Covid hit, last minute WD’s were common as players tested positive, and I think this led books to rethink futures policies, as well as other rules such as the ”no listed pitcher” rule I referred to and which is still used at some books.
I really like the way Circa handles futures, and I wish I knew how all books handled them, but a lot of them don’t publish their rule. Standard rule book please!
Here’s a story of woe. I am not going to name the sports book involved, as I will lambaste them in my blog at a later date. I had not encountered an offshore pulling this stunt in the past, and I have been doing this professionally for 40 years.
I had been following UNC’s college hoops team most of the season, with an eye as to whether they would jell. They were shaky enough that I was able to pin down two late season games where I figured they had to win one and possibly both to make the tournament. I figured they had to win two games straddling late January/early February.
One offshore had them at 600-1. Everyone else at the time had them between 125 and 200-1 to win the whole thing. I waited until they closed the deal on the second game they had to win, and I bet them at 600-1. I timed it perfectly with a late night wager minutes after the end of the game. Well, the wager was made, confirmed, and then the next afternoon I get an email from the offshore saying it was cancelled, that the 600-1 was a “typo.” I was flummoxed. They were claiming the odds should have been 60-1. Well, the only problem with that excuse was that the teams were listed in order of odds, and UNC was at the end of the list at 600-1 with some other dregs. If this were a typo, they’d be sitting between 50-1 and 70-1. They were not.
I’d never encountered a situation like this, with the offshore claiming their word was the final say. I had even been nice about it, not launching a max wager, but putting about a third of the max on the bet. It turned out, figuring my hedging strategy, that this cancelled bet cost me a new car or thereabouts.
My new rule is to not trust stated rules. At least with offshores.