“We Won’t Pay!” – Round 2

A few weeks ago there was the Bellagio S. Korean baseball incident where a handful of games were left up for betting after start time. Some bettors noticed the oversight and stuck in multiple bets on the in-progress games and ran good. They racked up a six-figure win and then the fun began.

https://www.espn.com/chalk/story/_/id/29389142/probe-opened-las-vegas-bettors-exploit-error-international-baseball-bets

The sports book decided it would void the bets, a player dispute was filed with NV Gaming and they took a look at it. To the surprise of many, Gaming allowed the bets to be voided and the bettors had to settle for refunds. 

Debates ensued on the ethical nature of the bets, the course of action taken by the book, and the eventual decision by Gaming. 

BetMGM admitted it screwed up and wanted to be protected from itself. Gaming agreed that, in this case, BetMGM shouldn’t have to pay just because it made a mistake. Opinions varied on just how much should be done to protect a sports book and specifically, where do you draw the line on protecting a book from itself?

Less than a month later we have another operator attempting to void a large number of bets (reportedly hundreds) due to what it admits was its own incompetence.

In an article on ESPN.com, writer David Payne Purdham details how FanDuel claimed that it lined a dozen or more soccer games improperly during the week of July 12-18.

https://www.espn.com/chalk/story/_/id/29594798/soccer-bets-unpaid-review-new-jersey-indiana

The article emphasizes one particular game in the MLS involving Cin-Atl. The Cincy line against the heavily favored Atlanta team was quoted in the article as +5/-134 on the alternate goal line. 

Unfortunately, that only scratched the surface of the issues FanDuel was having that week because it wasn’t just that one game according to them.

What was only touched on in the article was that this was just one of more than a dozen games with lines on which FanDuel eventually canceled bets. None appeared to be as off-market as the Cin-Atl game, so that game apparently became the one that all the other canceled bets were based on! 

Did New Jersey or Indiana Gaming even look at all the other games that resulted in canceled bets? We’re talking who knows how many instances of games being arbitrarily declared “no action” with no explanation. Apparently they were all piggy-backed onto the highlighted game as in “Oh, by the way -‘ there are a bunch of other games we’re not going to honor bets on as well.” 

Some canceled bets involved 1Hs and others were +2 goals in the full game with a lay price. An example from the list of canceled bets circulating is NY Red Bulls +2/-166. FanDuel canceled that bet along with many others in that price range. That game, along with several others, was declared invalid. Just like that, with no explanation other than they messed up, so come get a refund on your winning tickets.

FanDuel reportedly took bets in multiple soccer leagues on multiple games and in multiple states for two days. When it finally realized it was significantly unbalanced on these events, it locked the tickets and declared it wouldn’t pay on any of the wagers in both New Jersey and Indiana. What was decided in other states FanDuel operates — including Colorado, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, or any of the others — was not disclosed. 

Instead of a case of what’s referred to as past-posting in the MGM/Bellagio deal, it’s now an issue of clearly protecting a book from it’s own incompetence. The bets in question were made well prior to the start times and in most of the instances, days ahead of the events. This begs a number of questions. Just how far must the states go in protecting the books from themselves? What is the barometer being used to determine when a book is permitted to renege on a wager? If that’s not established in some way, then how is it anything else but a license to cancel whatever bets a book deems to be taking the worst of it? 

When it comes to obvious errors, a lot of sports bettors would recognize one and would be able to agree that a number was off. In the case of the soccer bets however, it’s not so obvious. Many have asked what the issue was with the lines offered in the first place.

For example, when it comes to a 1H soccer line in the MLS between teams with a full game -214/+123/+266 3-way line, would you be able to look at a 1H line for the same game and declare whether -1 -104/+1 -126 on the 1H 2-way line was reasonable or out of order? That’s the type of thing FanDuel is crying foul on. 

Soccer bettors would clearly have an easier time evaluating the type of bets FanDuel has decided not to pay, but some of the bets that were made public take a minute or two to digest before concluding they should have been lined differently.  These “errors” by FanDuel are claimed to have affected over two dozen games across at least half-dozen leagues. Games involved were slated to begin over a stretch of five days and FanDuel took bets on them for at least those first two days, possibly three! That’s an incredible period of time to be unaware that it had lines up it didn’t want to take bets on.

In the mispriced live-betting case that showed up in the news in September 2018, FanDuel had a line up for the last minute of a Broncos/Raiders game. When players bet it and won, FanDuel initially declared it was refusing to pay on the handful of bets it took. After “consulting” with state gaming regulators, it did a 180 and paid up. It sounds more like FanDuel was compelled to pay and decided to put a self-serving spin on it. Check out the about face position the company ended up putting forth publicly once it realized it might have a problem welshing on the bets.

“The company initially refused to pay the bet placed at its sports book at the Meadowlands Racetrack, saying it isn’t obligated to pay for obvious errors. But FanDuel reversed field after consulting with state gambling regulators.”

 FanDuel to pay man full $82,000 after disputed bet

What’s interesting about books like FanDuel is that they have no problem offering promotional lines that cost big money. Then when they make what they deem to be a mistake that results in much smaller payouts, they seem to prefer moves that alienate their client base.

A case in point is the Lakers promotion that ran just a week ago. They allowed bettors to move the line until the Lakers were getting +52 points mid-game! Darren Rovell detailed that promotion for Action Network, citing a $5 million loss that the book was happy to cover as a marketing cost.

https://www.actionnetwork.com/nba/fanduels-lakers-promo-costs-company-nearly-5-million

It’s baffling how they can give away millions in a promotion like that, then decide to go to war over what appears to be about 5% of that amount. 

So now we have a case where a line wasn’t up for just a minute or two. Now it’s multiple lines up for multiple days involving multiple games across multiple leagues.

FanDuel again is saying it won’t pay but … this time it claims state regulators are backing them up and allowing FanDuel to void hundreds of bets. In New Jersey the case is still under review after over two weeks since first being presented with it. Are they looking at all of the reportedly dozen or so games in question or will the ruling be based on the one highlighted game in the ESPN article? 

Keep in mind that this is a book that’s now partnered with an NFL team! Coincidentally, it’s the Denver Broncos, the same team they had to pay on when in the live-betting dispute. A little over a month ago, FanDuel and the NFL announced that their partnership would begin with the Broncos and intimated that other teams would follow with the blessing of the leage.

NFL.com report: https://tinyurl.com/yxt9cde3

The partnership includes “once-in-a-lifetime experiences” for FanDuel customers, per the release, as well as extensive marketing opportunities offered to the two participants in the partnership. With sports betting gaining steam across the country and an NFL team now residing in Las Vegas, the Broncos’ partnership appears to be merely the first in what could become a normal type of partnership in the NFL in the years to come.

If the “once-in-a-lifetime-experiences” they refer to includes fans making bets that can be unilaterally voided to the benefit of the book, then what are we in for once the NFL and other major sports leagues partner up and endorse these books? 

With a helping hand from state regulators, FanDuel may get away with refusing to pay bets, not only now, but in the future as well. Is this where we’re headed in the U.S. with sports betting? Just more of “heads-the house-wins, tails-the bettors-lose” in the gambling world. It’s a big part of the reason leagues like the NFL shunned sports betting for decades — the sports books’ shady reputations that the leagues claimed were prevalent. Now they’re embracing and endorsing it since the leagues themselves will be cut in for its percentage. 

You’re warned in the sports books that if a mistake is made and you don’t catch it before agreeing to exchange money for your ticket, then it’s your own tough luck. Apparently this is a one-sided stipulation and applies only to the bettors.

“Check your tickets before leaving the window — all bets go as written” 

Yeah, sure.