Although some of the restrictions on race and sports betting and the protocols surrounding these activities in Nevada have been lifted in recent years, enabling bettors to use their mobile phones in sports books, call in to the book from the outside (although many hotel operators don't seem to have gotten the memo on that one), and place wagers on various events deemed non-sporting, including the World Series of Poker, betting on the Olympics remains as taboo as it was back in 2006, when we addressed this question in relation to the Winter Olympics. Here's what we wrote back then, when asked if bets could be placed on Olympic events:
The short answer is no. For the long answer, which required a fair amount of research into why it’s not allowed, read on.
First off, we called a couple of major sports books in town, both of which confirmed that they do not and cannot accept any wagers on the Olympics, due to state regulations.
One claimed that the reason behind this is that the outcome of many of the events is decided by the voting of judges (with the implication that bribery and corruption could occur, as it has in past Olympics), while the other explained that it was because the Olympic Games consist of amateur events, and wagering on those is prohibited by law.
We then called the Gaming Control Board (GCB). Our contact there pointed out that boxing is also judged by panels of judges, and yet professional fights are legally bet on in Nevada. So the amateur aspect applies in this instance: Betting on the Olympics is prohibited by Nevada Gaming Control Board Regulation 22.120, which states, "No wagers may be accepted or paid by any book on any amateur non-collegiate sport or athletic event" (among other things).
It was following pressure from the industry and the public that Regulation 22.120 was revisited in 2000 to legalize betting on Nevada collegiate teams and on college sporting and athletic events* in the state of Nevada. These previously were disallowed, which had led to uncertain circumstances in which would-be wagerers couldn’t place futures bets on the outcome of sporting events that included local teams, for fear that Nevada would remain in the running and the bet would be void. When the UNLV Rebels basketball team was at the height of its success, there was a lot of interest in their games. The books were keen to cash in on the public's desire to bet on the local team, so the legal anomaly was amended.
At the same time, however, a powerful political faction opposed sports betting and lobbied forcefully for a ban on wagering on all college teams. Hence, although Regulation 22.120 was relaxed in one respect, the opportunity was taken to emphasize that wagering on other amateur sports — specifically high-school and Olympic events — was illegal. The International Olympic Committee was openly opposed to betting on the Games and the specific mention of Olympic and high-school events may have been a salve to the anti-gaming lobby by reinforcing that anything involving minors or other amateur events was a definite gambling no-no.
However, both the Gaming Control Board and the Gaming Division of the Nevada Attorney General's office also raised the point to us that the main reason wagering on the Olympics remains prohibited is that no one has ever asked for it to be legalized. When the U.S. basketball "Dream Team", featuring the likes of legends Michael Jordan and Charles Barkley, competed in the 1992 Barcelona Olympics, Nevada's sports books accepted wagers; the composition of the team meant that the contest was essentially considered a professional one, plus -- perhaps most pertinently -- the public was hungry to bet on it. But since then there hasn't been the level of interest to warrant race and sports book managers lobbying for permission to make lines on Olympic events.
There could also be another practical consideration at work, namely the difficulty of making lines on many Olympic sports, which are somewhat obscure and feature foreign athletes of whom the books here have little knowledge.
The GCB expressed has its openness to consider legislative amendments, if the gaming industry or the public presented them with a case for a change. The request would then be duly considered by the Gaming Control Board, the Gaming Commission, and the Attorney General’s office. Had someone suggested after 2000 that regulation 22.120 should again be revisited and that the Olympics should be made an exception to the rule, like U.S. collegiate events, there’s a chance that betting on Olympic events would be legal today. But no one did. So, if you feel strongly about the issue, we suggest you contact your local congressman and lobby for a policy change.
