What's the Story Behind Dapper Dave's Futures Bet?

In today's QoD [about all the Bills-Bengals futures bets being refunded], Dapper Dave's story caught my attention. He said that William Hill "gave me a hard time" and Gaming Control straightened it out fast. I'd like to hear the details about giving him a hard time.

Editor's Note: We went back to "Dapper" Dave Kamsler and asked him for the full story. He graciously complied, titling it "Call the Cops" or "When Is 13 Not More Than 10?"]

Last summer before the NFL season started, I placed an under bet on the William Hill mobile app on the Bills' win total, which was 10 at the time. The Bills went 13-3 this year, which is pretty clearly not under 10, so I lost that bet, right?

Not so fast.

If you read the fine print of the house rules (which I do, because I'm a nerd), rule 8(e) of William Hill's house rules says, "When wagering on football regular-season-win totals (college and professional), teams must play the exact number of games on their schedule for action."

That's about as unambiguous as you can get. In fact, it's pretty standard for most sports books.

When the Bills-Bengals game was suspended, I contacted William Hill to get my bet refunded. Fortunately, for a completely unrelated reason, I happened to take a screenshot of my bet at the time, so I had the ticket number. They looked up my bet and, after a lot of back and forth, told me that the bet wasn't no action, since it was graded as a loss at the time that the Bills went over 10 wins for the season. All of which makes perfect logical sense. Except that's the exact opposite of what their own rules say.

I tried explaining that to them, to no avail. Commenting on the original Question of the Day, someone raised a valid point, that maybe William Hill was trying to game the system by canceling over bets as no action, while grading the under bets as losers.

I immediately called Gaming Control. After giving a brief explanation to the receptionist, I was placed on hold for a few minutes while she connected me with an enforcement agent. I gave him all the details, including my ticket number. He also asked for my WH account number -- presumably my bet could've been looked up that way even without the ticket number.

He had the house rules at his fingertips and quickly confirmed my interpretation of 8(e). He said, "Let me call over there and find out what their explanation is."

I told him what their explanation was and he replied, "No, I mean their explanation to me." The implication, of course, was that they know they're wrong and once law enforcement gets involved, they'll back right down.

He was right. He called me back in a half-hour and a couple of hours after that, the money showed up in my account balance on the app, which I cash out as normal.

That wasn't the first time I had a positive experience with Gaming Control.

About 15 years ago, I was at Lagasse Stadium at the Venetian, doing in-game wagering on an NFL game. At that time, there were no betting apps. The in-game wagering was run by Cantor Gaming. The Venetian sports book at Lagasse lent you an iPad-type device, you loaded up your funds, and odds were quickly displayed for the possible results of the upcoming play.

I was watching and betting on a game between the Ravens and the Browns. The game was tied with about 10 seconds left in regulation and the Ravens had the ball near midfield. When they lined up for a potential game-winning 60-yard field goal, a window popped up on my device: "Will the next field-goal attempt be good?" Yes odds were around +500. I figured, what the hell, and clicked on the button for a $10 wager.

The Ravens thought better of the miracle field-goal attempt, the game went into overtime, and the Browns kicked a chip-shot field goal to win. My $10 bet was still hanging out as pending, so when I returned the device, I asked for a manager, who said he'd manually refund the $10.

I told him, in so many words, that the bet I made was, "Will the next field-goal attempt be good?" It didn't specify the Ravens, or the distance, or the time of the field-goal attempt. And the Browns' game-winner was the next field-goal attempt, even though it had odds of around -110. I told the manager that I wanted $50 for my winning bet.

He said, "The bets are graded offsite by Cantor Gaming, so there's nothing I can do about it."

I called Gaming Control. This one actually took a few months, but they eventually got the Venetian to mail me a $50 check.

One other time I called Gaming Control also illustrates the moral of the story.

I was playing $5 blackjack at Binion's at a table that did not have a 6-5 sign posted. I hit a blackjack and the dealer paid me $6. I complained to the floor person, who said that it was a 6-5 table, but they'd forgotten to put up the sign up, which he then did.

I said, "That's fine going forward, but without the sign, blackjacks pay three-to-two."

"Nope. This is a six-to-five table, with or without the sign."

I wasn't going to make a scene over $1.50, so I just cashed out and left.

Later, when I called Gaming Control, they confirmed that blackjacks are 3-2 by default and if there's no 6-5 sign, it's not a 6-5 table. Unfortunately, on a live table game, there was nothing they could do after the fact. The agent stressed that they're available 24/7 and in a dispute of that nature, I should've called them from the casino and they would have sent someone over right away.

So I highly recommend you put 702-486-2020 in your phone. They man the phone line 24/7. Don't be afraid to call them in the moment if you ever have a dispute with a casino.

No part of this answer may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, without the written permission of the publisher.

Have a question that hasn't been answered? Email us with your suggestion.

Missed a Question of the Day?

Have a Question?

Tomorrow's Question

Has Clark County ever considered legalizing prostitution?

Comments

rokgpsman Feb-13-2023

Customer service

You can figure the casino's low-level supervisors will rule in the casino's favor when you have a dispute about a bet. They do it all the time and most customers don't think they have any recourse so they drop the matter. This causes the casino supervisor to think he can get away with it everytime, and they usually do. He's probably afraid to make a mistake costing the casino money so he takes the protective way of handling disputes. In the old days disputes over relatively small amounts of money were often settled in the player's favor just to keep the customer happy. I've seen lots of times on a blackjack table that the supervisor would intervene in the player's favor if a card was dropped by the dealer or if a player was skipped on taking another card. The supervisor would back up the cards or let players pull their bet back, or have the dealer pick up all the cards, discard them and do the round over. Anything to quell the upset players.

Gtojohnr Feb-13-2023

Gtojohnr

You are right “ in the old days”
Nowadays it is “too bad, sorry about your luck”

Lotel Feb-13-2023

Dave = no integrety

Dave sounds like a jerk. he knows what his bet was but found a way out of it. this is why we have people and  layers everywhere suing eveyone. Dave and others need to take responsibility for what they are doing. They are  why you have to read a book of terms  any time you sign a contract to a hotel room,rent a car , stream a show, go on a ride. etc.

Wild Bill Feb-13-2023

Gotel

Just curious. Why does reading the rules that the other party to the transaction established, then insisting that the other party live up to them, make him a jerk? I'd say he did exactly what you're telling us all to do: He took responsibility. That's why there ARE rules and that's why it pays, literally in this case, to know them. He was the one with integrity; Will Hill wasn't. Calling him a jerk just makes you look like a numskull.

Raymond Feb-13-2023

How To Do It

There was a problem at El Cortez on my last trip.  Double deck blackjack, dealt from a shoe.  A card stuck to the back of the "cut card", and everyone at the table (four players) immediately brought it to the dealer's attention.  She called the pit boss (right move).  He said, "Dead card.  Play out the hand, and we'll resolve it from there."  One blackjack, two other winners, one loser.  He said, "Pay the three winners, push on the loser.  The last thing we need is Gaming Control getting involved over a $10 bet."  Everyone was happy--no one called Gaming Control, dealer was happy that she didn't get a write-up, the bettor who got the push was thrilled (she had a 16 against a 10).

The dealer did the right thing, the pit boss kept everything cool and kept the customers happy.  And unlike a few places (I'm looking at you, Caesars Palace), they understand that the players can play in lots of places and can drop the Gaming Control hammer if they get mistreated.

[email protected] Feb-13-2023

"Lotel" is Flat Wrong

"Dave" simply read THE SPORTSBOOK'S rules and acted accordingly. He is absolutely correct in using those rules to his benefit. On the other hand, what would Lotel say to the folks that had the OVER and could not cash their winning tickets? I would say HE might have been one of them but he obviously isn't a sportsbook gambler based on his comment...

Dnalorailed Feb-13-2023

Kind of related…

But not. My partner had a $50-$60 Tito ticket she held on to from MGM Grand Detroit. (She saves them sometimes). It had expired during the 5 month or so closure during Covid. Soon after the casino reopened, we went to cash the ticket at the cashier.  The cashier and us kept sliding the ticket back and forth (she didn’t want to cash it because it was expired). We asked for the manager, who eventually cashed it. I was about ready to call the Michigan gaming commission over that one, had the cashier not cashed in the ticket. I had read explicitly that casinos were honoring Tito tickets that had expired during Covid closures. How many others lost their money, either because they figured the tickets were bad or because of pushback from cashiers?!?!

DonaldM87801 Feb-13-2023

I guess I am an idiot....

I had $50.00 in "free play" chips and was playing BJ at the Monte Carlo. I put out a green chip and $10.00 of my own money. Won the hand and all they would pay was on my money, not the free play. I argued for a while, then gave up.

King of the Bovines Feb-13-2023

Then one year...

Didn't I read in some book that South Point just flat out paid all the season win total prop bets affected by Covid?

Something about a combination of not wanting to quibble over semantics, the cost wasn't that great and the goodwill generated?

AL Feb-15-2023

Yes, we can win

This discussion proves that we can win if we are on solid ground and if we fight well. Companies and corporations often are lax about their printed language and their operations, resulting in them not specifying things that they wish they had specified. One example is the simple failure to define a term. One time I applied for unemployment benefits and the EDD turned me down. The case hinged on the word "last", which they failed to define. It took me 4 months, but I prevailed. My winning argument was that if a certain party arrived at a restaurant at 7pm and left at 11pm when no other diners were still there, while another party arrived at 9pm (and no parties arrived after they did) and left at 10:45pm, who was the "last" dining party? Answer: the party who left at 11pm. I applied that structure to my situation. They could not insist that my argument was wrong, so they gave in, and finally approved my unemployment benefits. We should do similarly for gambling situations.

Question of the Day - 13 February 2023

Comments