Sports Betting Question
- Thread starter Acylum
- Start date
Didn't watch the video and I don't know if the same one, but this might be the one where the winner used a second party site to make the bet which is a no-no. When he won he let it slip on a social media video that he did that. The casino saw the posting and aren't going to pay.
If it was a situation where he wasnt legal gambling age and crossed state lines to gamble, then that sort of makes sense.
But, ultimately i would guess Caesars will try and settle for a lesser amount, although i have very little legal knowledge here.
However, the disguises thing is weird
www.cbsnews.com
Here is an updated article as well. I enjoyed the paragraph about the Iowa Gambling officials reviewing the case. He's not an athlete at any major in-state universities, so he has a really good chance of not getting completely ******
But, ultimately i would guess Caesars will try and settle for a lesser amount, although i have very little legal knowledge here.
However, the disguises thing is weird
Suburban Chicago man wins $800K in sports bets, but casinos won't pay. Who was in the right?
Thomas McPeek placed stacks and stacks of bets last year — complicated wagers on football called parlays, where several events all have to happen for the gambler to win.
www.cbsnews.com
Here is an updated article as well. I enjoyed the paragraph about the Iowa Gambling officials reviewing the case. He's not an athlete at any major in-state universities, so he has a really good chance of not getting completely ******
I don't know the laws involved, but why was the dude wearing disguises and structuring his bets? Seems like he knew he was doing something he shouldn't be doing.
I wear disguises when I run errands and do charitable work. I have to protect my bad boy image.
The casino's have limits on how much you can bet on any one bet without using one of their cashiers. The reason he didn't want to use the cashier was because some casino's limit how much professional betters can bet with them.
The Casinos were well within their rights to cancel his bets and ban him. The issue at hand here is whether them waiting to see if the bets won or lost before canceling them legally binds them to accept the result of the bet. I think it does but I'm no attorney.
I've read up somewhat on this guy, and he never really tells why he had to go place bets via Kiosk and not cashier, why he's not just using the mobile app that you see advertised on every commercial break of any sporting event, or many other pertinent details. But, from some experience - shortly after mobile sports betting apps became legal in Iowa, roommate was doing well betting college football, nothing more than like $500/game wins, but a certain sportsbook app capped/limited all his football bets to $50, and would refuse multiple bets on same game. Probably what happened to this guy, did real well placing bets via app, got capped to a bare minimum bet structure, or outright banned from placing bets via a certain app or apps, and thus had to physically go to casinos to place bets. With the apparent size of bets he was placing, if he were to go to a cashier and make the wagers, they would likely want to ID him and review his wagering activity, or noticehim placing numerous lower value bets on the same series of outcomes. But by using the kiosks, you don't have to show ID or a players card, and are basically placing wagers anonymously. And he probably found a sweet spot where he could wager a certain dollar amount and not exceed the Kiosk threshold for review by a physical person before accepting a wager. Then proceed to repeatedly place the same wagers to get more money on whatever he thought he had an insight or advantage on.
At some point, if someone is doing that well in college betting the house has to assume they have some sort of insider knowledge. It’s easier to limit wager amounts than to investigate.
