Nevada sportsbooks are not supposed to treat Joe Sharp any differently than Joe Square. But any serious sports bettor knows that’s not always the case.
On April 12, 2008, a bettor placed three $550 bets on NBA overnight lines at a Harrah’s sportsbook. According to Nevada Gaming Control Board records, the bets were approved, entered into the computer, the money was exchanged and tickets were printed. Shortly after, a supervisor returned to the window and informed the patron that the wagers would be voided.
The bettor filed a complaint with Gaming Control. The NGCB found that the supervisor voided the bets because he believed the patron’s player rating did not qualify him to wager on the overnight lines. In other words, because the bettor was good, he wasn’t afforded the same opportunities that a less successful player might receive.
The NGCB ruled that the supervisor had violated Regulation 22.115, which states a book cannot unilaterally rescind wagers without prior written approval from a Gaming Control Board chairman.
Harrah’s was fined $100,000 for the violation.
Since then, there have been other instances where books have refused to take a bet from a professional player at the listed point spread, only to turn around and offer the other side of the game at the same line to a recreational player.
Quite obviously, it shouldn’t be that way.
“We require a fairness standard,” said Jerry Markling, the NGCB’s Chief of Enforcement. “You can’t let the first person bet a game at a certain line and then not let another patron bet the game at that line. That would be inappropriate. It could also be a violation under regulations.
“The books have to treat everyone essentially the same,” Markling added. “They can’t show favoritism toward one bettor or against another.”
Markling said that limits are the lone exception to the rule. Sportsbooks have the right to vary the wager amounts they’ll take from one bettor to another.
“If a big bettor wants to bet $100,000 on one side of the line and the book is already over-balanced on that side, then they may decide that they can’t accept that,” Markling said. “That’s within their rights.”
Books can also require bettors to sign up for a player’s card or online account to place wagers that exceed a certain amount.
“If one book is requiring all of their bettors who want to bet over, for example, $1,000, then that’s the book’s business,” Markling said. “I think it becomes a fact of whether or not players want to do that, because there are other books that are not requiring that. I think it’s a matter of buyer beware: ‘These are the requirements of this book.’”
After 22 years with the NGCB, the last seven as Chief of Enforcement, this is Markling’s final week. He’s leaving to become the Director of Investigations at the Venetian, where he’ll monitor both gaming and non-gaming issues.
Karl Bennison, an 18-year veteran of the NGCB, will be stepping into Markling’s role and oversee Nevada’s entrance into the online gaming world.
“One of my primary goals is to stay on top of the changes,” Bennison said. “Interactive gaming is new to us, for example, and we just want to stay on top of it as it grows. We have one licensee out there and we’re just kind of making sure that our concerns are addressed.”
Bennison said sports bettors who feel they have been treated unfairly can contact the Nevada Gaming Control Board. The Enforcement Division Complaints regarding online gaming can be filed here.
