Why do you assume he does have a case? Or that lawyers aren’t involved in writing the contract & disclaimers? Or that the language voiding these bets isn’t in there?
Draft Kings lawsuit - they voided bets that paid out big
- Thread starter mstateglfr
- Start date
Sportsbook that voided Iowa man’s $14.2 million payout says it acted properly
The lawsuit seeks damages for breach of contract and violations of consumer-protection laws.www.kcci.com
Long article,but it does a good job of explaining the situation.
A guy won multiple bets on a golf tournament because he entered them after the 3rd round ended and the 4th round was cancelled.
I don't think they would have refunded my money had I bet wrong in that same scenario...so Draft Kings' justification is a bit tenuous.
It makes me feel better because I have avoided those sites like the plague. I am not saying that like I'm smarter than everybody else; I just learned my lesson about betting money on football games a long time ago. I give myself a small amount of cash to play with on other websites, such as Yahoo.
I get what some of you are saying about a talented player and a casino rights as a business. Just seems the laws are fine for the casino to get every advantage. Slot machines should not be allowed to be one big networked machine. The only reason that each machine isn't on an island by itself is so they can control the payout. If they are controlling the payout that's fixing.
I am sure not an expert but when I have played blackjack they have a 6 or 8 deck shoe that gets all shuffled together and then a stop card is placed somewhere in that shoe by a player. I don't get how card counting can even be done in those games because you have no idea how many of each card is in play. Now could a very good mathematician understand the odds better than the regular person, possibly, but not to the degree that they have a distinct advantage over the house.
I know there are single deck games at some places, but that is the casino's choice to provide them and there should be rules that the customer has an expectation they can play as long as they don't cheat. Being able to remember the cards played is not cheating. Casinos can have an up front rule that they have a winning limit that can be reviewed and a manager can decide whether you can continue playing. So you hit that $100,000 and your done unless you are given a new limit.
I just have never heard of a story where a casino was forced to pay out money that they decided they didn't owe to the player. Maybe it has happened, but it has been kept quite for my 65 years. And yes, known cheaters should be banned.
Card counting isn't keeping up with the exact cards that have been played. It's tracking the number of lower numbered cards vs. the number of higher numbered cards played. It takes practice, not mathematics.
The casinos dont ban players unless they are concerned about losing big money. I suppose one threat from skilled card counters is that they COULD cheat, so better to get them out now. And if a card counter is at a high or no limit table, there's the threat they could suddenly bet the max amount once the count is in their favor.
I know, but it still requires that you know the total number of cards in the pool. If you only play 2/5ths of an 8 deck shoe, you can't know the distribution of the high or low cards. Those cards can be mostly high or mostly low.
So understanding your odds is cheating?
If that's the case, don't burn any cards. Play every hand with a new shuffle of a full deck.
What I'm saying is there are ways to fairly setup the games and make sure the rules apply to both sides.
I think there are two key things here:
1) What did they do with the bets made around that timeframe that failed? If they refunded them, the sports book has a strong case. If they didn’t, it’s going to be difficult taking some people’s money and not paying on others.
2) The guys betting patterns are odd. He obviously knew what he was doing and he was just trying to exploit the situation. That works against him here IMO.
1) What did they do with the bets made around that timeframe that failed? If they refunded them, the sports book has a strong case. If they didn’t, it’s going to be difficult taking some people’s money and not paying on others.
2) The guys betting patterns are odd. He obviously knew what he was doing and he was just trying to exploit the situation. That works against him here IMO.
Im breaking my own rule by trusting in the accuracy of the article, but it says Draft Kings voided all bets placed after the conclusion of the third round.
And the plaintiff totally knew what he was doing. He admits it. He was looking for a way to maximize his payout if the final round was cancelled. He placed $325 on various parlays based on the 3rd round standings, and seeks over $14MM. Pretty good payout for betting on the weather.
Because lawyers are expensive, the core facts at hand are that the bets were accepted by the site and were not voided until after the fact (therefore no “error” happened), the suit was filed 1.5 years after the event occurred….meaning there was plenty of time to exercise due diligence done by plaintiff’s attorney to analyze the site disclaimers at the time the bets were placed vs. what they are now to see if they changed anything.
This last part is purely a guess on my part, but I think the plaintiff himself perhaps has a legal background, definitely knew what he was doing, closely analyzed DK’s posted rules and kept timestamped record of them at the time bets were placed, and then executed his plan. Might have even selected DK specifically over other sites based on perceived favorability of the outcome based on their service contract. He knew he’d either get paid life changing money if there was a cancellation (very low probability), or still get paid a pretty good bit from a settlement (much higher probability). The settlement is the end game.
fwiw, casinos do this too. I saw a drunk guy put hundreds on a roulette wheel. He lost thousands. And when his number hit, they didn’t pay him his full due. They pointed to the max payout sign on the table.Sportsbook that voided Iowa man’s $14.2 million payout says it acted properly
The lawsuit seeks damages for breach of contract and violations of consumer-protection laws.
Long article,but it does a good job of explaining the situation.
A guy won multiple bets on a golf tournament because he entered them after the 3rd round ended and the 4th round was cancelled.
I don't think they would have refunded my money had I bet wrong in that same scenario...so Draft Kings' justification is a bit tenuous.
i lol’d because they were banking his losing bets.