A proposed rule change that would make it easier for Nevada sportsbooks to cancel past-posted wagers will have to wait.
The issue was on last week’s Nevada Gaming Control Board agenda. It would have made a routine recommendation to the Nevada Gaming Commission that would allow sportsbooks to cancel such wagers on their own, rather than seek approval from Gaming Control Board Chairman Kirk Hendrick. Such approvals have been granted in the past, but the change would speed up the process.
Senior Deputy Attorney General John Michela told the Board that based on ongoing internal discussions, he requested the issue be returned to staff until similar matters, currently under investigation, are resolved. It was originally anticipated that the new rule would be in place prior to the start of football season, but that’s in jeopardy for now.
When asked by Hendrick when the issue would return to the Board, Michela said a month or two would be reasonable, but he wouldn’t commit to a timeframe. The issue could also be taken up by a Board workshop if major changes are made.
“I’m fine having it on a Board agenda. Just make sure everyone in the industry — patrons, licensees, and the public — has time to show up and present any arguments before or after seeing the next draft.”
Past-posting incidents have garnered national headlines in recent years that put Nevada in a negative light.
In 2020 in a high-profile incident, regulators approved BetMGM’s voiding more than $200,000 in parlay bets that were made on the mobile app and Bellagio kiosks on baseball games in China and Korea that had already started in the early-morning hours. In June 2022, Red Rock Resorts paid an $80,000 fine to the state for technical glitches in its system that accepted past-posted sports wagers.
The issue continues into 2024.
The Board heard an appeal by bettor Taemee Feuerv, who filed a complaint against Red Rock Resorts for not payout on a winning parlay. The Board’s hearing examiner recommended denying a payment of $7,283 to Feuerv after $502 was already paid to her, but the three-member regulatory body put off a decision on the case until it received more information on unanswered questions. Rules don’t allow the Board to take testimony on the issue during the hearing, which necessitated it be remanded to the hearing examiner to gather further evidence to supplement the record, Hendrick said.
The bet involved five separate but identical three-way parlay wagers, each for $100, made within a span of 3½ minutes on Sept. 8, 2023, rather than one $500 parlay wager in the normal fashion.
“It appears the petitioner had never placed a sports wager before, but here the petitioner placed five separate three-leg parlays just a few minutes apart and a few minutes before these soccer matches were supposedly scheduled to start,” Hendrick said.
Hendrick wanted further information on the people who advised the bettor, where they got their information, how many wagers Red Rock Resorts properties took on the two soccer matches, and how many patrons were denied payment. Further, he questioned why Red Rock didn’t request the Board rescind the wager of the bettor once they learned of the past posting and if the operator did that for others too.
“I’m not accusing anyone of fraudulent acts. However, based on what I read into the record of this patron dispute I have a lot of questions.”
Likewise, Board member George Assad wanted further explanations as to how multiple players at various Red Rock properties made dozens of identical bets within minutes of each other.
“It’s highly suspect that people would be betting in such a way and if it didn’t occur at any other casinos, that makes it even more highly suspect,” said Assad who asked if other casinos had similar past postings. “I don’t believe in coincidences. You can’t have dozens of people making strange bets on soccer games in another country within minutes of each other unless they had prior inside information. It doesn’t matter if this patron had knowledge or not. If someone was telling her to make these bets, that’s enough right now to establish denial of these bets.”
Assad also questioned why the bettor who filed the complaint had to leave a poker game to make the wager.
“There are multiple shenanigans with this bet and I would like a further investigation.”
