USC/Utah post-game score change
September 11th, 2011 at 9:29:14 AM
permalink
How did Vegas sports books react to the USC/Utah post-game score change? I've heard that some books (e.g. the Wynn) went with the changed score, paying out many winning tickets on both sides of the bet, while others (e.g. MGM) stuck with the now-incorrect score. I haven't heard how online books (e.g. Bodog) reacted, I suppose in many cases they have the unique ability to retroactively un-pay a previously winning ticket.
A related question, what should the books have done? (I suppose, with respect to Bodog, this question is especially relevant to the Wizard.)
A related question, what should the books have done? (I suppose, with respect to Bodog, this question is especially relevant to the Wizard.)
September 11th, 2011 at 10:30:14 AM
permalink
Quote: BingoLongA related question, what should the books have done? (I suppose, with respect to Bodog, this question is especially relevant to the Wizard.)
The books don't really care what I think, but ...
I think that they should just go ahead and pay all tickets under both scores. The reasons are 1) it's not that much money in the grand scheme of things and it could go a long way in keeping bettors happy; 2) they didn't really have a policy so they can use this event to set one so bettors will know going forward.
September 11th, 2011 at 2:07:11 PM
permalink
Beats me. Why was there a score change? Mistake in addition?Quote: BingoLongHow did Vegas sports books react to the USC/Utah post-game score change?
September 11th, 2011 at 2:21:08 PM
permalink
From AOL:
The decision created confusion along the strip, whether someone who wagered won or lost depended on where he placed the bet. Caesars, MGM and Wynn stayed with the 17-14 result. Others, such as the Hilton, went with 23-14, according to Covers.com. Some offshore books returned all bets.
“Each book has its own house rules clearly stating how an overturned call will be handled for wagering purposes,” Caesars sportsbook analyst Todd Fuhrman told Covers. “At our properties, we don't recognize suspended games, protests, overturned calls, etc. when grading bets so anyone with a Utah ticket gets paid.”
An MGM Mirage manager told the Los Angeles Times that the sportsbook lost double because most of the bets it took were on Utah and it paid those bets before getting the news of the changed score.
http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/story/2011-09-11/late-score-change-in-utah-usc-creates-confusion-in-las-vegas#ixzz1XgHnxPdZ
The decision created confusion along the strip, whether someone who wagered won or lost depended on where he placed the bet. Caesars, MGM and Wynn stayed with the 17-14 result. Others, such as the Hilton, went with 23-14, according to Covers.com. Some offshore books returned all bets.
“Each book has its own house rules clearly stating how an overturned call will be handled for wagering purposes,” Caesars sportsbook analyst Todd Fuhrman told Covers. “At our properties, we don't recognize suspended games, protests, overturned calls, etc. when grading bets so anyone with a Utah ticket gets paid.”
An MGM Mirage manager told the Los Angeles Times that the sportsbook lost double because most of the bets it took were on Utah and it paid those bets before getting the news of the changed score.
http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/story/2011-09-11/late-score-change-in-utah-usc-creates-confusion-in-las-vegas#ixzz1XgHnxPdZ
November 28th, 2011 at 3:40:13 PM
permalink
Here's an update about a dispute at NGC over this game:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sports/2016881573_apfbcchangedscorevegas.html
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sports/2016881573_apfbcchangedscorevegas.html
November 28th, 2011 at 5:18:57 PM
permalink
Good question!
This reminds me of a somewhat similar situation where a record keeping change was made about two days after the Super Bowl. I write about in detail in my article Number of Kickoffs in Super Bowl 43. Here is the executive summary:
1. There was a prop bet on the Steelers/Cardinals Superbowl on over/under 9.5 kickoffs.
2. There were 9 undisputed kickoffs, plus a punt after a safety.
3. The Associated Press initially counted the punt after the safety as a kickoff, and the papers the next day reported it as such, so 10 total kickoffs.
4. Sometime the next day or the day after the AP changed their web site statistics for the game to 9 total kickoffs.
5. Most sport books in Vegas use the initial published AP figure as what they go by, and don't respect changes, so graded the over as the win.
6. Some scored it themselves. The Golden Nugget scored the winner as the under, and Pinnacle Sports book the over.
In my case I scalped that one, betting the over at the Golden Nugget and the under at Pinnacle. At first it was going to look like I would lose both ways. However, I put up a huge stink with Pinnacle, and they eventually graded both sides as winners. So at least I won one way.
Getting to the bet in question, Gaming does not have a lot of standards on this as far as I can tell. I think it is fair if the casino's written policy is that they don't respect outcome changes after the initial ruling. If the casino can show that is a posted house rule, I would have called bets on Utah as the winner, respecting the 17-14 score. If they don't have any posted house rule then I think they have to honor winning bets on USC. Basically, the benefit of the doubt should go to the player.
Certainly any casino choosing to honor both sides as winners gets karma points. I may ask around to see if anybody is going that by choice. MGM shouldn't get credit since they were forced to by Gaming.
Let me add that it is nice to see another ruling go in a player's favor. It used to be that virtually every dispute when in the casino's favor, but the tide seems to have changed.
This reminds me of a somewhat similar situation where a record keeping change was made about two days after the Super Bowl. I write about in detail in my article Number of Kickoffs in Super Bowl 43. Here is the executive summary:
1. There was a prop bet on the Steelers/Cardinals Superbowl on over/under 9.5 kickoffs.
2. There were 9 undisputed kickoffs, plus a punt after a safety.
3. The Associated Press initially counted the punt after the safety as a kickoff, and the papers the next day reported it as such, so 10 total kickoffs.
4. Sometime the next day or the day after the AP changed their web site statistics for the game to 9 total kickoffs.
5. Most sport books in Vegas use the initial published AP figure as what they go by, and don't respect changes, so graded the over as the win.
6. Some scored it themselves. The Golden Nugget scored the winner as the under, and Pinnacle Sports book the over.
In my case I scalped that one, betting the over at the Golden Nugget and the under at Pinnacle. At first it was going to look like I would lose both ways. However, I put up a huge stink with Pinnacle, and they eventually graded both sides as winners. So at least I won one way.
Getting to the bet in question, Gaming does not have a lot of standards on this as far as I can tell. I think it is fair if the casino's written policy is that they don't respect outcome changes after the initial ruling. If the casino can show that is a posted house rule, I would have called bets on Utah as the winner, respecting the 17-14 score. If they don't have any posted house rule then I think they have to honor winning bets on USC. Basically, the benefit of the doubt should go to the player.
Certainly any casino choosing to honor both sides as winners gets karma points. I may ask around to see if anybody is going that by choice. MGM shouldn't get credit since they were forced to by Gaming.
Let me add that it is nice to see another ruling go in a player's favor. It used to be that virtually every dispute when in the casino's favor, but the tide seems to have changed.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
