SONBP2
SONBP2
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 289
Joined: Nov 17, 2009
September 8th, 2011 at 10:48:41 PM permalink
I went to make a bet on the Saints +5 on Thursday night's football game. However, when I got to window at Palace Station they said there was a glich in the system and they could only take bets on the Packers for the game. To me this seems like it has to be a violation as a casino could likely use this method to their advantage in many sports betting circumstances. If the Saints would have scored in the final seconds and missed the 2-pt try the casino would have made a considerable amount of money with the Saints covering. Favorites in sports are always bet more than underdogs. I just believe that a casino has to offer a betting option on both sides of a game.

Can a casino offer a point spread bet on only one side of a game?
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1491
  • Posts: 26435
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
September 8th, 2011 at 10:58:15 PM permalink
I believe it really was a glitch. Never before have I heard of such a thing, and the glitch theory seems more plausible. If they had too much money on the Saints, then they could have moved the line to Packers -4.5 to attract more action on that side. I also doubt there is a regulation that requires them to offer both sides of a bet.

Also, in your case, all's well that end's well, assuming you didn't bet it elsewhere. Personally, I had Saints money line at +228.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
SONBP2
SONBP2
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 289
Joined: Nov 17, 2009
September 9th, 2011 at 12:23:43 AM permalink
I would buy the glitch theory in this case because very rarely does a casino or bookie want more action on the favorite. However, I would think the gaming commission would have to require casinos to offer betting action on both sides and if they couldn't do that to take down the bet. This would be to ensure a fair and honest market. What if a casino had inside information, not privy to the public, and then decided to refuse all action on one side of the game, the side they knew was going to lose?

I just think a fair betting field would require that all casinos offer action on both sides of a game.
FleaStiff
FleaStiff
  • Threads: 265
  • Posts: 14484
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
September 9th, 2011 at 3:13:24 AM permalink
Quote: SONBP2

I went to make a bet on the Saints +5 on Thursday night's football game. However, when I got to window at Palace Station they said there was a glich in the system and they could only take bets on the Packers for the game.

I'd tend to believe him too. A glitch of some sort unique at to the event, no special knowledge or anything else. Sports book WANT action, they make their money on taking on all action, but doing it a price that is favorable to them. They can widen or narrow the spread at will but have no reason to lop it off entirely.

I doubt any regulation would compel them to write action they don't want to take or to write tickets other than in the normal course of their business. When a computer goes down they may lose money but they don't have to keep writing tickets.
FinsRule
FinsRule
  • Threads: 128
  • Posts: 3914
Joined: Dec 23, 2009
September 9th, 2011 at 3:28:55 AM permalink
I hope it's a permanent thing that Palace Sportsbooks will only take wagers on the eventual winning side...
s2dbaker
s2dbaker
  • Threads: 51
  • Posts: 3259
Joined: Jun 10, 2010
September 9th, 2011 at 4:13:06 AM permalink
Quote: FinsRule

I hope it's a permanent thing that Palace Sportsbooks will only take wagers on the eventual winning side...

Dayam! I'm with you there!
Someday, joor goin' to see the name of Googie Gomez in lights and joor goin' to say to joorself, "Was that her?" and then joor goin' to answer to joorself, "That was her!" But you know somethin' mister? I was always her yuss nobody knows it! - Googie Gomez
  • Jump to: