Voided Winning Sports Bets Raise Concerns about Pricing Errors

Since 2018, sports betting has rapidly expanded across the United States. The repeal of PASPA, paving the way for the expansion of legal wagering helped deliver the activity to customers in nearly 40 different states. Customers who use licensed betting operators can feel confident that their data is protected, while at the same time, they can securely deposit funds and withdraw winnings. Yet, a new practice that involves voiding payouts is picking up speed, leaving punters empty-handed and disappointed.

Similar to iGaming activities, licensed bookmakers have a list of terms and conditions. One clause present in those terms and conditions seeks to protect the bookmaker in cases related to errors in pricing. This policy effectively enables bookmakers to void different bets and serves as an “insurance plan.”

However, a new report reveals that some successful long-shot wagers may also be voided under the aforementioned policy. As announced by the Washington Post, one Hard Rock Bet customer almost had nearly $130,000 voided after three of his wagers on hockey turned out to be successful.

Two Months Later, the Bettor Received His Winnings

Christopher Kozak, an experienced bettor and financial trader, placed a number of wagers in Tennessee on NHL players who won’t score. The long-shot bets were successful, securing him a win of $127,420. Regardless, Kozak didn’t expect that the bookmaker would void his three wagers.

Currently, the Seminole Tribe operates Hard Rock Bet. The sportsbook contacted Kozak a few days after his massive win and informed him that his wagers were voided. He was told that the payouts for his wagers were an “obvious error” and that he was due to receive only a refund of the wagered sum.

Not unexpectedly, the bettor wasn’t happy with the whole situation and even complained to the Tennessee Sports Wagering Council. Then, Kozak said that Hard Rock attempted to renegotiate the odds, a move that he saw as a “slap in the face.”

What was most frustrating about the case was that the sportsbook did not elaborate on what the error consisted of, nor explained how it was that there was an error, reveals correspondence between Kozak and the betting operator. Once he reached out to the Washington Post, the publication also sought to contact Hard Rock about the case.

Ultimately, Kozak’s three wagers were paid in full in the end. Yet, this happened two months after those wagers were initially voided, raising concern about the aforementioned practice that enabled sports betting operators to void bets.

David Rebuck, the director of the gambling regulator in New Jersey, the Division of Gaming Enforcement, criticized errors related to pricing for sports wagers. He explained that such types of errors must not happen.