The Massachusetts Gaming Commission (MGC) has denied a motion from DraftKings to void a set of wagers from one patron that would result in a payout of $934,147.87.
According to the reports, the patron wagered $12,950 on 27 parlay wagers concerning Major League Baseball (MLB) player Nathan Lukes.
He was able to combine correlated "Player to Record x+ Hits in Series" markets due to an error in the system.
Peter Harrington, DraftKings Legal Director, argued that the wager should be voided because "there is a fundamental fairness question in regards to other patrons. While this patron may not have known about the exploit, being able to obtain higher odds without higher risk is unfair to other players."
He also argued that the customer knowingly "engaged in fraud," because on the day of the exploit they deposited $13,000 and wagered this amount; which was more than the $7,000 lifetime deposits and average wager amount of $65.
"They doubled their handle from this bet alone, and DraftKings believes that a family member of this patron also bet on the same exploit," Harrington argued. "They took purposeful efforts to evade our controls... It's deceptive behaviour to unethically gain at DraftKings' expense. We don't believe that behaviour should be rewarded or encouraged."
DraftKings wanted to pay out the customer at the same odds that other customers had, plus return his stake value, which would result in an approximate payout of $95,000.
Paul Brodeur, MGC Commissioner, argued: "There were bets available and this patron made them. What would have happened if the player in question only had five hits? Then the patron would have lost a substantial amount of money.
"Fairness suggests that we allow this patron to be paid based on the wagers he made. I don't think it's any more complicated than that."
At this point, Harrington attempted to respond to Brodeur's statement but was stopped by Jordan Maynard, MGC Chair.
Nakisha Skinner, MGC Commissioner, said: "I understand the importance of holding the operator responsible. It's the cost of doing business, you have to be diligent in your offerings.
"While this is an obvious error on the part of any patron, this is also an obvious error for DraftKings. The in-house controls should have caught this error."
Eileen O'Brien, MGC Commissioner, also commented on the fact that while DraftKings claimed that the player committed fraud and included family members in this exploit, then did not provide any evidence on the matter.
"The compulsion to pay in this circumstance may improve compliance, so I am a no on the void request," she said.
Finally, Maynard commented: "I am disturbed, and I hear my fellow Commissioners as I'm speaking, that we could put a patron at a disadvantage in the Commonwealth."
Ultimately, the MGC denied DraftKings' request to void the wagers.
The Commissioners voted 5-0 to deny the void motion
