Las Vegas bookmakers see no need for changes in wagering rules

Top Las Vegas sportsbook operators say they do not expect, nor see the need for, changes to Nevada’s wagering rules despite a wave of betting scandals that have triggered national scrutiny and fresh limits in other states.

Sports betting controversies have touched the NBA, NCAA, MLB, and UFC in recent weeks, prompting a U.S. Senate inquiry into what lawmakers have called a “new integrity crisis.” MLB also imposed a national $200 cap on pitch-by-pitch prop bets after two Cleveland Guardians pitchers, Emmanuel Clase and Luis Ortiz, were indicted for allegedly accepting bribes to influence individual pitches. The NFL likewise reaffirmed restrictions on certain prop wagers.

But Nevada bookmakers say the state’s system is working, and no adjustments are planned. “I think operators should be allowed to decide what markets they want to offer and what the prices and limits are going to be on those markets,” Circa sportsbook director Chris Bennett told Las Vegas Review-Journal.

He added that integrity risks will persist anywhere incentives are strong enough to compromise games. “Imposing wagering limits and restrictions can help curb the behaviors we’ve seen, but it is also limiting the freedom of the operators to compete,” Bennett added.

Bennett said any future intervention, if it comes, will likely center on player-specific markets at the college or amateur level, where athletes are more vulnerable. However, pitch-level “micro bets,” common at DraftKings and FanDuel, are not offered at major Nevada books such as Circa and the Westgate SuperBook.

Westgate’s vice president of race and sports, John Murray, said the key is experienced staff, not new restrictions. The Westgate pulled a UFC fight off the board this month after identifying suspicious wagering. 

“I think as long as you have a team that knows what they’re doing and knows how to catch these things and knows how to get the right information to the right people, there’s really no reason to make adjustments to your betting board,” Murray said.

MLB commissioner Rob Manfred said this week he does not anticipate additional limits on baseball prop bets. “The ability to monitor betting activity… is really, really important,” he said. “We’re generally prepared to move forward under the rules that we have now.”

An NFL memo sent to teams earlier this month detailed four prohibited categories of prop bets, including wagers tied to officiating and outcomes determinable by a single player on a single play. NCAA President Charlie Baker praised the league, warning that such bets “lead to abusive behavior toward student-athletes.”

Nevada regulators have not requested changes to in-play or prop betting menus. The Nevada Gaming Control Board said it remains in “regular and direct communication” with pro leagues to ensure “the fairest, safest and most secure betting opportunities.”

Murray warned that banning prop bets could push customers toward illegal operators and noted that NFL prop wagers make up more than 60% of Super Bowl handle. He also argued that some proposed prohibitions - such as bets on interceptions or missed field goals - hinge on variables too ambiguous to regulate fairly. “I don’t see that happening,” he said.

Even if certain wagers were eventually restricted, Murray said the overall impact on sportsbooks would be limited. “Would it really make any difference to their business? It would just be one less offering on a betting menu that has hundreds,” he said.

“The average person wants to parlay together all the favorite players to score a touchdown, and I still think that’s where the bulk of your handle is always going to come from.”