Rained off
The Independent brought us the details of a unique and curious lawsuit this week, as it told the story of Nicholas Bavas, a disgruntled bettor who is suing DraftKings for what he says should have been more than $14m in winnings, which the operator refused to pay out.
The tournament was scheduled to run from 1 to 4 February, across four rounds, with a champion set to emerge after a total 72 holes played.
However, on day three, the weather at the tournament “turned bad… with forecasters predicting severe storms on the final day, which threatened to cut short the event.”
Bavas decided to follow the advice of the weather forecasters, and shortly after 10pm on 3 February, placed a $100, 20-leg parlay on the tournament’s final result.
With the strong possibility of the tournament’s last day being cancelled, he reasoned, the existing leaderboard was likely to remain in place, with the top performing player at that stage to be declared the winner.
If the tournament’s last day was cancelled, he stood to inherit an almighty windfall.
After placing his first $100 bet on the result, he quickly followed it up with another $50 on the same result and, seemingly realising the opportunity he had, stuck another $100 and yet another $50 on the same outcome that night.
He also placed a separate $25 wager on a slightly different bet, picking who he thought would be the top 20 finishers in the tournament in no particular order for a further potential $250,000 in winnings.
In total, the $325 worth of wagers would have paid out more than $14.2m if the weather remained bad, and the tournament’s result was declared without the participants completing their final day. Or so Bavas thought.
The tournament’s closing day was struck with “historic rain and wind” and, that evening, the PGA Tour Rules Committee announced it would be cutting the tournament short.
“In accordance with the PGA TOUR Regulations the tournament results will be final through the conclusion of 54 holes,” it was announced.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, DraftKings was reluctant to hand over Bavas’ supposed millions in winnings.
On 5 February, the operator invalidated the punter’s bets and returned his $325, prompting his lawsuit agains the firm.
The case has been removed from state court to Des Moines federal court, and its conclusion is still not known.
Both sides will inevitably fight their corners tooth and nail, and it will certainly be an interesting case to keep tabs on.
Kalshi vs. heavyweights
Elsewhere, and speaking of betting on the weather, the Financial Times brought us its latest analysis of the rapidly emerging prediction markets sector in the US.
According to the article, a new wave of prediction markets led by Kalshi is shaking up the US sports betting industry, threatening the dominance of giants like DraftKings and Flutter.
Unlike traditional sportsbooks, which are heavily regulated by state laws and not available in several states, prediction markets operate under a different framework, it explains.Kalshi structures its offerings as derivatives contracts on binary outcomes and is regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), enabling it to by state gambling restrictions in places like California and Texas.
Kalshi, which counts Donald Trump Jr. among its advisers and has ties to influential figures within the CFTC, has quickly expanded into sports events.
Its first sports prediction contracts launched around the 2024 Super Bowl, with subsequent offerings including March Madness and major international tournaments.
Since then, the company’s meteoric growth and legal positioning have blindsided traditional gambling firms, prompting a strategic reassessment.
DraftKings and Flutter, which together control over 80% of the US market, are now exploring ways to counter this emerging threat, whether through licensing, product development, or potential acquisitions.
Kalshi’s model — peer-to-peer betting with lower regulatory overhead — poses a fundamental challenge to legacy operators, whose business models rely on customers betting against the house.
Industry analysts suggest prediction markets may appear more transparent or fair to s, particularly amid rising scrutiny of gambling-related harm.
Despite gaining legal traction, however, Kalshi is also facing resistance. Several states have issued cease-and-desist orders, prompting the company to sue state regulators, asserting that federal oversight preempts state laws.
Early court victories have bolstered Kalshi’s confidence and could pave the way for broader acceptance of its model, though concerns remain over regulatory gaps.
As the CFTC grapples with how to handle this emerging space, the entire US sports betting sector could face a transformative shake-up.
This long-read does a good job of setting out how and why the emerging vertical could prove seriously disruptive to the status quo.
So long, farewell…
Finally, Antilliaans Dagblad brought us the latest from Curaçao, as it suggested one of the island’s most recognisable brands may be waving goodbye.
“Everything points to Pinnacle.com, a major online sports betting operator based on the island, effectively ceasing operations in Curaçao. The Antilliaans Dagblad has been unable to them for over a week,” it reported.
The operator’s rented office spaces, where Pinnacle once occupied multiple floors “are largely empty and deserted,” it said.
The report also suggested the contracts of several Pinnacle employees had been terminated, with redundancy packages offered, “but no one is allowed to talk about it to the media.”
The article adds that Pinnacle still holds its Curaçao licence, but that “reasons for the departure can be guessed.
“It is said that Pinnacle finds the operation in Curaçao too expensive, especially as a result of the relatively higher wages. The current management is also said to have had enough of the island.”
It will certainly be worth watching where Pinnacle pops up next, but for now, it seems, it’s time to say goodbye.
