The spread of legalized wagering has created unprecedented interest in betting, betting lines, and betting outcomes. And when the betting outcome creates a strange outcome for a provider of betting, it becomes news.
And, in turn, an advertisement for more betting.
Consider the item currently on the front page of ESPN.com, regarding the supposed “worst-case scenario” that unfolded for Caeser’s Sportsbook when a last-play, garbage-time touchdown pushed the final score in Santa Clara from 49ers 30, Cardinals 26 to 49ers 36, Cards 26.
“We needed the Cardinals to lose by more than 10 since no parlays lost and Arizona backers at more than 10 didn’t lose,” Caesers director of trading Jeff Davis told Ben Fawkes of ESPN.com. “San Francisco by four was no good, but by 10 was worse. We needed [the 49ers] by 11 or more.”
The line had opened at San Francisco minus-13.5, and it closed at San Francisco minus-10.
The article contains no information about the money lost by Caeser’s, but the reality continues to be that the house . . . always . . . wins, even when it loses. Because when it loses, bettors smell blood in the water. Even if it’s ultimately their own.
That’s how it works. The house wins some and loses some and over time it’s going to win. So shed no tears for Caeser’s. We hear about the rare occasions when they take a bath; the rest of the time, the bath is taking you.
