DraftKings Faces Lawsuit Over Weather-Shortened Golf Bets

• DraftKings voided multi-leg parlay bets following a weather-shortened golf tournament, citing rules designed to manage unpredictable outcomes and protect the platform.
• The lawsuit challenges whether these rules fairly apply to parlays, putting sportsbook policies and bettor expectations in the spotlight.

DES MOINES, Iowa – An Iowa man’s multi-million-dollar lawsuit against DraftKings has ignited fresh debate over how sportsbooks handle bets on events disrupted by weather. Nicholas Bavas claims DraftKings owes him over $14 million after the online betting giant voided several winning parlay bets placed on the 2024 AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am golf tournament.

The tournament, scheduled for four rounds, ended early after just 54 holes because of historic rain and wind. The PGA Tour officially declared the standings at the end of the third round as final. Bavas wagered heavily on a complex parlay combining 20 individual picks, such as which golfers would finish in the top 5, top 10, and top 20 positions.

His $325 total wager stood to pay out more than $14 million if every pick held true.

While Bavas argues his bets should have been honored given the official results, DraftKings disagreed, voiding the wagers and refunding his stake. The company cited its “Tournament Futures Winner” rule, which at the time stated that futures bets placed after the last completed round would be voided.

But Bavas’s lawsuit insists these rules apply only to futures bets, not to parlays, which are treated differently under sportsbook policies.

This distinction is crucial. A futures bet is a single wager on the outcome of an event, like who will win the tournament outright. Parlays, on the other hand, combine multiple individual bets into one. Importantly, PGA golf sportsbooks typically remove any leg of a parlay affected by cancellations or weather delays and recalculate the odds for the remaining legs, rather than voiding the entire bet.

Click here for more information about betting on a parlay.

DraftKings’ practice to void Bavas’s entire parlay rather than adjusting it has raised eyebrows in the legal sports betting community. The sportsbook later updated its rules to explicitly clarify that bets placed after the final shot of the last completed round would be void – a change some see as retroactive justification.

Sportsbooks must carefully balance protecting themselves from unforeseen risks with honoring legitimate bets and weather-shortened events are notoriously tricky to navigate.

More On The Lawsuit

In his lawsuit, Bavas accuses DraftKings of breach of contract and unfair business practices, asserting the Iowa sportsbook exploited a vague rule to avoid a costly payout. Declining public comment, DraftKings directed media to its posted betting rules.

For bettors, the Bavas case underscores the importance of understanding sportsbook terms, especially the nuances between different bet types. For legal online sportsbooks, it’s a reminder of the fine line between risk management and customer trust.

As this lawsuit unfolds in federal court, it will likely set a precedent for how parlays and weather-affected bets are handled going forward.

News tags: DraftKings | Iowa | Lawsuit | Nicholas Bavas | Pebble Beach Pro-Am | PGA