I had a few bets on this year's WrestleMania with an American sportsbook and it turned into an atrocious betting experience.
The Michael Cole versus Jerry Lawler match was one of the selections I had in a parlay (accumulator for those on this side of the water). I had an inkling that Cole would win this match as I felt he needed to come out of the bout with a victory so their feud could be prolonged for at least another pay-per-view.
The match ended with 'Stone Cold' Steve Austin calling for Cole's submission although, moments later, the match was awarded to Michael Cole via disqualification after the Raw General Manager felt Austin had taken liberties.
So, the match is down as a Cole win in the history books. WWE even listed it as 'Cole defeats Lawler' on the official website yet 5dimes.com called my bet a loser.
I contacted one of their operators in a live chat and they drew my attention to this rule:
Results will be graded/regraded based on the official result at ringside. A result may be revised or altered after initial presentation by the ring announcer. Results are not official for wagering purposes until verified by officials at the fighting venue. Official or unofficial sanctioning body overturns of a fight decision based on appeal, suspension, lawsuit, drug testing result, or any other fighter sanction will not be recognized for wagering purposes
I laughed out loud when they used this argument. I informed them that I was betting on a professional wrestling match, not a real athletic contest. They didn't accept my view so I emailed them yesterday morning to complain again.
I pointed out that Michael Cole was the winner and linked them to the actual WWE website with the match results on it but they responded with:
I am afraid the winner of an event or game will be determined on the date of the event or game's conclusion according to house rules. Our sportsbook does not recognize suspended games, protests, overturned decisions, etc., for wagering purposes.
Which is a contradiction to the rule I already referred to where a 'result may be revised or altered after initial presentation by the ring announcer'.
They evidently want to use what ever rule will suit them so they don't have to pay out on the performer with the higher odds. Any proper bookie would have seen that they made a mistake and rectified it or, in the very least, called it a 'push'.
A proper bookie would also be regulated and, unfortunately, they seem to be a law unto themself.
After this situation, the sportsbook did change its rules and now takes bets on the original result and an 'end of broadcast' ruling which helps both the sportsbook and the punter. I still believe I was let down by the result in 2011 but welcome the rule change. With this matter being cleared up, I guess I would do business with them again because where else am I going to get value in wrestling betting?