What an attorney called the “largest dollar amount for an unpaid bet against a sportsbook in U.S. history” is headed to a federal court.
Key Takeaways
- Iowa resident Nick Bavas alleges that DraftKings voided wagers following the rain-shortened Pebble Beach golf tournament in February 2024
- Plaintiff’s attorney argues rules at the time of accepted wagers entitle his client to the $14.2 million payouts
- Sports betting cases are still new in the U.S. and offer few precedents
Iowa resident Nick Bavas filed the civil complaint in April, alleging that DraftKings failed to pay out $14.2 million in winnings following a controversial, rain-shortened end to the PGA Tour’s 2024 AT&T Pro-Am at Pebble Beach.
“I’ve yet to find one that’s worth $14 million that has been publicly filed,” Ben Lynch, the lawyer representing Bavas, told Covers this week. “It’s a big deal."
DraftKings Inc. and its subsidiary Crown IA Gaming filed on May 23 to have the case removed from Polk County (Iowa) Court to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.
The case is still early in the process. DraftKings has not filed an answer to the plaintiff’s plea, but Lynch believes that it is coming soon. Lynch would not comment on whether settlement negotiations have occurred.
The bets
With inclement weather forecasted during that Sunday’s final round of the Pebble Beach tournament, Bavas placed what he believed were five valid parlays on the tournament’s top 20 golfers while the market was still being offered late on Saturday, February 3, 2024, according to the lawsuit.
Bavas first placed a $100 wager on the top 20, including Wyndham Clark as the winner, that was accepted by DraftKings with a payout of over $4.6 million. The plaintiff then bet $25 on the top 20 in no particular order that was set to pay out over $250,000.
Bavas later placed three more parlay wagers totaling $200 that were identical to the first bet. The three payouts combined for over $9 million.
According to the lawsuit, DraftKings voided the bets and refunded Bavas’ wagers. Lynch argues that this is a case of contract law.
“I think it was very poorly handled,” Lynch said. “They were accepting bets. He placed a valid bet. The rules on file at the time that he placed the bet did not allow them to cancel the bet or void the bet. He won the bet. They voided his bet and gave him his money back, a few hundred bucks.”
The controversy
Tournament officials tried to wait out the bad weather but eventually canceled the final round late Sunday, meaning the leaderboard at the end of the third round stood for the end of the event. Many bettors, including Bavas, accused DraftKings of changing its house rules from 36 holes to "until the final shot,” voiding bets worth millions of dollars in payouts.
DraftKings has not responded to a request to comment.
Following the event in February 2024, DraftKings did tell Covers that their “house rules are currently the same as they were at the start of the event,” which Lynch and his client are disputing.
“At the time that he placed it, it was a binding contract between Nick Bavas and DraftKings, and they need to honor it. It’s as simple as that,” Lynch said. “It’s not a loophole. It’s not a scheme. It’s not illegal. It’s not morally wrong what he did. It’s called gaming law.
“They were accepting bets. They didn’t have to take his money if they didn’t want to do business on this particular bet. We all know that if Nick had lost the bet or on a different bet, Nick wanted to cancel it, they never would’ve given him his money back, so it should go both ways.”
The unprecedented
Bavas filed a complaint with the Iowa Racing and Gaming Commission, but “there wasn’t much of an investigation,” and regulators “kind of just said, no,” Lynch explained.
Since Bavas’ case has received media attention, Lynch has heard from other disgruntled bettors who had very similar incidents happen to them.
Sports betting has become legal in 39 U.S. states since PASPA was overturned in 2018, but gaming laws are still new and difficult to navigate. Few cases like this one have been heard, so there are few precedents and examples for legal teams.
Lynch called it the “Wild West,” but going up against big-name sports betting operators is “like David versus Goliath.”
Iowa sports betting has generated over $1 billion in wagers so far in 2025 and over $2.7 billion in 2024. Sportsbooks have hauled in $300 million in revenue during that span. According to the IRGC’s figures, DraftKings has generated $899.5 million in wagers and claimed $76.7 million in revenue year-to-date.
“My client just wants his bet paid,” Lynch said. “Whether or not they’re going to do that voluntarily, I couldn’t tell you. I really don’t know.”
