MLB’s sportsbook partners will cap wagers on proposition bets related to pitches (so-called “pitch-level wagers”) at $200 and prohibit those bets from being included in parlays, which combine multiple individual bets, the league announced Monday.
The move comes after the U.S. Department of Justice on Sunday charged Cleveland Guardians pitchers Emmanuel Clase and Luis Ortiz with conspiracy to commit wire fraud, conspiracy to commit honest services wire fraud, conspiracy to influence sporting contests by bribery and conspiracy to commit money laundering. The duo, who if convicted would face up to 65 years in prison, allegedly rigged prop bets by sharing insider information with bettors and intentionally throwing errant pitches, including ones aimed at the dirt before home plate.
Prop bets have attracted controversy for some time—long before Clase and Ortiz became criminal defendants and before similar charges were brought against Miami Heat guard Terry Rozier, Portland Trail Blazers head coach and Hall of Famer Chauncey Billups and former NBA player and assistant coach Damon Jones.
Prop bets are wagers on specific events or outcomes in a game. They can be as granular as whether a pitcher will throw a pitch faster than 95 mph or whether a point guard will dish out more than four assists in a quarter. NCAA President Charlie Baker has been a vocal critic of these types of bets and has urged states to ban them. Prop bets are difficult to monitor and can tempt athletes. After all, the player isn’t asked to make their team lose; they only need to alter a single play—or in the case of Clase and Ortiz, one pitch—by ensuring the “under” occurs.
MLB believes the new measures will deter players from being tempted by pitch-fixing schemes since the amount of money that can be wagered is relatively low. These safeguards will reportedly be adopted by sportsbook operators representing 98 percent of the U.S. betting market.
In a statement, MLB commissioner Rob Manfred said he commends “the industry for working with us to take action on a national solution to address the risks posed by these pitch-level markets, which are particularly vulnerable to integrity concerns.”
Sports betting is an awkward topic for pro leagues. For years they fought in court to preserve the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992, which made it illegal for 46 states to authorize sports betting and which was passed at the behest of league commissioners who warned of the perils of legalized sports betting.
After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the leagues and declared PASPA unconstitutional in Murphy v. NCAA (2018), the leagues partnered with sports betting companies. Legalized sports betting has opened new revenue channels for teams as well as for players. It is especially notable for MLB—which was tarnished by the Black Sox and Pete Rose betting scandals, and which can impose lifetime bans on players, managers and coaches who bet on their own teams—to pave the way for betting relationships.
There are growing calls for Congress to re-enter the sports betting arena, particularly due to concerns about the prevalence of college students betting on sports and the addictive qualities of gambling. So far, no bills have gained serious momentum. The American Gaming Association, which is the gambling industry’s top trade group, has expressed disapproval of the federal government imposing restrictions on the business of betting.
Leagues striking deals with sports betting companies to rein in wagering may be a smart political move. It might signal to lawmakers and regulators that the industry can regulate itself.
But whether lawmakers and regulators will be placated by industry self-regulation is a bet in and of itself. Only time will tell whether the under or over wins.