Chris Andrews passes a pen across the table. Thanking his late uncle and mentor Jack Franzi, he repeats the legendary oddsmaker’s advice.
“Always have a pen on you,” Andrews says. “You never know when someone wants to make a bet.”
He’s no stranger to taking bets. He’s director of the sports book at South Point Hotel, Casino & Spa, author of three books on sports betting, and a pioneer in the industry.
During the 2016 presidential election, Andrews and fellow bookmaker Jimmy Vaccaro constructed a parlay card to allow South Point players to bet on electoral votes in 17 states. While the Nevada Gaming Control Board called it “technically okay,” he says, they also “seriously frowned upon it” telling him they would prefer he not do it. He didn’t.
Betting on elections is illegal in the U.S., but a federal appeals court muddied the waters in October when it cleared the way for a New York trading platform, Kalshi, to take bets on 2024 election outcomes — a decision the Commodity Futures Trading Commission continues to challenge.
Andrews recently shared his thoughts on the Kalshi case and the odds of election betting coming to the Silver State.
How often do you get asked about betting on elections?
Oh, all the time. I don’t know if it’s every single day, but it’s quite often. It’s mostly out-of-towners because the regulars know we can’t do that in Nevada.
But it’s done in Europe?
It’s legal in Europe and in a lot of offshore places, the Caribbean and Central America, where people in this country have accounts. So, if you have an account there you can bet there. Technically, it’s illegal (to place the bet from the U.S.), but the last time that’s been enforced was maybe 20 years ago.
Did this Kalshi case change anything?
I talked to our attorney — and he’s a former gaming regulator too — he said from his interpretation, they can only bet on New York elections. That may have set the precedent, it may not have. We don’t know yet until it gets tested.
Why not be the ones to test it?
Good question.
So, you’d be open to that?
Sure. It would be difficult because you may turn Gaming Control against you. I think there would have to be sort of a grassroots movement that would eventually lead somebody to actually test it in court.
Who would lead this grassroots movement?
Not me, I’m too old.
To make any kind of a splash, it would have to be casino executives, whether it’s bookies or general managers, what have you, saying this is what our customers want.
Is it what the customers want?
Yeah, it is, but once you tell them they can’t do it they just say, “Okay.”
“Grassroots” might not be the right word. It would have to be something that would filter up to high-powered executives that would make it worth their while to test it.
Maybe someone takes this New York case and probably would have to take it to the U.S. Supreme Court, from another jurisdiction, and use that as precedent to say, “Well, they legalized it in New York.”
I don’t think it would have legs until it’s gone through a couple of cycles to say, “See, this has no negative effect.”
Do you think it will happen?
In my lifetime, no. I could be wrong. … But we’re very slow in Nevada; very slow to change.
Are you concerned about negative effects?
It would be impossible in a presidential election, even in senatorial or House of Representatives elections, it would be difficult to cheat for betting purposes.
Would this (cheating) be to help win a bet or to help stay in power? I don’t think the betting has anything to do with staying in power.
What are the benefits of legalizing it?
If guys made a bet, they’d go out and vote, and that’s been a problem in this country ever since I can remember — a lack of participation by the general public, no matter which side of the aisle you’re on. … You need everyone getting out and voting. It’s part of the democratic process.
Would it be good for the sports book?
It would be unbelievably good business for the sports book. You could open it up four years in advance, even if you didn’t know the nominees. …
I think the last Super Bowl handle in Nevada was just shy of $190 million. … This would be close to a billion. It makes the Super Bowl look like Tuesday afternoon college basketball.