Why Can’t You Bet on Bad Things to Happen?

If you visit a bookmaker, you’ll find plenty of things to bet on with various markets are on hand relating to a selection of sports. There are even those markets that veer away from sports as well: entertainment, television programs, awards ceremonies, and so on. There is a lot that sports betting companies are able to offer to you for betting purposes.

Generally speaking, though, the markets you can bet on are quite positive. In football, you can bet on goals scored, both teams to score, a team to win etc. There is very little, if anything, that you can bet on in a negative way. Even in the cases of unique markets being available, the odds are on good things. Who the next James Bond will be is a more recent market to be wagered on.

With all these positive markets, it does beg the question of if you can wager on anything bad. It may be the case that you have tried to do this. Have you thought of visiting the bookies and trying to wager on how destructive climate change will turn out to be? Or when the end of the world will come to pass? The likelihood is that these markets are not available, regardless of where you try to wager on them.

Why is it that you can’t bet on bad things of this ilk, though? After all, bad things do happen around the world on a daily basis. Is there something in place that restricts bookmakers from offering odds on them? We’re going to be taking a look at some of the things you can’t bet on and why. Plus, we want to know if there have ever been instances of punters having the chance to place wager like this. If so, what happened to stop these bets from being possible anymore?

It’s Usually a Matter of Taste

Even though you can often walk into a bookmaker’s shop and request a bet on something unique, certain things are off limits. The usual reason behind this denial of a wager is a matter of taste.

There is a certain code of conduct in place for licensed bookmakers to adhere to. This means that they have to act in a responsible way when it comes to their markets and odds. Thus, bets on anything illegal or immoral are off the radar. Options like betting on war breaking out or someone dying are also in bad taste.

A variety of things are often deemed to be immoral and thus unsuitable for betting on. The deaths of people is very high on the list when it comes to this. It’s quite strange to know that there is a website offering a game surrounding this topic, though. If you know about Celebrity Death Pool, then you’ll know what it provides. A website where people earn points for a correct prediction of a celebrity death. Yet, there is no money attached to this. It is not a form of gambling, and the website does discourage people from putting money down on such. You would be hard-pressed to find a bookmaker providing odds on markets like this.

Not only is it a matter of being distasteful, but it could encourage bad behaviour in people. If someone is betting on a celebrity passing away, what is to stop them trying to make that happen? Not everyone is capable of acting within the law. If someone is desperate to win a wager of this nature, then it may encourage them to commit the act themselves. Or it could be that they hire someone else to do it. That’s quite the extreme way of going about winning a wager. Yet it’s not beyond the realms of possibility.

It’s something that has risen to the top of punters minds in recent times, though. When Barack Obama won the U.S. Presidential election in 2008, bettors sought out a specific bet. They started asking if they could wager on his assassination while in office. That’s quite the insane market to provide.

What’s even worse is that Paddy Power proceeded to offer odds on that market! The company withdrew the controversial market following a flood of complaints. The odds of 12/1 on Obama’s assassination while in his first term in office disappeared from the bookie’s site. Victims’ campaigner Willie Frazer, and the DUP of Northern Ireland submitted complaints. Both labelled the market as being in bad taste.

It Also Depends on the Terminology

Bookmakers sometimes know that they’re providing immoral markets. Paddy Power has been guilty of such offences throughout history. Yet so as not to raise concerns, they alter the terminology used for the markets. For example, you have the chance to wager on when the next pope ascends to the prime position. A new pope usually only happens when the current one passes away. It’s sort of like a bet on when someone dies without that being an outright market.

This doesn’t affect animals, believe it or not. There is nothing wrong, it seems, with bookmakers providing extinction bets. This usually comes in the category of the effects of climate change. One of the markets found online is certain species reaching extinction.

If we put Paddy Power to one side for a moment though, there is a reason bookies don’t like such bets. Many people do have morals, so would avoid a sportsbook providing controversial markets. That means less money for the bookie – a big no-no for them. They don’t like losing money.

Think about it for a moment. You have an immortal market in the first place, leading to a smaller uptake in bets. You also know that such a market could encourage people to take action into their own hands. Thus, it could lead to big payouts for those wagering on it. A sportsbook is still a business. It doesn’t want to be haemorrhaging money. Likewise they may take a few bets on that market but they may lose several fold more customers due to backlash driven by the fact they are offering it. With this being the case, markets on bad things happening are not provided.

There is one other thing to consider, too. With special markets, there is little ability for bookies to balance them. The idea of bookmaking is to balance the markets. This requires an equal proportion of bets on the various outcomes. Through this, a bookie ensures profit regardless of the result in most cases. Without the ability to do this, a huge risk comes into play. Sportsbooks don’t like massive risks, as it isn’t good for future revenue. It’s all about the money at the end of the day.

Strange Bets That Have Happened

Even though many of the markets discussed wouldn’t happen, some have in history. One of those insane markets is betting on the end of the world. The apocalypse has supposedly been nigh for many centuries but has yet to happen. Despite the insane nature of betting on something so morbid, you need to ask if it’s worth it. Anyone betting on the end of the world wouldn’t be around to collect any winnings on it afterwards. If the world comes to an end, the bookmakers aren’t going to exist, people won’t exist, and so on. It’s a pointless and stupid bet if ever there was one.

We need to return to everyone’s favourite strange bookmaker in Paddy Power for this. Two main types of wager exist on the end of the world. Those are when it will end and how it will actually occur. The Daily Express has the occasional article on the end of the world, strange as it may seem. In September of 2015, the newspaper reported on the Blood Moon occurring on the 28th. This led to many people casting suspicions that Jesus Christ would return and end the world.

Few bookmakers actually began offering an end of the world market for that time. Yet Paddy Power was front and centre with it. The bookie offered odds on when the end would come. Although at the same time, the company referred to anyone betting on it as a “whacko”. Even with this stance, it continued offering odds of 200/1 on the event occurring on September 28. An extra market with odds of 250/1 was also offered on it happening any time in October of 2015. Of course, anyone who did choose to bet on either of those markets didn’t receive a profit from the bookie. Disappointment that the end of the world didn’t come, perhaps!

The other market – how the world will end – has also been available to bet on. The 888 brand even collated odds on this, providing an infographic to illustrate the options. Within that image were several possibilities, including:

• A zombie plague
• Alien invasion
• Plants becoming sentient
• Vampires
• An ape uprising

What makes this even worse is the comparable odds offered by 888. It thought Leicester City had less chance of winning the Premier League in 2016 than the ape uprising or sentient plant outbreak!

Wagers on Bad Things

Even though bets on bizarre and distasteful things have happened, they are not so common. It’s not only UK bookmakers that have ventured into these dark places, though. Offshore platforms catering to other countries have done so, too. Of course, they are not quite as bound to any code of conduct, because they aren’t often licensed. Yet there is one online bookmaker of this ilk that offered odds on celebrity deaths. This wasn’t when a specific celebrity would die from old age. It played out in the following way:

“Demi Lovato versus Artie Lange. Which of these two troubled celebrities will die of an overdose first?”

Both of these celebrities have indeed had troubling lives. Their respective hospitalisations a couple of years ago highlight this point even more. Yet for an online bookmaker to provide markets on which one will die first is crude. As it happens, neither has passed away from a heroin overdose. Yes, both have admitted to using it before, but have obtained help. The fact is that it remains quite the immoral market for people to bet on.

If a licensed sportsbook provided such a market, the likelihood is it wouldn’t survive. It goes against the code of conduct for operating in a responsible way.

When it comes to betting on life, many people would likely say that it is illegal to do so. Yet, it’s not something that people have to do via bookmakers. A contract that pays money upon the death of a specific person is “life insurance”. Insurance companies have pretty much been betting on life for decades.

For example, an insurance company “bets” that you will die before you reach 75 and not before. You pay monthly fees as a charge for this insurance. Calculations occur in the same fashion as if you were a horse in a race. Except the insurance companies dress it up as ‘underwriting’.

To avoid the moral hazard of creating a contract killing market, life insurance is not tradeable. At least, it isn’t something that you can trade with a person or entity who doesn’t have an “insurable interest” in the insured. It’s quite interesting to see the comparison between gambling and insurance, though.