[SBR Andy]

Usability Digital recently released a study on the availability and effectiveness of in-play betting markets during the Super Bowl at 5 of the leading US operators: FanDuel, DraftKings, BetMGM, Caesars, and Unibet.

Some takeaways from the analysis:

- In-play betting markets availability varied greatly during the Super Bowl. DraftKings was the most complete/seamless sportsbook with just one minute and 26 seconds of suspension time during the game, accounting for 99.2% of the in-play betting window. Unibet was the worst, with 45 minutes of suspension time as their in-play markets were available for about 75.4% of the Super Bowl action.

- Caesars and Unibet were the most successful sportsbooks in transitioning from pre-game to real-time game betting activities. FanDuel, DraftKings, and BetMGM all had a difficult time switching from pre-game to live-game. Their spread, moneyline, and total odds were somehow unavailable to customers right around kickoff. BetMGM's in-play betting didn't come back online until nine minutes after the official start of the game.

- It had been assumed that suspension times for both the betting websites and apps were inconsistent across all of the five participating sportsbooks, in all participating states. That assumption turned out to be true. There was an obvious lag in the time of suspension, the length of suspension and the reaction time to the events on the field during the Super Bowl. An example given was a 5-8 second lag between UK broadcaster SKY Sports and the actual events taking place on the field. While revealing and possible to affect in-play betting patterns, such a lag was concluded to be acceptable, and not a game-changer in the in-play betting world.

- Different strategies about the implementation of in-play betting for the five sportsbooks included in the analysis became obvious. DraftKings, for instance, appeared to review plays and call decisions prior to the on-field referees and adjust their odds accordingly. FanDuel and Unibet (Barstool) took a cautious approach with many suspensions, even during low-risk plays. Other sportsbooks analysed also took a more cautious approach, but still suffered suspensions due to technical issues or other factors such as manual trader overrides.

- FanDuel had the most suspensions but the lowest suspension time average, while Caesars had the fewest number of suspensions but the longest suspension times. One of the biggest eye-openers in the data was FanDuel suspending its in-play moneyline opportunities 104 times during the Super Bowl while rival DraftKings only suspended twice.

- Availability of markets such as moneyline, the spread, and totals varied greatly during the game. DraftKings moneyline had the fewest suspension time with one minute and 46 seconds. Unibet was worst in this regard with about 45 minutes in total market suspension time.

- Despite FanDuel having the most suspensions, the average time for their suspensions was the shortest. The frequency of the suspensions, however, made for the longest overall suspension time. Their low-risk approach seems to have led to more suspensions.

- BetMGM and Unibet, on the other hand, had less frequent suspensions but the duration was longer for spreads and totals.

- Not all of the suspensions were related to on-field activities, which means that technical issues could have contributed to both the number of suspensions experienced by the participating sportsbooks and the durations of those suspensions. According to the data, this is especially true with Caesars and BetMGM sports betting platforms.


Read the full article here: https://www.sportsbookreview.com/new...y-may-24-2023/


What's the most surprising takeaway for you?

[Jayvegas420]

Biggest surprise is that people still wager with Unibet.

[goduke]

Usability Digital recently released a study on the availability and effectiveness of in-play betting markets during the Super Bowl at 5 of the leading US operators: FanDuel, DraftKings, BetMGM, Caesars, and Unibet.

Some takeaways from the analysis:

- In-play betting markets availability varied greatly during the Super Bowl. DraftKings was the most complete/seamless sportsbook with just one minute and 26 seconds of suspension time during the game, accounting for 99.2% of the in-play betting window. Unibet was the worst, with 45 minutes of suspension time as their in-play markets were available for about 75.4% of the Super Bowl action.

- Caesars and Unibet were the most successful sportsbooks in transitioning from pre-game to real-time game betting activities. FanDuel, DraftKings, and BetMGM all had a difficult time switching from pre-game to live-game. Their spread, moneyline, and total odds were somehow unavailable to customers right around kickoff. BetMGM's in-play betting didn't come back online until nine minutes after the official start of the game.

- It had been assumed that suspension times for both the betting websites and apps were inconsistent across all of the five participating sportsbooks, in all participating states. That assumption turned out to be true. There was an obvious lag in the time of suspension, the length of suspension and the reaction time to the events on the field during the Super Bowl. An example given was a 5-8 second lag between UK broadcaster SKY Sports and the actual events taking place on the field. While revealing and possible to affect in-play betting patterns, such a lag was concluded to be acceptable, and not a game-changer in the in-play betting world.

- Different strategies about the implementation of in-play betting for the five sportsbooks included in the analysis became obvious. DraftKings, for instance, appeared to review plays and call decisions prior to the on-field referees and adjust their odds accordingly. FanDuel and Unibet (Barstool) took a cautious approach with many suspensions, even during low-risk plays. Other sportsbooks analysed also took a more cautious approach, but still suffered suspensions due to technical issues or other factors such as manual trader overrides.

- FanDuel had the most suspensions but the lowest suspension time average, while Caesars had the fewest number of suspensions but the longest suspension times. One of the biggest eye-openers in the data was FanDuel suspending its in-play moneyline opportunities 104 times during the Super Bowl while rival DraftKings only suspended twice.

- Availability of markets such as moneyline, the spread, and totals varied greatly during the game. DraftKings moneyline had the fewest suspension time with one minute and 46 seconds. Unibet was worst in this regard with about 45 minutes in total market suspension time.

- Despite FanDuel having the most suspensions, the average time for their suspensions was the shortest. The frequency of the suspensions, however, made for the longest overall suspension time. Their low-risk approach seems to have led to more suspensions.

- BetMGM and Unibet, on the other hand, had less frequent suspensions but the duration was longer for spreads and totals.

- Not all of the suspensions were related to on-field activities, which means that technical issues could have contributed to both the number of suspensions experienced by the participating sportsbooks and the durations of those suspensions. According to the data, this is especially true with Caesars and BetMGM sports betting platforms.


Read the full article here: https://www.sportsbookreview.com/new...y-may-24-2023/


What's the most surprising takeaway for you?

This is on par with FanDuel. Freezing in game all the time

[TheMoneyShot]

I'm just curious... does anyone know what the MAX wager is Live? Is it different than a regular straight bet before the game starts? I would assume it is.

[Optional]

Biggest surprise is that people still wager with Unibet.

I use Unibet a lot for soccer and motorsport. Often have best odds in market for some drivers.

The article is right about how seamless it is from pre-game to in-play compared to any other book. And how long their suspended markets can last

I'm just curious... does anyone know what the MAX wager is Live? Is it different than a regular straight bet before the game starts? I would assume it is.

It varies widely at Unibet and have been told of people getting 10k+ down live on major events. I don't bet large live to know upper end for sure but sometimes I get trader referred for pretty small amounts.