Spooktacular Bonanza

What is Spooktacular Bonanza?

The Genesis Invitational, which Max Homa took down after a shoot-off with Tony Finau, attracted 10.79% of the wagers on Bodog this past weekend. Homa is intimately familiar with the course where the tournament is played, the Riviera Country Club, and has been a regular on the greens since he was two years old. With his Genesis win, Homa joins Bubba Watson as the only two players to take a Riviera victory with a bogey-free final round since 1990.

The NBA action returned to Bodog’s list next, with three games getting more than 10% of the wagers. Next, the NCAA’s Michigan vs. Ohio State game was popular with gamblers, as 9.07% of the bets on Bodog were placed on this game. Third-place Michigan handed fourth-place Ohio State a loss, walking away with a 92-87 win to improve to 16-1. Novak Djokovic vs. Daniil Medvedev in the Australian Open attracted 8.58% of the bets as Djokovic swept three sets. The last of the top-ten events on Bodog flipped back to the NBA, with the Sacramento Kings/Milwaukee Bucks and the Golden State Warriors/Charlotte Hornets games getting 7.63% and 7.5%, respectively.

The post Basketball takes over sports gambling on Bodog appeared first on CalvinAyre.com.

How to play Spooktacular Bonanza

Merging Marlins and rewarding Free Spins build momentum throughout the game, creating opportunities for bigger wins.

About Spooktacular Bonanza

George Hasselback is done with Imperial Pacific International (IPI). The attorney has been representing the controversial and incompetent casino operator as it defended itself in a lawsuit filed by Fox Financial, as well as others, but has now washed his hands and stepped away. He had filed a request to withdraw from representing the company on February 12, and a judge granted his petition yesterday. Magistrate Judge Heather Kennedy agreed with Hasselback in his assertion that continued representation would put him in an ethical conundrum.

Judge Kennedy explained in her ruling, “The court finds that Hasselback’s statements that continued representation in this matter would cause him to violate several ethical obligations trigger mandatory withdrawal under Model Rule 1.16(a) and is sufficient for granting his motion.” She added, “Hasselback need not be required to provide details, beyond his written motion, to establish that mandatory withdrawal is warranted,” and stated that requiring him “to specify the basis for his mandatory withdrawal could create the untenable situation of an attorney having to choose between his obligation of candor to the court and his obligation to maintain his client’s confidences.”

Unfortunately, because of that attorney-client privilege, it is difficult to know what types of ethical dilemmas Hasselback is facing. However, it’s likely just the mere hint at issues will be enough for IPI to find itself, once again, being more closely scrutinized. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, given gaming regulators’ reluctance to hold the company accountable for its actions.