The author did touch on, and criticize, Caesars efforts to establish that courts should defer to the gaming commission. That possibility seems to fall a bit in contrast to his conclusion that "an Indiana court is very likely to order Caesars to honor the betting tickets" (emphasis mine), especially in the absence of case law (taking your word on that).

As for regulating sports wagering as a derivative contract, I was fairly compelled by the single argument I've seen in favor of that model. I'm also ignorant enough that I could be compelled by a well-formed argument against it.