Why the Tiger Woods bet was bad

I essentially stated that 49 of 50 states had mostly clueless people when it came to making a hypothetical even money bet on Tiger Woods against the field.

In short, such a bet approximates making the statement, "Against a professional golfer, Tiger Woods has an 89% of defeating that golfer in match play." If Woods's percentage is less than that, he becomes less than a 50-50 proposition to win a six-round match play tournament.

I wonder how much money Vegas makes off such bets...