Originally posted on 11/29/2012:

In sporstbooks there are two ways of seeing things. The "Las Vegas" way (aka regulated), where every line must be allowed with the same line and limits to almost everyone, even egregious errors. And the "offshore" way (aka unregulated), where books may limit any player, even deal dual lines, and are allowed to cancel bad lines. They are the extremes, which one is right?

As the thread is full of blackjack references, it is a pertinent example. Back into 80s, the "regulated" place was New Jersey's Atlantic City, where the casinos were unable to boot anyone out, while Las Vegas (and even better, Reno) had freedom to boot players. What was the results? AC games were shitty 6-8 decks games with low penetration, while Reno 1-deck games were thriving. The dream of every card counter wannabe was going to Navada. Some won money, most lost miserably. Atlantic City became a ghost town.

The point is, you cannot go to an unregulated market expecting to get the benefits of a regulated one. The unregulated offers are good in part bacause the books have a safety net.