From A Vegas gambling expert: Had to get banned New Jersey William Hill

[KVB]

One thing about regulation is consumer protection.

But I think the lobby will convince the lawmakers that protecting the business here is more important if they want taxes from everyone.

[ans61201]

Although I hate books doing this, is it any difference then them telling someone they can't play blackjack?

[ans61201]

You are looking at it wrong. A lot of the time the Casino needs the action to balance the money and the big player's are valuable. If your normal limit for a NFL game is 20k and you are going to lose $-500,000 on team A and the game starts in under a hour. Big bettor comes up to window wants to bet however much he can get on Team B you are gonna let him have up to $400,000 to even the action and you will still be rooting for Team B cause that is what makes your Casino more money. We get guys like this all the time where we hafta shade line to encourage action and they either want to value bet or scalp. You need players like this , but i do get your point if your a smaller casino yes if one guy keeps siding you and you cant balance the action they will ban. But if you're betting at smaller outfits they should not be taking huge wagers in the first place.

This. Often times casinos need the whales, and their often times on opposite ends of the crowd, so they want the action to balance it. When the casinos don't like is being killed in game or on rare off hand sports.

[BrickJames]

Although I hate books doing this, is it any difference then them telling someone they can't play blackjack?

The state licensed horse track in my state allows people to openly count cards there's no rule against it and they will not turn you away.

[BrickJames]

The state licensed horse track in my state allows people to openly count cards there's no rule against it and they will not turn you away.

It's a simple fix all you have to do is cut the shoes in half that way only half a shoe gets dealt and there's no way of telling if the second half of the shoe is rich or thin

[ans61201]

The law of averages and statistician say it is impossible to win long term because of juice, books just too stupid and too scared

Pinnacle knows you can’t win

Another reason people hve difficulty sustaining long term is when they get hot for a stretch, many like in poker will up their bet/stakes, so a few losses dents that back down to in the red very quickly. Human nature brings the greed.


As far as your question about fan duel, it's more similar to a poker site then sports betting as far as revenue. No reason to ban as you aren't playing the house-in theory

[ans61201]

Some good info on here , some people i have no idea where you're thought process comes from...

In Las Vegas it is very difficult to be banned outright betting over the counter at places like MGM & Caesars properties it's impossible unless you are doing something nefarious money laundering, trying to bet mistake lines, etc. I have never seen someone banned over the counter betting for simply just winning by MGM. When your betting over the counter they have time to look at there risk factor, balance money , counter your bet maybe you want 10k they don't want to take that they offer you 5k. In a previous post a person mentioned players cards they don't do that to monitor how much you are winning , they do that to monitor themselves and not miss a title-31 which happens more than you think. And if internal audit catches a missed 10k transaction that was not filled correctly gaming can fine the Casino's they take that very seriously.

Where the banning takes place in Las Vegas is Mobile Apps! Casino's have no time to counter anything balance the money especially the smaller casino's that offer apps. If you bet steam , scalp , or yes just beat them consistently the smaller casinos will limit or ban you from using the apps.

Yes also for tax purposes, but if you don't think your wins and losses etc can be pulled up when you hand over your account # I don't know what to tell ya. I would wager any amount that's a part of the reason asking for cards. I've been asked for my card for as little as a 800 bet at NY Ny

[semibluff]

You are looking at it wrong. A lot of the time the Casino needs the action to balance the money and the big player's are valuable. If your normal limit for a NFL game is 20k and you are going to lose $-500,000 on team A and the game starts in under a hour. Big bettor comes up to window wants to bet however much he can get on Team B you are gonna let him have up to $400,000 to even the action and you will still be rooting for Team B cause that is what makes your Casino more money. We get guys like this all the time where we hafta shade line to encourage action and they either want to value bet or scalp. You need players like this , but i do get your point if your a smaller casino yes if one guy keeps siding you and you cant balance the action they will ban. But if you're betting at smaller outfits they should not be taking huge wagers in the first place.

I never worked in a casino but I can confirm this philosophy was correct as far as Coral's sportsbook was concerned in my time there. There were occasions when we knew the public was going to bet 1 side of an event and we'd shade the line that way just to limit liabilities. If you open a coin-flip scenario at -116 -104 and the public still bets the -116 then at some point you have to move the line even further - even though you know the line was wrong to start with. If you have to lay +102 or +103 to even out the liabilities then that's what you have to do. (If Billy Walters is the guy to take +103 then you smile and say thank you - it's just business). This normally only happens on huge events. Books are there to get equal liabilities on either side so they can live off the juice. They are not there to gamble against the public even at favourable odds because as any gambler will tell you, even with value on your side sooner or later you'll hit a disastrous streak.

[RudyRuetigger]

I never worked in a casino but I can confirm this philosophy was correct as far as Coral's sportsbook was concerned in my time there. There were occasions when we knew the public was going to bet 1 side of an event and we'd shade the line that way just to limit liabilities. If you open a coin-flip scenario at -116 -104 and the public still bets the -116 then at some point you have to move the line even further - even though you know the line was wrong to start with. If you have to lay +102 or +103 to even out the liabilities then that's what you have to do. (If Billy Walters is the guy to take +103 then you smile and say thank you - it's just business). This normally only happens on huge events. Books are there to get equal liabilities on either side so they can live off the juice. They are not there to gamble against the public even at favourable odds because as any gambler will tell you, even with value on your side sooner or later you'll hit a disastrous streak.

bro you just turned into a clown show

DUCY

[vividjohn45]

Not him

15 people have been banned already Monmouth Park

Lol. I'm on cubs runline -1.5 Tonite, what's NJ say about that? Lol.

[SBR Tony]

Rule # 2

MANAGEMENT 1. Management reserves the right to add, delete, or change the House Rules and/or payoffodds subject to regulatory approval of the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement(“DGE”).
2. Management reserves the right to refuse any wager or delete or limit any selection(s)prior to the acceptance of the wagers.
3. Management determines the minimum and maximum wagers on all events.

http://www.monmouthpark.com/uploadedFiles/Handicapping/William_Hill_Sports_Book/House_Rules.pdf

[KVB]

...Books are there to get equal liabilities on either side so they can live off the juice. They are not there to gamble against the public even at favourable odds because as any gambler will tell you, even with value on your side sooner or later you'll hit a disastrous streak.

No, the big books, with deep pockets, have the big, longer term picture in mind.

https://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/players-talk/3050399-equal-action-right-action-lol-didnt-read.html

[grease lightnin]

I never worked in a casino but I can confirm this philosophy was correct as far as Coral's sportsbook was concerned in my time there. There were occasions when we knew the public was going to bet 1 side of an event and we'd shade the line that way just to limit liabilities. If you open a coin-flip scenario at -116 -104 and the public still bets the -116 then at some point you have to move the line even further - even though you know the line was wrong to start with. If you have to lay +102 or +103 to even out the liabilities then that's what you have to do. (If Billy Walters is the guy to take +103 then you smile and say thank you - it's just business). This normally only happens on huge events. Books are there to get equal liabilities on either side so they can live off the juice. They are not there to gamble against the public even at favourable odds because as any gambler will tell you, even with value on your side sooner or later you'll hit a disastrous streak.

Thank you.

[KVB]

No, the big books, with deep pockets, have the big, longer term picture in mind...

That might not include Coral's or any local. We're talking about the guys exchanging the big bucks, and doing over a long period of time.

There's a difference and one shouldn't extrapolate the business of a small book to that of the industry players.

[jjgold]

No difference playing blackjack or betting sports it’s the same long-term outcome

[ikid2groove415]

Although I hate books doing this, is it any difference then them telling someone they can't play blackjack?

Would have to be counting cards in blackjack -
Watch the movie (21)

[pimike]

bro you just turned into a clown show

DUCY

“CLOWN”

This is clearly your favorite word!!!

[Thor4140]

Here is just one recent banning live, we are now up to 15

WILLIAM HILL

https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video...SR49.mp4?tag=3



scroll down a little

BET OFFSHORE

3 fuking days the guy bet and he is gone lol. Fuking joke

[KVB]

That's the business model. It could lead to a whole industry of service beards.

Just like porn, syndicates will be looking for fresh new faces.

[semibluff]

No, the big books, with deep pockets, have the big, longer term picture in mind.

https://www.sportsbookreview.com/for...idnt-read.html

Micky Embletton used to be the guy who did all the soccer odds for Corals. He left with George Irvine when Satellite Information Services was being set up. He was replaced by Joe Fagan. Micky knew his stuff but he wasn't the most knowledgable person about lower league soccer. What Micky did know was being a bookie. Joe wasn't a bookie. Joe was a gambler and he made no secret that he was going to lay odds on teams he thought would lose. If the market line on a team he thought would lose was +120 he wanted to be the bookie that was laying +125. The problem was all of Joe's books were overloaded on 1 side. He was told to change because we weren't there to bet against the public. As a gambler he just couldn't change and he was fired very quickly. He wasn't off on his judgements. He was just an unacceptable risk that would inevitably have lead to a streak of disastrous results.

No book expects to get equal liabilities on each outcome. It's a philosophical goal rather than a working practicality. Some days you win and some days you lose, but the objective is to make it as smooth a ride as possible, not a roller-coaster.

Where you absolutely don't want a lop-sided book is on a major event. Mike Tyson was the undisputed best heavyweight on the planet and Frank Bruno was a likeable but horizontal heavyweight. The line on their 1st fight opened in the UK at -2200 +1000. People came out of the woodwork to bet Bruno. We kept cutting and cutting the price on Bruno and we still couldn't lay a bet on Tyson. It was insane. The closing line on that fight was -450 +300. We still couldn't lay Tyson at -450.

Coral's philosophy hasn't changed. When I started there Ron Bridges was in charge and 2 of his sons were there with him. Kevin Bridges was my first ever boss. When Ron passed away Kevin took over and he's still the top guy there today - 35 years on.

[KVB]

It is by far better for smaller bookmakers using originators to get their lines, or any smaller bookmaker, to try their best to balance the action.

The long haul can be a bitch.

[milwaukee mike]

Rule # 2

MANAGEMENT 1. Management reserves the right to add, delete, or change the House Rules and/or payoffodds subject to regulatory approval of the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement(“DGE”).
2. Management reserves the right to refuse any wager or delete or limit any selection(s)prior to the acceptance of the wagers.
3. Management determines the minimum and maximum wagers on all events.

http://www.monmouthpark.com/uploaded...ouse_Rules.pdf

seems like an illegal rule

just because someone writes a rule doesn't mean they are allowed to do that... all grocery stores have signs that they aren't liable for damage done by carts... and all ski resorts say they aren't responsible for injuries... but both those things are totally untrue

it's against consumer protection laws to disallow customers that aren't doing anything wrong, and to favor certain customers by allowing them to bet more than others. nobody really challenges this stuff like they don't challenge hospitals/doctors breaking the law by having different fee schedules that they don't publicly display, but it's still blatantly illegal

[2daBank]

JJ maybe you should open up a sportsbook and noticed that a guy is cleaning you up yearly - keep letting him killed your profits? 🙄

JJ been around this shit for decades and you a don’t know jack shit nobody yet one post after another of you trying to tell him how it is. God you are a fukkin moron.

[ikid2groove415]

JJ been around this shit for decades and you a don’t know jack shit nobody yet one post after another of you trying to tell him how it is. God you are a fukkin moron.

How much meth did you take co*ksucker? $10 hour toilet cleaning isn’t cutting it anymore ?

[jjgold]

The Meadowlands first week numbers are about 1 million they thought they were gonna do a little more

[Optional]

seems like an illegal rule

just because someone writes a rule doesn't mean they are allowed to do that... all grocery stores have signs that they aren't liable for damage done by carts... and all ski resorts say they aren't responsible for injuries... but both those things are totally untrue

it's against consumer protection laws to disallow customers that aren't doing anything wrong, and to favor certain customers by allowing them to bet more than others. nobody really challenges this stuff like they don't challenge hospitals/doctors breaking the law by having different fee schedules that they don't publicly display, but it's still blatantly illegal

When I was young it was considered fair practice that licensed rails bookmakers had to accept bets from all comers, up to a certain amount. (which was a lot in this days)

I don't think it was ever a law or written rule though. Just that you wouldn't keep your rails spot if you didn't book that way.


My state has tried to bring that back as a rule for horse racing betting. Saying books must accept bets from anyone to lose up to $2500. But it really hasn't worked. Books just find some valid excuse to get rid of player totally.

[milwaukee mike]

When I was young it was considered fair practice that licensed rails bookmakers had to accept bets from all comers, up to a certain amount. (which was a lot in this days)

I don't think it was ever a law or written rule though. Just that you wouldn't keep your rails spot if you didn't book that way.


My state has tried to bring that back as a rule for horse racing betting. Saying books must accept bets from anyone to lose up to $2500. But it really hasn't worked. Books just find some valid excuse to get rid of player totally.

there are so many laws on the books here that aren't being followed... just as one example, in wisconsin (and other states have similar laws) if you are a retailer, you can't have an item shown "on sale" right when it comes in the door, and has to be full price for 4 weeks out of every 90 day period... well go into any kohl's department store and they break that rule with almost every item in the store

[dark star]

Stop

[lonegambler23]

lol 190 on plays.. high roller

[Thor4140]

I wish i ran a book with just guys who think books look for equal action on both sides. To believe this is a special kind of stupid. I would never have to work another day in my life and neither would generations of my family members.

[Barrakuda]

bro you included matchbook which is an exchange

ofcourse they wont limit you

its a way for books to offset their liability and a way for you to get more action

they arent at risk

Cred ---> zero. Exchanges either make markets or offer credit to MMs. That is risk.

So Bookmaker, Pinnacle and Heritage are all booting players? That would be newsworthy, except it's not true.

[Barrakuda]

Anyone who has worked inside the big UK books will tell you those books don't want winners. They aren't there to provide a service. They're there to make money. Bouncing people who win is a sound business strategy. The best way to avoid being noticed is to make bets that won't return a 4-figure sum. Don't bet 500 at +100, bet 490. Don't bet 250 at +300, bet 240. If you're a winner it will eventually get noticed whatever you do, but if you're not a big bettor then make it harder for them - stay under their radar.

Yeah, because most books run spreadsheets that use =COUNTIF(A:A, ">999") instead of =SUM(A:A). LOL.

Any self-respecting book is worrying about whether you're beating the close before counting up $1k wins.

[KVB]

...Any self-respecting book is worrying about whether you're beating the close before counting up $1k wins.

...limited for beating the closing lines over a large number of bets in NCAAB totals, my porofit/loss was about even at the time, only slightly ahead.

I was hitting early lines.

I wasn't winning a huge amount, there was give and take, but I was beating the closer pretty bad for a stretch.

They notices.

[cornmeal]

I have never had an issue with will hill , i bet only straight, good amount of tennis and golf as well. They take much larger limits then most of the offshore,with just as good odds if not better. Just an honest opinion.
Ive had much harder times with mgm properties...

[jjgold]

Cred ---> zero. Exchanges either make markets or offer credit to MMs. That is risk.

So Bookmaker, Pinnacle and Heritage are all booting players? That would be newsworthy, except it's not true.

Rudy is a troll, he has no clue about any form of gambling so do not listen to him

Most offshore books way more tolerant of winners and bigger bets than legal usa ones