Do Sportsbooks Really Ban Sharps? An MIT Panel Took On The Controversy

[danshan11]

A bookmaker license is not like a regular business. It's a govt issued permit to provide a gambling as entertainment service to the public.

It should not be compared to a regular business license. BOTH parties are supposed to be just gambling.

Not a money making or investment opportunity for players, or for the book to exploit the situation to maximize profit.

They should offer same odds and same limits to all comers.


But reality of that is that bettors would be screaming louder than now about how everyone's limit was tiny if they actually worked that way.

cut everyones limits to 10 bucks and problem solved!

[danshan11]

A bookmaker license is not like a regular business. It's a govt issued permit to provide a gambling as entertainment service to the public.

It should not be compared to a regular business license. BOTH parties are supposed to be just gambling.

Not a money making or investment opportunity for players, or for the book to exploit the situation to maximize profit.

They should offer same odds and same limits to all comers.


But reality of that is that bettors would be screaming louder than now about how everyone's limit was tiny if they actually worked that way.

and this sounds like lawyer technical pussy shit. if you run a business you try to make as much money as possible without burning out the candle or going to jail. if you run a for-profit business any different than that you will fail

some pussy schoolyard stuff like if Johnny cant play with you in the sandbox everyone has to get out.

I have never been limited when I did not deserve it and I am cool with it. BOL said FUKK that this guy is killing us at the 1k point cut his ass down to 500, simple clear NO ISSUE but let him keep roaring at max limits cause we are kicking his ass there! Makes sense to me no offense. if I went to a bar and kept spilling drinks at some point the bar says hey man if you spill again you buy it and if you dont want to do that BOUNCE!

[Optional]

and this sounds like lawyer technical pussy shit. if you run a business you try to make as much money as possible without burning out the candle or going to jail. if you run a for-profit business any different than that you will fail

It may sound like technical lawyer talk.

But it is the base logic behind responsible governments agreeing to permit and license bookmakers.

It's how they justify legitimizing and taxing it as ethically justifiable.

And it's how established regulators like the UKGC view the setup.

[Golden fleece]

what do winning players that get banned everywhere often do afterwards?

get people to place bets for them? sell picks? stop playing cuz it's not worth it anymore?

anyone know?

[The General]

Winning gamblers can hire help and when the help gets outed then winning gamblers can hire new help. Rinse repeat.

[FrankJames]

There's only 15-30 games a year across the board worth betting. The money's and time best spent is in arbing.

[acquavallo]

Frank, you are out of your league here son. Mouth shut ears open. Know your role.

<br>
<br>
Heck of an audition! Give the man a mod position, and while the final decision is being considered throw him a Pro bone.

[acquavallo]

Pool commingling & intra-book laying off would solve this in a heartbeat.

[2daBank]

Just be a degenerate asshole and lose like the rest of us and you will never have a problem!

[acquavallo]

I think I lost over 600k the last 7 years I still got banned or limited at Will Hill, Atlantis Reno, Westgate, SIA, Heritage, and BetUSA while I was getting crushed.

Westgate?!?!?

[HeeeHAWWWW]

what do winning players that get banned everywhere often do afterwards?

get people to place bets for them? sell picks? stop playing cuz it's not worth it anymore?

Beard accounts from others is common.

Selling picks is an option too, but that becomes more about marketing than anything, because the customers get banned also so you'd need to always attract new customers .....

Stop? That too


4th option: play at pinnacle or the Asians. Major advantage if your sport is soccer, because that's their focus.

[Golden fleece]

Beard accounts from others is common.

Selling picks is an option too, but that becomes more about marketing than anything, because the customers get banned also so you'd need to always attract new customers .....

Stop? That too


4th option: play at pinnacle or the Asians. Major advantage if your sport is soccer, because that's their focus.

that all makes sense. you'd have to have a lot of trust in someone making plays for you tho

maybe selling them would be best option. if I couldn't get the money down that I wanted to I would want to punish them as much as possible for it....

[bettingman6]

that all makes sense. you'd have to have a lot of trust in someone making plays for you tho

maybe selling them would be best option. if I couldn't get the money down that I wanted to I would want to punish them as much as possible for it....

I wonder why sharps don't threaten to sell their picks if books ban them. That would deter books from banning anybody.

If you really wanted to threaten the books, you could even threaten to post your picks for free on your twitter account.

[The General]

The numbers would move so fast lines would be stale real quick.

[danshan11]

https://www.racingpost.com/news/latest/support-for-winning-punters-a-surprise-inclusion-in-irish-government-report/372093?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=RP-ThursdayNews&utm_content=Irish%20government%20report&utm_term=NULL

sounds like you Irish winners can just keep crushing the books and they cant get rid of you but they can just adjust the juice to make the non sharps pay for the sharp winners!

[ans61201]

98% that get banned at books usa or offshore or UK are SCALPERS and or bonus scammers with multi accounts

They are not sharps 8th grade math skills

10000%. Almost all guys banned in Vegas is for other reasons. Books in Vegas not taking action is few and far between. People on here who think otherwise frankly just don’t know what the hell theyre talking about

[danshan11]

its like a badge of honor here to get banned or limited, reality is that is a rookie mistake. anyone that actually wins long term that is the first thing they tackle is getting down enough to make money!

"I am so good I got banned or limited'. most of the time it has nothing to do with skill. I see the guys on twitter all the time with the screenshots of emails or them walking in a book and the book saying "you cant bet here over $5 dollars", its dumb as hell. getting limited or banned is a rookie mistake if it even really happens for "skill" might be more like bigfoot

[rm18]

Westgate?!?!?

Las Vegas casino. The Will Hill was in Vegas too not the offshore one. They didnt ban me but app limits 25% of normal players.

[Hman]

10000%. Almost all guys banned in Vegas is for other reasons. Books in Vegas not taking action is few and far between. People on here who think otherwise frankly just don’t know what the hell theyre talking about

Would you agree that your point is pretty much the same with offshore books?

[pretentiousGuy]

Aside from Pinny/IBC, pretty much every other book boots anyone betting +EV. It's been like that for 15+ years, and any books claiming otherwise are flat out lying.

Bookmaker, too? Besides niche markets

[PaperTrail07]

HUGE MMA bets aren't exactly welcomed in Vegas....that's for sure

[ikid2groove415]

Weird question OP? Would you like someone 2 keep taking your money ? Books only welcomes losers

[Wohlford]

We're legalizing sportsbetting across the USA so we have a chance to shape how this legislation will be crafted.

There's one simple reform that should be instituted:

1. Bookmakers are licensed *by* the public and must therefore serve the entire public.

2. All licensed bookmakers must accept action from all customers on an equal basis.

3. All games/props that they put on the board must always accept some reasonable minimum wager amount.

[MC PICKS]

Yes they do.

[KVB]

We're legalizing sportsbetting across the USA so we have a chance to shape how this legislation will be crafted.

There's one simple reform that should be instituted:

1. Bookmakers are licensed *by* the public and must therefore serve the entire public.

2. All licensed bookmakers must accept action from all customers on an equal basis.

3. All games/props that they put on the board must always accept some reasonable minimum wager amount.

I'm all for consumer protections but you are asking for a standard of at least -130/-130 for spread bets with that one simple 3 part reform.

[RangeFinder]

HMAN no such thing as being sharp in games of chance

The word is very mis used


$15 per hr sportsbook manager think a big bet is by a sharp or knows something , they are too fukkin stupid to realize guy on the other side at another book and most likley offshore and can care less who wins, they just saw an arb and could not name one player on a team or even know their records

jj wake up

[Optional]

We're legalizing sportsbetting across the USA so we have a chance to shape how this legislation will be crafted.

There's one simple reform that should be instituted:

1. Bookmakers are licensed *by* the public and must therefore serve the entire public.

2. All licensed bookmakers must accept action from all customers on an equal basis.

3. All games/props that they put on the board must always accept some reasonable minimum wager amount.

Those rules would result in low limits and high juice for everyone.

And do you really want the govt legislating to prevent competition?


In other jurisdictions where a minimum limit for all horse betting has been instituted, it hasn't really changed much for players. Those that used to be selectively limited on horse racing, now just get banned out right from the entire book instead.

[lonnie55]

In other jurisdictions where a minimum limit for all horse betting has been instituted, it hasn't really changed much for players. Those that used to be selectively limited on horse racing, now just get banned out right from the entire book instead.

Source?

[Optional]

Source?

Mostly just from friends and news reports as Australian states have introduced minimum bet rules over the last 5 years. Some books closed accounts calling them syndicate players and the regulator deemed that fine. Some books came up with "new products" that weren't classed as fixed odds where they now offered the best odds, some books put people on phone in only bets and some books started dealing dual lines so they would still honour the min bet rule but at worse odds.

It has settled down now and the end result is better for horse punters overall, but I don't think it's the perfect panacea people are expecting it to be in the UK.

[HeeeHAWWWW]

Those rules would result in low limits and high juice for everyone.

I'd tend to agree.

The hope for future pro-focused betting is blockchain outfits. Betfair but with drastically lower commission, and truly global markets with the huge liquidity that brings.

[Optional]

I'd tend to agree.

The hope for future pro-focused betting is blockchain outfits. Betfair but with drastically lower commission, and truly global markets with the huge liquidity that brings.

Agree, that is the solution. But who is going to be so altruistic to invest the money to build it for us, without maximizing their return?

[lonnie55]

Some books closed accounts calling them syndicate players and the regulator deemed that fine. Some books came up with "new products" that weren't classed as fixed odds where they now offered the best odds, some books put people on phone in only bets and some books started dealing dual lines so they would still honour the min bet rule but at worse odds.

This is not the idea behind the rule. If books found a way to circumvent this rule by restricting the customers in other ways based on simple allegations they do not even have to prove I would try to take legal steps against the book.
Do you know if there is a legal expenses insurance in UK or Australia that bears the costs in gambling issues?

[Optional]

This is not the idea behind the rule. If books found a way to circumvent this rule by restricting the customers in other ways based on simple allegations they do not even have to prove I would try to take legal steps against the book.
Do you know if there is a legal expenses insurance in UK or Australia that bears the costs in gambling issues?

I'm not sure.

I've never really heard of the concept.

And to be fair, I probably did overstate things saying it hasn't really changed much, after the initial clean out of accounts. It's been at least a year since I last heard anyone complaining it wasn't working as hoped.

[KVB]

I'd tend to agree.

The hope for future pro-focused betting is blockchain outfits. Betfair but with drastically lower commission, and truly global markets with the huge liquidity that brings.

Would like to see high volume exchanges hit the US.