In practice, limiting a certain player on a certain type of bet is the same as the book only taking bets on one side of a posted line.
There was a lot of debate about whether it was ethical for 5Dimes not to take bets on the sharp side of a game because 'the line is being evaluated', but still taking bets on the square side.
How is limiting players who know what they're doing any different?
eg1. Limiting players who only play teasers that don't cross the 0 means they are essentially only allowing square teaser action
eg2. Limiting players who only bet NFL dogs.
Remember a thread about this at the now super rogue sportsbook.com that told a player to change his betting patterns "and not just bet their juicy lines on dogs" but throw in some favorites as well.
eg3. Greek limiting sharp prop bettors but continuing high limits for square prop bettors
So either players should be more outraged about this, or they should think the 5Dimes controversy is way over blown.
There was a lot of debate about whether it was ethical for 5Dimes not to take bets on the sharp side of a game because 'the line is being evaluated', but still taking bets on the square side.
How is limiting players who know what they're doing any different?
eg1. Limiting players who only play teasers that don't cross the 0 means they are essentially only allowing square teaser action
eg2. Limiting players who only bet NFL dogs.
Remember a thread about this at the now super rogue sportsbook.com that told a player to change his betting patterns "and not just bet their juicy lines on dogs" but throw in some favorites as well.
eg3. Greek limiting sharp prop bettors but continuing high limits for square prop bettors
So either players should be more outraged about this, or they should think the 5Dimes controversy is way over blown.
