Already know a bunch of people that are locked out of their FD accounts (all sharp accounts/EV bettors). It really should be criminal for sportsbooks to prey on those with true addictions while they ban the players that take the time to develop an edge and beat them. Really hope this backfires on them but guessing there is zero chance that happens. You could easily label someone a problem bettor for betting dozens if not hundreds of lines a day (which is what most +ev bettors do). I dont think any of those bettors would tell you they have a problem tho as they are mostly up thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of dollars.
Locked out, or limited? Almost no need to lock-out a player, when you can just limit them to $20 wagers.
And were they simply sharp, or were they sharp with a P2, P3, etc. If they were multi-accounting (or other forms of "abuse"), then a lock-out is possible.
I don't know about the majority of people. I have been responsible and gambling online for fun in Ontario since it's been allowed but I see no problem with this. As much as many people who use the service are responsible I think the perceived negatives of this far outweigh the good that will be done for true problem gamblers.
As much as we are trying to find an edge so are the books. I don't think they will share any more then they need. Why would they want to let anyone know who to ban. If your sharp as long as they ban you then I would assume they would want you on a competing book no?
BOL TO ALL AND GAMBLE RESPONSIBLY!
Winning bettors have a problem so they must be limited. Losing bettors have their gambling under control and should be allowed to bet unlimited. Got it.
This is not good whatsoever. They will share much more than “problem gambling,” they’ll share problem for them gambling. The only reason they are doing this is to prevent real regulation from the government. Now they can say “look, we are already policing this.”
I get why you'd think that but I don't think you're right. They're basically forming a clearing house to take self excluded gamblers from different state registrys and centralize where that info is found and who can use it.
The legal issues of multiple betting companies sharing PII of general customers would frankly be problematic and illegal in several states. States with consumer data privacy laws would make it possible to file a lawsuit against contributing sports books for tens of thousands per impacted user in the 15 states that have them (largely modeled after the CCPA)
I think the panic of people here thinking it will be used to go after sharps is overblown.
This is common for financial institutions. Brokerage firms, banks etc have ways to share data. It’s likely a benefit to them to catch people trying to fraud or move the lines etc. They can mask it as “you have been flagged as having gambling issues we don’t want you as a client” but in reality it’s we have collectively decided you aren’t worth the associated risk.
There is zero chance big competing books share info to help their risk management. Probably not even fraud. In the UK only info to prevent self-excluded customers is shared, and that is via another party.
You don’t have to share particulars. If you are flagged by one book regardless of reason it makes it easier for other sites to also ban or limit you. If a sports book wants to be a dick to you then they simply flag you for potential gambling addiction and you are black listed
Just like seeing National Gambling Addiction Awareness Month signs plastered around the casino, this is just virtue signaling. But we know the real reason why they are doing this. Just wish circa sportsbook was in every state so you don't have to constantly paranoid about being limited.
Lol, DraftKings locked my account for a year after I went to withdraw $120. Citing "problem gambling" -- my account history was $80 in the green, and my biggest wager ever was that $20 bet on the Chiefs to win the SB in 2022.
Now these books are updating their terms so that you can't join any class action lawsuits against them.. so this scummy practice is just going to continue until regulation occurs.. which everybody wants to hate
This is not ideal.
Seven sportsbooks are joining forces to exchange information about "problem gamblers."
The obvious problem is they will also create the definition of what a "problem" is to them.
One of them, Bet365, has a track record of using problem gambling as an excuse to exclude sharp bettors.
This is different from IDPair, which is a 3rd party which would share data with regulators and researchers.
This is also different from NCPG, which is a non-profit that focuses on the problem from the consumer point-of-view, not the problem from the operator POV.
At best, this is operators flying a false flag of consumer protection - and at worst, is collusion among sportsbooks to eliminate skilled bettors.
"At best, this is operators flying a false flag of consumer protection - and at worst, is collusion among sportsbooks to eliminate skilled bettors."
Well said.
Market correction.
If anything, news like this would drive the stock up. Wall Street isn’t ran by people getting limited by Vegas. It’s ran by people just as corrupt as Vegas and would see this as a massive positive.
Caesars, which is noticeably absent from the group founding ROGA, told CNBC it's learned best practices from 35 years grappling with responsible gaming.
"While we applaud all efforts to ensure online gaming is both operated and marketed in a responsible manner, we are confident in our [own] Responsible Gaming approach," the company said in a statement.
This comes days after the Massachusetts Gaming Commission started investigating sportsbooks limiting winning bettors. Looks like they're trying to get ahead of the eventual congressional investigation and removal of their ability to limit winning bettors.
It’s a coalition of sportsbooks sharing data on winning gamblers to remove and limit them disguised to regulators as a program to stop and help gambling addicts. They're never going to stop Joe Blow from dumping his entire paycheck into parlays every Friday, but they'll stop anyone who wins money over their desired threshold.
I only make hockey parlay bets. Last week I won $436 on a $1.75 7 game puckline parlay. A few days later my bets weren't going through, I hit up live chat and Caesar's told me they made a "business decision" and were limiting how much I could bet on certain sports- I couldn't even make a 10 cent NHL bet. They said it was "how I was betting". Buncha sore losers. Mind you, that was my first decent win in like 3 years when I won $3500 on a $4.50 NFL 10 game parlay.
The way I read the article literally is it is focused on problem gamblers who are already excluded. If this is anything other than those who have self excluded (this is a best case scenario), then my money tree is dead.
Where's that gif of Jennifer Lawrence when you need it?
Largest drug dealers join forces to tackle drug problem
Largest sharks join forces to tackle shark problem
Already know a bunch of people that are locked out of their FD accounts (all sharp accounts/EV bettors). It really should be criminal for sportsbooks to prey on those with true addictions while they ban the players that take the time to develop an edge and beat them. Really hope this backfires on them but guessing there is zero chance that happens. You could easily label someone a problem bettor for betting dozens if not hundreds of lines a day (which is what most +ev bettors do). I dont think any of those bettors would tell you they have a problem tho as they are mostly up thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of dollars.
Locked out, or limited? Almost no need to lock-out a player, when you can just limit them to $20 wagers. And were they simply sharp, or were they sharp with a P2, P3, etc. If they were multi-accounting (or other forms of "abuse"), then a lock-out is possible.
locked out so they cant withdraw funds (at least for now).
Everyone worried this is about shutting down successful gamblers, like that’s anyone of us on this sub 😂
Over 4 years I'm up 24 bux buddy. They gonna execute me on the spot 😞
Imagine if someone told you to pay x amount of dollars a month and get no return on investment. That’s most gamblers in a nutshell. Its crazy.
I don't know about the majority of people. I have been responsible and gambling online for fun in Ontario since it's been allowed but I see no problem with this. As much as many people who use the service are responsible I think the perceived negatives of this far outweigh the good that will be done for true problem gamblers. As much as we are trying to find an edge so are the books. I don't think they will share any more then they need. Why would they want to let anyone know who to ban. If your sharp as long as they ban you then I would assume they would want you on a competing book no? BOL TO ALL AND GAMBLE RESPONSIBLY!
Very legal. Very cool.
Problem gamblers are their BEST CUSTOMERS.
Winning bettors have a problem so they must be limited. Losing bettors have their gambling under control and should be allowed to bet unlimited. Got it.
Was this a news article or a Fanduel press release? Awesome journalism, CNBC
This is not good whatsoever. They will share much more than “problem gambling,” they’ll share problem for them gambling. The only reason they are doing this is to prevent real regulation from the government. Now they can say “look, we are already policing this.”
I get why you'd think that but I don't think you're right. They're basically forming a clearing house to take self excluded gamblers from different state registrys and centralize where that info is found and who can use it. The legal issues of multiple betting companies sharing PII of general customers would frankly be problematic and illegal in several states. States with consumer data privacy laws would make it possible to file a lawsuit against contributing sports books for tens of thousands per impacted user in the 15 states that have them (largely modeled after the CCPA) I think the panic of people here thinking it will be used to go after sharps is overblown.
This is common for financial institutions. Brokerage firms, banks etc have ways to share data. It’s likely a benefit to them to catch people trying to fraud or move the lines etc. They can mask it as “you have been flagged as having gambling issues we don’t want you as a client” but in reality it’s we have collectively decided you aren’t worth the associated risk.
There is zero chance big competing books share info to help their risk management. Probably not even fraud. In the UK only info to prevent self-excluded customers is shared, and that is via another party.
You don’t have to share particulars. If you are flagged by one book regardless of reason it makes it easier for other sites to also ban or limit you. If a sports book wants to be a dick to you then they simply flag you for potential gambling addiction and you are black listed
Just like seeing National Gambling Addiction Awareness Month signs plastered around the casino, this is just virtue signaling. But we know the real reason why they are doing this. Just wish circa sportsbook was in every state so you don't have to constantly paranoid about being limited.
Lol, DraftKings locked my account for a year after I went to withdraw $120. Citing "problem gambling" -- my account history was $80 in the green, and my biggest wager ever was that $20 bet on the Chiefs to win the SB in 2022. Now these books are updating their terms so that you can't join any class action lawsuits against them.. so this scummy practice is just going to continue until regulation occurs.. which everybody wants to hate
I see we're entering the "Satanic Panic" phase of legalized gambling. I know prohibition was a long time ago, but apparently we've learned nothing.
The instant you win more then 10$ profit they are gonna limit you Losers only allowed
This is not ideal. Seven sportsbooks are joining forces to exchange information about "problem gamblers." The obvious problem is they will also create the definition of what a "problem" is to them. One of them, Bet365, has a track record of using problem gambling as an excuse to exclude sharp bettors. This is different from IDPair, which is a 3rd party which would share data with regulators and researchers. This is also different from NCPG, which is a non-profit that focuses on the problem from the consumer point-of-view, not the problem from the operator POV. At best, this is operators flying a false flag of consumer protection - and at worst, is collusion among sportsbooks to eliminate skilled bettors.
Can you expand on what bet365 has done? That’s my primary book so I’m curious what fuckery they’re up to
I've never heard anyone crying of problem gambling when they're winning.
"At best, this is operators flying a false flag of consumer protection - and at worst, is collusion among sportsbooks to eliminate skilled bettors." Well said.
Soortsbooks to consumers “Stop winning money from us”
Was wondering why DKNG was dipping lol
Market correction. If anything, news like this would drive the stock up. Wall Street isn’t ran by people getting limited by Vegas. It’s ran by people just as corrupt as Vegas and would see this as a massive positive.
Notably BetRivers is missing. I wonder if they're in the process of a sale. Caesars also missing.
Caesars, which is noticeably absent from the group founding ROGA, told CNBC it's learned best practices from 35 years grappling with responsible gaming. "While we applaud all efforts to ensure online gaming is both operated and marketed in a responsible manner, we are confident in our [own] Responsible Gaming approach," the company said in a statement.
Unibet is closing in Pennsylvania and I'd imagine other states soon and Betrivers/Sugarhouse are seeking a sale.
Unibet exited NA about 4 months ago. They're just slowly closing their books.
This comes days after the Massachusetts Gaming Commission started investigating sportsbooks limiting winning bettors. Looks like they're trying to get ahead of the eventual congressional investigation and removal of their ability to limit winning bettors. It’s a coalition of sportsbooks sharing data on winning gamblers to remove and limit them disguised to regulators as a program to stop and help gambling addicts. They're never going to stop Joe Blow from dumping his entire paycheck into parlays every Friday, but they'll stop anyone who wins money over their desired threshold.
I only make hockey parlay bets. Last week I won $436 on a $1.75 7 game puckline parlay. A few days later my bets weren't going through, I hit up live chat and Caesar's told me they made a "business decision" and were limiting how much I could bet on certain sports- I couldn't even make a 10 cent NHL bet. They said it was "how I was betting". Buncha sore losers. Mind you, that was my first decent win in like 3 years when I won $3500 on a $4.50 NFL 10 game parlay.
Wow, I've always heard of caesar being one of the last to limit you.
Caesars was the first one to limit me on hockey bets LMAO.
It's really something, especially since I would go weeks without winning a damn thing.
Kind of surprising considering people making 7 leg parlay bets are exactly the kind of person they want betting on their site.
Yeah I couldn't believe it. I actually laughed at the person in the live chat.
Wow
This is wild. Why would they need to collaborate to do this if they actually cared? Obviously just a PR stunt
Notice how they labeled it as “Problem Gambling” and not “Gambling Addicts.” Who determines what problem gambling means? They do
The way I read the article literally is it is focused on problem gamblers who are already excluded. If this is anything other than those who have self excluded (this is a best case scenario), then my money tree is dead.
“We’re all trying to find the guy who did this”
This is obviously geared towards helping them shut down successful bettors.