Written by :
Published on :
Massachusetts regulators will finally take a stand against licensed sportsbooks intent on limiting winning gamblers.
The Massachusetts Gaming Commission (MGC) will now be seeking information concerning how and why players were limited following recent hearings on the matter.
The MGC will then consider possible regulations.
Professional sports gambler Gadoon “Spanky” Kyrollos applauded the move on Thursday.
"Slowly but surely state by state the predatory limiting practices will come to an end," Kyrollos tweeted out following the news.
Matt Meiselman, responding to Spanky, didn't seem to have a whole lot of confidence in how this might all unfold across the U.S. Massachusetts regulators are a whole other animal when it comes to taking player protections seriously. They are one of the few regulators that prevent customers from opening a betting account with a credit card.
"Can’t wait to restart my betting career in the next 3 to 50 years," Meiselman tweeted.
Two weeks ago, Gambling911.com reported on examples of the craziest sportsbook limits ever.
One person shared a screenshot of their limit per an undisclosed sportsbook: $1.03.
The payout on what was a 4-team parlay would have been a whopping $13.45.
A meeting on player limits was held by the MGC on September 11 during which representatives from regulated sportsbooks along with members of the public shared their perspectives. Initially, sportsbook operators gave the MGC the one finger salute. They quickly changed their tune upon learning the regulators were having none of it.
Bill Speros of Bookies.com:
In a meeting on August 1, Commissioners offered a "carrot and stick" approach to the state's 7 online and 3 retail operators during a scheduled discussion on the matter.
That was enough to get all licensed operators in the Bay State to the table in September. “To effectively manage risk, we limit a small minority of patrons that we consider to be advantaged players who attempt to take advantage or find ways around our risk management framework. This group of limited patrons, many of whom self-identify as professional bettors, are loud in insisting that limiting patrons is a pervasive practice by operators. However, this is not accurate; it is actually the opposite,” BetMGM senior director of compliance Sarah Brennan said at that meeting.
She added that BetMGM limits only 1% of its Bay State customers. “And it is our ability to limit that small minority of advantaged players that allow us to continue to offer competitive lines, competitive odds, and a wide variety of markets for the 99 percent of non-advantaged players that play with us.”
The other operators who spoke in September shared a similar sentiment, publicly admitting what many had believed: Sports betting operators limit players who are more likely to win.
It's a good start but we don't necessarily share Spanky's optimism that this trend will continue across the majority of other states.
|
|
