Written by :
Published on :
Pro sports bettors were keeping a careful eye on Wednesday's Massachusetts Gambling Commission hearing on the limiting of gamblers. It's the first of its kind in terms of examining the behavior of many regulated sportsbooks in the U.S. Interestingly enough, the practice has opened up a cottage industry of sportsbooks - most of which operate offshore but with a handful in the North American regulated market - that welcome pro gamblers (i.e. Costa Rican resort operator BetAmapola)
Here is the notice regarding the meeting:
"Please note that the Commission will conduct this public meeting remotely utilizing remote collaboration technology. Use of this technology is intended to ensure an adequate, alternative means of public access to the Commission’s deliberations for any interested member of the public. If there is any technical problem with the Commission’s remote connection, an alternative conference line will be noticed immediately on our website: MassGaming.com."
That discussion can be watched below.
It's interesting to note that sports bettors commended FanDuel to at least being honest in terms of who they limit.
Pro bettor Spanky of SpankOdds and BetBash offered:
"The Fanduel guy Cory Fox kept it real admitting to limiting customers who simply have a better model or who are arbitraging. At least one operator didn’t portray the limited customer to look like a cheating criminal."
Others weren't so kind when it came to the likes of BetMGM and DraftKings, each of whom initially resisted attending this meeting.
Craiger wrote: "He's in a good spot going after MGM. Fanduel can be fair to play with, MGM limits you for having a pulse."
Vladimir Abuzarov perhaps put it best:
"Of FanDuel, DraftKings, BetMGM, and Fanatics - FanDuel limits arbitragers the least."
Good questions from Commission members included:
"Is it a mere coincidence that an individual who bets the same way and is under and is then limited after they've won significantly, what about that behavior, that pattern there that raises eyebrows for the operators? In the scenario I am describing, it's a losing pattern. And that one wager hits and they win, it's a big payout. Is that a scenario that is concerning to the risk management team?"
Kenneth Fuchs of Caesars insisted: "This is not the type of situation where we would limit someone with a big win. We are looking at a pattern of behavior over time."
So if you keep on winning, expect to get limited at most of these places?
|
|
