[Mudcat]

I am often surprised at how passionate people get about being restricted/booted by a book.

Case study: I had a situation recently with US Sportsbook where they sent my entire balance to my Neteller account - without even consulting me. I was actually happy because my limits were so low I was planning to cash out anyway and it saved me some effort. But even if they had phoned me and said what they were doing, I would have just given them the telephone equivalent of a handshake and moved on.

I didn't feel any of the indignation that I see people express. If anything, my thought was, good business decision.

I'm not talking about being restricted in the middle of a rollover. That's a different story. And I'm not talking about them trying to confiscate a portion of a bonus or something like that. Again, different story. I'm just talking about a straight, we don't want your business any more scenario.

If I was more calculating, I would probably pose as being indignant about these things and try to contribute to whatever forum pressure a book like US Sportsbook or Bet365 may feel. That would be in my best interest. (Actually that's debatable.)

But the bottom line is, I don't feel it.

Just wondering what people's thoughts are on the ethics.

[rolemand]

Deleted comments since it appears I'm from Mars

[gotsteam]

I am often surprised at how passionate people get about being restricted/booted by a book.

Case study: I had a situation recently with US Sportsbook where they sent my entire balance to my Neteller account - without even consulting me. I was actually happy because my limits were so low I was planning to cash out anyway and it saved me some effort. But even if they had phoned me and said what they were doing, I would have just given them the telephone equivalent of a handshake and moved on.

I didn't feel any of the indignation that I see people express. If anything, my thought was, good business decision.

I'm not talking about being restricted in the middle of a rollover. That's a different story. And I'm not talking about them trying to confiscate a portion of a bonus or something like that. Again, different story. I'm just talking about a straight, we don't want your business any more scenario.

If I was more calculating, I would probably pose as being indignant about these things and try to contribute to whatever forum pressure a book like US Sportsbook or Bet365 may feel. That would be in my best interest. (Actually that's debatable.)

But the bottom line is, I don't feel it.

Just wondering what people's thoughts are on the ethics.

Were you in the middle of a rollover with this book? Were you beating them? If so, by a lot? Were they being difficult about sending you your money ? I am curious, as we have seen lately big publicly traded books stealing from players ( when they win ) etc

[RickySteve]

Getting banned is a compliment. It's annoying losing a good profit stream, but it's not something I take as a personal affront.

[tacomax]

Were you in the middle of a rollover with this book? Were you beating them? If so, by a lot? Were they being difficult about sending you your money ? I am curious, as we have seen lately big publicly traded books stealing from players ( when they win ) etc

They don't steal, they re-allocate funds. That's the management buzzword of the month at BetOnSports Towers, I hear.

[rara51]

if ALL books took that approach mud, you wouldnt have that attitude and would find it hard to even make ten dollars a day with those limits posed across the board. what pisses me off is that the books philosophy is it shouldnt incur any risk to sharps and only profit from the squares. isnt this gambling or am i missing something?

[DrSlamm]

It is hard to get mad a book that boots you when it is an obviosuly correct financial decision for them. If you are a -EV customer they should by all means have the right to give you the boot and should.

They are not in business to give away money and if you are naive enough to think that they should be forced to keep bad customers.. well you are crazy

[gotsteam]

It is hard to get mad a book that boots you when it is an obviosuly correct financial decision for them. If you are a -EV customer they should by all means have the right to give you the boot and should.

They are not in business to give away money and if you are naive enough to think that they should be forced to keep bad customers.. well you are crazy

I would have to agree with you. I think any book who takes the approach of saying no to a player, or gives them the "heave ho", and PROMPTLY gives the money as well is demonstrating good management. Of course if they start making excuses and dont pay the player, that is a different story.

[Chuck Sims]

Mudcat, I am surprised you have that attitude. Maybe you do not understand the ramifications. The REAL sportsbooks might start to feel the pinch when all the winners are forced to play at only a handful of books while the bloodsuckers destroy the industry by chasing everyone that shows a profit.

[Terris]

The REAL sportsbooks might start to feel the pinch when all the winners are forced to play at only a handful of books

Its still gambling thou...anything can happen, someome beating book A can be a loser at book B.

Books dont limit because you are a winner usually, its all about beating them to line moves, always getting good numbers, hunting scalps and all that stuff.

The real sportsbooks are happy if they get more booted "winners" lol, they love players who try to beat them.
There are exceptions, but they surely dont mind taking action from scalper xxx who got the boot from 3.65 because he laid "insane" amounts of $500 or maybe even 1k on a few soft lines

[rara51]

GOT STEAM and DR SLAMM see above . question- if the books are running such a smart business(which they are) and are making smart decisions as to who plays with them(which they are as well) the both of you should open a book?no - i thought so, thats why the books have to take the good with the bad(dont worry their still making a shite load of money) so they dont kill the industry and force winners to play at handfull of books

[JDK192]

The situation that mudcat is describing has happened to me a couple of times. Here's your money, no hassle. "It's strictly a business decision", "It's no longer economical to house your bets" blah blah blah in the form of a letter. It did piss me off because I handicap my own games, I don't scalp or chase steam. But I spoke to a bookmaker that put it into perspective for me. Books look at themselves as retailers making 4% +,- off of each bet. But if someone keeps winning books have to look at the player as a shoplifter because it is money taken directly off of the bottom line. So to answer the question yes it does bother me but I understand why it's done.

[Chuck Sims]

Terris, you're right. In throwing people out who may go on a mini-run or beat the book to moves, they no doubt toss long term losers in the process.

[isetcap]

...because he laid "insane" amounts of $500 or maybe even 1k on a few soft lines

I N S A N E !!!

[JoshW]

Business is going very hard toward kicking out advantage players. Steam chasers no longer wanted, but now even just consistent winners taking advantage of weak lines. I feel like the industry is changing for sure, and I can't even really blame the sportsbooks. If I was running them I would likely be close to the bodog model: give something to screen watchers every once in a while, but only when you really need it to balance a ton of public action. New era.

[Mudcat]

Were you in the middle of a rollover with this book?

No.

Were you beating them?

Yes.

If so, by a lot?

Depends how you look at it. Just in terms of raw dollars, it was maybe about 1K - which I don't consider a lot but they probably do.

Were they being difficult about sending you your money ?

No, they couldn't have been less difficult. They sent all my money to Neteller without me even having to ask. There were no fees.

[BuddyBear]

It's getting tougher and tougher to find books that focus more on the lines than on the players. I think Lakerfan is right the industry is slowly (perhaps not slowly for some people) changing toward a new business model (i.e. keep losers, kick out winners).

The only advice I can give is to spread your money across books as much as possible this way you have the option of placing bets at several different books instead of just one or two which may be easier for books to handle guys who chase steam or continually pick winners. It may work, it may not work but that's the only thing I can really think of.

[Doug]

Mudcat, I am surprised you have that attitude. Maybe you do not understand the ramifications. The REAL sportsbooks might start to feel the pinch when all the winners are forced to play at only a handful of books while the bloodsuckers destroy the industry by chasing everyone that shows a profit.

It doesn't matter too much anyway, Chuck. It will become a few big books, and more exchanges. These smaller shops won't be able to make it. Those booting won't be around that much longer, they are weak already. They could adjust the line and get a bet on the other side of what they don't want, cancel it that way.