Winning Sports Bettors Being Limited Comes Into Focus in Massachusetts
Oddsmakers frequently restrict or even forbid sports gamblers from continuing to wager if they win more than they should. The majority of states that allow legal sports betting allow it, but Massachusetts casino regulators are considering changing this practice.
The issue of operators restricting bettors was brought up near the end of the more than two-hour meeting of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission (MGC) on Thursday. The MGC's sports wagering operations manager, Andrew Steffen, told the agency that the discussion was started last year by a member of the public who wanted to know if the business strategy was allowed by Massachusetts' sports gambling laws.
The Sports Wagering Division recently determined that the technique is legal under the state's sports wagering regulations, Steffen informed the commissioners. The "Minimum and Maximum Wagers: Additional Wagering Requirements" statute of the MGC was quoted by Steffen.
“Unless otherwise directed by the Commission, there is no limitation as to the minimum or maximum wager a Sports Wagering Operator may accept,” the statute reads. “This rule does not preclude a Sports Wagering Operator from establishing its own minimum or maximum wagers, or limiting a patron’s Sports Wager for reasons considered necessary or appropriate by the Sports Wagering Operator.”
Sportsbooks Make Moral Arguments
In order to ascertain whether a regulatory change might be necessary, Steffen informed the MGC commissioners and Jordan Maynard, the interim executive director who was appointed to the role by Governor Maura Healey (D) earlier this month after Cathy Judd-Stein retired, that his division had met with the MGC's legal team and sportsbooks.
According to Steffen, sportsbooks assert that they impose wager restrictions in order to "preserve the integrity of the sporting event" and for "risk management." Limits, according to the licensees, promote "fair competition" and guard against "undue influence of bets on the outcome of the game."
Steffen went on to say that the sportsbooks acknowledged that they also place a per-customer wager limit. Massachusetts bookmakers stated that skilled bettors are occasionally few, much to the annoyance of sharps and professional bettors.
The sportsbook representatives informed Steffen that they have the legal authority to restrict bettors, as stated in their sports wagering rules and regulations. According to the house rules agreement provided by Boston-based DraftKings, the book "reserves the right to limit the maximum bet amount … at its sole discretion."
Discussion Continues
The subject of whether sportsbooks restrict bettors who consistently lose as frequently as they do those who consistently win was brought up by commissioners. Commissioner Eileen O'Brien stated that the operators might have too much discretion because March is Problem Gambling Awareness Month and responsible play is emphasized.
“There’s a deeper issue here in terms of individual patrons. Their house rules talk very vaguely about management in their sole discretion. What I’m curious to know as a commissioner is, ‘What’s the basis [for limiting]?'” O’Brien asked.
"How and why are they making these limitations is critical to whether we need to amend this regulation and help us as we go forward with the research with AI and whether or not we’ll be moving into a regulation that would require some of the information that may very well be going into these limitation determinations to proactively flag problem gamblers,” O’Brien continued.
At a subsequent meeting, the commissioners want to carry on the discussion. Since O'Brien believes the bookmakers will assert that they use proprietary methods to decide whether to limit, those discussions may take place behind closed doors.
