I Believe it is WRONG to Kick Winners Out!!

Search
As many of you know, I am certainly NOT afraid to voice my opinion. As I am beginning to witness more and more sports books KICK OUT gamblers who are WINNING, I am beginning to FOAM at the MOUTH!!

While I certainly understand that due to the FIERCE competition, sports books operate on thin profit margins, I also recognize that most gamblers operate on finite bankrolls and end up LOSING. This fact is indisputable...

As more and more gamblers are getting tossed from offshore sports books simply because they win, I believe it is necessary to FIGHT BACK against what I consider to be WRONG and DISCIMINATORY behavior by some operators.

Do these SAME sports books also kick out COMPULSIVE gamblers who may LOSE more than they can afford to? Of course not!!

Annually, the number of overall NET WINNERS compared to NET LOSERS who engage in SPORTS BETTING is less than 10 per cent!!!

Most sports books will not share this with you but it is a FACT!!! More than 90% of gamblers who open up an offshore betting account will be a net loser after one year!!

While I certainly recognize the need to make a profit in any business, I contend that these sports books who send out letters, like the one SPORTING BET has, should be ashamed of themselves.

Let me copy and paste a response of theirs from a previous thread to a gambler that beat them.


"Dear Mr Change

We regret to inform you that after serious consideration from our Line Management staff and our sister company Sportingbet USA.com's Line Management that we are closing your account forthwith. After analysing your account over the past year we have found you to be a very successful bettor who has a very high winning percentage with us. As we are a recreational betting company, we do not cater to professional bettors who continually bet or follow the steam moves on Don Best. We thank for your custom in the past but you must realise that we are a business and without making a profit, we would cease to exist. All open bets will be honoured and you may reply to this email to let us know how you would like the balance of your account refunded to you.

Kind Regards

Customer Services"


While I have absolutely no problem at all with sports books who want to LIMIT some PLAYERS (usually this will only occur if they suspect you are sharp or a winner), I LOATH the fact that more and more sports books are closing up accounts of those who WIN, rather than LIMITING them!!

Beginning next week, we will start listing the sports books who make a PATTERN of tossing players merely because they WIN.

I believe it is our obligation to let the PLAYERS know IN ADVANCE about which sports books behave in this manner.

If anyone reading this can furnish us with PROOF that they have been TOSSED merely because they WIN without being limited, please email shrink@theprescription.com

Thanks,

THE SHRINK




[This message has been edited by THE SHRINK (edited 09-16-2000).]
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
439
Tokens
Ken

The solution is obviously above the heads of these people. Any book with these "wiseguy" rules or winning player rules should be boycotted. The way to handle winning players is to reduce their limits. It's that simple. I can assure you that a wiseguy will not put a 3 dollar out on a first tier call level. This will give the shop plenty of time to move the number if place the chooses to wear a skirt.

,you would think this is nuclear engineering or something. Stupid , stupid, stupid. Lets not forget Ken who started all these b u l l s h i t rules and then people wonder why I yell and scream so loudly at them.

The Major
 
Major,

Although I am NOT in favor of wise guy rules, at least it is SPELLED OUT by SOME sports books for gamblers to know...

As long as sports books make their rules perfectly CLEAR for everyone to read, I can't fault them if they are afraid of sharp players betting into them.

What I do have a MAJOR problem with (no pun intended) are books with NO wise guy rule, who TOSS players out before LIMITING them.

I would like all gamblers to be aware of sports books who operate in this manner because it is UNETHICAL...

THE SHRINK
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
45
Tokens
I see it like this: it's the same thing as when a casino bars a blackjack player for using special abilities (our good friend can tell you all about this).

Whether it's right or wrong is a tough call. Casinos claim that they are not public property in Nevada, and have the right to refuse entry.

If I don't want you to get into my car, I don't have to let you in.

Having said that, while I believe the rules suck, that's the way the cookie crumbles. The best thing is for people to simply post publicly which books/casinos practice this strategy - and people will stay away. That may cause them to think twice before chasing people away.

In short - it's their right - but we don't have to patronize them either.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2
Tokens
Shrink I agree with you 95% but I have one major problem with your statements. How can you so stongly denounce the practice of kicking someone out one hand and the other hand you dont have a problem with a shop as long as they have this so called wise guy rule. I have a problem with that and if you would please clear that up for me.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
86
Tokens
ABETZ - BRING IT ON.. 10% credit card bonuses
15% W/U Bonuses. Bonuses are cash added to your account IMMEDIATLY.

1-800-403-3417

dman
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2
Tokens
IF your a sportsbook and worried about "wise guys" actions, then set a max wager to all...but funny thing is they welcome all the losing public bettors so they will never do a thing like this. Like I mentioned in another forum, Bowman has two numbers set up now for public and so callled sharp players. Giving out two different lines, on each number, just boggles the mind where the "sharp" bettor is ahead of these shops.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
3
Tokens
I have no problem with a Wiseguy clause.
What I do have a problem with is taking a bet and then stiffing, that's right stiffing a player if he wins saying he's a wiseguy.

That is just stealing, plain and simple!! and everyone knows who I'm talking about.
 

RKG

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2
Tokens
I agree with Shrink 100%. I've said a few times in this forum my distaste for books that operate this way. If only losers can keep gambling, why should anyone gamble at all?
 
Are the internet shills paying attention? There's money in this folks... /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
15
Tokens
Not all books through out winners but their treatment of the player tells them to get lost. ie. 800 to callin and no one is there to answer. Calling in on special line, being put on hold for a few minutes and then having the book renege on the line quoted. Often players will have several outs and may be breaking even only to be doing their winning at one book. Then the book will say you are winning too much. It is becoming all to common and is garbage!
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
3
Tokens
Now this is my type of topic. Anybody who can jusfify booting a winner is out of their mind. Do not give me the card counting analogy, because that is equally as wrong. Everybody bets to win, period. Most cannot do so, but everyone aspires to. Any book that doesn't let players win, is in essence "FIXING" the results. 10,000 clients, 500 winners, SEE YA. Replace the 500 winners with another 500 clients(25 of which are winners) see ya. They are in bookies heaven. Roughly 10,000 clients, and not a 1 is capable of beating them. THIS IS OKAY? So then every book does it. The more we(the players) let books get away with, the more they will try. Why do we as players want the "suckers only" books getting the benefit of all the square action. As far as I am concerned any book that boots winners or has a wiseguy clause, is not a real book. PERIOD!

Spread the word. Tell everyone you know to avoid these books like the plague. Shrink, sorry, there is little distinction between the two. Honestly I would prefer a book that pays and boots to a book that has a wiseguy clause(which is basically a right to steal).
Would like to see a list on every forums sight of books who have booted winners and books who have wiseguy clauses. Take a stand.
People. The players need to drive the market, not the books. If the books had it their way, the 95% sucker action would be the only money being bet. With 100's of books out there offerring essentially the same thing, why support a "suckers only" book?
 
So, there should be 2 lists.

"THEY SUCK" - For books who throw out winners with no wiseguy clause.

"THEY SUCK TOO, BUT AT LEAST THEY WARN YOU" - For books who throw out winners with a wiseguy clause.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
45
Tokens
Slam -

Nobody is going to defend the practice. All I'm trying to point out is that it's within their rights.

Like I said, the best way to beat these books is to post a list of every book that is going to chase a big winner or wiseguy out.

Perhaps The Prescription would be a good place to start a "dumblist".
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
290
Tokens
I like Joe's idea for a new list. He's hit the nail on the head. Let's spread the word and stay away from these gutless shops.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,773
Tokens
Let's compare 2 businesses that are very much alike. Sportsbooks and Car Insurance

An insurance company will drop you if you file too many claims or become too big a risk. There is no reason to let high risk people hold a policy with them, there are enough good drivers out there to justify dropping the worst 10%. If you fall in that 10% of bad drivers you have to get 'high risk' coverage. If you still drive poorly you risk loosing that coverage and won't be able to drive at all.

Now let's say that you are in the 10% of sportsbettors that win. Any sportsbook that is run by a business person would say to drop those players (just like an insurance company) some shops may offer 'high risk' (wise guy) lines. But if you continue to win even with wiseguy lines then don't be surprised to get the boot.

Does this suck? yes.

I hate Insurance companies, but I do admire the way they do business.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
3
Tokens
You are missing the point. Insurance serves a function. It is a big ripoff, but if I do get into an accident and find myself liable for a large amount of money, I face financial turmoil. So I pay the ripoff premiums, knowing there is that ever small chance that I may need it. Inusurance companies provide a service, protecting their clients from financial turmoil. As long as a client is capable of taking reasonable responsibility for their driving and not get in too many accidents, they will be insured. That is fair enough. If you cannot drive without getting into too many accidents, you probably do not deserve to drive anyhow. With car insurance my objective isn't to drive my car through the local mall and cause a million dollars worth of damage. If a insurance company needs to exclude a clown who drives drunk every day, because he might kill someone and set them up for a major payout, so be it.

Now sports betting is a completely different entity. Player lays unfavorable odds at an attempt to win money from a book. The sole objective of the player is to WIN MONEY. Please do not feed me this bookies rationalization that they are providing entertainment for guys who like action and expect to lose. PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEZE. Everybody bets to win and because they think they will win. If they achieve the expertise to do just that, how dare any book say, "Well guy, you were a good customer back when you used to lose every week, but now that you know how to win, get the **** out". How can you respect a business that says lets play a game, I charge you 11 to win 10, and will gladly take your money, but as soon as you prove to me that you can win, I will boot you?
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
68
Tokens
What most books fail to realize is that a winner is their most reliable source of revenue!!!!! Most books are trying to balance their action and take the vig ---- I know this is not always the case and certainly not the case in a game to game situation but it is the desire for most operations (particularly the Vegas Stores). The winner will produce consistant handle while the loser has constraints of bankroll. Additionally, more than half the time, the book is delighted to have the action the winner provides because it serves as a balance for the square money. Books win the majority of the games that they have a significant imbalance ,otherwise, 90% of the people would not be losers. Thus, the imbalance is not normally coming from the winning player. I suspect the only time the book is not happy they have the winners action is when it becomes time to payout. The point I am making is simple --- the winner balances the books action more often than not and he provides a steady source of revenue ----- juice is juice ---the book is just blind to the fact that they make money off winners ---
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,106,787
Messages
13,438,985
Members
99,339
Latest member
billcunninghamhomeloans
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com