Do sportsbooks really limit winning bettors?

[FirmWars]

Just because someone claims they were limited doesn’t automatically mean they were a real long-term winner.

The person does not need to be a long term winner before they can be limited, I don't think it works like that, the way it works is if you win an enormous amount several times on different bets you staked on. So, assuming you bet on several single games or even on a parlay and all these bets were successful and you won an enormous amount, then you staked on more games again and still won all, if the won amount are enormous, the casino will limit you from betting, I think that's how it works, I have not experienced it myself but others have.

[Agbamoni]

I believe they are lying; it is not true.
I have heard complaints from people online, never have I heard anyone close to me complain that they were limited by a sportsbook. Also, most of the sportbooks I use to place my bet, has never restricted me from betting even when I was on a winning streak.

[Cantsay]

Do you believe that sportsbooks really limit bettors just for winning consistently?


Just because someone claims they were limited doesn’t automatically mean they were a real long-term winner.

I don’t know if you have know betnomi or not, but there was a time the representative of that gambling site publicly stated that those gamblers who won consistently are not good for the business and since running a bookmaker is the same as running a business, they usually limit the account of such a bettor so they don’t keep losing money to such person.

I haven’t personally experienced it, but I don’t think they are lying about it.

[Rabata]

Do you believe that sportsbooks really limit bettors just for winning consistently?

I was in a situation a long ago where I was limited to one bet. When I placed money on the same bet repeatedly and won, they limited me at one point. I was surprised but there was no problem with other bets. If it is not possible to do so, then there is no chance of this happening. Now betting sites have become very transparent. They want to give maximum benefits to their clients. I agree with your idea that betting sites do not give their own money but rather give money to other bettors so they have no loss. There is a lot of competition in the gambling business, which is why restrictions are no longer seen, but it could have suddenly appeared, but not regularly.

[Hispo]

So far the only case I have seen lately of someone getting limited on bookies was someone who openly admitted to get involved in betting arbitrage, it seems the bookie detected his activities and decided to limit his possible wager size in order to stop him from doing arbitrage on their platform.
So far, that is the only reasonable case I can come up with in which a bookie would have any reason to limit the bets of someone instead of banning them completely.

Also, there are people who consider themselves to be professional bettors, and are consistent enough to live off their bets, and they do not get limited, otherwise it would be very difficult for them to remain professional on betting in sports, since they would have no access to liquidity.

[jossiel]

Do you believe that sportsbooks really limit bettors just for winning consistently?

Yes, they do. Although I haven't experienced it but I've read some topics like that before.

To me it doesn’t fully make sense. Sportsbooks don’t need to beat a bettor’s bankroll, they balance action by moving lines and make money from the juice. If heavy money comes in on one side, odds adjust, problem solved.

Well, that's why consistency is not a thing for them and it's against their business model. And so, they have to act on it to avoid further loss that are being made to them by these good sports bettors.

So why limit someone at all? Is this actually common, or are some bettors lying to make themselves look good? Saying they got limited because they “win too much” sounds better than admitting losses, bonus abuse, or other issues they don’t want to talk about.

Just because someone claims they were limited doesn’t automatically mean they were a real long-term winner.

It's a case to case basis. Not counting all of the long term bets but if that time it's damaging to the bookie, they'll have to take a stoppage for that.

[nelson4lov]

To be honest, I have never seen a case with evidence that a sportsbooks has actually limited a bettor for winning too many bets
In casinos, it is not uncommon to hear and see cases where the company claims that the bettor is using some kind of cheat, counting cards, etc., but in sportsbooks, I have never seen this

If anyone knows of any proven cases, please share them with us

Yeah, I don't think it happens in sportsbooks. I think majority of the time that a player can cheat on sportsbooks bets (i don't know how) that it is likely due to a mistake from the sportsbook like for instance, if their odds provider fails to update odds quickly and someone places a bet and takes advantage of that situation, i think that's a case that likely gets users in trouble with casino but other than that, I thought think sportsbook have that problem. It's always casino games because sports event are independent of these casinos.

[hyudien]

There is no smoke without fire. When someone says their bets are capped, there must be a reason whether it's arbitrage betting, bonus utilization, or taking advantage of market imbalances. Consistent long-term winning through pure standard betting is very rare. Besides, if the person is really good at betting when his account is restricted he can switch to using other sites, and usually people with such expertise will keep quiet without telling that he can win consistently, unless there is something to it, apparently it is a lie to attract other bettors to subscribe to their predictions.

[ralle14]

I've experienced getting limited at a sportsbook once, so I believe it's a real thing. There are always bettors who do more damage by making good bets, and moving lines isn't enough to offset that when traditional sportsbooks don't change the odds once the bet is placed.

You're right about the other part you mentioned. It's easy for people to lie, or it could be a misunderstanding on their part, because it's almost the same as having your account frozen in an exchange where you're left in the dark and just given the boot.

[GreatArkansas]

I've experienced getting limited at a sportsbook once, so I believe it's a real thing. There are always bettors who do more damage by making good bets, and moving lines isn't enough to offset that when traditional sportsbooks don't change the odds once the bet is placed.

You're right about the other part you mentioned. It's easy for people to lie, or it could be a misunderstanding on their part, because it's almost the same as having your account frozen in an exchange where you're left in the dark and just given the boot.

This is my first time hearing of a sportsbook limiting its customers; how does their limit work? Is this kinda legal? Like, I'm curious about their reason for limiting their winning customers. Because as far as I know, the more bettors placing bets on your platform, the more money they will make, even winning or losing.

[alegotardo]

Do you believe that sportsbooks really limit bettors just for winning consistently?

Yes, I believe they limit the bettors that winning, but not in the way you are describing... it hapens that when a people consistently find the value in wrong odds, they are no longer gambling, they are extracting money from the system. Casinos realize this and try adjust with some limits, but if even then the players continue to succeed, then they are no longer customers... they become an accounting liability.
And actually, I think you do not even need much to receive a "red flag" on your account, you do not need to be a genius to be limited, I think in fact, any ROI above about 20% in more than 100 or 200 bets is already enough.

That is wrong??? I do not know... I think that in the same way that you can choose which casino you want to bet, casinos can also choose which customers they want accept.
As long as they do not withhold the value you rightfully won, I do not think there is anything wrong with close door to you. They just ca not be disrespectful or denigrate you because of it.

[asriloni]

Sportbook let us to lose, but they don't like when we're winning continuously. Even winning small amount of money from doing live betting can get us being limited. So the assumption only someone with long streak win can get limited by sportbook is not right.

The fact that it seems no matter what do you do, you can be limited even if it's due to non sensical reason.

[Awaklara]

So why limit someone at all? Is this actually common, or are some bettors lying to make themselves look good?

We do not know the truth of what actually happened. If I'm not mistaken, there was a forum member who posted about themselves not being able to place big bets on one sports betting site. Even though previously they were able to place big bets with both losses and wins. 
Maybe there are indeed gamblers who experience such problems, but perhaps the reason is not just winning consistently. 
Because in reality, large and reputable betting sites also pay out whatever winnings the gamblers earn.

[Nightwalker(NW)]

That can only happened when they noticed an Arbitrage gambling on your profile, in fact you could also be limited to make withdrawal from your winning and casino doesn't tolerate that. However, if your profile is view and reviewed and they knows that your are constant gambler, you could be given some preferences like handle your case immediately your submit report and you could also find your way into the VIP roll.

[ZeroVinsonN]

Nobody win all the time, anyone saying that the win alot or all the time is just desperately trying to hide away from the fact that they are losing at an uncontrollable rate,

If that’s the case, then why are there still reports of gamblers getting limited because they’re winning. If your opinion is correct and it’s really all just luck, then those people claiming they got limited for winning are definitely lying, is that what you’re trying to say?

Winning multiple times is possible but it's still up to luck, but think about this for a bit, gambling companies are always promoting winning in order to get more people to gamble with them which means that more impressive wins more new clients for them even more so when this winnings are coming from one person, it's an even more marketable situation, if one person can win big five times in a roll then so can you so they have no long term profitable reason to limit themselves people especially with the negative publicity they might end up getting for it.

[_act_]

That can only happened when they noticed an Arbitrage gambling on your profile, in fact you could also be limited to make withdrawal from your winning and casino doesn't tolerate that.

Arbitrage betting is what gambling sites really against, any account suspected going for two accounts and using the two accounts to try to cheat, they disable withdrawal on the account. It can lead to a point that the gambler will be told not to make use of their gambling site anymore.

I am still surprised that someone will want to go for arbitrage betting but the person will make use of the the same gambling site instead of creating another account on another gambling site instead.

[Jody.Drummer]

In general, they don't because the more money they wager the possibility of making money by casino will increase and saying I am win all the time is a big fat lie that we see from the influencers who wants to projects themselves as a sport bettor guru and all these stunts are just to sell you paid predictions.

In some cases, casinos might restrict users but it's all about wagering limits now, making them to lose deliberately.

The influencers themselves obviously have a working relationship with the casino, so their job is to convince people who see their ads, because that way, they'll be interested in betting their money. Yes, I believe that in any form of gambling, there are limits to winnings. The influencers will receive profits from the casino, but I don't know how they're distributed, whether it's based on the number of people who register or whether they still receive a profit regardless of whether someone registers.

[Dunamisx]

Do you believe that sportsbooks really limit bettors just for winning consistently?

No, i don't think so, but i know of some strategies already in place that makes the whole thing well balanced, such a way that the gambler does not have much upper edge in winning, as the house edge effect for those that often play on the casino games, while on sport bets these may not occur, but we are being limited by how we play our games, considering the odds, risk, amount stake and the likes.

[rachael9385]

To be honest, I have never seen a case with evidence that a sportsbooks has actually limited a bettor for winning too many bets
In casinos, it is not uncommon to hear and see cases where the company claims that the bettor is using some kind of cheat, counting cards, etc., but in sportsbooks, I have never seen this

If anyone knows of any proven cases, please share them with us

A friend of mine hasn't just been limited only but he has also banned several times and he actually showed me the email that was sent to him by the bookies all because he was making too much profit. This clearly shows that the sportsbook doesn't want you to be on profit,  these games were designed for gamblers to lose and that's a fact. Winning consistently is suspicious though they would assume you are cheating

[eisen33]

Do you believe that sportsbooks really limit bettors just for winning consistently?

To me it doesn’t fully make sense. Sportsbooks don’t need to beat a bettor’s bankroll, they balance action by moving lines and make money from the juice. If heavy money comes in on one side, odds adjust, problem solved.

So why limit someone at all? Is this actually common, or are some bettors lying to make themselves look good? Saying they got limited because they “win too much” sounds better than admitting losses, bonus abuse, or other issues they don’t want to talk about.

Just because someone claims they were limited doesn’t automatically mean they were a real long-term winner.

I don't think casinos can cap winnings because that would create a lot of publicity for such a casino, but I do admit that they could limit the maximum bet for such players. Although I don't see any point in doing so now, as there are so many different casinos, and any player can register at different casinos and split their bets into smaller amounts. So, I don't think winning or bet limits are currently effective for players.