I’ve written plenty about sportsbooks placing limits on perceived “successful” players through the years, and clearly, it’s not getting any better. For anecdotal proof, just go to Elon Musk’s toy and type in “sportsbook limited” and see what you get.
And so forth and so on. I’m a “victim” myself, being severely limited at three major books here in New Jersey. I can’t tell you why, precisely. I’m up over $5,000 at one, up a few hundred at another, and down $600 at the third. For the record, none of these are because of my betting acumen. They’re simply because I take advantage of bonus offers and the like and place relatively large wagers on both sides of a game — at different books — often enough. So that “up $5,000” mostly means I’m “down $5,000” somewhere else.
The point is, I’m not crushing closing line value, I’m not a proven winner, I’m not laundering money (more on that in a moment). I’m not doing anything.
But when I try to bet a player prop on any of the three sites, I’m limited to the teens.
Bottom line: These decisions are idiotic. The books are leaving gobs of money on the table by limiting me. If there’s a $5 bonus I can grab, I’m liable to bet a few thousand to get it. But they don’t want that easy action. Take my money today, give me back my money — at a discount — tomorrow. Rinse, repeat.
“The crazy thing about this whole thing is back in the ’80s and ’90s there were so many different sportsbooks in and around Vegas and these places would take on anybody and they would have fair limits,” said Gadoon “Spanky” Kyrollos, pro gambler, currently banned at Caesars and Bally’s properties. “And you could get more down in 1982 than you can in 2022. So what’s happening? There’s something wrong.”
Spanky points to numerous theories as to the “why” of this problem continuing with no sign of abating.
“I believe it’s a lack of talent on the bookmaker side, plus the bettors are smarter with the internet and the constant flow of information, but the bookmakers are also smarter. Circa has that talent. Other places don’t. Then there’s the ‘European invasion,’ and not the good type like The Beatles. It’s the soft book model, the recreational model, where essentially if you have a pulse, you’re getting limited.”
Or, in Spanky’s case, you’re getting banned.
Here’s the thing about Spanky getting banned from Bally’s: It makes zero sense. Bally’s, in its letter to Spanky — according to Spanky — cited anti-money laundering laws as the reason he’s been booted.
Bally’s wouldn’t go on record Monday when I tried to find out why, exactly, the operator decided to ban him, but a source close to Bally’s decision-making said, “Bally’s takes a very conservative approach to responsible gaming and protecting its licenses to operate,” and that it simply doesn’t have interest in doing business with Kyrollos.
To be fair(ish) to Bally’s, Spanky does have a money-laundering indictment under his belt back in 2012, but he wasn’t convicted (or tried) and eventually pleaded out to “promoting gambling,” which, in this day and age, reads similar to someone being charged with bootlegging during Prohibition but then pleading to “drinking a beer in my backyard” once the government realizes they were out over their skis.
Furthermore, Spanky plays at numerous other New Jersey sportsbooks, and this particular ban seems to stem from him depositing $100,000 at the Bally’s cage to use on Sporttrade.
Meaning, this ban doesn’t even stem from Spanky being a successful bettor, as exchange betting site Sporttrade simply books a commission on either side of the bet. Sporttrade — which didn’t want Spanky banned — didn’t stand to lose any money with him as a customer, and neither did its license-holder Bally’s.
As the source close to Bally’s put it, they just didn’t want to deal with him and his real or perceived baggage.
It feels like bad business, and, frankly, a Trojan Horse way for any sportsbook to ban any player for any reason by citing the anti-money-laundering laws. I’m not saying that will happen, but now there’s real precedent.
So, will sportsbooks ever get their act together here and treat customers like human beings? Will they ever stop limiting people, especially people who clearly have no business getting limited? Will this industry stop stepping on every rake left in the grass?
Surprisingly, Spanky thinks it will.
“It’s going to take the wrong person who has enough power, or enough cred, to get the attention of someone who can make a decision,” he told me. “And you know what? It’s going to happen. It’s ultimately going to happen.
“Let’s say you have a house and the basement is always flooding,” Spanky analogized. “There’s two ways to handle that. You can hire a bucket brigade, cheap labor to scoop out the water. And the next day it rains, you’ll hire the cheap labor again. It’s cost-effective, but the problem never gets resolved.
“Or you could hire an engineer, who can change the leveling of the house to siphon the rainwater and instead of it being a problem he makes it a solution where you can now use that rainwater in different ways. Now, the engineer is going to cost a lot of money and it’s going to take a while for that project to complete, but once that project is complete, you’re good.”
(For those who don’t feel like utilizing their English Lit skills: The rainwater is the sharp bettor, the bucket brigade is the Euro model, and the engineer is the sharp sportsbook.)
That’s certainly a rosy picture Spanky paints, especially for someone on the wrong end of all this. And while I’m not going to argue with him when it comes to gambling knowledge, I’m going to put it at +5000 that any meaningful change when it comes to limiting — and everything associated with it — happens anytime soon.
Image: Shutterstock