Bet365 deecreased my betting imit

[scrollock]

I think bet 365 is coming in for some unfair flak here, as has been pointed out MOST bookmakers do this.

the simple fact is, just as you can decide wether to place or not place a bet, and how much or little you want to stake, the bookmaker has the same right.

heres an example, if you and a friend decided to have a friendly bet on let say tommorows weather and your friend worked for the meteroligcal office, would you not either refuse the bet, or at least play for reduced stakes ?

my only problem with bookmakers reducing stakes is when they are too quick to do so as an over-reaction to a winning punter. because regardless of the sporting event, someone has to win! e.g. 10 punters put on £2000 each on different horses in a 10 horse race, then regardless of the result someone has to win. but when this happens the bookies are far too quick reduce stakes for that winning punter.

[blankley]

Bet365 are not admitting to reducing limits for someone who has backed a few winners but this-

'Since the rise of betting exchanges and odds comparison sites, along with more professional gamblers conducting their betting online, trading teams have to have much greater awareness of potentioal arbs. 'Arb'ing can bring about very low margins for bookmakers and it is business many traders seek to avoid. If a customer is a known arber, it is likely they will find their betting limits reduced.'


Why does arbing bother them so much? What does it matter what the punter does, after he has had a bet with them? So you've taken a few bets because you're the top price in the market, what you you expect, that you only have fools for customers?

[dealer wins]

Originally Posted by blankley

= So you've taken a few bets because you're the top price in the market, what you you expect, that you only have fools for customers?

That is exactly the sort of customer they want. Compulsive clueless casino playing drunk would be perfect

[Rhyzz]

Risk management is something that all bookmakers do. I'm sure the details of why and how are kept quite secretive within the industry, otherwise people would get around them.

[fatshaft]

Originally Posted by Eagle

Hi Kate,

Thanks for your reply. It has shed some light on the situation.

I must say I still am not fully convinced - seeing how you say you'll limit users who don't seem profitable for you.
It is the nature of the bookie's business (and I do know it's not easy) to make any user who's willing to wager their money profitable for them. Either through his losses, or through the losses of the bettors who picked the opposite outcome. Any bet makes it possible to offer a better price or a bigger bet to the other side.

Also, the same goes with laying a pick. Profiting as a bookie is different than when you're selling any other good, that is true - but the nature of refusing to sell it to me as a customer seems still pretty much the same.
Same cash, same pick, doesn't matter where it comes from. That same bet is in any case used as a way to expand the particular market (and adapt to the terms).

But regardless, thanks for your thoughts.


Eagle

Why pick on bet365 when they all do it, some to worse degrees than bet365?

[Slotster!]

Every single bookmaker in every single shop or online does this. It is common practice, and should be accepted and understood by anyone prior to engaging in gambling with an organisation.

Kudos to Kate at Bet365 for attempting to explain the reasons why.

[Eagle]

Originally Posted by Slotster!

Every single bookmaker in every single shop or online does this. It is common practice, and should be accepted and understood by anyone prior to engaging in gambling with an organisation.

Kudos to Kate at Bet365 for attempting to explain the reasons why.

Originally Posted by fatshaft

Why pick on bet365 when they all do it, some to worse degrees than bet365?

Hi guys,

I wasn't trying to pick on bet365.
I was thinking of depositing there. That is the reason why I asked questions. I wanted to know what the stories I heard are about.

"They all do it", and "some to a worse degree" is both incorrect and vague. First of all, they do not all do it because there are better ways to handle any money a person wants to put to a certain market. And to put it to good use. A bookie can offer a better price, or bigger bets, on the opposite outcome for any cash he receives.

Second of all, what a couple of others might do worse does not necessarily make anything somebody does adequate.
I simply will not give a second thought to those who "do it to a worse degree". I do not care about them and I'll simply take my business elsewhere. And they do not matter. I am not interested in them. I am interested in those who handle it better and where my cash is safe.

The fact that there are a few bwin-like sportsbooks, who'll limit you quicker still doesn't make potential reported bet365 problems after hitting three or four 100 eur bets in a row any more lucrative. What'll I do then... bet 20 000 1 eur bets to be allowed to withdraw? With any decent research and the amount of games you can bet on per day, it'd only take 5 000 days...


Eagle

[Shocked]

Originally Posted by blankley

Why does arbing bother them so much? What does it matter what the punter does, after he has had a bet with them? So you've taken a few bets because you're the top price in the market, what you you expect, that you only have fools for customers?

I would imagine that arbing reveals areas in markets that bookies have missed and are therefore less profitable / loss making for them..also, as said before, one person betting at 1k takes a lot of money available for laying many other smaller punters bets.

TBH, if the OP is an arber then he should just take it on the chin - doesn't sound like he was left with a huge liability to worry about. If it's a regular punter..then, if you're betting with those amounts, Bet365 is probably doing him a favour.