[francisofascii]

I do find this annoying, but to play devil's advocate, it is supposed to be just entertainment. The question is who is losing money when you find an edge like that? Is it the sportsbook? Or is it poor souls (The fools) on the other side of those bets? Probably a bit of both. To some extent, the sportsbooks is simply acts as a marketplace to pair up two sides of a bet, and taking a cut. In all honestly though, if they set limits, fine, but they should set the same limit for everyone. I am intrigued by your web site, I have to say.

[parrot987]

Yes, you have a point. The "soft-books" (FanDuel, DraftKings) use the justification of being a form of entertainment as the reason to limit players. Fair enough, I have no personal issue with that.

As for who is losing money, I think you're also correct about that. Both the sportsbook and losing bettors will subsidize the "sharp bettor".

It's also worth noting that some sportsbooks (the more well established ones like Caesars and Pinnacle) do limit all players equally. That's because the do as you say and act like a marketplace to pair up both sides of the bet.

The problem with entertainment books is that they often pick a side on the bet so each side is not equally balanced. An attempt to maximize potential profits for themself instead of the traditional strategy to minimize their risk.

[francisofascii]

Those situations where the book picks a side are interesting. Do you have any insight on how those situations arise? To me they must find a big difference between what their internal model says, and what public perception says, and so they create a point spread in the middle to lure the better into the taking the less favorable side.