The Massachusetts Gaming Commission (MGC) continues to be the most proactive regulator when it comes to learning more about the practive of sportsbooks limiting bettors.
The group held a meeting on Tuesday to discuss its findings after asking for operators to provide data related to how often bettors were being limited.
MGC data analysis concluded very few bettors being limited
The data largely corroborated testimony the operators provided to the MGC a year ago, which is that limiting is something that happens to a fraction of a percent of bettors.
The data did indicate that those bettors who consistently won were more likely to have their betting limits lowered and were less likely to be included in a sportsbook’s VIP program.
Averaging the data from the seven online sportsbooks in the state, the MGC determined that 0.64% of bettors in Massachusetts were limited. The majority of those bettors (57.6%) were limited to between 1-24% of the default maximum bet on a app. However, 12.7% of those being limited were limited to less than 1% of the default maximum stake.
Though the number of bettors being limited was rather small, the commissioners still agreed it was necessary to take action on multiple fronts to try and at least provide more clarity to the practice of limiting, which was often happening to players with no explanation or notification.
MA wants action, including new regs and re-tooled algorithms
“We’ve identified the problem we have, and we’ve talked about it for over a year. If half a percent of bettors are being limited without justification, I wan’t the alogrithms to be retooled, I want people to be held accountable at the operators to be sure those folks can get back into the regulated market,” said Chairman Jordan Maynard regarding next steps.
MGC staffers and consultant Dustin Gouker presented the commission with several options moving forward. Even though the MGC is part of an active lawsuit against the prediction market Kalshi, Gouker did advocate that the market model does allow for sharp bettors to participate without limitation.
He also suggested revisiting regulations that might be too prohibitive for the sportsbooks known to cater to sharper clientele, such as Circa and Prime Sportsbook, to enter the state.
While the commissioners took all suggestions under advisement, there were three immediate next steps the group wanted to pursue.
Three immediate next steps
First, they instructed MGC staffers to draft language for a new regulation that would, at minimum, require licensed operators to notify bettors if their account was being limited in some capacity. The group discussed potentially including the rationale behind the decision be reported to users as well.
Second, Commissioner Eileen O’Brien suggested the group revisit the advertising regulations surrounding sports betting to ensure operators are not advertising sports betting as an opportunity to win substantial sums of money and not cautioning about the possibility that the sportsbooks might limit how much they can bet if they win too much.
Finally, the group intends to go back to operators both to hear feedback on the findings of the data analysis and to get further explanation around some of the information the sportsbooks gave the regulator regarding the reasoning behind limiting bettors.
Another topic of discussion was how to keep these bettors in the regulated space and not driven into the black market, with questions coming up about how a patron can get unlimited by a sportsbook.
The actions of the MGC stand in stark contrast to Wyoming regulators presented with similar information. A report from Wyoming Gaming Commissioner Special Agent Supervisor Michael Steinberg concluded that the limiting was happening at such an infrequent rate and largely happening to patrons violating the terms of service of the apps for it not to be something that the commission should be concerned about.
