Unlike previous attempts that saw limited participation from operators, this latest session allowed regulators to dig deep into the issue of limiting bettors in Massachusetts, uncovering insights into the practices and challenges of Massachusetts sportsbook operators in managing betting risks.
Operators Defend Limiting Practices
During the meeting, sportsbook representatives defended their decision to limit only a small fraction of bettors, arguing that these actions stem from player behavior rather than a quest to punish winners.
“The decision to impose a wager limit is based on multiple factors that align with BetMGM’s overall risk management framework,”
explained Sarah Brennan, BetMGM’s senior director of compliance.
According to Brennan, the limits target what they term
“advantage players,”
roughly 1% of patrons, who engage in irregular behavior such as exploiting errors, syndicate betting, or placing bets in volatile markets.
FanDuel’s vice president of product, Cory Fox, echoed these sentiments, explaining that operators prioritize behavior over winning streaks. Fox noted that only 0.043% of FanDuel wagers in Massachusetts were placed at the maximum limit in 2023, highlighting the minimal impact of these limitations on the broader player base.
“Some users may have more information than we do. We’re comfortable taking wagers from them, but we have to do it responsibly,”
Fox said, underscoring the balancing act that operators face between accepting wagers and managing their financial exposure.
Risks of Limiting Casual Bettors
Despite operators’ defenses, concerns remain about the potential for casual bettors to be unfairly targeted by limiting practices. MGC Commissioner Nakisha Skinner raised this very issue, questioning whether a recreational player could unknowingly fall under the category of an advantage bettor based on their betting patterns. This concern highlights the nuanced nature of determining which behaviors warrant restrictions and the importance of distinguishing between casual and sophisticated players.
The operators, for their part, stressed that limiting practices are crucial for maintaining a diverse betting market. FanDuel’s Fox noted that the ability to limit bettors allows sportsbooks to offer a wider range of markets, with the company managing more than 37,000 different betting options on an average day. Without such risk management tools, the number of markets available could be reduced, ultimately affecting the consumer experience.
Calls for Greater Transparency
As discussions continued, the need for increased transparency emerged as a central theme. The MGC has received numerous complaints from players regarding the lack of clarity around limits, leading to frustration and confusion.
Commissioner Eileen O’Brien emphasized the importance of notifying players in advance about potential limitations, a sentiment that was supported by Richard Schuetz, CEO of American Bettors Voice, who criticized the often vague explanations provided by Massachusetts betting sites.
“At a minimum, it sounds like you could alert them to the fact that that’s going to be happening,”
O’Brien urged, pushing operators to communicate more openly with bettors. In response, Fox mentioned that FanDuel currently indicates betting limits on a wager slip, but they have no plans to proactively notify players via email, citing logistical challenges given the sheer volume of markets available.
