The heads of Australia’s leading corporate sportsbooks have been grilled over the practice of banning advantage players during an often-tense day of questioning at an inquiry into the impacts of online gambling.
With the inquiry turning its focus to sports betting practices and advertising this week, Sportsbet CEO Barni Evans and Director of Regulatory Strategy and Safer Gambling for Entain, Steven Lang, were among those in the hot seat on Tuesday although both were reluctant to concede they may ban or restrict advantage players.
Evans in-particular was involved in a heated exchange with committee chair Peta Murphy after she asked whether Sportsbet bans players who gain an edge via arbitrage betting or constantly win using bonuses.
“We will seek occasionally to limit some forms of transactions, be they bets or deposits, in a number of circumstances,” Evans said. “If people are betting on behalf of other individuals we will intervene there, if their behaviour is deemed to be using privileged information and is therefore distorting the market and affecting the prices that other people can bet on we will intervene. If they are in a cooling off period between setting deposit limits then we won’t allow them to transact at that point, and if they are betting into highly illiquid markets that are volatile and have very high fluctuations then we will reduce the available stake in those areas. And if the model is predicting risk of harm then we’ll intervene.”
“And if they are winning consistently?” Murphy asked.
“If they are seen to be acting on privileged information that is distorting a market, yes we will,” Evans replied.
“We’re not opposed to mathematically gifted customers, but we do seek to look after the majority of our customers and when one customer is using information that might not be accessible to the rest of the market – like a trainer in a market – then we will intervene.”
While Evans refused to concede how Sportsbet deals with winning players who are not utilizing “privileged information” – stating only that the company strives to offer all customers a fair bet – Entain’s Lang admitted such instances do occur. Entain operates Ladrokes and Neds in the Australian market.
“In relation to minimum bet limits, where the customer is betting on an Australian racing event, there are absolutely bets that we are required and we would take a bet from all customers in relation to,” Lang told the inquiry.
“For some other events where there is less liquidity and less certainty in the markets we may impose some restrictions on a small number of customers.”
Muprhy commented, “So yes, it does happen,” to which Lang replied, “It does happen.”
Nick Minchin, chair of lobby group Responsible Wagering Australia, admitted it appeared likely that some customers were blocked on the sole basis of winning.
“I personally think the companies shouldn’t, but for very good reason, prohibit any customer from participating as a customer simply because they win all the time,” Minchin said.
“I don’t think that is the practice of members but inevitably there will be occasions when a customer is excluded and there doesn’t appear to be any other adequate explanation other than they’re winning.
“You can’t eliminate that possibility, so I’m not saying it doesn’t occur but I’m confident it’s not something our members adopt [as standard practice].”
Launched in September, the inquiry aims to better understand the online gambling industry and its impacts on people with gambling problems.
Murphy said at the time that the inquiry “will be a fresh look at online gambling and whether current laws, regulations, consumer protections and education and support programs are enough to reduce harm to gamblers.
‘The Committee is concerned about the increasing reach of online gambling platforms into Australians’ lives, the exposure of children and young people to gambling advertising and how this may contribute to increases in problem gambling in the future.”
