Episode 62

Brianne Doura Schawohl [00:00:00]:

There's probably not enough limiting being done right now across the board as it relates to Prom and Responsible Gambling, but I'd also like to offer caution that it can be just as detrimental to the wider public to use that as a reasoning if it is not truly an issue with problematic play.

Shane Mercer [00:00:18]:

Space, do you think a sports book would do something like that?

Andrew Pace [00:00:22]:

Oh, jeez. Yeah. Of course. Yeah.

Shane Mercer [00:00:35]:

Hello, and welcome to another episode of Behind the Lines, the only podcast purifying the sports betting industry. Remember to like, download, subscribe, follow us on all the socials @inplayLIVE. And if you wanna see what inplayLIVE is all about behind the scenes, we've got that promo code for you. It is behind the lines, all caps. Alright. I'm your host, Shane Mercer. That guy over there, Andrew Pace, founder of inplayLIVE, the most sophisticated sports betting community on planet Earth. And Pace today, Tuesday, May 21st, the day we're recording this, there was a very big meeting in the state of Massachusetts, an open meeting for anyone to attend, and they are tackling this is the Massachusetts gaming commission.

Shane Mercer [00:01:17]:

They are tackling the topic of limiting sports bettors at the individual level. We have been talking about them for the past couple of months now because they are a regulator in North America that is really taking this topic very, very seriously. And today's meeting really kind of showed that, and it's kind of just the beginning. But we're going to play you a whole bunch of highlights from it. But we've got to start off with what I would call the elephants not in the room. And so this was a really, really big deal. And this meeting was scheduled a couple of months ago at the end of March. And, all of the big operators in the state of Massachusetts were invited to attend this meeting.

Shane Mercer [00:02:07]:

And, they all apparently initially said they would be attending, but things changed in the past 72 hours. And so what I'm gonna do here is, play a clip for everyone out there. This is the chair of the commission, Jordan Maynard. He is the guy that's essentially running this meeting, and, he has 4 or 5 other commissioners that are part of this commission with him, but he is the chair. And so he's the the guy tasked with with running this meeting. And so, why don't we, play, the clip for you? This is kind of how, the meeting began.

Jordan Maynard [00:02:45]:

I've been made aware that 10 active operators in the Commonwealth, after initially signaling that they would attend and actively participate in this public roundtable, decided not to. It is my understanding that they were requesting an executive session to discuss these matters as they felt that some information would be too sensitive to reveal in public.

Jordan Maynard [00:03:14]:

I will turn to counsel Grossman and the legal team to address this issue later, but I wanna clear the air here. We are required by law to do our job in an open forum in Massachusetts. At times, it can be uncomfortable to have these conversations in public, and we understand it. My fellow commissioners and I are faced with this situation at almost every meeting. Without the benefit of being able to collaborate before we join a meeting. It's tough. But that said, transparency is key to integrity of the industry in Massachusetts. This commission will never compromise transparency or integrity.

Shane Mercer [00:04:03]:

The sports book operators wanted a closed door meeting, essentially, an executive session that wasn't open to the public. And as you heard there, from, Jordan Maynard, he wasn't going to allow it. And as part of this meeting too, they actually heard from, what sounded like their legal counsel who came on to explain why. And, essentially, the reason was is that this meeting doesn't meet the threshold required to limit that transparency. So they weren't even legally allowed to hold the meeting behind closed doors. And so sportsbooks didn't attend. Pace, just very quick reaction from you before we get to some of the reaction from the commissioners who

Andrew Pace [00:04:45]:

are hoping to hear from those sportsbooks. I find the most interesting piece of this that the 9 operators that didn't attend did so in tandem. It makes me think about the whole ROGA thing and all the collaboration that is attempting to be existed. It isn't like one dropped out. They all dropped out, and they all dropped out together. Yep. So that that's the most alarming thing from my side of things here, just looking at it and going, this was executed with collaboration, and deliberately, obviously, for a specific reason.

Shane Mercer [00:05:19]:

Yeah. Exactly. Right. It's not like, oh, one decided and, you know, the others followed suit. It seems like they all collectively decided, no. This isn't in our best interest. Let's not attend. And, you know, the commissioners who are on this part of the gaming commission there, They were really hoping to hear, you know, from the operators to get a sense of how do you limit players? What data do you use? Who are you targeting exactly? Is this about responsible gambling, and are you doing it for players benefits, or are you strictly just targeting winning players? And, PACE, I think you and I kind of know the the answer to that.

Shane Mercer [00:06:02]:

But these commissioners, they don't. And they're wholeheartedly, you know, approaching this in a way that they want to learn about what's taking place. And, well, a couple of them were, I guess, disappointed. I think we could just say to say the least. But you know what? Why don't we hear it in their words? And, I'll just play you some of their comments here for a moment.

Nakisha Skinner [00:06:27]:

A little bit of a discussion. And, I appreciate your contribution, but I, have to admit it. The discussion was not as meaningful as I had hoped it would be, and it's there's something quite not right, about asking you to speak on behalf of our sportsbooks here, in Massachusetts. And so I hope that we can continue that this discussion, in whatever form or fashion the, operators are comfortable with and that meet our obligations under the open meeting law, because I do think we have not scratched the surface. In order for us to even have future conversations among this body at a public meeting, there's a lot of information that we just don't have. And so I I I you know, on the one hand, I I I feel like, this was not a good use of our time today, given that we didn't have our primary stakeholders part of the discussion, but I hope we can work to to to change that going forward because we do need to, to move this needle, in whichever way, is is is appropriate according to this body. I think what someone mentioned, a couple of folks mentioned that the data is going to be important and that's a good starting point it seems for me.

Jordan Maynard [00:07:52]:

Thank you, commissioner Skinner. Commissioner Hill, anything to add?

Brad Hill [00:07:56]:

I would just, add that I first of all, thank you for everybody who participated today, and thank you for the information. But I share in commissioner Skinner's, I think, frustration, And I I will go so so far as to say anger that I have today for not, being able to get a lot of, more information than I thought we would be able to get today to start this conversation. And although it was started today, it really didn't give us the the the starting point that I had hoped that we would get today. The information we did get, it it was invaluable, and we will take it forward as we start this discussion in public meetings for sure. But I I feel like commissioner Skinner that there was a lot more information we should have and could have gotten today that we didn't get, and it was very disappointing to me.

Shane Mercer [00:08:52]:

Alright. So that was, commissioner Nikisha Skinner and commissioner, Brad Hale and, Pace. I think, you know, I think Brad Hale really sort of puts it in in in perspective on on how they felt. And just to point out, those comments were made at the end of the meeting. So there's a whole bunch of people that they did hear from, and we'll get to some of those people, but that's how those commissioners left the meeting.

Andrew Pace [00:09:14]:

Yeah. I think, you know, when you really think about the operators not coming and then, obviously, the disappointment from the commissioner's side of things in not accomplishing nearly what they had hoped to, with this meeting, it just reminds me of being an actual player, to be honest with you. They didn't give them the information that they were required to or required to make a a a decision, and they're left with a delay. And you can sense the frustration almost like a player being put on tilt, by the sportsbooks with how their practices, you know, and and how they operate. So, it it's almost like I felt, you know, some commonality with them there. But, yeah, I mean, from a legal standpoint, what did the sportsbooks accomplish here? Well, they kicked the can down the road. So even if they get a desirable result at the end of this, which I think a lot of the practices being exposed will not be desirable for them, which is why they didn't attend, if they could have said, like, hey. This is why we do it, and it was, an answer that they believe would have been satisfactory to the commission to allow the practice to continue, they would have shown up today.

Andrew Pace [00:10:23]:

But because they didn't show up, they kicked the can down the road. They are able to extend their current practices longer at least for the time being. And should they get a desirable result at the end, they gave themselves more time. If they don't get the result that they wanted at the end, again, they they bought themselves a little bit of extra leeway to make more legal legal decisions and also gather the information that was presented today to have their legal teams look at that and be better prepared for the next the next time around, if they if they do in fact show up. But, eventually, they're gonna have to show up because the decisions are just gonna be made on their behalf if if they don't. And kinda what you alluded to there, Shane, this commission doesn't have the information. Right? They this all started from one one person a year ago asking about, limitations. And we've brought up so many times on this podcast people's reaction in the main circles, you know, Gary Bettman, etcetera, and how they react to, learning about the practice in the first place.

Andrew Pace [00:11:22]:

So, I mean, I I don't wanna be negative about them not showing up because I think all of this is just phenomenal, to be honest. So Mhmm. Yeah. Yeah.

Shane Mercer [00:11:34]:

Yeah. The gaming commission absolutely, you know, kudos to them for tackling this topic. I think you're absolutely right that the sportsbooks, you know, made a calculated decision here to, hey. Let's just not show up for this, and let's see what they talk about. Right? And then we can kinda go from there. They they sort of, you know, prevent themselves from being caught off guard, and they'll be, you know, likely more prepared when they do decide to to show up for a a future meeting. Now, I guess, you know, I'll also just mention here very quickly to, you know, the legal counsel, the reasoning for it not being an executive meeting behind closed doors meeting, and this is a direct quote from from the legal counsel. There was no clear and safe way to enter into an executive session, and that's because of those transparency laws, that were mentioned by, Jordan Maynard.

Shane Mercer [00:12:23]:

So if the sportsbooks are hoping for a closed door session in the future, I think it's highly unlikely. And, you know, we'll all get to benefit from seeing something, in which they have to come and sort of explain how and why they limit players. So so fingers crossed that we do get to a point where they do show up. But I have to say that a sportsbook did show up to this meeting, and it's kind of strange, but let's, we we, you know, we gotta talk about it. So Bally Interactive did show up to this meeting. Justin Black, was their representative. And, to be honest, I'm not sure why. I don't know why, he showed up because Bally doesn't operate in the state of Massachusetts.

Shane Mercer [00:13:05]:

So I'm really a bit confused. I still don't understand totally why he showed up, but he was a voice for for the operators out there. And he was the only voice for the operators, really, that was that that attended this meeting. Again, maybe Bally is working on trying to get into the state of Massachusetts and is working on getting a license. But I don't know if that's the case. It just seems strange to have one operator there who doesn't operate in the state. But, you know, Justin showed up, Justin Black. And, there was another guy, though, Pace, who spoke for us.

Shane Mercer [00:13:46]:

He's a professional sports bettor. His name is Jack Andrews. And he showed up a professional sports bettor. He's also associated with unabated sports. And for people out there who aren't familiar with them, Pace, I don't know how familiar you are with them, but, it's a service that provides tools and resources to help sports bettors become sharper. They mostly focus on pregame, but they share a lot of the similar values and beliefs that we do here at inplayLIVE. They want to make sports bettors, sharper, and they provide a lot of the similar tools and resources pace that that inplayLIVE provides. And so, Jack Andrews was, you know, the voice of, us, the professional sports bettor who gets limited on a regular basis.

Shane Mercer [00:14:27]:

And he's a guy, you know, who who made it very clear to everybody there. He's been limited numerous times on numerous books. He can't play in the state of Massachusetts because all of the operators that are in the state of Massachusetts, he's been limited by. And so it was it was great to see that there was somebody there sort of speaking up for us, bettors. And early on, there was an exchange between Justin Black and Jack and or between Justin Black from Bali and Jack Andrews, the pro sports bettor from unabated. So, why don't I play that for you now?

Justin Black [00:15:03]:

Based on that, I mean, we'll just start with saying that, obviously, sportsbooks offer to, you know, aim to offer a large, broad range of possibilities and wagering activities with thousands of events being, offered each month. And in these events, millions of odd changes are made every month. With Canvas, they make approximately 650 odd changes per month. Specific to limiting of patrons, I can only speak from from Valley's, perspective and, and how we operate in other jurisdictions, but we don't limit players based just on winnings. But rather, it's based on underlying factors, that are proprietary proprietary to to values interactive, right, from a risk perspective.

Jordan Maynard [00:15:54]:

Thank you, Justin. So, commissioners, do we have any follow-up questions to to that question? And then we'll open it up to the floor to to anyone that may have a a comment on that. Mr. Andrews.

Jack Andrews [00:16:12]:

Hi, yes. Sorry. Honored to be here with you all, commissioners. Thank you. You know, my response to that would be that Bally's utilizes, Kambi, which is a third party that operates all of their risk management. So, mister Black's statement that they do not themselves limit bettors based on winning is true. However, I my question back to mister Black is, would Canby say the same? Because Canby has a history of identifying players based on their their closing line value or their expected value and adjusting them, stake factoring them is what they call it, and then telling Volleys, okay, these are the players that we've we've limited down. So, my question back to you, mister Black, is would Kambi say the same thing that that you said?

Jordan Maynard [00:16:59]:

Mr. Andrews, let's try to always, this is just a reminder, direct the questions through the chair, right? No.

Jack Andrews [00:17:05]:

My apologies.

Jordan Maynard [00:17:06]:

Let's try to keep this as civil as as possible. So, mister Black, if you are prepared to to to respond to that, feel free, to do so.

Justin Black [00:17:17]:

Obviously, I can't speak on behalf of Kambi and what they would say. I mean, all I can say is, you know, unlike other game verticals, sports wagering odds are subject to huge number of variables. The roster changes, tactics, momentum, weather, and so odds aren't always perfect. Right? And so sportsbooks have to sportsbooks have to operate under that assumption, and some patrons actively look to make an edge, right, out of those imperfections. So, you know, I can't speak directly for what CAMI would advise us, but, I mean, that just hopefully adds a little context to, you know, some of the variables and some of the challenges with with sports wagering. Right? And and and how, you know, those, odds are are set.

Shane Mercer [00:18:04]:

So, Paes, does that remind you of maybe some of the conversations you've had with sportsbooks and and perhaps sportsbooks traders and, you know, the customer service referring to, you know, a trading decision that's been made?

Andrew Pace [00:18:17]:

Yeah. I mean, why did what you know, you said why did they show up because they're not operating in Massachusetts? Why did they show up? Period. Like, you showed up to say nothing. You know? Like, it's just you're not operating in Massachusetts. You show up at a what? Good faith to hope to operate there one day, and then you you show up to tell people nothing. Elizabeth Holmes, super famous for creating a completely fabricated business on, false claims about, your your health in the in the medical sector. And when her company was starting to get exposed, great great TV show, I think it's called The Dropout, There was all these different departments at her company, and you weren't allowed to share information from one department to the next. And the reason for that is because they didn't want employees to know that nothing that was going on inside of their organization was working.

Andrew Pace [00:19:12]:

A lot of this shit reminds me of what Elizabeth Holmes was doing, which she's, you know, now sentenced and, you know, gonna be behind bars for a significant amount of years. The whole thing is just it's a total freaking joke. It's laughable. And, I actually was thinking about the whole concept of the other 9 providers or the sorry, the 10 providers not showing up. And there's an argument for them never to show up. And the reason for that would be Massachusetts is small in the grand scheme of some of the other states that they're operating in, Ontario, New York, right, Pennsylvania, so Arizona. Not not to say it isn't significant to them, but it's nowhere near significant as some of these other states. And this public forum, this transparency law in Boston, is significant.

Andrew Pace [00:20:07]:

If you were to, say, hold this in in, Maryland or Virginia or or, you know, another state like that where, yes, they're looking into things. Yes. The providers show up. Yes. They provide the details. And, potentially, players don't get limited in that jurisdiction. It's behind closed doors. Whereas whatever gets said here, every single other jurisdiction is gonna get to to see the practices and be able to to see it what it is that they're doing.

Andrew Pace [00:20:35]:

And this could have a real snowball effect. Or if they do show up and things don't go in their favor, it would it would just be completely insane not for it to snowball and roll into the other states. So the calculated move of kicking the can down the road in Massachusetts may actually continue just from that standpoint alone where, the open forum becomes too big of a problem for the sportsbooks to even, consider ever engaging in, knowing that that could also affect their businesses beyond the United States. It could affect their businesses in Canada and potentially different jurisdictions that they are operating in through odds providers, like, SB Tech being, like, a really good example that is owned by DraftKings where they are operating in the UK where potentially these conversations then filter over there and really can hurt, some of their their businesses abroad as well.

Shane Mercer [00:21:30]:

Yeah. I yeah. That that that's a really good point you made there. I do wanna mention, though, that those sportsbook operators, did communicate with the commission, you know, through through emails and letters and that kind of thing. And, the commission did say that they will be posting, those those messages that they receive from the sports book operators as a part of, the notes or the minutes of the meeting that took place. They weren't ready for in time for us to record this podcast, so I can't share them with you at this time. But for anybody out there that is interested in seeing, well, what exactly did the sportsbooks say, in in the response to the commission and and the reasoning for not attending the meeting, they are posting, posting those, communications, as part of the meeting notes or or the minutes. So, that that is something that you can go and look at, later on.

Shane Mercer [00:22:22]:

But I I just wanted to mention that in case anybody is interested in sort of hearing more from them potentially. Okay. A couple of other people that did attend this meeting, there were, 2 consultants, that attended. One of them is named, Dustin Gooker. So he acts as a consultant, for the sports betting industry for operators. He said he has a lot of experience in daily fantasy sports, and he was sort of really walking a fine line down the middle in in most of his comments, throughout. But he did raise, an issue around needing data points for who is being limited and when. Is it a is it for problem gambling, or is it because they're winning? Is it because they're betting broken lines? That kind of thing.

Shane Mercer [00:23:05]:

Right? And and we need to see the data was sort of the point he was trying to make. And the other, consultant, that attended, her name is, Brianne Dura Shawwal, and she focuses on responsible gambling, problem gambling awareness. And, she does a lot of lobbying. And, you know, she might be sort of your your typical problem gambling advocate type of person. And, you know, she made, some interesting, comments as well, when it comes to this topic of, okay, well, why are sportsbooks limiting players at the individual level? Is it because of problem gambling? Is it because they're winning too much? Or, you know, do they say that they're limiting you because it will help you? And she brought up the idea that maybe sportsbooks are lying sometimes when they limit players, you know, and they say it's for problem gambling when really it's because they're winning players. So let me just, play her comments, for you here now.

Brianne Doura Schawohl [00:24:14]:

Unlimited. I did wanna point out though for the group, though there is a very interesting test case that was rather high profile in Washington DC where a player was limited. The reasoning was given, a problem or responsible gambling concern but in fact it actually had to do with his winning. I would like to just offer up a word of caution that we have seen instances in other jurisdictions where responsible or problem gambling is the rationale for why someone's being limited. And having that very clear distinction about a a case being a true problem or responsible gambling issue versus, a justification that actually may not be authentic or truthful for that rationale, I believe, is very important here. I look forward to offering up some commentary on how there's probably not enough limiting being done right now across the board as it relates to Prom and Responsible Gambling, but I'd like to offer a caution that it can be just as detrimental to the wider public to use that as a reasoning if it is not truly an issue with problematic play.

Shane Mercer [00:25:26]:

PACE, do you think a sports book would do something like that?

Andrew Pace [00:25:30]:

Oh, jeez. Yeah. Of course. Yeah. I'm I'm it's just this stuff's just music to my ears. Right? Because it's like, okay. She said exactly what needed to be said there and needed to be heard. And it's like, don't don't let them get away.

Andrew Pace [00:25:42]:

Like, if we're looking into this, let's not just let them get away with saying whatever it is that they want to and allowing that to be, you know, the the the dictator of how these books are gonna be operating in the future. So, yeah, it's it's, it's it's really awesome that she brought that to light and, keep it going. Right?

Shane Mercer [00:26:00]:

Yeah. You know, the one one of those, commissioners, sort of jumped into the conversation at that point, Nikisha Skinner, top of the show, who was really upset that the operators didn't didn't show up. So she jumps into the conversation and asks the question about, you know, well, do all the sportsbooks do this? You know, are there any that don't limit players? I want to also mention that one of the prompts for the meeting is is what happens if, sportsbooks can't limit players? Right? So this is sort of something that that we've heard about and talked about here on the podcast a fair amount. And, you know, I think I I referenced it specifically to DraftKings that made it very clear to shareholders that if they can't limit players, they don't know that they have a viable business. And, that that sort of topic came up, and that was one of, you know, one of the questions to be addressed in the meeting. It was on the agenda. And so, I wanna go back, to Justin Black from ValleyBet because, you know, they put this question to him. Right? Well, what happens if if you can't limit players? Right? And, you know, he he sort of gives, well, he kinda gives the explanation that I think you would, typically, expect from just about any sports book.

Shane Mercer [00:27:13]:

But, you know, we we should, in all fairness, give him a chance to say it. So here he is.

Justin Black [00:27:17]:

Perspective. I mean, limiting is no longer possible, right, for individual players to whatever extent. Right? Then there are, you know, applicable restrictions. Right? There'll be product restrictions that'd be necessary and that wouldn't impact all players. Right? So they would be things like more defensive pricing strategies, meaning worse prices present to patrons. Lower limits, right, would be applied to both patrons. You know, and, obviously, there'd be product restrictions and maybe even some offerings being removed. Right? So if the ability not to limit, you know, certain patrons and then everyone is is puted with the same brush, we'll obviously have have an impact, right, on on the offerings that are available to to patrons within within Massachusetts.

Shane Mercer [00:28:04]:

So, you know, he's basically saying, hey. If you can't limit, well, we're not gonna be able to offer a lot of the stuff that we offer.

Andrew Pace [00:28:10]:

Right. Well, I think if you're, you know, the guys at Prime Sports and, obviously, our guy Adam Bjorn, who was on the podcast recently, you're licking your chops. Right? Because they view this as the direction that sportsbooks inevitably are gonna have to go. And once you, you know, go in that direction, you have to adopt this sharp model that, you know, the Pinnacles and the Prime Sports are the bookmakers, etcetera, are using. And, once you you adopt that model, you don't want to have to reinvent your own when there's just someone that's already offering it that you can piggyback on. So, you know, you gotta credit, you know, these sportsbooks like Pinnacle, like BookMaker, like Prime Sports, you know, Adam Beorn being the betting bookmaker, you know, these guys at SXBet, you know, and what they're doing because they are they're seeing things 2020. You know? If you wanna take the risk on yourself and be a bookmaker and offer those lines, you can offer them on here. We we give you that opportunity.

Andrew Pace [00:29:10]:

But the only limiting that happens there is you giving up yourself as offering those odds because our players are here to stay. Right?

Shane Mercer [00:29:19]:

Yeah. Exactly. Now, you know, the thing is, PACE, is that, you know, you're in this industry. You're you're an expert in the industry, you know, but these commissioners aren't. Right? And they're trying to learn. And so they don't know about the pinnacles of the world. They don't know about the prime sports of the world or the SX bets. Right.

Shane Mercer [00:29:37]:

They don't. They're just they're still at this space where they're trying to kind of do this sort of fact finding and figuring it all out. And, and that's one of the commissioners. And Nikisha Skinner sort of brings up this this topic. Well, are there any operators out there that don't do this? And it sort of felt like as she was asking the question, she was sort of saying, I know there's operators out there that don't do this. You know, it sort of felt like that in a lot of ways. But she's she's sort of posing the question and kind of giving, you know, giving an opportunity for someone to kind of jump in and explain it. And thankfully, that guy, Jack Andrews, the professional sports veteran, attended this meeting.

Shane Mercer [00:30:13]:

And, he was able to to jump in, with with with sort of a bit of a take and and sort of a bit of an education. So here's him.

Jack Andrews [00:30:22]:

Limit, that post the max limit, and that max limit is the same for everyone. There are also exchanges that allow basically, an exchange couldn't limit if they tried because they're just the middleman in a transaction between a market maker and a consumer. And that's actually one of the solutions to propose to Massachusetts is, if I were to come to your state, I can't bet at any of your sportsbooks. They've already all limited me. I would be bored to play elsewhere. But there are plenty of other operators out there that take a low margin approach to the industry. They're willing to learn from sharp bets. They're willing to take all comers and and basically offer a level playing field for everyone.

Jack Andrews [00:31:07]:

Now they don't offer as many bets as a Ballies would offer or, you know, DraftKings or FanDuel, but they do offer a fair a fundamentally fair playing field for all bettors. The reason they're not in your state, and this is not a criticism to anyone on this call, is your barriers to entry are very high and your tax rate is very high, and your licensing fees are very high. And these are low margin providers, so I know there is, you know, this isn't an impetus to change, but there is a solution for answering the problem for a lot of consumers, and that is a bring on the operators that are willing to take all comers.

Shane Mercer [00:31:49]:

So there there you go. Right? Kind of the the answer, you know, that that you wanna hear. But then he does point out this very, real, hurdle for for the pinnacles, for the primes, for anyone trying to enter Massachusetts is this high barrier, to enter in those those high fees and high taxes. And, you know, you can't And somebody else, Dustin Gueker, the consultant, you know, he brought up the fact that, yeah, but you're already legalized now. And all of those soft books have already met that high barrier. You know? So can you go and change the game in the middle? You know, what what in the middle of the game kind of thing. Right? Or can you change the rules in the middle of the game? But, anyway, you know, it's interesting in the sense that, oh, you know, this regulator came along and created these high barriers. Right? But now have they have they perhaps excluded those sharp operators? Right.

Andrew Pace [00:32:45]:

Well, the other thing you always have to keep in mind, and I think that a little bit closer to home for us, Shane, is the Ontario landscape. And when Canada switched their laws that were ancient, you know, they were written before the Internet existed to allow for online single games. Well, yeah. Like, to allow for online single game sports betting, I think across Canada, I was quite excited being in in Vancouver. And then, of course, you being in Ontario, you're like, oh, this is this great. We're gonna get all these, these new sportsbooks. And, you know, that was a part of the whole gold rush of of the whole sports betting industry as a whole. But then there was these little things that came along with the regulation in Ontario where as a veteran in Vancouver, I was like, you know, maybe I don't need these sports books.

Andrew Pace [00:33:31]:

Like, what is it with this notion or mindset that, you know, I have to have access to these in order to succeed? I've succeeded here for years. And there's a lot of sportsbooks that I go to dive on right now, s x obviously being a notable one. Not to say that you wouldn't be able to access them using different methods that they wouldn't advise or recommend. Not available in Ontario. Right? So there is something that could be considered here and that is do you wanna pluck away at soft sportsbooks that, you know, kick you off? Or do you want soft sportsbooks to become sharp ones? So you always have to factor in what comes with that next decision. Do you want legalized betting in your state where now, some of these offshore sportsbooks and bookmakers, that maybe you've become comfortable with wagering on that have really nice leashes or potentially, infinite leashes, are now technically or no longer, able to be used in your state or jurisdiction. So those are things for sports bettors to consider. It's like, oh, I I want sportsbooks to never limit me ever again and and, you know, just keep making money from doing this.

Andrew Pace [00:34:41]:

There is another side to that. Right? And and we have to always think about that in our in our long term decisions. I'm a huge advocate for obviously, the the player and I think that not limiting players is a huge part of that. But when you talk about, say, a Kambi, saying, oh, you know, we're gonna have to lower our limits across the board. It's like, you guys have already done that. Right? You open a a a brand new Kambi up. And in Vancouver, at least, and any of the providers, oftentimes, it's hard to spend, even a a $500 wager on a main on a main market line. So, they've definitely already taken a bit of that approach.

Andrew Pace [00:35:17]:

But, if you were to say to me, you know, you had a DraftKings, a FanDuel, a Bet365, a BetMGM, And the maximum minimums across the board are, say, $500 a profit, which is very small. Like, a lot of people would turn their nose up to that number.

Andrew Pace [00:35:32]:

And I go hey, you know, I've got all these books and 500 is my maximum wager or maximum profit per market on each one. Bring it on. Right? Like, I I'd be thrilled that. And I think that for the majority of players, like, obviously, there are players that that play into the into the 5 figures, myself included. I I like to think of it from a broader perspective and not just about me the individual. Like, oh, boo hoo. You can't get a 5 1,000 or $10,000 bet in in one click anymore. Like, life's so hard.

Andrew Pace [00:36:00]:

Right? Whereas, you know, the sports bettor who who comes in and, you know, makes a little bit of money, you know, wagering $100 bets that no no longer is allowed to play on your site, like, it's just ridiculous. Right? So that's that's obviously, who we have to consider when you're looking at things from this broad perspective.

Shane Mercer [00:36:20]:

Yeah. An interesting point there, you know, this sort of, you know, balance. I think on on first blush, it's, you know, especially after you've been limited maybe a few times or you're sort of in this process and, you know, you got limited on your first 365, and you're sitting there going, oh, screw those bastards. You know? They they limited me. Right? And and maybe you get limited on a few more books, and then you start thinking, this is totally unfair. You know? How can they do this to me? Right? But then maybe you hear the other side or you even look at the other side side and you look at a book like Pinnacle, and Pinnacle doesn't offer maybe some of the markets that you've been betting on bet 365 to get limited. Right? Or betting on on a a a point spec, for example, right, where you've been getting maybe some ridiculous odds on on the same, you know, type of wager, you know, that that on another book might, you know, pay, you know, even money and you're getting it on points bet at 3 and a half to 1 or something like that. Right? If you sort of got rid of a lot of those those soft books, you might also get rid of a lot of those soft lines that you may have been taking advantage of.

Andrew Pace [00:37:20]:

Totally. And I think that that's that's part of what makes you a true pro is being able to win over the long term dealing with those those kinda gut punches. Like, I I've I haven't been doing this for decades, but I've been doing it for long enough that I can remember betting some things on Pinnacle that did used to be there. And one of the fundamental differences and this is without betting as a group. This is me as an individual, and this isn't specific to Pinnacle, but I'm just using them as an example. Having a great line or a exploitable, beatable market that wasn't a main market, that you made money on and maybe you did it for a week, maybe you did it for a month, and in some of these cases, maybe you only were able to do it for a day, a night, or a game. But the sportsbook reacting to what it is that you wagered on and then removing the market and seeing it never return. So they look at it from the standpoint of this market being a competitive advantage that we are offering players that are not sharp, that draws in players, that isn't profitable to the sportsbook, we will then take that market and continue to post those lines almost as a trap to eliminate sharp players while letting these losing players continue to, continue to wager on markets like that when and where it fits into the ecosystem of their losing sort of environment or losing wager type or or style and then that whole sort of relationship.

Andrew Pace [00:38:58]:

So you'll see Bet 365 year in, year out offer markets that other sportsbooks don't offer at all. And a lot of these other new sportsbooks, ESPN, BetFam Dual, DraftKings, offering similar competitive markets that are that are highly exploitable versus, say, a pinnacle where maybe a market somewhat like that actually did exist in the last 10 years. And they just simply took it down overnight because they went, we can't continue to offer this. This isn't a competitive advantage. It's something that will hurt us over the long term. So there's sportsbooks that limit players that fall in between that sort of those sort of two perspectives where they do limit winners. You do have a decent leash, but they actually go, okay. This market is just as crazy.

Andrew Pace [00:39:39]:

Why why would we continue to, to offer that? And the odds providers. So you can have the exact same odds provider on 2 separate books where this sportsbook said, we wanna have that market and this sportsbook said we have to turn that market off or we want nothing to do with it. And you'll see a very similar layout. You go into the sportsbook, you see all the lines, and you go, oh my god. They've got it. They've got it still. Let's get it while we can. And then sure enough, you know, the next day, that that particular market will be will be turned off.

Andrew Pace [00:40:07]:

And that that's definitely something that, you know, we've been on a journey on, from as winning players, but also as a group of people where we see some of these opportunities. You take it when, where when when and where you can, knowing that, you know, it just simply will not be there tomorrow. And when tomorrow comes, you just you don't necessarily know. Yeah.

Shane Mercer [00:40:29]:

Yeah. Yeah. You you're you're kind of, pace. You're really speaking to to the core of my, experience over the past 6 months or so, especially when it came to, a Pentagon women's college hoops. There there was a lot of a lot of that that you just described there. And, you know, on a small market like that, it's expected. Right? And that's something, you know, that that I learned from and will know to expect in the future and take advantage of it where and when I can and and just appreciate that I had the chance.

Andrew Pace [00:40:57]:

Yeah. And you know what's really interesting is, Bet 36 65 being, like, a staple sports book of mine over the last 10 years being in Vancouver, and seeing them offer just the same thing year in, year out, literally the same thing, not making any adjustments. And then watching the the whole landscape legalize around them, right, where they weren't or aren't a primary provider in the United States, and then have started to get legalized in a few different states. But for the longest time, they were only operating in New Jersey. And then as they roll out across the states, them being that sportsbook that had those competitive advantages and being someone that if if you're talking to another sports bettor in Vancouver that is not a sharp player, they really just have one sportsbook, and it's always the same answer. They play on bet 365. That's where they play. And but then seeing 365 try to start making some adjustments so much so that they're offering the same lines on a lot of these crazy props and competitive market type markets that they're offering start to look the same as DraftKings and FanDuel and start to use some of their their same lines and providers.

Andrew Pace [00:42:09]:

And then not having not having personally used one in quite a long time opening, opening up their lines and going, holy smokes. Like, they're offering anything you can think of to bet on. We're talking right down to the next pitch type, to the type of of of of the next play in football. Like, anything like, the the over under on the next yards of the next play, will it be a run or a pass? Like, will it be a strike or a ball? Will it be in play? Like, every single little thing you can think of, is available there. And I'm usually pretty confident that things like that are exploitable, but I also know they are they're there to be competitive and and they're there as a trap.

Shane Mercer [00:42:51]:

Yeah. Yeah. And, you know, probably very, true for the Ontario market as well, PACE, when it comes to Bet 365 and recreational bettors. You talked to any recreational bettor in in the province of Ontario. Where do they play? They play on Bet 365.

Andrew Pace [00:43:03]:

Really?

Shane Mercer [00:43:03]:

Because it was yeah. Yeah. For sure. And that and that's because it was here, and it was established for so long. Right? And, that's what people got comfortable with. And and that's that's, you know, all of all of my friends who are recreational sports bettors, they bet on 365. And Right. It's it's been like that for a long time.

Shane Mercer [00:43:19]:

I mean, maybe there's some some, you know, younger younger groups out there that that are more into the FanDuels and DraftKings now that that, you know, that 365 didn't reach because they were too young at the time. But but for the most part, it's a very sort of similar experience. I wanna get back to the meeting, because, there was some moments at the end where it was sort of like, alright. You know, final thoughts, opening it up to opening up the floor, and actually played some of those final thoughts for you all at the top of the show when those 2 commissioners, expressed their anger and, you know, disapproval with the sportsbooks for not showing up. But, there were a couple of other moments there And, you know, a a couple of them came from, one back from from Jack Andrews, our professional sports bettor, and, the, other one came from, Dustin, Gooker, the, consultant that works in with with sports book operators. And, why don't I, you their thoughts?

Jack Andrews [00:44:16]:

Beating. Commissioner Skinner coined the term that I think is is very smart, and that's the term fundamental fairness. And I think a lot of what players feel in sports betting these days is that it's it's not fair for them. Now, you know, they have to bet into minus 110. Of course, it's not gonna be fair. The house has the edge. This is gambling. However, there's a lot of them that feel that, things don't cut both ways.

Jack Andrews [00:44:44]:

And, limiting is just an example of that. And you know, if you're able to limit a sharp bettor, why are you able to raise the limits of a bad bettor? That doesn't seem fair. And I would invite the commission in how they go forward with what they found today to to realize that, fairness is is not just how it's intended. I believe everyone on this call, everyone in this industry intends to be fair. That's why they're in regulated gaming. But it's how it's perceived. And I think there's a lot of perception out there of fairness that feels just not right to people. And I appreciate the commission giving audience to this and understanding more about this.

Jack Andrews [00:45:28]:

Because this goes a long way to the perception of fairness, the fundamental fairness, to to grow and foster in in the industry. So thank you for your time.

Jordan Maynard [00:45:39]:

Thank thank you, Jack. Dustin, I see your hand's up.

Dustin Gooker [00:45:42]:

Yeah. Again, thank you for having me on the panel, mister chairman, and everyone, and the commissioners. 2 things, 2 odd thoughts that I had before we wrapped up was, I don't know if this is a regulatory fix necessarily, but I think it's worth talking about in this discussion is that the sportsbooks also do a lot of marketing of very large bets, which is very discordant, I think, with with player limiting and things like that, because they're marketing the idea, you can bet whatever you want. And I don't think that's necessarily quite fair. You'll see even mister Portnoy, for you're familiar with from both, ESPN, that's, Barstool Sportsbook and or not ESPN, but Barstool Sportsbook now, represents DraftKings. Like, like, can get down whatever amount of money he would like. He bets I think he's, posted $1,000,000 bet slips, in the past several months like that. Again, I'm I'm not saying they shouldn't be able to do that.

Dustin Gooker [00:46:33]:

I'm just saying there's, like it seems this important to me, and I don't know what the fix is for it, but it's just important to say, look, this guy over here can bet 100 of 1,000, 1,000,000 of dollars if he wants, and they can market that as a selling point. And then over here, you have people who can bet a dollar. That that that just, again, goes to Jack's what Jack said, fundamental fairness. That's I understand, mister Portnoy and others are not fair they're not good bettors. They're betting because they have he has the means certainly to lose that much money, but it gives this idea that you can, like, if you you can bet what you want, and that's not really a fair I don't think that really fairly assesses what's going on in the marketplace right now.

Shane Mercer [00:47:10]:

Right. So question of fairness and then, you know, getting into those marketing tactics space that we've talked about, a fair about here on the show too, you know, where it's it's this sort of perception and idea that you can win 1,000,000 of dollars playing at my sports bucket. We all know they're never gonna

Andrew Pace [00:47:26]:

let you do it. Yeah. I mean, there's almost nothing to even add to that. You know, we've covered so much of that on the show. It's just so great to see it coming into the spotlight.

Shane Mercer [00:47:36]:

That's exactly it. Right? And, you know, kudos again to the Massachusetts Gaming Commission for taking this issue so seriously. I don't think we've seen a regulator, even care if sportsbooks operators are limited players. You know? They they they just sort of say, hey. You're gonna pay our fees. You're gonna pay our taxes. You're in. You know? And and that's it.

Shane Mercer [00:47:59]:

They don't care about how they're treating, treating people and treating players. And, it's just really, really refreshing to see the commission, take it this seriously and and be this persistent with it because they're not gonna let this go, and and they're gonna continue to to look into this. And they may change the regulations, when when it comes to this practice. So just super refreshing to see.

Andrew Pace [00:48:22]:

Yeah. Absolutely. Absolutely.

Shane Mercer [00:48:24]:

Alright. Well, if anyone's interested, the full recording is out there on YouTube. You can go watch the whole thing if you'd like, and, they'll very likely be future meetings. I'm not sure if one is in the books yet, but we will definitely keep you posted, here on this show, and I hope that regulators around North America are looking at what is taking place there around this conversation. I'm sure they are. And, that that's part of the reason we're covering here on the podcast too is that all of you out there to bring it to you. Maybe you missed it. Maybe you didn't get a chance to watch it.

Shane Mercer [00:48:55]:

So there's some of the highlights for you, and you can even take some of that information and maybe share it with your local regulators and just maybe even send them the YouTube video or something like that. Payson, any fun thoughts before we say goodbye?

Andrew Pace [00:49:05]:

Yeah. I think what you mentioned there is big time, Shane. Like, if you guys have have any malpractice or, you know, mistreatment from the sportsbooks from limiting all the way up, you know, you might think the regulators don't care, but now is the time to tell your story. If it's to the media, if it's to us, if it's to, to the regulator directly, I think all all are great. Just just get that message out there. This is I alluded to it already. This is the start of a a snowball really rolling down the hill. So, let's hope that other jurisdictions, get word of this and, and take similar, steps to to obviously, level the playing field a little bit in the in the way of the player.

Andrew Pace [00:49:50]:

So, yeah, really exciting stuff, guys. The conference tournaments are now on here, for both hockey and NBA. We've been, doing really well with those. So, it's it's a great time at inplayLIVE. So, yeah, always always a great, great time to plug the the promo code here on the podcast, 'BEHINDTHELINES', all caps, for a great discount to join our sports betting community where you can work with people that have these stories of winning money over time and and what that looks like.

Shane Mercer [00:50:20]:

Yep. There's a reason why it's so important to us because we've, we've been there. We've been limited. And, you know, we are we're we're covering it very, very, closely for you. So that's 'BEHINDTHELINES', all caps. And, we mentioned s x bet here on the program. That is an exchange where you'll never get limited. And, PACE, we've got a promo code that is in play all lowercase for anybody in inplayLIVE that wants to, join s x bet.

Andrew Pace [00:50:48]:

Right. And they're actually hosting a tournament that starts, tomorrow Woah. For, inplayLIVE members. So if you use the code in play, there's a tournament starting that'll be based on, the profit of your account and how well you do, with them over the next month of the playoffs. Any sports, can be wagered on, but they'll be looking at profit, and, you can get a nice little bonus in your account, should you find yourself atop the leaderboard. 1 of many very cool things that, we're gonna be doing with them.

Shane Mercer [00:51:20]:

Wow. That's that sounds awesome. Alright. Looking forward to that. Jeez. I wish I was I knew about that. I had a time pace. I would have been more prepared for tomorrow's tournament.

Shane Mercer [00:51:28]:

But, anyway, that'll be that'll be awesome. Really looking forward to that. Again, folks out there, you can find the commission's, full meeting on YouTube. And, again, feel free to send it to anyone that you think would be interested in it. And, of course, share our show on socials and all of that as well. Alright, Pace. Till next week, buddy. Keep beating those bucks.

Shane Mercer [00:51:46]:

Thanks for tuning in to another episode of Behind the Lines. Remember to like, download, and subscribe. We are on YouTube, Apple, Spotify, and everywhere you get your podcasts. Have a betting story or wanna be featured on our podcast? Drop a note in the comments below. And if you wanna join inplayLIVE, use promo code 'BEHINDTHELINES'.