Limits- PART TWO

[Cons]

To make things short and simple, I can't believe why limits are a problem altogether. the world's biggest bookmaking organisations will let you bet as much as you want. There are simply no limits to be taken into consideration.

You can walk into a betting shop and bet a fiver, or you can bet $500,000 or more in the same manner. The whole limit issue is overrated, and every player should be able to bet as much as he wants. The only issue is the number at which the bet is made. But apart from that there should be no limit, as this is not the logical way to run a business. The big boys in the business have already shown that they will take all the traffic that you throw at them, so I can't see where all the fuss about limits is coming from...

[Chester]

Cons,
Since limits do not mean anything to you, I would like to know which offshore out you run the lines at I have a few things from time to time that don't mean anything that I would like you to hold for me; but only until after they are graded. Then you can transfer those funds however you would like to my bank account of your choice.

[Chillin-the-Most]

Cons,
If you think that is true talk to Kerry Packer. This guy is the biggest whale in the industry. Mirage will not take his action. He is no wise guy at all. But, he wants to bet at least US$250,000.00 per game. If anybody can get past the limits in Vegas it is a good casino player. By this I mean someone who wagers a lot in the casino. A good casino host can get the limits increased for their players. This guy Packer is fought over by every casino on the world. No one will let him bet that kind of money, even on the NFL!
Rich

[thedevil]

Cons,

I beg to differ. Limits are set for more than one reason. Books set limits so they can move the line after a maximum bet. This is to protect themselves. Can you see a book taking $500,000 bets from the Pokers. If that was the case there would be few beards and all the lines would change as soon as they hit one store.

Also there is still a lot of credit business out there. Runners or agents set limits on how much a customer can bet on a game or how much he can risk in a week. The book doesn't know what the customer is good for but the agent is responsible.

DEVIL

[Fred]

Chillin

I didn't know Big Kerry bet on sport. I knew he loses millions a year at casinos (litterally small change to him). He has also been taking bookies to the cleaners in recent Melbourne Cups.

Do you know which sports he bets or any stories/info relating to sport bets he has made?

Cheers

[Cons]

Devil, you're absolutely right. Limits are there to allow 'adjustments' to the line without getting hit to hard on a particular side.

I guess it also depends on the sport you're betting on. With US sports and all the steam, etc. , the limits should be low of course. But I still think it should be a five-minute thing where you can bet again after the move. I mean if the book wants action at a particular number then it shouldn't matter where it's coming from.

Soccer is a high vig market so that is part of the reason why people are allowed to put 500,000 on the table. I agree that with sports like baseball you could not do such a thing. Baseball dime lines fly all over the place, whereas 85% of soccer lines never move at all.

[scott]

Limits should be set at the amount a BM can get two way action at(according to his coustomers). After a play is made the costomer then says "what do you have it now?" and can bet it again. If your out is not in this mode drop him. The online books should opperate the same way... Scotty

[mikren]

If its considered acceptable for some books to refuse a player's action entirely, how can it not be acceptable to place a hard limit on a particular player? I agree it would be better if the bm just continued to move the line, but I'd rather have a hard limit than to be kicked or chased.

[Chillin-the-Most]

Fred,
Yeah Kerry plays sports. Like you said, he mostly plays horses(he is very close with Mark Read of DAS). I have a frien that use to be a supervisor during the Jimmy V years at the Mirage. He was telling me that they were letting him play $250,000.00 a game. Evidently he his record was about 3-7. He was down quite a bit. When the lady took over at the Mirage, I think Betty is her name or something like that, they cut hom off. It was really a chicken **** move from what this guy told me. They didn't like their whole day depending on one player. I'm sure Jimmy V wouldn't have minded. But. then again maybe this order came from even higher. The problem is that these directors are given the responsibilty of making money for the house, but their hands are tied sometimes by higher management. Offshore, we are more likely to take the action especially if the player is SQUARE. In Vegas, a director may decide he needs to lower limits for the end of baseball season, but then a call comes in that one of the casino's high rollers just lost a million in craps and would like to place a bet on his home team for $100,000.00. Now if he wins, that loss just looks like a loss to upstairs, even though the director didn't want the action, he is still responsible for explaining it at the end of the month. I am sorry I don't have a better story about Kerry.
Rich