I know this comment will "pooped" but I really think that the punter should be covered by legislation here, dear me, they only want losers???? well they are about 98% safe anyway, they should be forced by law to accept wagers from 2% winners as well, pre requisite to hold a license!!

Commiseration Mark,
I posted early on but my post seems to have disappeared into the ether.
Anyway I was saying that I was surprised at the suddenness of it, I have my accounts restricted by a few outfits but only after I started to win consistently.

They offered me an option to bet big but my basic bet is only $200 for one thing, the other more important reason why I refused was that the odds offered were substantially less.

It left me with the TAB and Betfair, but Betfair is too inconvenient to wager $200 on horses at the odds I work at in one go and sometimes not getting matched at all for more than a pittance.

I signed up with Luxbet but now I read here that they do restrict you as well.
Not what the gent told me?
We shall see.
The bottom line is bookies do not like to pay out, fair enough, but after just one win? Crickey how glass jawed are they?
Good luck

a mob called sportsbetting.com.au are using the punters show to spruik their business, it's probably all bluff as well. I don't use the corporates, i use BF exclusively.

i guess when i finally get slugged with PC i may have to give this game up. i never really thought about that prospect before.

Mark,
I say they knew what you were doing as they would have access to betfair prices and didn't want to take the chance of results going the other way or didn't like you making a profit at there expense even if they would have been in front.

I agree with you in principle but you'll will find that your numbers in this case are way out.

I think there are more than 2% winning punters, but be it as it may, what's more important is that the great majority of losing punters don't actually bet with the bookies.

This brings the margins between winning or losing much closer for the bookies.
But as you said, if they are prepared to take your bet when you lose they should be prepared to take it when you are winning.

good luck

Lomaca, the 98% was surely pulled out of the air, but otherwise I have to differ as we have already established the corporates' will only accommodate losing punters and they all seem to be doing ok! (the bookies that is) so they must have plenty of losers.

PS by the way I have to agree on your point about trying to get set on BF, I just gave it up as a joke, like my biggest bet is $200, and usually $100, half the time I couldn't get set for $20, an absolute waste of time!

Yes with hindsight, you are probably right, they (bookies) are good at weeding out the winners.
As to bfoolyou it has one redeeming feature the ability to lay.

But for us backers, you certainly know as well as I how frustrating it is to try to place a bet against a robot.

Anyway I have been rebuked here before for speaking about bf.

Can't repeat it often enough I do not knock it, it doesn't suit me and my style of betting but if it suits someone else use it!

I too was dropped by Spotsbet after 1 fortunate day.
No probs , I just go to the next one
I find Betezy very good.
They pride themselves on not dropping punters.
They are owned by Paddy Power.
One of the largest Bookie organisations in the World .

Same owners as IAS and Sportsbet so that is no option.

I believe bookmakers standing at any race meeting must accept a bet to win a minimum dollar amount from any punter. They cannot ban a punter for winning. Same rules should apply to ALL online bookmakers operating here.