DraftKings limits winner's NBA Cup bet to 49 cents

DraftKings restricted a Michigan bettor to a 49 cent wager on the NBA Cup, a decision that illustrates how sports betting platforms manage their most successful customers. Michael Trevithick of Ann Arbor shared a betting ticket showing this specific cap, which effectively prevented him from placing a substantial stake on the event.

A company spokesperson explained that DraftKings applies customer specific limits to less than 0.15 percent of accounts. The firm stated these restrictions serve as an enterprise risk control, generally responding to activity that appears designed to exploit errors or target discrepancies in odds. The decisions are based on customer behaviors, irrespective of whether the customer is winning or losing.

This practice, known as limiting, involves applying the brakes on gamblers who are having too much success. States and lawmakers are now scrutinizing how these companies treat their biggest winners. Brianne Doura-Schawohl, director for the Campaign for Fairer Gambling, argues the practice is unfair because pervasive advertising tells consumers they can win, yet the house ensures it always wins.

Last week, a group of U.S. lawmakers wrote to major gambling platforms expressing concerns about the exploitation of vulnerable bettors. The letter noted that perks such as exclusive events, celebrity videos, and Super Bowl tickets distract bettors from financial losses and encourage them to continue betting when they otherwise would not.

Mike Manning, a full-time professional better in Massachusetts, experienced this shift firsthand after the state launched sports gambling in 2023. Manning uses a mathematical approach with analytical models rather than intuition. He reported winning on nearly every app before platforms began limiting his bets one by one.

Manning said DraftKings limited him to $25 per bet. On BetMGM, he moved from wagering $1,000 to $5,000 per game to being able to bet only $5. Manning called the disparity in treatment predatory, stating that companies exploit the losing bettor while showing guys like him the door.

The Massachusetts Gaming Commission investigated the practice in 2024 after it caught the regulator's attention. The Commission found that winning gamblers have their betting limits decreased while gamblers who lose have their limits increased. Gadoon Kyrollos, another professional bettor, described this as a ban or bankrupt model.

The number of restricted accounts is small. The Massachusetts Gaming Commission found that 0.64 percent of state betting accounts had been restricted. Matthew Litt, a New Jersey attorney, says the practice is legal as long as companies do not discriminate based on protected characteristics such as race or religion.

FanDuel wrote to Manning that he was restricted due to an assessment of his overall wagering patterns and their impact on the company's long-term risk position. DraftKings told Manning it took action for internal risk management purposes.

Chris Swett, a former South Carolina attorney, pleaded guilty to four counts of wire fraud and four counts of money laundering in federal court. He stole about $2 million from his law firm to fund his gambling addiction on FanDuel. Swett said he took personal responsibility but felt the system was designed to keep him playing.

Swett wagered between $5,000 and $10,000 a month by 2019. A FanDuel employee emailed him that spending $25,000 a month qualified him for a VIP host. The host provided free tickets to sporting events and complimentary fantasy contest entries. In one 2020 email, Swett told his host he was tapped out. Two days later, the host offered a 4 percent bonus on new bets.

In a two-year span, Swett wagered $11 million and lost about $1 million on the site. He now faces a maximum of 20 years in federal prison. FanDuel stated that millions of customers use the platform responsibly and that it has made changes to its VIP program, including additional employee training and new technologies to identify and stop problem gambling.