Newcastle United (4) 2-0 (0) Arsenal - 05/02/2025

[DubblyDubblyDubbly]

9 minutes ago, Lotus said:

Help me out here, are you saying if you’re good at gambling bookies will block or ban you? 
Genuine question (I’ve never placed a bet).

100%. I'm banned on dozens of online bookies and shops.They use facial recognition and get a ping when i walk in.

[geordiesteve710]

5 hours ago, Lush Vlad said:

Yes. That is exactly what I am saying. If you consistently win or they even suspect you have info on things like horse racing. You get restricted to pennies/banned. 
 

I got knocked for about 90 quid on a racing bet with Bet UK. They have all sorts of terms and conditions and other such nonsense where they can withhold payment, close your account, limit you etc. 

 

All this affordability checks stuff they’re bringing in is utter nonsense and a con from bookmakers. It’s more intrusive personal data collection and so that they can close even more winning accounts.
 

All the harm markers and patterns of play are already there for them to monitor for problem gamblers and the difference between fixed odds games gambling (online casino) and skill based/sports betting. They don’t give a fuck about problem gambles and addicts. 
 

Anyway, not meaning to derail this thread. There is a betting and even a racing topic, I think

 

Skybet are a proper bunch of fannies. Was winning on the horses a few years ago. Got up to 4 figures but nothing life changing or owt and I'm restricted to £1 bets.

 

The bit in bold nails it- they all restrict rather than ban in the hope that you'll get bored and squander your account on the fixed odds shite.

[Lotus]

5 hours ago, Lush Vlad said:

Yes. That is exactly what I am saying. If you consistently win or they even suspect you have info on things like horse racing. You get restricted to pennies/banned. 
 

I got knocked for about 90 quid on a racing bet with Bet UK. They have all sorts of terms and conditions and other such nonsense where they can withhold payment, close your account, limit you etc. 

 

All this affordability checks stuff they’re bringing in is utter nonsense and a con from bookmakers. It’s more intrusive personal data collection and so that they can close even more winning accounts.
 

All the harm markers and patterns of play are already there for them to monitor for problem gamblers and the difference between fixed odds games gambling (online casino) and skill based/sports betting. They don’t give a fuck about problem gambles and addicts. 
 

Anyway, not meaning to derail this thread. There is a betting and even a racing topic, I think

 

Really shocked at that. It's a gamble for both sides so the idea that a bookie will restrict or ban you if you have a good streak seems outrageous given how they're almost certain to win out in the end.

[geordiesteve710]

21 minutes ago, Lotus said:

 

Really shocked at that. It's a gamble for both sides so the idea that a bookie will restrict or ban you if you have a good streak seems outrageous given how they're almost certain to win out in the end.

They're businesses that want to maximise their profit margins at the end of the day.

 

Betfair is the better option as can't gut gubbed on there.

[El Prontonise]

There's very little laws to protect customers when it comes to gambling, they can refuse payouts for whatever reason for example with no process to complain to ombudsman.

 

 

Edited February 7 by El Prontonise

[geordiesteve710]

2 minutes ago, El Prontonise said:

There's very little laws to protect customers when it comes to gambling, they can refuse payouts for whatever reason for example with no process to complain to a regulator etc.

Think IBAS can make legally binding judgements if a case is escalated there but I've heard it's a right carry-on and not sure how "independent" it really is.

[Gaztoon]

6 hours ago, DubblyDubblyDubbly said:

100%. I'm banned on dozens of online bookies and shops.They use facial recognition and get a ping when i walk in.

 

Any red hot tips 🤫

[ste_ne24]

 

I think i must be on the watchlist now (probably on quite a few tbh) but this is literally the fourth time i've won this now on different websites. Fucking random i do it today after reading the last page. That's Tenerife in April sorted now  

[Lotus]

2 hours ago, El Prontonise said:

There's very little laws to protect customers when it comes to gambling, they can refuse payouts for whatever reason for example with no process to complain to ombudsman.

 

 

 

Surely the bad publicity that will accrue if a bookie doesn’t pay out is bad for business?

Is there a widely read publication/zine that they can be listed in?

[Jonas]

Pleasantly surprised by the reaction of the Arsenal fans.  Was really starting to dislike them but just goes to show how that's mostly because of that twat of a manager.

[SteV]

1 minute ago, Jonas said:

Pleasantly surprised by the reaction of the Arsenal fans.  Was really starting to dislike them but just goes to show how that's mostly because of that twat of a manager.

Even the most deluded of fans have to accept a 4-0 defeat over two games is fairly comprehensive. Especially when there wasn’t a controversial decision across both games (bar possibly the Isak offside).

[OCOCOL]

13 hours ago, Lush Vlad said:

Yes. That is exactly what I am saying. If you consistently win or they even suspect you have info on things like horse racing. You get restricted to pennies/banned. 
 

I got knocked for about 90 quid on a racing bet with Bet UK. They have all sorts of terms and conditions and other such nonsense where they can withhold payment, close your account, limit you etc. 

 

All this affordability checks stuff they’re bringing in is utter nonsense and a con from bookmakers. It’s more intrusive personal data collection and so that they can close even more winning accounts.
 

All the harm markers and patterns of play are already there for them to monitor for problem gamblers and the difference between fixed odds games gambling (online casino) and skill based/sports betting. They don’t give a fuck about problem gambles and addicts. 
 

Anyway, not meaning to derail this thread. There is a betting and even a racing topic, I think

you make some good points but the affordability thing is imposed by the (No) Gambling Commission who don't understand their remit or purpose as defined in the Gambling Act and as highlighted by the National Audit Office. 
 

I have skin in the game for transparency - and stake factoring / limiting I agree has gone too far but you want to look outside of the big boys (Bet Uk whilst they were Newcastle founded are now  owned by MGM who acquired LeoVegas Gaming PLC) and find a niche punter friendly bookie. DM me if you want. 

[The Prophet]

I'm barred from Coral and have restricted access through Sky. The restrictions are real.

[Lush Vlad]

45 minutes ago, OCOCOL said:

you make some good points but the affordability thing is imposed by the (No) Gambling Commission who don't understand their remit or purpose as defined in the Gambling Act and as highlighted by the National Audit Office. 
 

I have skin in the game for transparency - and stake factoring / limiting I agree has gone too far but you want to look outside of the big boys (Bet Uk whilst they were Newcastle founded are now  owned by MGM who acquired LeoVegas Gaming PLC) and find a niche punter friendly bookie. DM me if you want. 

Not wanting to derail this thread any further.
 

I know plenty on the subject of the affordability thing, I think. As it’s hard not to if you listen to The Barstewards Enquiry. 
 

Bookmakers like Bet UK and many others by all accounts. Have already taken it upon themselves to go about the ‘affordability checks’ before they’ve even come in. Knowing full well punters aren’t going to give up all their info. Nor should they. Just another ploy and excuse to restrict or close down winners. 
 

To try and get said 90 quid out. It was the usual fobbing off. About 10 different ways of proving your ID, although they did stop short of a photo outside your house and a paper with today’s date  refused to give them any banking info other than what they will already be able to access. They then eventually moved to saying my account was closed and tried to link the two small bets I’d had. To some kind of vague clause. Saying I had inside information or some such nonsense.
 

Worst operator I’ve ever come across. But everyone says Bet MGM are dreadful so it figures and I was aware of that. Albeit after the event and all the Cheltenham madness and bad PR Bet MGM got. 
 

I’m not a big punter. I back flat racing and the odd small football bet. I’m not getting knocked all the while or anything and most my accounts would be losing accounts. I’m a recreational punter. I just find the larger operators are a bunch of scumbags.
 

I’ve gone back to trying to bet on course when I go. Fuck Big Corp, basically. 

[Cf]

7 hours ago, ste_ne24 said:

 

I think i must be on the watchlist now (probably on quite a few tbh) but this is literally the fourth time i've won this now on different websites. Fucking random i do it today after reading the last page. That's Tenerife in April sorted now  

 

You most certainly won't be on any lists for winning at slots. If anything they'll want you to keep playing

[ste_ne24]

2 minutes ago, Cf said:

 

You most certainly won't be on any lists for winning at slots. If anything they'll want you to keep playing

Aye i'm always just a bit wary until the money is in my bank account and i think i seen a while back that @Stifler said BetMGM could be a bit of a twat for paying up.

 

What are people betting on to get banned from the websites or bookies? 

[SteV]

27 minutes ago, ste_ne24 said:

 

What are people betting on to get banned from the websites or bookies? 

Anything where the bookmaker can’t definitively control the outcome.

 

Great if you’ve managed to win a bit on the slots, but ultimately the bookmaker is 100% in control of how much gets paid out on slots/games, so if you play over a sustained period, it’s almost impossible to be in profit (bar maybe having an extremely large win).

 

In sports betting, they can control the odds they offer but never the outcome. If you can be disciplined enough (combined with a degree of relevant knowledge and usually plenty of spare time) to only bet when you think the odds offered are too high, you will see profit over the long term. And that’s what they don’t like, and where they will look to shut you down.

[ianbeany]

33 minutes ago, ste_ne24 said:

.

What are people betting on to get banned from the websites or bookies? 

 

Horses are the highest risk thing you can bet on.

 

It's not so much about how much you win with bookies that gets you restricted, its more about how much value you are taking with your bets (ie how the odds compare to the exchanges)

 

I'm restricted by almost every bookie out there now but I made 30k in under three years matched-betting so fuck 'em

[ste_ne24]

Aye i've had a few tips off someone i worked with who 'knows' a trainer or something that gets news about Cheltenham but thats it. I do the odd lucky 15 but my only ever decent wins are literally seeing a horses name that sounds like the guy from Assassins Creed so i just stick e/w bet on and somehow bag £500.

 

It's a slippery slope like my sisters ex husband had a horrific problem with horses and he'd gamble their whole months money when he was working away. I've self excluded from most now and just do the odd capped deposit per week. I'm probably up overall so long as i'm not stupid all should be ok.

[Cronky]

On 06/02/2025 at 14:40, The College Dropout said:

Is it the first time we've beaten a top team (playing their strongest side) on the way to a final?

 

Off the top of my head, Gullit's team beat Spurs in a FA Cup semi-final (1999?) and we also beat Spurs in a League Cup semi (1976?)

 

So I think the answer to your question is yes.

[SteV]

50 minutes ago, Cronky said:

 

Off the top of my head, Gullit's team beat Spurs in a FA Cup semi-final (1999?) and we also beat Spurs in a League Cup semi (1976?)

 

So I think the answer to your question is yes.

Depends on your definition of a top team? Spurs finished 11th in 98/99, and 9th in 75/76.

 

We’ve never beat a team as highly placed in the league as Arsenal*
 

*haven’t checked pre-76 like, so possibly did in the 50’s or prior.

 

edit - re-read your point, and could have just posted ‘agreed’.

 

 

Edited February 8 by SteV

[The College Dropout]

12 minutes ago, SteV said:

Depends on your definition of a top team? Spurs finished 11th in 98/99, and 9th in 75/76.

 

We’ve never beat a team as highly placed in the league as Arsenal*
 

*haven’t checked pre-76 like, so possibly did in the 50’s or prior.

Think Cronky is agreeing with me.  Spurs don’t count.  

[Andy84]

7 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Think Cronky is agreeing with me.  Spurs don’t count.  

This is a new NUFC, beating big sides in Semi finals is not something we’ve ever done that I can remember. Even when we were previously good 

[SteV]

26 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Think Cronky is agreeing with me.  Spurs don’t count.  

Yes, I see now. You could argue they count as a ‘big’ team, but not a ‘top’ team.

[The College Dropout]

19 minutes ago, Andy84 said:

This is a new NUFC, beating big sides in Semi finals is not something we’ve ever done that I can remember. Even when we were previously good 

That’s the point I was getting too.  
 

That Chelsea semi was massive back in the day. Has we squeezed past them we would’ve won the FA Cup that year imo.

 

Beating Arsenal and then Liverpool to win a trophy will change the very DNA of this club.