BOOKMAKERS are refusing to take bets from successful gamblers.

Some clients have said they’ve had their betting accounts closed or their bets restricted following wins.

Bookmakers say they limit bets from a minority of customers to ensure good odds are available to everyone.

Neil Smith, a teacher from Yorkshire, says he’s had about 450 online accounts closed.

One bookmaker restricted the amount he could bet, and only allowed a 10 pence bet on a 4/1 horse.

He said: “They will just say: ‘Sorry our traders have deemed your betting pattern to be unprofitable and we’re a business.’ “They shouldn’t be advertising a product that’s not available to everybody.

"The flipside of this is they are trying to squeeze money out of people who they are know are profitable. If you’re good, you can’t win long-term, it’s as simple as that.”

Campaigners are calling for the gambling authorities in the UK to force bookmakers to accept all bets up to a limit – a move which has recently been imposed on bookmakers in Australia – and make it clear to all players that restrictions may be imposed.

Gamblers have claimed they suspect that people’s betting patterns are being tracked Peter Ling, who runs the Secret Betting Club, an independent gambling advice service says the bookmakers are using sophisticated IT to identify likely winners.

“Five years ago it used to be a badge of honour for serious punters to be restricted, and you would have to win some substantial sums to get a letter or e-mail like that,” he said.

“But these days it’s all too common. And it’s not just people like me or my members, but your regular Joe Punters who are having the occasional bet, and are having some success, are finding themselves restricted.”

He surveyed his 850 members to find out who had accounts closed or restricted to a small percentage of the stake they wanted to wager.

Three quarters of respondents reported that one company sought to regularly restrict bets to a few pounds. Half said another firm had closed their accounts.

One manager who wished to remain anonymous said the company encouraged staff to screen-out successful gamblers: “If they are a serious backer of horses and clearly know what they are doing with the odds the orders are ‘get rid of him,'” he said.

Paddy Power said it managed financial risk like all businesses and had a number of restrictions to prevent certain bets being made.

William Hill insisted the majority could bet what they like but sometimes restricted bets from a small minority, mainly professional gamblers. Other bookmakers declined to comment.

Gamblers suspect sophisticated software programs which are used to combat fraud are also being used to track people’s betting patterns online or check whether they are using comparison sites.

Two told the BBC they had accounts closed with one bookmaker before they’d even put a bet on. The Association of British Bookmakers said they were unable to comment on the allegation.

5 Live Investigates has been told some High Street shops are also on the alert to identify the smartest gamblers and restrict the bets they can put on.

Neil Smith says he has been banned. One shop told him it was because they’d had a handwriting expert compare his betting slips with previous winning bets.

Paddy Power shop in Central LondonImage copyrightEPA Image caption Paddy Power says it manages financial risk like all businesses Customers have told 5 Live they believe the cooling attitude to those punters who follow the odds and apply mathematics to their wagers, is directly connected to the success of fixed-odds betting terminals and other casino-style games of chance online.

But the industry insists they are just trying to be fair to the ordinary punter by restricting a small number of what they call “professional” gamblers.

The BBC asked firms about the practice of restricting bets but most declined to comment.

“We take a ‘one-for-all’ rather than an ‘all-for-one’ view, so for instance if we’re prepared to lose €2m (£1.5m) on an event, we would much prefer to lose €2,000 to 1,000 different customers rather than €2m to one individual,” a spokesman said.