Two days down at Cheltenham and the racing has been absolutely top drawer. Day 3 promises more of the same, with a card stacked full of competitive handicaps where a bit of clever form reading can pay serious dividends.

I’ve put together a daily double that lands at 31/1, focusing on two horses that look genuinely well handicapped and primed specifically for this meeting.

Both carry that classic Festival profile: progressive form, relatively unexposed over fences, and crucially, racing off marks that might not reflect their true ability.

Meetmebythesea in the Ultima Handicap Chase (11/2)

This one has been on my radar for weeks. Meetmebythesea has won five of his six career starts and looks a proper natural jumper since switching to fences. That matters enormously around Cheltenham’s New Course, which demands respect for 17 fences over a gruelling three miles.

The handicap mark is where this gets really interesting.

He runs off 139, but there’s a growing feeling among punters that he’s actually a 150-rated horse in disguise. He’s receiving weight from several rivals and could be very well treated indeed.

Ignore his last run, which was essentially a qualification exercise for this contest. Everything about his preparation suggests this has been the plan all season. Trainer Ben Pauling has kept him fresh and protected in the market, which is exactly how you want to arrive at a competitive Festival handicap.

At 11/2, there’s proper value here. This is the type of horse that wins these races, a progressive chaser on a workable mark with untapped potential.

Waterford Whispers in the Kim Muir (4/1)

The Kim Muir is one of the Festival’s most demanding contests, a true stamina test over three miles and two furlongs. Waterford Whispers looks built for exactly this sort of examination.

His last run at Leopardstown was textbook Festival preparation. He finished third in a 23-runner cavalry charge, beaten just over a length while staying on strongly late. Crucially, he didn’t win, which means the handicapper left his mark alone.

He arrives here looking very well treated as a result.

The trip is a massive positive. This distance is significantly further than many of these have proven over, and Waterford Whispers has been crying out for extreme distances throughout his career. His strong finishing style and relentless gallop make him perfectly suited to that brutal climb to the Cheltenham finish line.

Alan O’Sullivan’s 3lb claim is another serious asset. In amateur races, the rider can make or break a horse’s chance. In a stamina test like this, carrying 3lb less could easily be the difference between winning and finishing a gallant fifth.

The favourite Jeriko Du Reponet carries the maximum weight in what is an extreme test. He’s the class horse on paper, but I’m not entirely convinced by his jumping under pressure. That big weight could find him out late on.

Waterford Whispers at 4/1 looks a fantastic bet.

Additional Selections for Day 3

The rest of the card is brutally competitive, as you’d expect at this stage of the Festival. C’est Different in the Pertemps looks well treated and capable of going very close, while Jade de Grugy could get the better of Wodhooh in their contest.

I’ll also be backing the great Bob Olinger to roll back the clock once more.

Some horses just turn up at Cheltenham and find another gear entirely, and he’s one of them. That hill seems to bring out something special in certain horses. At his beloved Festival, he’s worth another chance.

Day 3 is shaping up to be a brilliant one. Best of luck to everyone having a go.

Massachusetts lawmakers have advanced a controversial bill that could reshape the state’s sports betting landscape. Senate Bill 302, which cleared committee on Monday, proposes banning in-play and proposition bets entirely, capping wager amounts, and nearly tripling operator taxes from 20% to 51%.

The Ban on In-Play and Prop Bets

Senator John Keenan, sponsoring the bill, has targeted what he calls “the most addictive form of bets.” The legislation explicitly states that sports wagering would include neither in-play bets nor proposition bets. Full stop.

Keenan’s concern centres on the rapid-fire nature of live betting. “They are quick, they’re easy to place, and they provide instant gratification if somebody should win, or a desire to respond to it, if they should lose, perhaps by doubling down,” he explained.

The problem? In-play wagers account for 50 to 60% of all sports bets in most markets.

A complete ban would fundamentally alter how the industry operates in Massachusetts, potentially driving significant revenue offshore.

Industry Pushback on Restrictions

The Sports Betting Alliance, whose members include Massachusetts-based DraftKings, has come out swinging against the proposals. The industry group argues that in-play betting actually helps operators identify suspicious patterns and potential match-fixing, something that becomes impossible when punters move to unregulated platforms.

DraftKings CEO Jason Robins called the prospect of a blanket ban “crazy.” He’s reflecting broader industry sentiment that prohibition rarely works as intended in the digital age.

The proposed tax hike to 51% would put Massachusetts alongside New York, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island as one of the highest-taxing states for sports betting. Operators warn this combination of restrictions and taxes could make the regulated market uncompetitive, frankly.

Wager Limits and Player Protections

Beyond bet type restrictions, SB302 would cap individual wagers at £1,000 daily or £10,000 monthly. Operators could grant exceptions if they verify these amounts don’t exceed 15% of a player’s bank balance, introducing unprecedented financial oversight requirements.

Interestingly, Massachusetts has simultaneously moved in the opposite direction on limiting winning players. The state Gaming Commission unanimously approved new rules requiring sportsbooks to explain why they’ve restricted successful bettors. Commission Chair Jordan Maynard calls it a first in the United States.

“The operators keep telling me they’re not limiting many people,” Maynard noted. “If they’re not limiting many people, they should be able to tell people why they’re limiting them.”

The Wider Debate on Betting Restrictions

Massachusetts isn’t alone in dealing with these issues, though its approach is among the most restrictive being considered. Ohio struck a more moderate deal with MLB and operators, limiting micro bets on individual pitches to $200 rather than banning them outright. New Jersey lawmakers are debating similar micro bet restrictions.

Recent betting scandals across the NBA, NCAA, MLB, and MLS have intensified calls for tighter controls on player performance bets. Many states have already banned college sports prop betting, with the NCAA pushing for nationwide restrictions.

Not everyone’s moving towards prohibition, though.

Missouri rejected prop betting restrictions in its new sports betting market, while Washington approved sports betting with only in-state college props excluded.

The bill now heads to the Senate Ways and Means Committee. If it passes, Massachusetts could become a test case for heavy-handed betting restrictions, an experiment other states will be watching closely. Whether it protects players or simply pushes them toward unregulated alternatives remains the central question in what’s shaping up to be one of the year’s most significant regulatory battles in US sports betting.

Las Vegas is pulling in punters like never before, but they’re spending their money very differently than they used to. Fresh data from the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority shows sports fans are the new VIPs on the Strip, outspending regular visitors across nearly every category while the cost of a Vegas trip remains the number one gripe.

The 2025 Visitor Profile report reveals some properly interesting trends. Nine out of ten visitors have been to Sin City before, a record high that shows just how sticky Vegas has become. The flip side? First-timers dropped from 20% in 2021 to only 10% last year.

Vegas is preaching to the converted these days.

More than half of repeat visitors come back within two years, which tells you everything about how the city’s got under people’s skin.

Spending Patterns Tell Two Different Stories

Overall spending tells a tale of two cities. Traditional consumption is down, with food, drink, and shopping budgets all shrinking in 2025 as visitors feel the pinch. But spending on sporting events nearly doubled, and attractions spending climbed as well. People want experiences, not another T-shirt.

Despite the moaning about costs, satisfaction scores jumped massively. Some 87% of visitors reported being very satisfied with their trips, up from just 54% in 2024. Credit where it’s due, properties have been offering discounted rooms and experiences after visitor numbers softened, and it seems to be working. People are noticing.

Sports Fans Are the Golden Geese

The sports strategy is paying dividends. About 13% of visitors caught a sporting event during their 2025 stays, up from 10% the year before. These customers are absolute gold for the casinos. They spend more on everything, stay longer, travel in bigger groups, and they come back. The investments in NFL, NHL, and Formula 1 are clearly attracting exactly the crowd Vegas wants.

Gaming Habits Getting More Focused

More people are having a punt, with 81% gambling in 2025 versus 76% in 2021. The average gaming budget hit $858, which is healthy. But here’s the interesting bit: visitors are sticking to fewer venues. They played at an average of 1.7 casinos in 2025 compared to 2.2 in 2022.

The integrated resort model is working. Get them in, keep them in.

Younger, Richer, Less Traditional

The Vegas visitor is getting younger and wealthier. Average age dropped to 41.2 years, and 44% now earn at least $150,000. Meanwhile, 38% of visitors are unmarried, a massive shift from a decade ago when Vegas was still seen as primarily a couples’ destination.

Gen Z makes up 7% of visitors now, but they’re a different breed. Only 70% gamble, compared to 82% of Millennials. Instead, they’re hitting nightclubs, concerts, and immersive experiences. The casinos will need to adapt their offering as this lot grows, no question.

The Influencer Effect Cuts Both Ways

Social media is driving some serious spending. About 12% of visitors consulted influencers when planning their trips, and these people splash the cash. Their average shopping spend was $510 versus $182 for everyone else.

The catch? They’re harder to please. Only 73% reported being very satisfied, compared to 90% among other visitors. When you’ve been watching perfectly curated content from someone’s #VegasBaby highlights reel, reality can disappoint. That’s a challenge properties will need to think about as influencer marketing becomes more prevalent.

Ten Year Transformation

The decade-long comparison really drives home how much has changed. Across nearly all age groups, visitors are more likely to gamble, visit downtown, and cram more people per room. They’re also far less likely to be married. Among 21-29 year olds, just 16% were married in 2025 compared to 36% in 2015.

Vegas has always reinvented itself, but this data shows the transformation is accelerating. The city that once marketed itself to married couples and convention-goers is now pulling in younger, wealthier singles who want sports, shows, and Instagram moments.

The gambling is still there, of course. It’s just one part of a much bigger entertainment package.

California Senator Adam Schiff has introduced legislation aimed at clamping down on prediction markets offering contracts related to warfare and death, following controversy over platforms accepting wagers on conflicts in Iran.

The Discouraging Exploitative Assassination, Tragedy, and Harm Betting in Event Trading Systems Act (cheerfully shortened to the DEATH BETS Act) seeks to clarify existing prohibitions in the Commodity Exchange Act. According to Schiff, betting on war and death creates dangerous incentives where insiders can profit from classified information whilst national security takes a back seat.

What the Bill Actually Does

The proposed legislation adds specific language to the CEA, which already bans markets on terrorism, assassination, and war. The amendment would prohibit any contract that involves, relates to, or references an individual’s death, or could otherwise be construed as correlating closely to death.

That’s quite a broad definition. It’s prompted debate about whether the bill actually addresses a real gap in regulation or simply restates what’s already on the books.

The Kalshi Situation

The controversy kicked off when Kalshi, a regulated US prediction market platform, decided not to pay out users who’d backed Ali Khamenei to step down as Iran’s Supreme Leader. The company argued its existing rules already prevented profiting from death, though some users disagreed strongly enough to file lawsuits.

Kalshi CEO Tarek Mansour has been adamant the company follows CEA rules to the letter.

The platform has since updated its terms with an explicit Death Rule and launched an advertising campaign making clear it doesn’t offer death markets. The company also highlights its ban on insider trading and its commitment to operating under US law.

Polymarket Takes a Different Approach

Polymarket, operating internationally rather than under US regulation, settled its Khamenei market upon his death and continues to run markets on warfare. The platform had markets on the timing of US strikes on Iran, raising concerns about insider trading.

Israeli authorities are now investigating one account, Magamyman, which reportedly gained over $650,000 from wagers on Middle East conflicts. Israel has already indicted two individuals for allegedly using classified information to place bets on military operations.

This week, Polymarket highlighted several war-related markets to users. Russian military actions in Ukraine, potential Israeli strikes on Yemen, that sort of thing. These markets run on Polymarket’s international platform rather than its recently launched US site, placing them outside CEA jurisdiction.

Regulatory Questions

Senator Schiff argues prediction markets can’t be trusted to self-regulate, particularly with the CFTC allegedly turning a blind eye. He’s described the sector as the Wild West and insists clearer legislative boundaries are essential.

Representative Mike Levin, introducing a companion bill in the House, has gone further. He’s warned these markets could lead to deaths of American service members, pointing to over half a billion dollars wagered on the timing of US military strikes as evidence the system needs tightening.

Still, with Kalshi already avoiding war and death markets, and Polymarket operating internationally beyond US regulatory reach, questions remain about what the DEATH BETS Act would actually accomplish beyond clarifying intent.

International Pressure

Polymarket faces regulatory headaches beyond the US as well. The Netherlands has threatened weekly fines of $500,000 if the platform continues accepting Dutch users, particularly after its markets on Dutch elections attracted over $100 million in trading volume.

Several other countries have raised similar objections to Polymarket offering markets on political elections and other events prohibited under their gambling regulations. Enforcement against an international platform remains challenging, granted.

Whether legislative clarification will make any practical difference to how these platforms operate remains to be seen, but it’s clear US lawmakers are taking notice of prediction markets in ways they haven’t before.

The Betting and Gaming Council has rolled out a new online campaign designed to help UK punters spot the difference between legitimate operators and dodgy black market sites. The interactive “Spot the Black Market” quiz takes users through a series of scenarios that highlight the warning signs of unlicensed gambling platforms.

Teaching Players the Red Flags

The quiz opens with thumbnail images of popular casino games, asking participants whether the sites hosting them are properly licensed in the UK or operating outside the rules. Later questions show casino advertisements featuring cryptocurrency payment options and time-limited welcome bonuses worth £2,000, then ask players to identify whether these are legitimate or black market operations.

Both examples represent illegal sites, according to the BGC. UK-licensed operators aren’t permitted to accept crypto payments or offer time-sensitive bonuses that could encourage problem gambling. These restrictions exist for good reason, but they also create opportunities for unlicensed sites to position themselves as more generous alternatives.

The Imitation Game

The real challenge facing UK players is how convincing these illegal sites have become. A BGC spokesperson explained that black market operators “deliberately mimic trusted brands but play by none of the rules that keep people safe.” The polish and professionalism of modern illegal gambling sites makes them increasingly difficult to distinguish from the real thing.

The trade body advises players to check for visible Gambling Commission license numbers, watch for suspicious payment methods, and scrutinize terms and conditions carefully. These basic checks can save punters from sites that offer no consumer protections, no recourse for disputes, and no guarantee they’ll actually pay out winnings.

A £2.7 Billion Problem

The BGC reckons the UK black market drains £2.7 billion annually from the regulated sector, which itself contributes around £6.8 billion to the UK economy each year. That’s a substantial chunk of revenue flowing to operators who pay no tax, employ no UK workers, and answer to no regulator.

The timing of this campaign is notable. October’s Autumn Budget nearly doubled online gambling taxes from 21% to 40%, putting enormous pressure on licensed operators. Evoke has already announced plans to close 200 betting shops in response. When legal operators face such steep tax increases while competing against untaxed black market sites, the economics become genuinely challenging.

If the BGC’s education efforts succeed in steering more players toward licensed sites, it’ll provide some relief to an industry navigating difficult waters. Whether an interactive quiz can shift enough behaviour to make a real difference remains to be seen. But it’s a proper attempt at tackling a growing problem.

The Dutch gambling regulator has delivered its largest ever penalty, slapping online operator Novatech with a €24.9 million fine for running unlicensed gambling services targeting Dutch players. The Kansspelautoriteit (KSA) announced the record sanction on Tuesday, alongside a separate €1.8 million fine for another unlicensed operator, Fortaprime.

Novatech, which operates the Qbet and 55Bet brands under a Curaçao license, was found actively targeting Dutch customers despite lacking proper authorisation in the Netherlands. KSA investigators discovered that players could easily register accounts and deposit funds on both Novatech and Fortaprime platforms. Neither company made any real effort to exclude Dutch users.

Regulator Wanted to Go Further

The fine sounds big, but it’s actually just a fraction of what KSA Chair Michel Groothuizen believes would be appropriate. Dutch law caps penalties at 10% of an operator’s global turnover, limiting the regulator’s options. Worth knowing: Novatech reportedly earned hundreds of millions from Dutch players.

“A fine of €24 million sounds impressive, but without the 10% maximum, the fine would have exceeded €100 million, an amount that would be more appropriate for this offence,” Groothuizen explained. The chair made clear that if the law permitted, he would have issued significantly harsher penalties.

Fortaprime, registered in Costa Rica without any valid gambling licenses, received a smaller fine reflecting its lower turnover from Dutch customers.

Rising Tensions in Dutch Market

The crackdown comes as the Netherlands grapples with the unintended consequences of its strict regulatory approach. The country has introduced monthly deposit limits of €700, reduced to €300 for under-25s. They’ve banned gambling advertising in sports. Plus, they’ve hiked operator taxes to 37.8% this year, up from 34.2% in 2024.

These measures have had a noticeable impact on the regulated market. Tax revenue dropped by €43.5 million between 2024 and 2025. Meanwhile, the KSA’s own figures show more money being wagered on unlicensed platforms than licensed ones. The regulator has acknowledged that restrictive rules are pushing players towards unregulated sites where consumer protections don’t apply.

Trade body VNLOK has called for authorities to reconsider the current tax rates, urging a review of the relationship between tax burden, illegal supply, and player protection. Average monthly losses per player have fallen from €146 to €119. Critics question whether players are simply moving their spend to less transparent operators.

Wider Enforcement Campaign

The Novatech and Fortaprime fines form part of a broader enforcement push by the KSA. The regulator recently threatened prediction market platform Polymarket with weekly fines of up to $500,000 for offering markets on Dutch elections, which are prohibited under local law.

Groothuizen has defended the regulatory approach despite the revenue decline, arguing that player protection justifies the cost. However, the Dutch experience offers a cautionary tale for other jurisdictions considering similar restrictions. Player losses in the regulated market have decreased, sure. But the growth of unlicensed alternatives raises questions about whether the overall harm has genuinely reduced or simply shifted elsewhere.

The record fines signal that the KSA intends to maintain pressure on unlicensed operators, even as it navigates the challenging balance between regulation, revenue, and player safety in an increasingly competitive European market.

The Betting and Gaming Council has rolled out an interactive quiz designed to help UK players distinguish legitimate gambling sites from dodgy black market operators. The campaign, titled “Spot The Black Market,” comes as the industry body estimates illegal gambling is costing the UK economy £2.7 billion annually.

The online quiz walks players through a series of scenarios, asking them to identify whether gambling sites are properly licensed or operating outside UK regulations. Questions include identifying suspicious crypto payment options and spotting time-limited bonus offers that breach UK advertising standards.

How the Quiz Works

Players are shown thumbnail images of popular gambling titles and casino advertisements, then asked to judge whether each site is UK-regulated. The quiz highlights two major red flags: operators accepting cryptocurrency payments and casinos pushing time-sensitive welcome bonuses like £2,000 offers with countdown timers.

Both practices are illegal for UK-licensed operators. Crypto payments and pressure tactics that encourage excessive gambling breach Gambling Commission rules. Yet black market sites routinely use these methods to attract players.

Industry Concerns Over Black Market Growth

According to a BGC spokesperson, illegal operators deliberately mimic trusted brands but play by none of the rules that protect consumers. The quiz shows how easily players can be fooled by professional-looking sites that lack proper licensing.

The BGC advises players to check for visible Gambling Commission license numbers, scrutinize payment methods, and read terms and conditions carefully. These might seem like obvious checks, granted. But the slick presentation of many illegal sites makes them surprisingly difficult to spot at first glance.

The timing of this campaign matters. Following the Autumn Budget decision to nearly double online gambling taxes from 21% to 40%, operators like Evoke have announced plans to close 200 betting shops. With regulated firms facing increased financial pressure, the last thing the industry needs is players drifting toward unlicensed alternatives.

The regulated UK gambling sector contributes approximately £6.8 billion to the economy each year. That makes the £2.7 billion black market figure a substantial drain. If the BGC’s educational push successfully steers players toward licensed operators, it could provide welcome relief for an industry working through choppy regulatory waters.

The Kansspelautoriteit (KSA), the Dutch gambling regulator, has dropped a record €24.9 million penalty on Novatech, the company behind online brands Qbet and 55Bet. The sanction marks the latest chapter in the Netherlands’ increasingly tense relationship with its gambling industry, which is seeing players drift toward unlicensed operators following a series of heavy-handed restrictions.

The regulator announced the fine on Tuesday, accusing Novatech of actively targeting Dutch players despite operating without a valid local licence. The same day, the KSA also slapped Fortaprime with a €1.8 million penalty for running several unlicensed online casinos accessible to Netherlands residents.

Active Targeting of Dutch Players

KSA investigators discovered that both operators were making it remarkably easy for Dutch customers to register accounts and deposit funds.

Rather than blocking Netherlands-based players, the companies were deliberately marketing to them. Novatech operates under a Curacao licence, while Fortaprime is registered in Costa Rica but holds no recognised gambling permits.

The size of Novatech’s fine reflects its substantial turnover. KSA Chair Michel Groothuizen explained that penalties are calculated based on estimated Dutch player revenue, but Dutch law caps fines at 10% of global turnover. That limit proved frustrating for the regulator.

“Novatech earned hundreds of millions from its illegal offering, primarily from Dutch players,” Groothuizen said. “A fine of €24 million sounds impressive, but without the 10% maximum, the fine would have exceeded €100 million, an amount that would be more appropriate for this offence.”

Warning Shot to Other Operators

The KSA has been flexing its enforcement muscles lately. Earlier this month, the regulator threatened prediction market platform Polymarket with weekly fines of up to $500,000 if it continues accepting Dutch users. The platform’s coverage of Dutch elections violated local regulations, which prohibit betting markets on domestic political outcomes.

These enforcement actions come as the Netherlands grapples with an uncomfortable reality. The country’s well-intentioned regulatory crackdown is pushing players toward unlicensed sites in significant numbers. Last year, the KSA reported that wagering on unregulated platforms had overtaken the licensed market, a striking admission of policy failure.

The Cost of Protection

The regulatory squeeze has been comprehensive. Dutch players now face monthly deposit limits of €700, reduced to just €300 for those aged 18 to 25. Tax rates on licensed operators have climbed sharply, hitting 34.2% last year before jumping again to 37.8% in January.

Sports gambling advertising has been banned entirely.

The financial impact is becoming impossible to ignore. Trade body VNLOK noted that the Netherlands collected €43.5 million less in gambling tax revenue in 2025 compared to 2024. In a letter sent this week, the organisation urged authorities to reconsider the relationship between tax burden, illegal supply, player protection and contributions to the exchequer.

Groothuizen acknowledges the tax increase is reducing government income but maintains the cost is justified if players receive better protection. The numbers tell a mixed story. Average monthly player losses have dropped from €146 in 2024 to €119 in 2025, which the regulator views as evidence of success.

A Cautionary Tale

Look, the Dutch experience offers valuable lessons as other jurisdictions consider tightening gambling regulations. The country has achieved its stated goal of reducing player losses within the licensed market. However, it has simultaneously driven a substantial portion of the market underground, where player protections are non-existent and tax revenue disappears entirely.

The KSA’s aggressive enforcement against Novatech and Fortaprime signals its determination to crack down on unlicensed operators exploiting this regulatory gap. Whether record fines will prove sufficient to stem the tide toward black market gambling remains an open question. What’s certain is that the Netherlands has created a cautionary tale about the unintended consequences of overzealous regulation, even when motivated by genuine concern for player welfare.

For the licensed operators who’ve invested in Dutch compliance, the situation presents a proper headache. They’re competing against unlicensed rivals who face none of the deposit limits, advertising restrictions or punishing tax rates while still managing to serve Dutch customers with apparent ease. The KSA’s enforcement efforts will need to be both sustained and effective to level that playing field.

The Netherlands’ gambling watchdog has handed down its biggest ever penalty, fining online operator Novatech nearly €25 million for illegally targeting Dutch punters. The Kansspelautoriteit (KSA) announced the record sanction on Tuesday, alongside a separate €1.8 million fine for another unlicensed outfit, Fortaprime.

Novatech, which runs the Qbet and 55Bet brands under a Curaçao licence, was pinged for making it easy as pie for Dutch players to sign up, deposit, and gamble on its platforms. The regulator’s investigators found the company wasn’t just failing to block Dutch customers. It was actively chasing their business.

The size of the fine reflects Novatech’s turnover in the Netherlands, but KSA Chair Michel Groothuizen made clear he’d have gone much harder if Dutch law allowed it. Current regulations cap fines at 10% of global turnover, keeping this penalty at €24.9 million. Without that ceiling? Groothuizen reckons the bill would have topped €100 million.

“Novatech earned hundreds of millions from its illegal offering, primarily from Dutch players,” Groothuizen said. “A fine of €24 million sounds impressive, but without the 10% maximum, the fine would have exceeded €100 million, an amount that would be more appropriate for this offence.”

Crackdown Comes Amid Revenue Squeeze

The timing’s interesting here. These fines land just as the Netherlands grapples with a sharp drop in regulated gambling tax revenue, brought on by tighter restrictions the government introduced to shore up player protections. The country’s gambling duty rate climbed to 37.8% in January, up from 34.2% last year, while monthly deposit limits were capped at €700 for most punters and €300 for under-25s.

Those moves have had consequences. Trade body VNLOK reported that tax revenues fell €43.5 million short in 2025 compared to 2024, and the group’s now calling for authorities to rethink the balance between tax rates, illegal supply, and player safety.

Last year, the KSA itself noted that betting volumes on unregulated platforms had actually overtaken the licensed market. Players clearly voting with their feet when faced with what they see as overly restrictive rules.

Groothuizen acknowledges the tax hike is costing the treasury money, but he’s standing firm. The regulator believes stricter controls are worth the short-term revenue hit if they deliver better player protections. Average monthly player losses have dropped from €146 in 2024 to €119 in 2025, which the KSA sees as evidence the strategy’s working.

Sending a Message to Offshore Operators

The Fortaprime penalty adds weight to the signal the KSA’s sending. That operator, registered in Costa Rica without any valid gambling licence, faced the same accusations of deliberately courting Dutch custom. Both companies now face bills that should give other offshore operators pause before targeting the Dutch market.

The regulator’s also been rattling its sabre at prediction market platform Polymarket recently, threatening weekly fines of up to $500,000 if it doesn’t stop offering markets on Dutch elections. That’s illegal under local law, and the KSA’s made clear it won’t hesitate to follow through.

Whether these enforcement actions can reverse the flow of Dutch players to unlicensed sites remains to be seen. The Netherlands is becoming a test case for how far regulators can push restrictions before losing control of their markets entirely. For now, the KSA’s betting that hefty fines and aggressive enforcement will convince both operators and players that staying on the right side of the law is the smart move.

The bigger question? Whether other European jurisdictions watch what’s happening in the Netherlands and decide to follow suit, or take it as a cautionary tale about over-regulation driving business underground.

Polymarket has announced a major partnership with Palantir Technologies and TWG AI to develop a comprehensive sports integrity platform, addressing one of the most persistent criticisms facing prediction markets in the United States.

The move comes as state regulators continue questioning whether prediction markets have adequate safeguards to monitor sports event contracts. Connecticut’s Department of Consumer Protection stated last December that prediction markets had “no integrity controls in place,” while New York Attorney General Letitia James warned ahead of the Super Bowl that these platforms “operate without consumer protections” and aren’t subject to proper regulatory oversight.

Vergence AI Engine at the Heart of New System

The new integrity platform will be built on the Vergence AI engine, designed to detect, prevent, and report suspicious activity tied to sports contracts on Polymarket’s US-facing platform. As a CFTC-regulated Designated Contract Market, Polymarket lists contracts covering sports and various other events, making robust integrity controls essential for its continued operation.

Shayne Coplan, Polymarket’s founder and CEO, emphasised the broader industry benefits of the partnership. “Our partnership with Palantir and TWG AI allows us to apply world-class analytics and monitoring to sports markets while building tools that can help leagues and teams maintain confidence in the games themselves,” Coplan said. “Our goal has always been to give fans new ways to engage with the sports they love while ensuring those markets can grow responsibly on a global scale.”

End-to-End Trading Surveillance

The platform will monitor trading activity comprehensively, tracking order flow, execution data, and settlement activity across the board. The Vergence AI engine is expected to provide multiple layers of oversight, creating what Polymarket describes as a robust defence against manipulation and suspicious trading patterns.

This isn’t just about ticking regulatory boxes. The integrity controls should give sports leagues and teams greater confidence in how their events are being used in prediction markets, potentially opening doors to more official partnerships down the line.

Keeping Pace With Kalshi

Polymarket’s announcement puts it in direct competition with Kalshi, which has also taken an aggressive approach to market integrity. Last March, Kalshi partnered with IC360 to bring integrity monitoring and ProhiBet services to its platform, allowing real-time monitoring of prohibited bettors. Interestingly, Polymarket also uses IC360 and Sportradar for its existing partnerships with the NHL and MLS.

Kalshi went even further in early February with a big expansion of its surveillance and enforcement capabilities. CEO Tarek Mansour outlined how the platform polices insider trading through its Poirot system, which monitors and flags suspicious trades in real time. The exchange has also appointed an independent surveillance advisory committee and brought in partners like Solidus Labs and Daniel Taylor from the Wharton Forensic Analytics Lab.

The race between these two platforms to show proper oversight is clearly heating up. With state regulators watching closely and more jurisdictions considering how to regulate prediction markets, having sophisticated integrity systems isn’t just good practice anymore.

It’s becoming essential for survival in the US market.