Iddaa’s Limiting Policy Forces Turkish Bettors into ‘Identity Hunting’

Iddaa’s risk management policy of limiting successful or ‘risky’ bettors has effectively pushed thousands of players out of the system. Since Iddaa is the sole legal online betting platform in Turkey, this limiting decision amounts to a de facto online betting ban for affected bettors. Seeking a workaround, these players are now resorting to multi-accounting—using the identities of friends and relatives—and are thus accepting significant legal and financial risks.

A recent extraordinary event involving the Atalanta vs. AC Milan match brought a major crisis within the sector to light. The initial cancellation and refund of bets placed at 1.72 odds on a highly specific option, “Player to be Fouled – Rafael Leao 1+” (meaning, Rafael Leao to be fouled at least once), was only the beginning. Hundreds of users who played this bet, or were otherwise deemed profitable, were subsequently limited by Iddaa shortly thereafter.

This limiting decision goes beyond a simple account restriction. Since Iddaa is the only legal online sports betting provider in the Republic of Turkey, a user limited on Iddaa simultaneously loses access to all online dealers such as Nesine, Bilyoner, and Misli. In effect, the door to legal online betting has been completely shut for these individuals.

De Facto Online Betting Ban: How Limiting Works

Iddaa’s limiting process is typically conducted under the banner of “risk management.” However, the prevailing view in the industry is that this application has devolved into a policy aimed at blocking players who are successful, long-term winners, or otherwise categorized as “risky” to the operator’s profit margin.

When a user is limited, this status is automatically flagged within the Central Betting System. Since Iddaa is the only legal operator in Turkey, the same user is simultaneously restricted across all legal online dealers. This means the limited individual is essentially deprived of their right to engage in legal online betting.

Bettors typically encounter two main types of limits:

• Stake Limit: A severe reduction in the maximum bet amount allowed. For instance, being restricted to placing a 100 TL bet instead of 10,000 TL.
• Odds Limit: The automatic prevention of placing high-odds bets or combined (accumulator) coupons.

Industry experts point out that these practices, in a monopolized market, create unfair competition and push players toward unregulated overseas websites or illegal channels. Crucially, the biggest risk is that this restriction forces users who want to remain on legal ground into unethical methods, namely betting through accounts opened under the names of friends and relatives.

No IP Block, But a Bank Account Barrier: The Need for Identity Circulation

Users whose access to legal betting has been blocked by Iddaa’s limiting policies have started seeking alternatives to circumvent the system. The foremost method is multi-accounting.

The Key Point: Lack of IP Restriction

Currently, Iddaa’s platform does not have strict restrictions regarding access to accounts opened under different identities from the same IP address (e.g., the same home or shared network). This provides a significant advantage to limited users, allowing them to technically continue placing bets through a different identity without immediate system detection.

The Real Barrier: Bank Accounts

However, a fundamental rule of legal betting platforms comes into play: Every user can only deposit and withdraw funds using bank accounts opened in their own name.

This necessity pushes limited players into a new dilemma. The individual opening the new Iddaa account—typically a trusted friend, relative, or acquaintance—must provide not only their identity but also access or control over their bank account. This means players must entrust both personal identity and financial control to others.

Experts view this as an attempt to maintain activity within the existing system before potential future regulations. Yet, the legal and ethical risks are substantial. Whether Iddaa will implement stricter measures, such as IP restrictions, to prevent multi-accounting remains uncertain. Such a move would pose a serious obstacle for users relying on multiple accounts.

Global Practices vs. Turkey’s Monopoly Impasse

Iddaa’s risk management limiting applications are fundamentally similar to strategies seen in the global betting sector. Many leading operators worldwide tend to limit players identified as “sharp money”—those who place high-volume bets and achieve consistent long-term profits. This is a standard method used by operators to protect profit margins and balance risk distribution.

However, the situation in Turkey diverges significantly at this point.

In other countries, a limited player has the option to switch to hundreds of different licensed and regulated betting sites. In Turkey, since Iddaa is the sole legal platform, the limiting decision effectively turns into a betting ban. This not only marginalizes users but forces them into unethical alternatives while still trying to operate within the legal framework.

The Only Solution: Ending the Monopoly

Industry observers and bettors are unanimous on the single solution for the root cause of this problem: The end of the betting market monopoly. Establishing free-market conditions and licensing new, verifiable operators to enter the market could restore user confidence.

If players had legal, competitive alternatives to switch to when limited, Iddaa’s limiting decision would remain merely a commercial preference—and cease to be an obstacle restricting a citizen’s legal right. Otherwise, the continuation of the current system appears likely to drive the legal Turkish betting market toward an increasing prevalence of uncontrolled multi-accounting and a growing grey area.