Written by Miles Wigby.
Miles is a professional sports bettor with years of experience placing bets through accounts held by friends and family after soft books limited his own. Trademate users often ask what to do once retail books restrict winning accounts. This piece answers that question from Miles’s perspective. Trademate Sports does not condone illegal activity or anything that breaks a bookmaker’s terms and conditions. Over to Miles.
With most retail bookmakers — Bet365, Unibet and many others — winning value bettors should expect restrictions eventually. Soft books are not built to keep paying sharp action at full limits. The main exceptions are sharp books and exchanges that do not routinely cut winning players. For the soft-vs-sharp distinction, see this overview:
If you still want access to a particular soft book after your own account is limited, some bettors use an account in someone else’s name. In matched-betting and value-betting circles that is often called gnoming (or a gnome account): a friend or family member opens (or already has) the account, you stake through it under an agreed profit share, and you sometimes pick up a fresh signup offer as well. Second and later accounts usually get restricted faster than a first account that looked recreational for longer.
Gnoming has real legal, contractual and relationship risks. Understand those before anything else. Separately, see our guide on how bookmakers limit winning players — delaying limits on your own accounts is usually preferable to relying on other people’s.
Risks
- It breaks the bookmaker’s T&Cs. If they catch you, withdrawals can be blocked and balances voided under the terms you (or the account holder) agreed to.
- Linked accounts. If the book links the gnome to your limited account, both can be closed. You can lose the original account even if it was only partially restricted.
- Permission and fraud exposure. Acting in someone else’s name without clear permission is a legal risk. Written permission from the account holder is a baseline, not a free pass with the book.
- You do not legally own the money. Wins sit in the account holder’s name. You need someone you trust — and a clear agreement on deposits, withdrawals and the split.
Practical pitfalls (how accounts get linked)
These are the linking vectors books commonly use. None of this makes gnoming “safe”; it only explains why accounts die quickly when handled carelessly.
IP addresses
Books log where sessions come from. Same Wi-Fi or same device as a limited account is an easy link. Mobile data on a device that has never logged a betting account is what many people use instead of home Wi-Fi. Phone apps and previously used handsets still carry device signals even if the IP changes.
Cookies and browser data
Old cookies on a “new” signup stand out. Incognito/private windows and a clean browser profile reduce that signal; they do not erase device or payment links.
VPN / VPS
Results vary by book. Some retail books (Bet365 is a common example) block many VPNs and are hostile to shared VPS ranges; others are looser. A VPS is not bulletproof against a large book’s fraud stack.
Same home address
Two accounts at one address — especially when the second appears right after the first was limited and bets the same markets — is an obvious flag. Some books tolerate household signups until the pattern looks like recycling winners.
Mobile apps
Apps send a device ID. Logging a second account into the same app install on the same phone is a direct link. Browser-only on a clean device is the usual workaround people talk about; again, not a guarantee.
Deposits and cards
Funding a gnome with the same card (or same billing identity) used on a limited account is one of the fastest ways to get both closed. The lower-risk pattern is: the account holder deposits and withdraws with their banking, and you settle the profit share off-platform with someone you trust.
Making new accounts last longer?
What people call priming is placing some clearly recreational, often −EV action early (accumulators, bet builders, short-priced favourites) so the account does not look like a pure value-betting profile from day one. That can delay restrictions; it does not prevent them, and the −EV bets are a real cost against future edge. There is no reliable formula for “how many weeks of junk bets buy how many months of limits.” Treat priming as a costly delay tactic, not a strategy that creates edge.
How I use friends’ accounts
On Bet365 specifically, my own routine has been: cheap dedicated handset, mobile data only (no home Wi-Fi), browser login rather than the app, and the friend handles all deposits and withdrawals. Profit share has usually been 20–50%, or a fixed fee. That is one operational pattern, not advice that it will work for you or against any particular book’s current checks.
Is it worth it?
Gnoming is a last resort when you need a specific soft book you can no longer use at useful stakes — or when a signup offer is large enough to justify the relationship and T&Cs risk. Many winning bettors instead shift volume to sharps and exchanges, shop prices across more books, and accept that soft-book lifespan is finite (see avoiding limits).
If you do go down the gnome route: assume accounts will be linked eventually, never stake money you cannot afford to lose to a void or a personal dispute, and remember that every restricted friend or relative is one fewer option later. For finding prices above a sharp reference without inventing edge, Trademate compares soft books against sharp markets — on accounts you are actually allowed to use.