Bit of a random one, but with finals stuff ramping up I've been seeing heaps more bookie write-ups and comparison pages getting pushed around lately, and a lot of them read like the exact same bloke copied and pasted the lot.
They'll rave about boosted odds and same game multis, then somehow skip over the stuff punters actually care about once you've been around a while - limits, payout speed, how painful the ID checks are, whether they knock back bonus bets on certain markets, how they handle late leg voids, all that boring but important gear.
I've had a squiz through a few this week and some are miles off. One had a mob listed as "fast withdrawals" and I nearly spat my coffee... took me close to 2 days with them not that long ago, plus the usual back and forth after a decent collect. Another gave top marks for promos to a site that limits you the second you show a clue. Stuff like that makes the whole thing feel a bit cooked.
Not having a whinge for the sake of it, just reckon newer punters get fed a pretty glossy version of how these books actually operate. If a review doesn't mention turnover rules, restricted accounts, market depth on lower leagues, or whether support goes missing on a Saturday arvo, it's not telling you much.
Curious what everyone else is reading these days. Any review sites or forum posters you actually trust? Or do you just ignore the shiny write-ups and go straight to user comments now?