What’s the problem here?
Apparently it is perfectly legal and written into the terms and conditions of use for each of the gambling providers.
It’s OK by our governments.
No one has yet said it is contrary to ACL?
The big financial institutions are permitted to adjust their fees, charges, actuarial rates, etc to ensure they always make a profit! So to can a gambling provider?
In many ways our society has a less than pleasant streak, where it is accepted and legally practicable although not morally right for one person to profit from the poor judgement of another.
True the behavior of a gambling provider in limiting winners seems unfair.
Alternately consider that those winnings only come about at the expense of some one who may always be a looser.
It may be easier to argue that neither winning gamblers nor the Companies that provide the gaming services have the moral high ground here?
Caution re following moral judgement: I often wonder how much better our society might be if gambling as an industry or illegal pursuit did not exist. For those that genuinely believe in the “sport of kings” or dog’s chasing after fake fur for their future life prospects - let those keen on participating (like many of the rest of us do for our interests, hobbies and sports) 100% fund their hobby out of their own pockets and not the losses of mug punters who aspire to be like those living in the winners circles.
That some of the turn over comes back to the community (and often the industry of racing from the public purse) does not justify the source!