JULY 16, 2025 – In the sprawling, often chaotic world of global online betting, a new and alarming accusation has surfaced against offshore giant 1xBet. The operator, known for serving markets where it holds no local license, is being accused of demanding that winning players provide a formal doctor’s note—certifying they are not gambling addicts—before they can withdraw their funds.
The Shocking Demand
The allegations are supported by screenshots circulating on social media, which show purported emails from 1xBet’s security team. The demand is explicit: a player must provide a document “that confirms that you do not have gambling addiction,” which must be verified by a “medical specialist’s signature and stamp.”
This represents a disturbing new low in the catalog of withdrawal tactics employed by questionable operators. Rather than simply citing “technical issues” or demanding endless documentation, 1xBet has allegedly escalated to exploiting the very real issue of gambling addiction as a weapon against winning players.
1xBet now asking for doctors note saying you're not addicted to gambling to withdraw funds. This is getting ridiculous. pic.twitter.com/xyz123example
— john322226 (@john322226) December 9, 2024
A Cynical Ploy on a Global Stage
For industry watchdogs and player communities, the alleged tactic is a textbook example of predatory behavior. 1xBet operates in countless jurisdictions worldwide where it lacks local licensing, often exploiting legal gray areas. For an operator with this model to suddenly feign deep concern over a single player’s well-being—especially when that player is trying to cash out a large win—is being viewed as a deeply cynical ploy.
Critics argue the demand is not a gesture of responsibility, but a calculated obstacle. The intent is to create a personal, expensive, and bureaucratic nightmare that ultimately frustrates the winning player into abandoning their claim.
The Absurdity of the Request
Consider the practical implications of this demand:
- Medical Privacy Violation: Requiring players to disclose private medical information
- Financial Burden: Forcing players to pay for unnecessary medical evaluations
- Time Delays: Creating weeks or months of additional processing time
- Moving Goalposts: What happens if they reject the medical opinion?
- Selective Enforcement: Why only demand this from winning players trying to withdraw?
The Bright Line Between Regulated and Offshore
This alleged tactic highlights the vast chasm between operators accountable to strong local regulators and their offshore counterparts. In strictly regulated markets, this would be unthinkable.
Premier Regulatory Standards
Top-tier regulators like the UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) in Great Britain, the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (AGCO) in Canada, and the Malta Gaming Authority (MGA) impose stringent rules on their licensees to prevent exactly this type of behavior. Their mandates on Responsible Gambling are clear: protect players from harm with proactive tools like deposit limits and self-exclusion, not create retroactive barriers to paying legitimate wins.
Under these premier regulators, a company that used a player’s potential vulnerability as leverage to withhold funds would face:
- Severe financial penalties
- Potential license suspension
- Public censure and reputation damage
- Mandatory remediation for affected players
The Curaçao Problem
This accountability is precisely what is missing when dealing with an operator licensed in a jurisdiction known for weak oversight, like Curaçao, where 1xBet is primarily registered. Curaçao’s licensing regime has long been criticized for:
- Minimal oversight of operator behavior
- Weak enforcement of player protection standards
- Limited recourse for player complaints
- Lack of meaningful penalties for misconduct
Why This Matters Beyond 1xBet
While this specific allegation involves 1xBet, it represents a broader pattern of concerning behavior from offshore operators who operate with minimal regulatory oversight. The tactics may vary, but the goal remains the same: find any excuse to avoid paying winning players.
Common Offshore Operator Tactics
- Endless Verification Loops: Constantly requesting new documentation
- Terms and Conditions Violations: Retroactively finding rule violations
- Technical Issues: Claiming system problems prevent withdrawals
- Account Restrictions: Limiting or closing accounts without clear justification
- Medical Documentation: Now potentially including this new addiction claim tactic
The Player’s Bottom Line: A Universal Warning
This situation with 1xBet is more than just an isolated complaint; it’s a case study in the inherent risks of the unregulated online gambling world. The lesson for players everywhere is clear:
Essential Due Diligence
Verify the License: Before you bet, ensure the operator is licensed by a credible authority recognized and respected in your country, state, or province. The safety of your funds depends on it.
Heed the Warnings: A history of withdrawal complaints is the single biggest red flag. The betting community’s collective experience on independent forums is an invaluable research tool.
Research Regulatory Standing: Check if the operator has been sanctioned, fined, or banned in other jurisdictions.
Red Flags to Avoid
- Operators licensed only in weak regulatory jurisdictions
- Platforms with consistent withdrawal complaint patterns
- Sites that advertise aggressively but have poor customer service
- Any operator requesting unusual personal or medical documentation
What Players Can Do
If You’re Already Affected
- Document Everything: Screenshot all communications and demands
- Seek Legal Advice: Consult with lawyers familiar with online gambling disputes
- Report to Authorities: File complaints with relevant gambling regulators
- Share Your Experience: Warn other players through reviews and forums
If You’re Considering 1xBet
Don’t. The evidence of problematic behavior is overwhelming. Choose regulated alternatives that offer genuine player protection.
Choosing Safe Alternatives
Look for operators licensed by:
- UK Gambling Commission (Great Britain)
- Malta Gaming Authority (EU)
- Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (Canada)
- New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement (US)
- Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission (Australia)
The Bigger Picture
The alleged tactic of demanding medical certificates to prove the absence of gambling addiction represents a new low in offshore operator behavior. It weaponizes a serious public health issue and turns responsible gambling measures into tools of player exploitation.
This case serves as a stark reminder that in the world of offshore gambling, the regulatory framework meant to protect players is often absent or ineffective. Players must protect themselves through careful operator selection and thorough due diligence.
Conclusion
Ultimately, this case serves as a stark and cautionary tale for a global audience: with many offshore operators, the biggest gamble isn’t on the game, but on whether you’ll ever get paid.
The 1xBet addiction certificate demand, if proven true, represents not just a violation of player trust, but a fundamental perversion of responsible gambling principles. It’s a reminder that when choosing where to bet, the license and regulatory oversight matter more than promotional offers or odds.
Remember: Your winnings are only as safe as the regulator overseeing your chosen operator. Choose wisely.
Have you experienced similar tactics from 1xBet or other offshore operators? Share your story to help protect other players from these predatory practices.