No-KYC is not the same as anonymous on-chain
No-KYC platforms are often described as anonymous, which is misleading. What they remove is the identity check at the front door, not the public record behind it. Every deposit and withdrawal on a transparent chain is visible to anyone who cares to look, and the address that funds a betting account is the same address that may hold other assets.
Chain analysis has become a mature industry. Firms cluster addresses, follow funds across bridges and exchanges, and sell the results to exchanges, banks and, in some jurisdictions, law enforcement. A bettor who sends funds directly from a known exchange withdrawal address to a betting contract has effectively signed the deposit. Even a fresh wallet can be linked if it is funded from a source that is already labelled.
This matters in the Netherlands and across the wider European market, where gambling regulators and tax authorities take an interest in offshore activity. Self-custodial, wallet-only books such as Dexsport avoid collecting personal data, but they cannot make a public ledger private. The distinction is between a platform that does not ask who you are and a chain that does not forget what you did.
Practical hygiene helps at the margin. Separating wallets, avoiding reuse of a main address and understanding that mixers are themselves flagged are all sensible. None of it amounts to anonymity. Bettors who want privacy should think in terms of what is proportionate and lawful for them, not what sounds like a technical guarantee.