| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... 16:46 - May 27 with 11716 views | Zx1988 |
Only the f**king CEO of Sky Betting and Gaming.
Shameful. [Post edited 27 May 2023 17:04]
|  |
| |  |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 10:46 - May 31 with 1291 views | unbelievablue |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 10:29 - May 31 by The_Romford_Blue |
As you know, I myself found an angle on the table tennis a few years ago. Only lasted a week but it was risk free. Basically sat watching Bet365s feed which was 15 seconds ahead of Skybets odds. So you could bet the person to win specific games at 10-9 up when they were in fact 11-9 victors. Within a week it was blocked and me and some mates I’d told about it got our accounts closed but despite one email suggesting the police could be informed, they were surely bitter about the £63k we took off them between 11 of us.
A few days later they retracted the police suggestion and seemed legitimately sour about the money. They had no proof and it was their own fault to allow us to do it by not realising they were behind another bookmaker with their feed.
Upon then closing my account, I had to get it in writing from them that they would honour my antepost bets with them for the following years Cheltenham. I think that’s important because had I forgotten about those bets, they’d have never have paid out even after a couple won. That’s poor from them. But it’s a good example of them trying to harm a winning punter.
Obviously the best legitimate example I can think of that wasn’t from something like that is Betway restricting me to £1.80 maximum bets. Awful. Because I win. They being able to ban winning customers affectively is a disgrace. [Post edited 31 May 2023 10:32]
|
Fair play to you for finding that angle, and there is much worse that goes on in terms of market manipulation at much higher levels.
Sincere question - were you annoyed that they were annoyed? |  |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 10:51 - May 31 with 1288 views | unbelievablue |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 10:24 - May 31 by The_Romford_Blue |
Like J2, I’m someone working in the industry and I think the issue many of us have is that gambling issues very much tend to be on the machines.
In fact, I’ve literally never had someone self exclude or someone I’ve thought needs to take a break from betting ‘over the counter’. It’s always the FOBT machines. And I have been the same on here for years (even before I started working for the other side) that the FOBTs are a real issue. I said on here maybe 6/7 years ago if I had my way, FOBTs would be heavily restricted. And I’d also have set limits for each customer before they come in the shop that they can’t override. Obviously they’ll then try to go to another shop but that 10/15 minute gap will give them time to clear their head and think rationally. The importance of ‘take a break’ can’t be stressed enough with those machines.
But the problem I have is that FOBTs and horse betting seem to be thrown in together in the white paper. That’s not right at all. There must be real focus and awareness on the issues around gambling but also not drastic measures that will impact people like me who have no issue with gambling and would never touch a FOBT. The white paper making me have to show my bank statement for a £125 loss on a bet is absolutely insane. And that’s it I can even get on in the first place with my student loan counting as a debt. It’s madness. |
Thousands of people are addicted to horse racing, whether it be over the counter bets or online. I think using personal anecdotal evidence there isn't quite right, Rommers. I'm tempted to counter with my own anecdotal evidence but that would be hypocritical.
Granted, FOBT are worse, there are studies to this end, but equally if you think Horse racing and FOBT shouldn't be 'thrown in together' then there needs to be an acknowledgement that racing can be addictive and ruinous too. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 10:57 - May 31 with 1277 views | J2BLUE |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 10:51 - May 31 by unbelievablue |
Thousands of people are addicted to horse racing, whether it be over the counter bets or online. I think using personal anecdotal evidence there isn't quite right, Rommers. I'm tempted to counter with my own anecdotal evidence but that would be hypocritical.
Granted, FOBT are worse, there are studies to this end, but equally if you think Horse racing and FOBT shouldn't be 'thrown in together' then there needs to be an acknowledgement that racing can be addictive and ruinous too. |
Anything involving gambling can be ruinous. Even the lottery or scratch cards.
All we are saying is FOBTs are the largest part of the problem by far. It is frightening how quickly you can lose money on them. On the Betfair forum there is a thread full of horror stories. |  |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:00 - May 31 with 1272 views | unbelievablue |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 10:57 - May 31 by J2BLUE |
Anything involving gambling can be ruinous. Even the lottery or scratch cards.
All we are saying is FOBTs are the largest part of the problem by far. It is frightening how quickly you can lose money on them. On the Betfair forum there is a thread full of horror stories. |
Agreed, and if I was looking at legislation, help, etc. then I'd stick to FOBTs primarily in the first instance.
But Rommers said:
"In fact, I’ve literally never had someone self exclude or someone I’ve thought needs to take a break from betting ‘over the counter’."
That might be his lived experience but it is not ubiquitous. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:03 - May 31 with 1250 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:00 - May 31 by unbelievablue |
Agreed, and if I was looking at legislation, help, etc. then I'd stick to FOBTs primarily in the first instance.
But Rommers said:
"In fact, I’ve literally never had someone self exclude or someone I’ve thought needs to take a break from betting ‘over the counter’."
That might be his lived experience but it is not ubiquitous. |
Ok but I’m speaking as someone in a betting shop. I can get you the numbers right now in work.
We’ve had 38 people exclude in the last 12 months. All of which were FOBT players. 0 were sports. That’s facts. That’s not anecdotal, that is a fact.
Edit - And I only say this because the white paper is focused on sports bettors when 95% of the problem is the FOBT machines. That’s why I have objections to it. [Post edited 31 May 2023 11:09]
|  |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:04 - May 31 with 1248 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 10:46 - May 31 by unbelievablue |
Fair play to you for finding that angle, and there is much worse that goes on in terms of market manipulation at much higher levels.
Sincere question - were you annoyed that they were annoyed? |
Not at all. I knew all along they’d shut the account.
My issue is that had I not pointed out my antepost bets to them, they’d have kept my stakes for those bets yet to settled for another 6 months. That’s not fair | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:12 - May 31 with 1226 views | unbelievablue |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:03 - May 31 by The_Romford_Blue |
Ok but I’m speaking as someone in a betting shop. I can get you the numbers right now in work.
We’ve had 38 people exclude in the last 12 months. All of which were FOBT players. 0 were sports. That’s facts. That’s not anecdotal, that is a fact.
Edit - And I only say this because the white paper is focused on sports bettors when 95% of the problem is the FOBT machines. That’s why I have objections to it. [Post edited 31 May 2023 11:09]
|
I suspect most who are addicted to horses are betting online, so perhaps you're right in terms of those who self-exclude in shops are primarily or exclusively FOBT users.
I'm not throwing this in as evidence, so to speak, but here is my experience FWIW:
I spent days on days on days in betting shops throwing money at horses until I had none left, and I saw plenty of blokes do similar, leaving with head in hands and back the next day or week for more. It might have been a product of where I was betting (an area of Leeds with users who loved racing, and FOBTs were maybe less prevalent in 2010/11?) but honestly, I saw people ruining their lives daily betting on horses. I don't think its fair to suggest it doesn't happen. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:14 - May 31 with 1222 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 10:37 - May 31 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Indeed. If someone has managed to 'beat the bookies' then fair play to them. I'm sure there are plenty who don't, to make up for it. It should be a level playing field. Refusing to take bets because someone's too successful is akin to taking your ball home because you're losing that particular game. Pathetic. |
Oh it’s absolutely not the norm to be a profitable punter. It’s factually 2%. Albeit a high amount of punters do just football accumulators etc so would always be losing.
But there are a small 2% of us that make profit. That’s from the time studying a race card, pricing it up ourselves etc. Both of which aren’t traits of punters who become addicted. I could legitimately tell you of at least 3 Friday nights this year at Romford dogs where I’ve priced up an entire card for later in the week and then when the other bookies price it up, have a grand total of 0 bets. Probably 10 hours work for 0 bets staked. That’s what makes people make a profit. To the extent that now I can’t actually bet dogs with a few firms because they have access to my P/L for every sport. It’s very unfair and very much slanted in favour of the bookies. But there is a tiny tiny percent that do make money from it | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:19 - May 31 with 1214 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:12 - May 31 by unbelievablue |
I suspect most who are addicted to horses are betting online, so perhaps you're right in terms of those who self-exclude in shops are primarily or exclusively FOBT users.
I'm not throwing this in as evidence, so to speak, but here is my experience FWIW:
I spent days on days on days in betting shops throwing money at horses until I had none left, and I saw plenty of blokes do similar, leaving with head in hands and back the next day or week for more. It might have been a product of where I was betting (an area of Leeds with users who loved racing, and FOBTs were maybe less prevalent in 2010/11?) but honestly, I saw people ruining their lives daily betting on horses. I don't think its fair to suggest it doesn't happen. |
Firstly - sorry to hear that.
I’m not trying to say it doesn’t happen. But just that the white paper is aimed at all betting, almost even more so at over the counter betting compared to the FOBTs when there’s definitely in shops now 10 times more problems with FOBTs than over the counter.
I couldn’t really tell you about online numbers but I’m just going from my shop and the other shops in the area. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:19 - May 31 with 1212 views | unbelievablue |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:19 - May 31 by The_Romford_Blue |
Firstly - sorry to hear that.
I’m not trying to say it doesn’t happen. But just that the white paper is aimed at all betting, almost even more so at over the counter betting compared to the FOBTs when there’s definitely in shops now 10 times more problems with FOBTs than over the counter.
I couldn’t really tell you about online numbers but I’m just going from my shop and the other shops in the area. |
No worries, years without it now and all for the better (no pun intended).
I will give the white paper a re-read. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:31 - May 31 with 1195 views | J2BLUE |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:12 - May 31 by unbelievablue |
I suspect most who are addicted to horses are betting online, so perhaps you're right in terms of those who self-exclude in shops are primarily or exclusively FOBT users.
I'm not throwing this in as evidence, so to speak, but here is my experience FWIW:
I spent days on days on days in betting shops throwing money at horses until I had none left, and I saw plenty of blokes do similar, leaving with head in hands and back the next day or week for more. It might have been a product of where I was betting (an area of Leeds with users who loved racing, and FOBTs were maybe less prevalent in 2010/11?) but honestly, I saw people ruining their lives daily betting on horses. I don't think its fair to suggest it doesn't happen. |
Sorry to hear about that.
Completely agree that it can happen. Chopra betting on Brazilian football is another example. I certainly don’t mean to downplay the fact experience of anyone who has had problems with sports betting. I’m also not suggesting there should not be any checks and safeguards when it comes to sports but we could clean up the industry so easily with some targeted reforms. Personally I don’t think you should be allowed to use a FOBT without some sort of log in. Once you lost £100 you have a one hour cooling off period. Just having to leave the shop/come out of the moment online would save so many people chasing. The red mist is very real and with online casino games it can be lethal. At £25 per hand (a moderate stake) you can lose a lot very quickly. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:37 - May 31 with 1190 views | Herbivore |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 09:28 - May 31 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
I agree they should be taxed and the proceeds used to treat gambling addiction- I’ve known addicts in the family and it’s incredibly destructive.
BUT unlike drugs, gambling addiction is largely a localised promblem, it’s not funding/exporting crime, murder, and war to another countries and funding terrorism. |
Don't those wider harms from drugs occur precisely because it is criminalised rather than legal and properly regulated? When gambling was (and still is in some places) similarly prohibited it was run by organised criminal gangs much in the same way the drug trade is. |  |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:43 - May 31 with 1168 views | Herbivore |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 10:57 - May 31 by J2BLUE |
Anything involving gambling can be ruinous. Even the lottery or scratch cards.
All we are saying is FOBTs are the largest part of the problem by far. It is frightening how quickly you can lose money on them. On the Betfair forum there is a thread full of horror stories. |
I think, going back to using drugs as a comparison, FOBT are like crystal meth or smack and as you said in your earlier post require very tight regulation. That doesn't mean that other forms of gambling (or drugs) aren't also harmful to some people and should be free of regulation. If you think about some of the high profile cases of footballers being addicted to gambling, most of them were betting on sports primarily so sports betting is problematic if less so than FOBT. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:45 - May 31 with 1159 views | Ryorry |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:31 - May 31 by J2BLUE |
Sorry to hear about that.
Completely agree that it can happen. Chopra betting on Brazilian football is another example. I certainly don’t mean to downplay the fact experience of anyone who has had problems with sports betting. I’m also not suggesting there should not be any checks and safeguards when it comes to sports but we could clean up the industry so easily with some targeted reforms. Personally I don’t think you should be allowed to use a FOBT without some sort of log in. Once you lost £100 you have a one hour cooling off period. Just having to leave the shop/come out of the moment online would save so many people chasing. The red mist is very real and with online casino games it can be lethal. At £25 per hand (a moderate stake) you can lose a lot very quickly. |
Reading all these horror stories enables me to understand why, for the last six months, my email junk folder has been swamped with on average 30-50 spam/phishing emails daily, with jazzy emojis from firms begging me to join their casinos (Crown are the worst culprits). Probably an address list hacked off bookies, as I’ve never put on a casino bet in my life.
I always report them as spam/phishing but apart from a 24hr break occasionally, nothing stops them. |  |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:45 - May 31 with 1158 views | Herbivore |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:03 - May 31 by The_Romford_Blue |
Ok but I’m speaking as someone in a betting shop. I can get you the numbers right now in work.
We’ve had 38 people exclude in the last 12 months. All of which were FOBT players. 0 were sports. That’s facts. That’s not anecdotal, that is a fact.
Edit - And I only say this because the white paper is focused on sports bettors when 95% of the problem is the FOBT machines. That’s why I have objections to it. [Post edited 31 May 2023 11:09]
|
That is the very definition of anecdotal since it's based purely on your own experience. It doesn't take account of what's happening in thousands of other betting shops or, and this is more likely to be where it's taking place, online. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 12:16 - May 31 with 1120 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:45 - May 31 by Herbivore |
That is the very definition of anecdotal since it's based purely on your own experience. It doesn't take account of what's happening in thousands of other betting shops or, and this is more likely to be where it's taking place, online. |
I did say I was referring to the white papers stuff about shops tbf. The online stuff is a virtually separate argument.
I can tell you in every shop I’ve worked in, it’s 99% FOBT punters that self excuse. I’m not saying there aren’t people doing their brains on sports betting but that in shops, it is factually more FOBTs. You can call that anecdotal, but I’d call it factual as someone in the industry. I’m primarily here for my horse racing and dogs knowledge but I can spot problem punters a mile off. And the issues are those machines. As I said the other day, it becomes tunnel vision for them. Very quickly it’s numbers on a screen rather than money. Whereas at least over the counter you’re physically departing with cash which I do think plays a part. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 12:35 - May 31 with 1111 views | bluelagos |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 12:16 - May 31 by The_Romford_Blue |
I did say I was referring to the white papers stuff about shops tbf. The online stuff is a virtually separate argument.
I can tell you in every shop I’ve worked in, it’s 99% FOBT punters that self excuse. I’m not saying there aren’t people doing their brains on sports betting but that in shops, it is factually more FOBTs. You can call that anecdotal, but I’d call it factual as someone in the industry. I’m primarily here for my horse racing and dogs knowledge but I can spot problem punters a mile off. And the issues are those machines. As I said the other day, it becomes tunnel vision for them. Very quickly it’s numbers on a screen rather than money. Whereas at least over the counter you’re physically departing with cash which I do think plays a part. |
Some interesting points being made - and without the usual sniping which is good.
My view - and challenge - is that absolutely most problem gamblers will go for the FOTBs - that's just the ease of placing bets - quick returns (or more likely losses)
So we all seem to agree these should be tightened up - but let's say you do that - then what? Surely a problem gambler without access to the easy FOTB bets will then move on to other forms of gambling?
Whether that is online casinos or horse racing am not sure - but addressing the ease of betting with FOTBs shouldn't be seen as a solution - for me it is a necessary step but all forms of gambling need to be tightened up.
What scares me most of all is just how normalised betting has become. Lads in pub, open phone, place bets - without a care in the world. And plenty of them aren't doing any analysis - just how many corners / red card type bets - all encouraged by the half term adverts.
In one respect - so what? It's their choice right. But when it does harm then it becomes a far bigger issue...
Bit of a ramble - but I really think the access to and advertising for gambling needs to properly tightened up. |  |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 12:47 - May 31 with 1096 views | Ryorry |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 12:35 - May 31 by bluelagos |
Some interesting points being made - and without the usual sniping which is good.
My view - and challenge - is that absolutely most problem gamblers will go for the FOTBs - that's just the ease of placing bets - quick returns (or more likely losses)
So we all seem to agree these should be tightened up - but let's say you do that - then what? Surely a problem gambler without access to the easy FOTB bets will then move on to other forms of gambling?
Whether that is online casinos or horse racing am not sure - but addressing the ease of betting with FOTBs shouldn't be seen as a solution - for me it is a necessary step but all forms of gambling need to be tightened up.
What scares me most of all is just how normalised betting has become. Lads in pub, open phone, place bets - without a care in the world. And plenty of them aren't doing any analysis - just how many corners / red card type bets - all encouraged by the half term adverts.
In one respect - so what? It's their choice right. But when it does harm then it becomes a far bigger issue...
Bit of a ramble - but I really think the access to and advertising for gambling needs to properly tightened up. |
No use speculating on "what ifs" tho Lagos, and as FOBTs are the biggest evil by a country mile right now, the need is to deal with them first.
Then tighten up the web with policing if necessary to slam down hard on the wild west of the internet which allows casino firms to spam me up to 50x daily with alluring, jazzy "offers". Block the b*ggers, with jail time for serial offenders. It gets to the point where even I have a 000.05 temptation to join, just to stop the onslaught of emails, which is actually quite wearying & grinds you down. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 13:18 - May 31 with 1074 views | bluelagos |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 12:47 - May 31 by Ryorry |
No use speculating on "what ifs" tho Lagos, and as FOBTs are the biggest evil by a country mile right now, the need is to deal with them first.
Then tighten up the web with policing if necessary to slam down hard on the wild west of the internet which allows casino firms to spam me up to 50x daily with alluring, jazzy "offers". Block the b*ggers, with jail time for serial offenders. It gets to the point where even I have a 000.05 temptation to join, just to stop the onslaught of emails, which is actually quite wearying & grinds you down. |
Am not objecting to tightening the rules on FOTBs
My issue is very much "Is that it?" - and experience tells us that these things only get properly looked at (in terms of regulation/laws) every few years.
So I can see a scenario where we tighten up on FOTBs, listen to the betting industry and water down all the other measures - and then things carry on pretty much as now only a few problem gamblers simply move to another form of gambling - and it takes another x years before we revisit the issue...
If we all agree that some people (problem gamblers) need help and protecting from themselves - then lets do all we can to help them (and prevent future addicts) - and if that means the betting industry gets a bit upset - that's a price well worth paying imho | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 13:38 - May 31 with 1062 views | MattinLondon |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 13:18 - May 31 by bluelagos |
Am not objecting to tightening the rules on FOTBs
My issue is very much "Is that it?" - and experience tells us that these things only get properly looked at (in terms of regulation/laws) every few years.
So I can see a scenario where we tighten up on FOTBs, listen to the betting industry and water down all the other measures - and then things carry on pretty much as now only a few problem gamblers simply move to another form of gambling - and it takes another x years before we revisit the issue...
If we all agree that some people (problem gamblers) need help and protecting from themselves - then lets do all we can to help them (and prevent future addicts) - and if that means the betting industry gets a bit upset - that's a price well worth paying imho |
Pardon my ignorance but what are FOTBs? |  | | |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 14:04 - May 31 with 1042 views | J2BLUE |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 13:38 - May 31 by MattinLondon |
Pardon my ignorance but what are FOTBs? |
Fixed odds betting terminals
Think casino games and slots. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 14:10 - May 31 with 1028 views | J2BLUE |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 11:43 - May 31 by Herbivore |
I think, going back to using drugs as a comparison, FOBT are like crystal meth or smack and as you said in your earlier post require very tight regulation. That doesn't mean that other forms of gambling (or drugs) aren't also harmful to some people and should be free of regulation. If you think about some of the high profile cases of footballers being addicted to gambling, most of them were betting on sports primarily so sports betting is problematic if less so than FOBT. |
I have gone out of my way to say exactly that. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 14:12 - May 31 with 1020 views | MattinLondon |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 14:04 - May 31 by J2BLUE |
Fixed odds betting terminals
Think casino games and slots. |
Someone I went to uni with used to put his mobile on top of a slot machine and used to swear that this helped him to win…it very rarely did. | | | |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 14:22 - May 31 with 1014 views | J2BLUE |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 12:35 - May 31 by bluelagos |
Some interesting points being made - and without the usual sniping which is good.
My view - and challenge - is that absolutely most problem gamblers will go for the FOTBs - that's just the ease of placing bets - quick returns (or more likely losses)
So we all seem to agree these should be tightened up - but let's say you do that - then what? Surely a problem gambler without access to the easy FOTB bets will then move on to other forms of gambling?
Whether that is online casinos or horse racing am not sure - but addressing the ease of betting with FOTBs shouldn't be seen as a solution - for me it is a necessary step but all forms of gambling need to be tightened up.
What scares me most of all is just how normalised betting has become. Lads in pub, open phone, place bets - without a care in the world. And plenty of them aren't doing any analysis - just how many corners / red card type bets - all encouraged by the half term adverts.
In one respect - so what? It's their choice right. But when it does harm then it becomes a far bigger issue...
Bit of a ramble - but I really think the access to and advertising for gambling needs to properly tightened up. |
I don't wish to snipe but a big part of the problem is that people want to attack gambling so once this thread dies and gambling is mentiioned again the same attacks will come and people will ignore everything we've said. At a minimum, Rommers, Ryorry and myself have made these points repeatedly.
Another problem I have is you saying things like this:
So we all seem to agree these should be tightened up - but let's say you do that - then what? Surely a problem gambler without access to the easy FOTB bets will then move on to other forms of gambling?
To me that is just going in with bias and looking for a reason to attack the entire industry. Apologies if that sounds harsh but to give a comparison it's like saying a heroin addict might smoke some weed if they can't get heroin or a hardcore gin alcoholic might switch to beer. Problematic? Yes but clearly not the biggest problem and most people can enjoy a beer without any problem. Our points have been taken on board for the duration of this thread but I strongly suspect they will be forgotten as soon as possible.
People who want sports betting to be under extremely tight regulations are just helping the bookies. They would love more monitoring of accounts and to be able to ban anyone who wins even earlier. That's all they will use it for. They will take all the sports betting controls you can throw at them but they will fight everything when it comes to casino/FOBTs.
It's fashionable to attack gambling. I don't believe most of you would accept solving 95% of the problem with FOBT/casino restrictions because it's a witchhunt.
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying you have no good points. Stopping bookmaker ads during sporting events, stopping gambling sponsors etc are all things I would support. But I don't believe this is about solving the problem for most people. It's about completely decimating the industry.
Apologies if that seems harsh but I haven't seen anything to suggest i'm wrong. Next time gambling comes up I will wait for the same posters to make the same arguments we've answered and I will link to this thread. | |
| |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 14:27 - May 31 with 999 views | J2BLUE |
| 'Guest of honour' at the Championship play-off final... on 14:12 - May 31 by MattinLondon |
Someone I went to uni with used to put his mobile on top of a slot machine and used to swear that this helped him to win…it very rarely did. |
There are all sorts of ridiculous ideas when it comes to beating slots/fruit machines.
Another thing that amazes me is how many people still use the martingale system. The other day a customer (of where I work) asked me if he should play on after losing something like £117. That's where it's frightening. Cigarettes have to have a health warning. I would like to see casino games have a warning that over the long term you WILL lose and that they should be played for entertainment purposes only with money you an easily afford to lose.
Try proposing that one and seeing how hard the bookies fight it! Propose they get to go through your statements if you lose £125 on sports and they will be all for it. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
