|
By:
This is the stupidity of all the affordability checking for sports betting - while still allowing all this casino rubbish to be constantly promoted to the heavens, on TV all the fecking time!
|
|
By:
Of course, as well as the physical versions which this article is highlighting...
|
|
By:
Read this article in The Guardian today and quite shocking really when you hear of these 24 hours a day places. All these bodies such as the Gambling Commission can only be considered as just a joke when you hear stories such as this.
|
|
By:
I'll never believe anyone who tries to say that casino (luck only) gambling is the same, or less dangerous, in comparing to sports betting.
It is a crack cocaine form of gambling, when you can pump in bets endlessly and very quickly, with programmed machines designed to hook you into the experiences. |
|
By:
Casino including slots of course.
|
|
By:
Sshh stu. Keep it to yourself, or somebody might realise that none of the "bookmakers" are bookmakers.
|
|
By:
These slots with premium play look funking awful. Roulette staking requiring each £2 spin to drop in a green sliver of a pie can lose hundreds in minutes and then the roulette spin can lose as well. There is a you tube video of Rainbow Lobster Pots premium play which lost 88 £2 spins on the trot. The premium play is misrepresented at three reels with a 1in2 chance of winning, so 2x2x2=8. Don't know how that can be allowed as the guaranteed win is 20x so clearly misrepresented odds.
|
|
By:
Storm Alert.
Was wondering why all Corals shop windows are full of lobster pot posters.. Hope you are well. Ronnie. |
|
By:
Without the machines you'd have been out of a job 20 years ago Ronnie.
Consider yoursen lucky in that respect regards |
|
By:
2 licenses. one bookmaker, one casino.
been telling them / you this for years, as usual no cnt listens to the Hulk. shame, cos if they had they'd be a lot better off (18,000/1 6 timer, 10/1 2 plaice double boosha)Best Eva ![]() |
|
By:
all these new cnts, they get a "bookmakers" licence then shut down any fkr that wants a "proper" old school bet. tenner on a horse etc.
turn themselves into casino (guaranteed win) only outlets. |
|
By:
phone a bet, dial a bet, monster bet, bet uk, bet purple, bet fkng this, bet fkng that ...
all hard fkng at it, won't lay you an egg. have you tried the casino ?? on yer bike ffs ![]() ![]() |
|
By:
I went into a bookies shop in Addlestone last Wednesday afternoon, baldys, 5 people in the shop, 4 on the slots and I was the only one watching a live race. One guy appeared to have his head on the machine and looked asleep
|
|
By:
that's par for the course i'm afraid. 20/30 years ago these places were a hive of activity.
now they're dead. as a dodo. (ronnie be on soon telling us he had 575 people in the shop yesterday and took half a mill over the counter. all smoke and mirrors) |
|
By:
same as *ports laying someone £100k every Royal Ascot
can set your watch by the lying cnts. every year, same old yadda yadda from them. open an account up with them you'll be history within a day. that's how fearless they are. |
|
By:
This is the legacy of the gambling review.
The machines have moved from betting shops to 24/7 arcades, casinos and bingo halls, where addicts can access them more easily. Punters lose their rights to financial privacy, and their right to decide to bet with their own money. Gambling charities, research academics, safer gambling departments and the companies who carry out ‘frictionless’ checks all now get a slice of the pie too, at the expense of the casual punter who now faces higher margins, less offers, no BOG, and all the other things that probably helped keep their betting ‘safe’ being removed. Smaller independent betting companies will likely go under, horse and greyhound racing loses huge slice of its funding. Everything else remains the same. Ridiculous. |
|
By:
My old man still goes in C0rals shops, he reckons the manager is a brown hatter because he keeps asking him if he wants a coffee!
|
|
By:
All eyes are on the punter wanting to beat the price, make a profit or bet more than their monthly allowance. Gambling Commission and bookies happy.
Meanwhile in the wild west saloon anything goes. Gambling Commission knows nothing about. Bookies happy. |
|
By:
Where are Just Stop Oil who disrupt the lives of people going to work? The damage of the crack cocaine of gambling is more immediate and destructive to individuals, families of individuals and societies affected.
Only a totally ignorant and/or blind person or entity can allow a 24-hr opening of slot machines on the high streets of the UK. Even casinos are not 24-hrs. |
|
By:
Sounds like a good thing to me. The prodnoses have found something new to get worked up about. Diverts attention from us.
All the best to Merkur. |
|
By:
they arent gambolling. they are giving it away and they can get on with it if they are that stupid. just demonstrates what an idiot this nation is. and the gambling commission, to use a tired over-used buzz-phrase, isnt fit for purpose and should be abolished
this became more of an issue because many women use these things. i asked my mp what why she had suddenly become so interested in this problem. she said she wanted to 'protect women and children' and was in favour of heavy restrictions on gambling, despite it being the most heavily regulated and highest tax-paying business in the uk. i tried to ask her if she was mp for gezzers also but she supid cow legged it, and jumped into her chauffer-driven motor 'crack cocaine' of gambling indeed. every time the same tired old cliched tripe turns up. crack cocaine is rubbish |
|
By:
The human brain is programmed to try and find patterns when they don't necessarily exist. FOBTs definitely use this to their advantage, with lots of close calls on losing spins appearing as nearly a big win, or nearly a bonus. It encourages players to keep playing and keep pumping money through.
Keep on playing and neuroplasticity will soon alter a brain, conditioning it to crave the dopamine kick which high speed risk/reward produce. Unfortunately the dopamine becoming less effective over time, requiring bigger risks (losses?) Once addicted, winning/ losing becomes secondary to feeding the craving. Very much like taking a recreational drug, I would have thought. 'Crack cocaine' is a very good analogy imo. Must be awful to be addicted to these things, much more difficult to manage than having several bets a day on the horses, where at least there is some 'cool down time' between races. |
|
By:
bollox. you tried crack?
if these things are so dangerous ban em altogether. casinos slots bingo arcades bookies irish lotto 49s scratchcards lottery. all gone they are heavily regulated already so if these things still do such harm they have to go |
|
By:
You are misunderstanding the analogy. There is no suggestion taking crack cocaine is similar to playing an FOBT. It is suggesting that crack cocaine is a highly addictive drug and comparing the addictiveness to gambling on an FOBT, which is highly addictive compared to other forms of gambling.
I agree they should go. The government ham-fisted attempts to regulate FOBT's to protect addicts is in danger of damaging horse racing by frightening off punters who object to the evasion of privacy, affordability checks can cause. |
|
By:
i was joking
they shouldnt go anywhere. you try and stop bingo or lotto or shut casinos. absurd notion why not issue ration cards based on income before you can buy a few bottles? |
|
By:
The sad reality is that hardly anybody in a position of power or in a position to do anything about it, has the first clue about the difference between gambling and gaming. Or even that there is a difference.
The small handful that did have a clue: a) Just lost their seats and b) were (indirectly) employed by "bookmakers" (casino/slots emporiums) anyway. This is why (pretendy) bookmakers will continue to risk destroying the gambling industry in their blatant pursuit of replacing it with gaming anyway. They are no longer interested in a target audience that consisted of almost entirely middle aged/old men and had very limited hours of play - they can now go after every demographic (including women and young people), absolutely all of the time (24/7). |
|
By:
they dont go after them. they provide something and people decide what to do with their time and money. its all heavily regulated so the only way to stop this is to ban the lot. is that ok?
women, for reasons unknown, or rather reasons i wont mention, love random number games. you see them in shops with reams of tickets on 49s heads and tails and similar nonsense. they also play bingo in large numbers. inexplicable to me but true. whos to decide they shouldnt be allowed play em? |
|
By:
If you think they are "heavily regulated"
- Just google the words "bookmaker fined". They have been barely regulated at all until very, very recently.As for "who's to decide" - no idea. I'm kind of with you that it's a personal choice - but when the (pretendy) bookmakers went all pro-active in generating and targeting addicts - they brought it on themselves (imo). So at that point i.e. this point - imo the "who's to decide" should be somebody that actually understands the subject matter - and as a starting point, that would be recognising the difference between gambling and gaming. |
|
By:
bookmakers were doing nothing illegal. and those bookmaker fines were entirely arbitrary and based on nothing other than the power to do so and wield a big stick. no legal precedent or laws broken that precsribed such penalties
they are regulated. and they didnt target addicts-these games were created by software firms who were partly an offshhoot from gaming companies and who sold the rights to them to the firms. similarly, with virtual racing-should that be banned, popular mad as it is? nor did they 'generate addicts' you sound like a conspiracist with such talk. and pro-active doesnt mean any more than active |
|
By:
I've done all this before with other people mitolo - I can't be bothered again.
Sending free-spins to people that have self-excluded is pretty pro-actively targeting people with a problem imo! Further to your earlier question "who's to decide" - I would apply this filter: Having watched the absolute ignorant (of the subject matter) buffoons that were somehow allowed to speak at that televised select committee meeting. If you'd had a bouncer on the door and in order to gain entry you first had to answer 1) What is the return on a £1 win double with winners at 2/1 and 3/1 and 2) Which comes first the Guineas or the Derby? The room would have been empty except for Philip Davies and his hideous wife Esther McVey, both of whom have had more hospitality (from bookmakers) than the entire cast of Casualty!. You might as well pick some people off the street ffs. |
|
By:
The funniest bit about that select committee meeting - a load of ignorant, out of touch old f4rts, took it in turns to stand up to speak - and all went with pretty much the same opening gambit:
"I don't profess to know much about this but......" then spoke for 30 minutes. "I'm no expert on this but ......" then spoke for 30 minutes. "My only experience in this matter, I remember as a young man having half a crown on the Grand National... spoke for 40 minutes. Yup, those are the people that will decide what happens next in the 21st Century gambling industry. |
|
By:
dont reply if you dont want to get into it again. no doubt someone else will on your behalf-maybe fromthe arse.
did they send free spins to those who had excluded themselves? might have happened by im sceptical it was common. i get em all the time and send em to a friend as i dont even know what to do with em random number generating games were made by firms like globecast and offered to the firms, who unsterstandably, accepted them, with a profit share. theyd have been daft not to, if others had. they didnt invent them i think you are too condemnatory of bookmakers-it was new thing and few predicted how they would take off. restrictions and affordability are what i blame them for. and the gc should go bingo is effectively the same as slots but doesnt attract the same condemnation. whys that? never heard of davies |
|
By:
@mitolo
"women... play bingo in large numbers. inexplicable to me but true." Bingo is a clever one. If you're sitting on an almost-full card, with one number missing, and someone gets it before you, you will feel like you "almost" won; the reality is there were still ~50 balls in the machine to come and you were getting excited about being on a 50/1 shot. And feeling like you "almost" won encourages you to play again (see also, the National Lottery). |
|
By:
would argue with that but being old is not something to hold against them
purely anecdotally this mob is going to be worse. my mp is a horror and an idiot |
|
By:
fazackerley- its the same as 'nearly' getting 3 plump pumpkins in a line only to be beaten by a raspberry getting in first
|
|
By:
Bingo is just the new "gateway" for (mostly) women to slots/casino.
If you don't believe me - go to the homepage of Gala Bingo ( which "proudly sponsors The Chase" at 5pm in the afternoon ffs). The homepage has one link to Bingo - and eighty links to slots games! |
|
By:
Foxy bingo (homepage) has a couple of links to Bingo and 144 (that's gross!) links to slots.
Eyes down for a house full of addicts. |
|
By:
888ladies where "every day is ladies day"
- only has 30 links to slots on their homepage. |
|
By:
theyve always played bingo. should bingo clubs restrict spending by being more severe on client spending on multiple cards?
thats not the point-whether they advertise other random number games is irrelevant as they are effectively the same as bingo anyway-but nobody goes on about bingo |