| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? 16:20 - Feb 10 with 9076 views | TresBonne |
Interested in a debate over this purely because I have just met the former CEO of a gambling company at a talk he did, and I was a little shocked at how blaise he was about problem gambling and the issues surrounding his line of work.
His main argument really, and he couldn't let on too much over this because it was an 'ethics' talk (which I thought quite ironic in itself!), was that it is more the fault of the punter in the majority of cases and they should be taking more accountability for getting themselves there in the first place.
I just wonder what other people's opinions are on this? To be honest, I left the talk feeling a little sick over it. I didn't like the arrogance, smugness that he had. [Post edited 10 Feb 16:21]
|  | | |  |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 19:05 - Feb 10 with 1436 views | Swansea_Blue |
Another good reason to not have Facebook (or Twitter). |  |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 19:13 - Feb 10 with 1435 views | OldFart71 |
It is to easy to say it's the punters fault especially if someone is hooked. Just as people get hooked on drugs, smoking or even taking prescription drugs gambling is a drug and those that get hooked on it can't get off it without help. It has been said before that those that are even in debt to bookmakers or who are gambling more than they can afford are given free spins, free bets and even in the worst case scenario given special treatment at race meetings. A recent ITV racing chat between the various commentators, pundits was interesting because it highlighted the Governments problem with their recent introduction of bookies having to do various checks on their customers to ascertain whether what they were gambling they could afford. The problem was/is with this is that it tars everyone with the same brush and has deterred not those that cannot afford it, but high rollers who can. It's not how much you bet, it's how much you can afford to lose. Some can't afford to lose a tenner a week whereas some could quite easily lose £500 and not miss it. Also with regards to those that are say restricted on one gambling site what's stopping them from opening another account with another online bookie ? Absolutely nothing. I have known in my life people who when they were paid cash for the job they did to go straight from work to a bookies shop and lose it all. How many people are hooked on online bingo, scratch cards etc the problem is possibly larger than we know. |  | | |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 19:28 - Feb 10 with 1410 views | J2BLUE |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 18:51 - Feb 10 by JakeITFC |
I don’t disagree with the general principle (that is to say that bookies are scum) however I just think that I think the argument is stronger for measures that would actually help (no offers (or at least not the bombarding of advertising about them), no limiting accounts, online casinos being regulated much more etc.) from a position of genuine good faith rather than from those who are playing the bad guy but just from the punters side.
I am a genuine believer in the art and principle of bookmaking and I think we’ve got so far away from it that I worry it will be dead at some point quite soon. I’d much rather it was fixed than a few people being able to nick a few quid out of its rotting corpse. |
Each to their own but think you're talking complete rubbish. |  |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 19:31 - Feb 10 with 1408 views | tcblue |
Much like booze and cigarettes, I wonder how it would be regulated differently if it was 'new'.
It's an industry which deals in misery. Not just for humans, horse racing would die without betting, hardly anybody really goes to watch the actual sport | | | |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 19:37 - Feb 10 with 1387 views | KingsCrossBlue |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 19:28 - Feb 10 by J2BLUE |
Each to their own but think you're talking complete rubbish. |
Yeah Jake, I would have found a way to manipulate you in to placing a bet. The affiliate sector is a totally different conversation but one that is also hugely influential.
I really don’t know why we don’t reinstall the 9% (or increase to 20%) levy on bets. | | | |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 19:39 - Feb 10 with 1382 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 16:43 - Feb 10 by Mullet |
Sounds like the perfect type of scumbag who should be running a gambling company. No different to loan sharks, smack dealers and other predators. But legalised akin to the tobacco companies who used to target vulnerable groups intentionally.
I hate how ubiquitous gambling is in football and how normalised it is. |
‘No diffeeent to loan sharks, smack dealers and other predators’ is a ridiculous statement. |  |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 19:41 - Feb 10 with 1368 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 16:32 - Feb 10 by itfcjoe |
If all gambling companies allowed punters to place all their bets with them then I'd have a bit more sympathy - but they only want 'mug punters' who lose every week following their offers.
Win too much and your account gets shut, bet too smartly and lose then your account gets shut.
It's a one sided industry designed to take money of people. |
Can only speak for my firm but we’d limit punters who are winning big rather than close. Or limit things that they are gaining from that are added extras such as best odds guaranteed.
As for the stuff regarding gambling issues, we do a huge amount of stuff to protect customers from harm. At some point though, they do also need to take some accountability.
If they’ve got £100 left in the world and are putting it into our site, is that on us? I’m not sure it is. | |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 19:45 - Feb 10 with 1347 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 16:59 - Feb 10 by J2BLUE |
They have multiple different algorithms. If you place 5 £20 bets over one week on horses who then go off at a shorter price you are considered to be 'taking value' and you will find yourself restricted.
I keep my accounts open a lot longer than average based on what I have learnt but eventually they get you.
A few years ago I noticed NetBet had higher prices on very short odds bets. I was making £3-4 per bet and there were 3-4 opportunities each day. I was going all in while laying off at the exchange for a guaranteed profit. I thought they will never restrict me because i'm smashing short prices and they can see I will eventually lose every time. A week later they restricted me to £4.50. They would rather restrict anyone who can make a profit even if over a year I would have lost tens of thousands to them all while securing my profit on the exchange. |
Again can only speak for my firm but we’d be able to tell within 10 bets of your account being open you are arbing.
Accounts that we would close are arbers and we have the technology in place to see who’s almost certainly arbing. And those accounts are closed and rightly so. And most of them would know that’s fair enough and move onto the next site. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 19:50 - Feb 10 with 1312 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 16:52 - Feb 10 by J2BLUE |
This is very common.
They hate smart bettors who use things like matched betting, arbing and just generally have some sort of edge. The head of StarSports did an interview where he basically called matched bettors scum. Geoff Banks, the now employer of a famous TWTD gambler, is open about how much he hates matched bettors etc.
They just want mugs. If you lose money they will send you more offers. If you lose money on slots and show you cannot control yourself they will send you free spins.
They take every advantage they can. They have now embraced affordability checks which sounds good but they are mainly weaponised against anyone who makes a profit.
The entire bookmaker industry badly needs regulating and made fairer for the user. If they put a price up they should have to take £100 from anyone on that selection.
It's the ultimate legal grift. |
Tbf to Geoff, if you aren’t an arber, we will lay you a proper bet. | |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 19:52 - Feb 10 with 1306 views | Mullet |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 19:39 - Feb 10 by The_Romford_Blue |
‘No diffeeent to loan sharks, smack dealers and other predators’ is a ridiculous statement. |
Seen people who lose everything to gambling? Or the coverage of gambling addiction in recent years for that matter?
Happy to hear you explain the difference to us all. |  |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 19:52 - Feb 10 with 1302 views | J2BLUE |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 19:45 - Feb 10 by The_Romford_Blue |
Again can only speak for my firm but we’d be able to tell within 10 bets of your account being open you are arbing.
Accounts that we would close are arbers and we have the technology in place to see who’s almost certainly arbing. And those accounts are closed and rightly so. And most of them would know that’s fair enough and move onto the next site. |
I keep my accounts open much longer than average. I learnt a lot from a book on card counting where they got caught. They then changed their tactics to do the same but blend in more and still make a profit but not quite as much. After 10 years matched betting I know every trick in the book now.
I will likely sign up with your first before Cheltenham if that cashback on losses sign up offer is still on. | |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 19:55 - Feb 10 with 1283 views | J2BLUE |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 19:50 - Feb 10 by The_Romford_Blue |
Tbf to Geoff, if you aren’t an arber, we will lay you a proper bet. |
Limiting to board prices and restricting stake seems to be his preferred tactic. | |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 20:09 - Feb 10 with 1250 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 19:55 - Feb 10 by J2BLUE |
Limiting to board prices and restricting stake seems to be his preferred tactic. |
Well yes if you’re arbing.
If you’re winning fair and square, we won’t do anything other than restricting stake (still to a reasonable amount to win 4-figures) or removing best odds guaranteed.
There’s many things that can be criticised but not laying a fair bet isn’t one of our weaknesses imo | |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 20:13 - Feb 10 with 1226 views | J2BLUE |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 20:09 - Feb 10 by The_Romford_Blue |
Well yes if you’re arbing.
If you’re winning fair and square, we won’t do anything other than restricting stake (still to a reasonable amount to win 4-figures) or removing best odds guaranteed.
There’s many things that can be criticised but not laying a fair bet isn’t one of our weaknesses imo |
They're not arbing as far as I know. They are taking prices hours in advance though which do almost always shorten which is the problem. | |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 20:14 - Feb 10 with 1218 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 19:52 - Feb 10 by Mullet |
Seen people who lose everything to gambling? Or the coverage of gambling addiction in recent years for that matter?
Happy to hear you explain the difference to us all. |
I’ve worked in the industry for 6 years now. In 2 shops and now make the odds for a firm with tens of thousands of customers.
So yes I obviously have seen gambling addiction first hand. Customers with any signs of gambling issues are called up. We will also require checks made on finances so they can only lose what they can afford. And any sign of gambling issue and they’re taken off all marketing emails etc.
Only once someone in the responsible gambling team has spoke to them first hand AND we’ve seen further proof that they’re losing an acceptable amount to what themselves and the gambling commission agree to, will we then let them continue betting.
To suggest people like myself are no better than loan sharks or predators or heroin dealers is both completely unfair and also somewhat misinformed. There’s a massive difference between professional firms such as ours and those shoddy casino sites registered overseas doing all they can to target those truly vulnerable. To tar us all in with the same brush isn’t right. | |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 20:16 - Feb 10 with 1211 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 20:13 - Feb 10 by J2BLUE |
They're not arbing as far as I know. They are taking prices hours in advance though which do almost always shorten which is the problem. |
Is it between 8am and 10am by any chance?
If you message me the usernames, I can have a look into it for you tomorrow personally. | |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 20:19 - Feb 10 with 1192 views | Mullet |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 20:14 - Feb 10 by The_Romford_Blue |
I’ve worked in the industry for 6 years now. In 2 shops and now make the odds for a firm with tens of thousands of customers.
So yes I obviously have seen gambling addiction first hand. Customers with any signs of gambling issues are called up. We will also require checks made on finances so they can only lose what they can afford. And any sign of gambling issue and they’re taken off all marketing emails etc.
Only once someone in the responsible gambling team has spoke to them first hand AND we’ve seen further proof that they’re losing an acceptable amount to what themselves and the gambling commission agree to, will we then let them continue betting.
To suggest people like myself are no better than loan sharks or predators or heroin dealers is both completely unfair and also somewhat misinformed. There’s a massive difference between professional firms such as ours and those shoddy casino sites registered overseas doing all they can to target those truly vulnerable. To tar us all in with the same brush isn’t right. |
A massive difference? Then why as a nation do we have such an issue with problem gambling and a saturation of advertising and sponsorship to perpetuate it?
How is it with all these checks so many people fall through the net? Could it be that there’s a commitment to profits not punters? | |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 20:30 - Feb 10 with 1149 views | J2BLUE |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 20:16 - Feb 10 by The_Romford_Blue |
Is it between 8am and 10am by any chance?
If you message me the usernames, I can have a look into it for you tomorrow personally. |
It would definitely be after 9 but could be before 10.
Cheers. I don't know the usernames though. Just something I have observed at work as loads get in touch and ask us what board prices are. | |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 20:36 - Feb 10 with 1131 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 20:19 - Feb 10 by Mullet |
A massive difference? Then why as a nation do we have such an issue with problem gambling and a saturation of advertising and sponsorship to perpetuate it?
How is it with all these checks so many people fall through the net? Could it be that there’s a commitment to profits not punters? |
People fall through the net because they move to the next firm? There’s 30ish highly reputable (ours included) firms. After that there’s a lot of much smaller dodgier sites. GameStop is there to stop people going from firm to firm and we would never ever open someone who is gamstopped. And would receive a form (rightly so) if we ever did. A fine in the multi millions.
In an instance where someone does ‘slip through the net’ and is opened, it’s major news in the industry and a multi million fine is put into place. There’s been about 5 instances of this in the last 10 years across all the major UK bookies.
The issue with gambling addiction is that the customer often moves onto other sites that aren’t regulated over here who are dodgy and/or go into shops on the high street where it’s not known if they have a gambling problem unless they’ve GameStopped or self-excluded and agreed to having their photo taken so every member of staff knows not to let them through the doors.
A heroin dealer gives people heroin knowing it will do them no good at all. Me laying someone a bet is not the same and you’re not daft enough (I’d hope) to think it is. It’s a hobby millions of people do enjoy, is legal and is good fun. Fun being the key word. If a tiny percent of that have an issue, we’d not let them bet. You cannot stop an entire nation doing something because a tiny percent may develop a problem. Its like suggesting all football fans should be banned because a tiny percent go to matches looking ti fight each other. | |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 20:46 - Feb 10 with 1096 views | J2BLUE |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 20:36 - Feb 10 by The_Romford_Blue |
People fall through the net because they move to the next firm? There’s 30ish highly reputable (ours included) firms. After that there’s a lot of much smaller dodgier sites. GameStop is there to stop people going from firm to firm and we would never ever open someone who is gamstopped. And would receive a form (rightly so) if we ever did. A fine in the multi millions.
In an instance where someone does ‘slip through the net’ and is opened, it’s major news in the industry and a multi million fine is put into place. There’s been about 5 instances of this in the last 10 years across all the major UK bookies.
The issue with gambling addiction is that the customer often moves onto other sites that aren’t regulated over here who are dodgy and/or go into shops on the high street where it’s not known if they have a gambling problem unless they’ve GameStopped or self-excluded and agreed to having their photo taken so every member of staff knows not to let them through the doors.
A heroin dealer gives people heroin knowing it will do them no good at all. Me laying someone a bet is not the same and you’re not daft enough (I’d hope) to think it is. It’s a hobby millions of people do enjoy, is legal and is good fun. Fun being the key word. If a tiny percent of that have an issue, we’d not let them bet. You cannot stop an entire nation doing something because a tiny percent may develop a problem. Its like suggesting all football fans should be banned because a tiny percent go to matches looking ti fight each other. |
Agree with this. There are 100+ bookies and thousands of online casinos.
Not to mention being able to buy scratchcards on nearly every street. | |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 20:53 - Feb 10 with 1083 views | Dubtractor |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 20:36 - Feb 10 by The_Romford_Blue |
People fall through the net because they move to the next firm? There’s 30ish highly reputable (ours included) firms. After that there’s a lot of much smaller dodgier sites. GameStop is there to stop people going from firm to firm and we would never ever open someone who is gamstopped. And would receive a form (rightly so) if we ever did. A fine in the multi millions.
In an instance where someone does ‘slip through the net’ and is opened, it’s major news in the industry and a multi million fine is put into place. There’s been about 5 instances of this in the last 10 years across all the major UK bookies.
The issue with gambling addiction is that the customer often moves onto other sites that aren’t regulated over here who are dodgy and/or go into shops on the high street where it’s not known if they have a gambling problem unless they’ve GameStopped or self-excluded and agreed to having their photo taken so every member of staff knows not to let them through the doors.
A heroin dealer gives people heroin knowing it will do them no good at all. Me laying someone a bet is not the same and you’re not daft enough (I’d hope) to think it is. It’s a hobby millions of people do enjoy, is legal and is good fun. Fun being the key word. If a tiny percent of that have an issue, we’d not let them bet. You cannot stop an entire nation doing something because a tiny percent may develop a problem. Its like suggesting all football fans should be banned because a tiny percent go to matches looking ti fight each other. |
I don't have an issue with gambling per se, although I don't gamble myself, but the extent to which it is advertised at us any time we go to football, listen to sport radio, or watch sport on the telly is mental. There is no way it should be allowed to that extent, and to just class it all as 'fun' is a massively one sided look at it.
I get that it is a subject very close to your heart, both personally and professionally, but I think it is a little naïve to think its just a bit of fun when it is such a big money industry now. I can understand why you'd push back on some of the stuff Mullet has compared it to, but I have some sympathy with his general point, even if the examples are a bit extreme! |  |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 21:01 - Feb 10 with 1062 views | J2BLUE |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 20:53 - Feb 10 by Dubtractor |
I don't have an issue with gambling per se, although I don't gamble myself, but the extent to which it is advertised at us any time we go to football, listen to sport radio, or watch sport on the telly is mental. There is no way it should be allowed to that extent, and to just class it all as 'fun' is a massively one sided look at it.
I get that it is a subject very close to your heart, both personally and professionally, but I think it is a little naïve to think its just a bit of fun when it is such a big money industry now. I can understand why you'd push back on some of the stuff Mullet has compared it to, but I have some sympathy with his general point, even if the examples are a bit extreme! |
The thing is it's always the same. It starts with a two footed lunge which you defend against and then it becomes well it's advertised too much etc. That's not something any of us have ever denied. It needs regulating, no doubt. | |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 21:13 - Feb 10 with 1031 views | Dubtractor |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 21:01 - Feb 10 by J2BLUE |
The thing is it's always the same. It starts with a two footed lunge which you defend against and then it becomes well it's advertised too much etc. That's not something any of us have ever denied. It needs regulating, no doubt. |
I would point out that me and Mullet are not the same person. | |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 21:17 - Feb 10 with 1008 views | J2BLUE |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 21:13 - Feb 10 by Dubtractor |
I would point out that me and Mullet are not the same person. |
No but that's the turn the discussion always takes. Not having a go, just saying.
 | |
| |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 21:38 - Feb 10 with 953 views | Bigalhunter |
| Gambling harms - punter vs bookmaker, who's at fault? on 20:36 - Feb 10 by The_Romford_Blue |
People fall through the net because they move to the next firm? There’s 30ish highly reputable (ours included) firms. After that there’s a lot of much smaller dodgier sites. GameStop is there to stop people going from firm to firm and we would never ever open someone who is gamstopped. And would receive a form (rightly so) if we ever did. A fine in the multi millions.
In an instance where someone does ‘slip through the net’ and is opened, it’s major news in the industry and a multi million fine is put into place. There’s been about 5 instances of this in the last 10 years across all the major UK bookies.
The issue with gambling addiction is that the customer often moves onto other sites that aren’t regulated over here who are dodgy and/or go into shops on the high street where it’s not known if they have a gambling problem unless they’ve GameStopped or self-excluded and agreed to having their photo taken so every member of staff knows not to let them through the doors.
A heroin dealer gives people heroin knowing it will do them no good at all. Me laying someone a bet is not the same and you’re not daft enough (I’d hope) to think it is. It’s a hobby millions of people do enjoy, is legal and is good fun. Fun being the key word. If a tiny percent of that have an issue, we’d not let them bet. You cannot stop an entire nation doing something because a tiny percent may develop a problem. Its like suggesting all football fans should be banned because a tiny percent go to matches looking ti fight each other. |
I assume all these companies that swamp every ad break during each and every sport event on Sky, TNT and Eurosport are the main problem? Just seen four in a row during the break in the snooker (don’t judge me, I’m babysitting the grandkids)
Mr Vegas
Ladbrokes and their ‘Gaffa of an Accra’
Paddy Power
32 Red
As someone who only ever places occasional bets on things I don’t want to happen, I’m just interested. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
