I'm such an idiot to start playing online again!

[lojo]

Great points Happy. I guess the thing to keep in mind is that no 'one way' works for everyone.
My condolensces to the OP. I hope you don't decide to change your mind again if gambling is not healthy for you.

I looked at GamCare sometime back when a similar discussion was going on here. I was impressed that they didn't seem to be a 12-step clone or another arm of moral re-armament, Buchmanism, et al.

I hope gamblers-anonymous has a higher 'recovery' rate than AA, which is dismal ( tho no actual controlled studies have been performed, AA's success rate can be charted to 5% which is worse than the 7% rate for 'spontaneous remission')

My basis for this 'opinion'? Much study, former facilitator for SMART recovery, and advocate in the judicial system for non-coercion to 12 Step programs (have even argued before a district judge in my own case and won)

"but aren't you a fine example lojo?" Yip, indeed I am. A month ago I was gutterdrunk on a half gallon of vodka a day, and now I enjoy my mead and beer again with no troubles.

I used shaman herbs to clear my brain, but I wouldn't suggest that to anyone else any more than I would suggest that 'you' are powerless over any inanimate substance or compulsive behavior. (extreme chemical imbalances aside)

If any one has had enough of a behavior, and wants to terminate it, I wouldn't suggest "just for today (for tomorrow i do it again)" I would suggest rational emotive behavioral therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, or for the fix it yourself person, go to rational.org and take the

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

. {Just change 'alcohol' to gambling, heroin, overeating, whatever} It can free you of all the guilt and shame and remorse that may keep you repeating the behavior based on deciding to never do it again and never change your mind.

Good luck OP, and anyone else with a problem.

 

[catrina m]

Sometimes I find this hard to read. Gambling should be a fun pastime with no horror stories of losing house's and everything you own trying for the big win.Everyone ultimately is in control of thier own destiny. If you choose to gamble money you cant afford to lose, truth be told, you will lose it. Pay your bills, feed your family and perchance if you have a small suplus, risk it.

Risk is the key word. It is a risk to gamble. If you are sick as deemed by society as a problem gambler, no one can help you but yourself. Online casino's are no different than land based in that thier ultimate goal is to part you from your money. Yes, people do win but the majority lose.

Try to understand your basic human needs for survival. Take care of those first. Take care of the people who depend on you first. Then if you have the funds take a shot at the big brass ring. Do not depend on it. If you absolutely have to win to make it, you never will.

No group, or counseling, or paying someone to make your decisions can help you until you understand the word NO.

 

[cyprean]

BWIN STUDY SHOWS LOW PERCENTAGE OF ONLINE PROBLEM GAMBLING

In a survey of 40 499 respondents, only 1 percent showed addictive signs
.

lol @ this study

 

[cyprean]

I believe that if we would have never stumbled upon gambling, we would all have richer lives.

 

[NASHVEGAS]

enjoy your snide comments while you can my friend, because tomorrow it might be you who falls over and will need a helping hand.

LIR , No intent to be snide and my post might not be clear but snide and kicking someone when they are down or need help never entered my mind. I will take the blame for being vague. I have studied addiction and even posted a long research article a few days ago based on dopamine and gambling addiction. Your thread opens a wide range of issues which most have been represented by fair and balanced differing views so I see no need to address my views other than I am sure you are aware of the necessary steps and yes addiction is an illness and will probably be a lifelong battle but if you want to win that battle ,only you can. I apolgize for a post that hopefully you will accept as a misunderstanding....best of luck. Nash.

 

[jetset]

lol @ this study

Study results are always received with mixed opinions, and I expected that this one would be no different because although executed by a reputable organisation (Harvard Medical School's addiction associate Cambridge Health), it was actually commissioned by a gambling group.

I don't believe that invalidates it.

This information was just a teaser, released at GIGSE time for maximum impact and to generate interest in the full survey which we will no doubt see published widely by Bwin in the near future. Thus, it's probably premature to make judgements on the validity of the survey despite the large sample and the respect which the Harvard name lends to it.

Taking a risk before the full results are out, I will say that most of the problem gambling experts I have spoken to will probably not be surprised at the 1 percent number, which is at the low end of conventional (land) casino gambling assessments that (land) problem gamblers typically constitute between 1 and 3 percent of the total.

That's still way too many, which is why companies need to constantly strive to block this sort of gambler for moral, social, political and business reasons.

Personally I look forward to the details of the whole project, which seems to be online gambling-focused and will therefore be of very relevant interest. I am looking forward particularly to comparing the Bwin results with the Nottingham Uni survey done last year for eCOGRA, and I find it encouraging that online organisations want more accurate and scientifically assessed knowledge on the player.

 

[Let_It_Ride]

lol @ this study

those figures seem way too low

I read somewhere a recent government report as saying upto 50% of people who gamble show some signs of addication. There is great concern in the UK about opening of the new super casinos and the problems it will cause to the nearby population.

 

[jetset]

I don't recall seeing such a figure as 50 percent, and I would have serious doubts about a figure of that magnitude for problem gambliers, but perhaps it's a question of what you regard as addiction (which you unfortunately seem to have, and should therefore try to abstain from gambling completely)

I regard even a 1 to 3 percent chance of problem gamblers as a serious concern which needs to be constantly addressed for the reasons stated earlier.

 

[dominique]

50% seems way out of whack.

Of course "some signs of addiction" is as vague as can be.

I am definitely addicted to coffee in the morning, and when the sun shines I feel compelled to step outside.

I can't wake up without a shower, I need my daily fix of news and I want meat with my dinner or I am not satisfied.

The statisfaction I get from gambling pales in comparison to any of these.

The % depends on the definition of "addiction".

If you define it as someone who cannot stop gambling even though s/he is losing the farm, I think the 2% are likely more than is actually the case. I know hundreds of people who gamble recreationally and spend about the same money on it per year as they do on their vacation.

The audience here is slanted to start, because all of us who take the time to post on a gambling forum have an interest in gambling that is more than average.

Addiction is still a mystery in many ways, but we do know that some are predisposed to it and others aren't.

Alcohol, cigarettes, a great variety of drugs, caffeine, chocolate, sports, exercise, carbohydrates, sugar, etc etc etc are all things some people become addicted to, meaning they cannot stop once they start and end up with hugely negative effects on their life.

The majority of people can indulge without complications.

Alcoholics for instance often become violent when drunk and get in fights or beat their wives or kill people in car crashes.

In comparison to other addictions, gambling is fairly harmless, you neither die from it nor do you kill others.

I am not trying to minimize it, all addictions are very bad for the individual and have dire consequences.

There is help for many addictions available, including gambling. But it is always the individual who needs to want to stop. No one can make an addict stop, no friend, no family and no law.

Only the addict him/herself can stop.

 

[pangloss]

In comparison to other addictions, gambling is fairly harmless, you neither die from it nor do you kill others.

I don't agree.


...

 

[Let_It_Ride]

There is help for many addictions available, including gambling. But it is always the individual who needs to want to stop. No one can make an addict stop, no friend, no family and no law.

Only the addict him/herself can stop.

I truely do want to stop I did last year and took steps to self exculde myself, and am also seeking medical help at the moment.

My intention in my first post was to highlight how different casinos are handling this problem, the good ones just said sorry can't reopen your account or locked out any attempt I made to open a new account, and for this I was grateful. I feel if all the casinos had done this and I know they can maybe the moment of weakness would have passed and I would not have started again.

Let me give you one more example from a casino they did let me play again, here is part of the email they sent me

Hi xxxxxx

I see that in the past that you have instructed us to close your account, and indeed have gone as far as asking to be self permanently self excluded from our Casino.

Now the key word here is permanent, however after answering a few simple questions, setting limits and a 24hour cool off period I was back online and playing, permanent should mean permanent.

Now this happened at one of the best casinos on the net, and from their reputation I truely believe they're not just in it for the money but do care about their players and want to help, but until all casinos put in place a hard set of rules, this will keep happening.

They have now closed my account from reading this thread and being able to match it with my casino account details (that is a bit scary they knew who I was from my post here )

I will keep trying to stop and thank everyone here for the encouragement, lets hope some of the casinos out there will also rethink their policy on this.

 

[Pinababy69]

In comparison to other addictions, gambling is fairly harmless, you neither die from it nor do you kill others.

I am not trying to minimize it, all addictions are very bad for the individual and have dire consequences.

While I agree with most of your post Dom about different addictions, and the level of pleasure they give you, I really have to disagree that gambling is fairly harmless. Sure, for anyone who has it totally under control, and doesn't have an addictive personality to start with..it may be harmless. But it can be just as dangerous an addiction as alchohol, cigarettes, drugs, sex, food, compulsive shopping, etc. They all have the potential to seriously destroy lives, if not kept in check, or dealt with. And not just the life of the person who is addicted, but also of those around them.

A serious gambling addiction is nothing to be trivialized, in any way. Just as a junkie will do ANYTHING to get his/her next fix, so too will a gambling addict. Including stealing, committing fraud, pawning items, not paying mortgages/rent and other bills, etc. I'm not talking of the recreational player, I'm talking about the ones who can't control themselves.

My thought is that anytime something controls you or your life rather than you controlling it...then you are in serious trouble, and need to seek help. And you need to help yourself as well, that's the first step.

 

[MPB]

Study results are always received with mixed opinions, and I expected that this one would be no different because although executed by a reputable organisation (Harvard Medical School's addiction associate Cambridge Health), it was actually commissioned by a gambling group.
I don't believe that invalidates it.

The scientific content might be very interesting or might be rubbish, without knowing methodology etc theres no real way to tell it.
From the littel what is known about gamblers, finding only 1% of them to expose signs of addction seems at the very lower end of what would be expected.
Anyway I think a statement like this

Referring to the 1 percent of the sample who might be regarded as potentially problematic, LaBrie revealed that even these are only spending the equivalent of “maybe a good bottle of wine a day”, online.

migth do a good job at discrediting the study, since it's a quite suggestive conclusion instead of a scientific statement you should expect from an objective researcher.
And I find it hard to believe that within a group of over 40000 gamblers there aren't a few who have lost really big by gambling way too much and costly.
On the other hand the havard guy might just be drinking very fine wine.

 

[Vesuvio]

Taking a risk before the full results are out, I will say that most of the problem gambling experts I have spoken to will probably not be surprised at the 1 percent number, which is at the low end of conventional (land) casino gambling assessments that (land) problem gamblers typically constitute between 1 and 3 percent of the total.

My guess would be that the percentage of problem gamblers will be higher on-line - you don't need to leave your house, everything's much faster, you're only clicking buttons rather than handling chips (which is already one remove from "real" money) and you can quickly reload without embarrassment or hassle, and so on...

Plus, this survey seems to be dealing with sports betting rather than casino gambling. There's a huge difference in terms of the potential for addiction. With sports betting there's almost a built-in cooling-off period as you're waiting for results, there's much more satisfaction simply from picking well, and the chances are most people will lose their deposits fairly slowly (over days, weeks or months) - it's much closer to on-line poker. At an on-line casino the average player probably keeps playing until they lose their deposit each session.

I'm not saying the survey might not be of interest (though the advance publicity is a bit distasteful, as MPB says), but I think we're in danger of comparing apples and oranges.

 

[just play]

With sports betting there's almost a built-in cooling-off period as you're waiting for results, there's much more satisfaction simply from picking well, and the chances are most people will lose their deposits fairly slowly (over days, weeks or months) - it's much closer to on-line poker. At an on-line casino the average player probably keeps playing until they lose their deposit each session.

This is SO true!!!

My husband can deposit $100 and have it last for a month or more depending on how well he charts, where as if I deposit $100, I am lucky to have it last for a few hours. (he gambles on dogs, I mainly gamble on slots)

He also gets very excited if he wins 20 bucks, as I just grown at a $20 win.


I would also like to add, gambling addiction is a very serious condition, people commit suicide (I'm sad to say I know a few people who have) because they get so far in the hole and have no way of coming out, marriages break up, etc...for the most part gamblers only spend what they can, but I am sure a lot of people don't pay a bill once in a while because of it.

 

[cyprean]

In comparison to other addictions, gambling is fairly harmless, you neither die

Actually people do rob banks, their employers and families just to fund gambling and gambling related debts. People also commit suicides because of gambling. So I don't agree with you.

I guess in general people easily underestimate the problems that gambling causes, especially if they work in and get paid by the industry.

 

[dominique]

Ok, you are all right. Suicides do happen, that's why Vegas has no balconys and you cannot even open the windows in the hotel rooms. And some people do steal to fund their gambling addiction, like in any other addiction.

My bad, I was mostly having alcoholic violence in my brain when I wrote this, and that is something I have seen a lot of in person.

I am sorry though, let-it-ride, don't think I don't sympathize or I don't care or I don't want you to get well, I do. Addiction is a disease, and you need to get well.

But you are not there yet. You keep blaming the casino and putting the responsibility off on the casino.

While I completely agree that your account should have been locked FOR LIFE, the casino cannot fix your disease. Putting the blame on the casino shows that you are not at the point where you really see what you are doing to yourself.

If you do not take complete responsibility for curing your disease, it can't be cured.

You are the only person who can do that, only you are responsible for what you do. Only you can stop. 30 casinos can block you for life, and you will find 30 more that do not know you. 30 banks can refuse to lend you money, and you will find one that does. 30 friends and family members can ask you to quit, and you will find someone who will play with you or encourage you.

It will always come back to one person, and that is you.

I know it's hard, any and all addictions are very, very hard to overcome. If you find a substiture behavior, it will be a bit easier. Alcoholics drink coffee instead. Sugar addicts eat apples instead. But no matter how you handle it (AND YOU MUST SEEK HELP! JOIN A GROUP THAT GIVES DAILY SUPPORT!), you will always be a problem gambler, even when you haven't gambled for 30 years, just like any other addict will always be addicted to their type of poison.

There is nothing easy about any of this, and there is no easy solution.

Take the necessary steps, all of the necessary steps. With acceptance of the responsibility and commitment to doing everything in your power and using every tool you can find (

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

,

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

,

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

, many other sites and everything you can dig up that will help make you strong) you can and you will beat this!


PS. If you or anyone reading this ever use G&C as a portal, please ask to have your IP blocked. It's not perfect, if determined there are ways to circumvent, but likely it will be one less place to tempt you, and every proactive step you take helps make you stronger.

 

[Let_It_Ride]

oh how right you are, the casinos are not to blame, they've been as good as gold, how dare I dis them!

kick me one more time then I'll be off and kill myself

thanks spin palace, thanks 32Red, you guys bleed me dry last year and then you took the last few drops this time around, permanent should MEAN permanent. If a B&M casino let an excluded player in again they would be fined in a court of law. It really is a shame because I considered you both to be good casinos but if you can't get it right then there is no hope for the online industry.

and while I'm at it, I really hate this thanking system, you guys keep thanking each other not because of the post but because of who posted it, and then add nothing to the thread yourself

bye.

 

[jetset]

Good points raised in this thread.

I don't think any of us can make a judgement on the Bwin-Harvard-Cambridge survey until it (and its methodology) can be studied in full, and there is usually argument on these initiatives no matter what industry it involves.

Where such research surveys are genuine, they provide much useful information that adds to the body of knowledge and can lead to improvements in an industry imo.

Vesuvio's post raises a particularly interesting point, which I hope the full study may address. Much of the addictive gambling estimates have hitherto been based on land gambling statistics, a specialist from G4 in this field told me a couple of years ago.

He said his sub-industry was very keen to see an internet-focused study of addiction to assess whether there was a significant difference between addiction levels online and offline. Vesuvio's comment that there may be differences in addictive potential between sportsbetting and casino gambling puts another interesting question into the mix.

I think this is the sort of work that major companies or trade bodies such as the RGA, EGBA or IGC could earn real credibility by sponsoring - and perhaps Bwin have done that here - we'll see soon enough.

Various posters have emphasised the importance of the addict personally buying into the need to stop, but in this state of mind that can hardly be regarded as the ultimate solution. Help is needed, and I find myself in agreement with Let It Ride that in an ideal world ALL casinos would permanently exclude problem gamblers. But, we don't live in an ideal world and I don't see that happening.

Unfortunately, there will always be those bottom-feeders who see other venues banning problem gamblers as a business opportunity rather than the right moral thing to do, so even that solution will at best just make it more difficult (and dangerous) for the determined addict.

It also raises a range of problems, not least of which is the definition and identification of problem gamblers (there are diverse *levels* of addiction), the justice in taking unilateral action, and possibly disputes with self-excluders who want back in and subsequently turn nasty when they are refused.

The six month self-exclusion "cooling off" period is something that responsible gambling sites seem to believe is enough to give a potential problem gambler sufficient time to recover his or her equilibrium, but as we have seen here in hardcore cases it simply doesn't work....and again the addict can simply go elsewhere in the absence of an industry wide "black book" - another controversial prospect with the additional complication of practical application in the global Internet milieu!

Dominique has correctly pointed out that over-indulgence and addiction is found in many other areas of human activity, and the challenge is to work out where and how to draw the line between players who "show signs of addictive tendencies;" gamblers who are clearly addicted and need to be immediately banned for life without further ado and gamblers who seek to self-exclude but not necessarily for life.

The way things are now, it's pretty much the casinos that are left with the job of identifying potential problem gamblers and doing something about them - giving them the basic tools to assess their own condition (which many sites do) and directing them to responsible gambling agencies where they can volunteer for treatment. Other options include excluding them on request for six months, setting limits on their gambling time and action or imposing individual lifelong bans - and efficiently enforcing same. I think we need to encourage more casinos to adopt those sort of responsible gaming concepts.

Strict government regulation should insist on all of these elements being continually available, professionally applied and audited regularly, which to my mind is one of the strongest arguments for regulation. But how is global regulation to be effected in the era of the borderless Internet?

Addiction is a tough one to handle in any industry, because human ingenuity and cunning allied to such a problem can make an addict an elusive personality to pin down until it is already an advanced condition. And the addict is not always prepared or capable of helping himself.

The best we can hope for imo is a continued awareness at both player and industry level of the tragic consequences of addictive gambling and its potential for personal and domestic disaster, and increased efforts at the casinos to identify and exclude addictive gamblers.

Tarring all casinos with the same brush and claiming that they are happy to profit from problem gamblers is over simplifying this issue imo. The efforts that many of the better casinos are making to ameliorate this problem deserve recognition and need to be maintained and expanded to a wider range of venues, but progress is being made.

A sense of perspective is necessary for fairness, too - individual issues such as this thread explores serve a useful purpose in again highlighting the dangers and inadequacies of existing systems, but are not necessarily indicative of a widespread failure of anti-problem gambling measures.

 

[dominique]

oh how right you are, the casinos are not to blame, they've been as good as gold, how dare I dis them!

kick me one more time then I'll be off and kill myself

thanks spin palace, thanks 32Red, you guys bleed me dry last year and then you took the last few drops this time around, permanent should MEAN permanent. If a B&M casino let an excluded player in again they would be fined in a court of law. It really is a shame because I considered you both to be good casinos but if you can't get it right then there is no hope for the online industry.
bye.

That you should have been locked out for life goes without saying.

Whether the casinos are to blame is not what this is about though, it is about you. It is about you not gambling anymore.

Anger is an ok first step. But now you have to reach out and get help.

There are a good number of places where you can vent and get constructive help. If you type gambling addiction into google, a world of support will appear.

Let them help you help yourself!

 

[babs7262]

LIR

The reason for some of my "thanks" w/o follow up is because I thought I had said enough and just wanted to show that I agreed with the poster. If you EVER want to talk on the phone, please PM me and Ill be happy to talk to you.

 

[just play]

and while I'm at it, I really hate this thanking system, you guys keep thanking each other not because of the post but because of who posted it

Well, I would have to agree with this....but it's like that at any forum you go to.


I brought up suicide because I know of a few people who commited suicide because they gambled all their money away, and didn't think there was a way out....then a few others on this board brought it up after I did and they were thanked and not me....

But that's how it is on online forums, doesn't bother me *shrug*

 

[dominique]

Sorry, I thought I had thanked everyone who criticised my remark about gambling addiction being one of the lighter forms of addiction...

I didn't mean to leave you out. I don't thank by who is who, I usually thank if I think someone contributed something valuable or to show that I get what they said.

I probably don't give near enough thanks, but it's not on purpose or because of favoritism.

 

[lojo]

Well, this is a volitile thread, but lets not forget there is a heart there, a person whose decisions affect others, and is here crying out for help. The OP's bitch was not about casinos and blocking, it was a cry for help. I'm here to help you, OP. (I won't refer to you as let it ride as that is part of your addiction)

Forget what you think you know about addiction, it is probably either all wrong, or how you have interpreted it wrong. Or you would be well now, yes?

Forget about the disease concept, and turning your will and life over to God, and about being powerless. You are not powerless, and these things are all cop-outs and good reasons to gamble again when you fail them.

Forget the idea that only an addict can help another addict.

These things have not worked for you or you would not be here asking for help.

I'm not kicking you when you're down, and you're not going to top yourself because I am so mean. Call it tough love, call it compassion, but don't deny yourself the opportunity to be free of that monkey on your back.

At the level that it can be CURED, any addiction is simply a self-indulgent behavior. Remove the man from the computer, remove the alcohol, the heroin, the ice cream, and you are left with a thrill seeker of sorts, someone who has been rewarded by dopamine, seratonin, adreneline, etc. for a behavior at such a deep level that they will seek that feeling forever until it is understood and defeated or it destroys them.

Id, Ego, SuperEgo in freudstuff.

ID: I am thirsty

EGO: there is some liquid, let's drink it.

SUPEREGO: NO!!! That's oil, it will kill us.

All is fine and good.

id - I need something

ego- i felt good when i gambled

superego - NO!!! (well that message is never heard) it has been worn down by the ego (i need) until it believes that the behavior will make all well again.

In the phyical model, we have the midbrain, the same thing an ape or dog or cat has. It is where survival messages come from: I must drink, eat, sleep, love, find shelter. When it is misprogrammed by a deep reaching event (the first high, a big win, whatever) it comes to 'believe' that the problem behavior is necessary for survival! And it will feed messages to the neocortex (man's brain, the thing that seperates us from the beasts of the field) to get what it thinks it needs to survive. It's really that simple once the computer is removed from the house, the alcohol is out of the system, the heroin has run it's course (depending on severity of actual biological addiction)

This is not disease, it is misprogramming. A junky will steal from his mother, a drunk neglect his children, a gambler foresake everything to meet this perceived and erroneous need.

The good news is that you are not a beast, you are a human being with faculties to override this misprogramming. Your neocortex (where decisions are made to lift a glass or go online or get in the car to drive to a B&M) sits not only physically ON TOP of your midbrain, where the desire eminates from, but it also functions ON TOP of desire. Your mid brain can not tell your hand to go online, only your neocortex can. My addiction can not make me pick up a needle, it can only 'talk' to ME, my neocortex, that part of my brain that can and does control my hand to 'pick up and use' or 'go online'.

You are not spiritually ill, you do not need soul surgery, you do not need to join a group to correct your situation, you only need to reprogram the relationship between your misprogrammed survival instinct and your free will. This is great news!!! And it is amazingly simple!!!

If you seriously want to quit, no matter what, until the last star sputters in the sky, i will walk you through it, or put you in touch with the pioneers in this liberating, freedom making, earth shattering development that is really as old as humankind.

No need for spiritual beliefs, and no need to get rid of them unless you want to continue to believe that God did not give you free will and doesn't desire you to excercise it for you and your loved one's own good.

It's about complete and utter self responsibility and the self esteem that comes from conquering the animal in you. It's about no longer relying on others or programs or dogmas to stop your self destruction. And it's about being free forever, or at least having the tools and the choices to be.


Whatever you choose, I sincerely wish you the best and I hope that you have a positive response expectancy from whatever methodology you choose, because that is, indeed, more than half the battle. Call it faith if you enter or return to a 12 step program, call it hope if you use rational recovery, call it the placebo effect if you want, but expect results.

Good luck. PM me if want to know more or visit the link in my first response. But if you've been involved in a 12-step program, and you aren't able to debrief yourself with an honest effort with the Crash Course (do the excercises, feel when it says to feel, listen to your own voice in your head when it tells you to listen, challenge yourself when it tells you to) if you can't do that, stop and immediately call your sponsor and have him/her remove the internet connection from your home and stay with your 24/7 until you feel safe. It is heavy stuff and meant to deprogram all of the beliefs that have not worked for you. If you give it an honest effort you will be fine!!! I promise. It is simple (it's not easy) and it is liberating. And it is 100% about complete and thorough abstinence from the self-destructive behavior. Just replace the words 'alcohol/drugs, drinking/using', with gambling.

Again, good luck. We're all pulling for you however you decide to rise above your problem. I wish you health and happiness and a little laughter along the way

 

[just play]

Sorry, I thought I had thanked everyone who criticised my remark about gambling addiction being one of the lighter forms of addiction...

I didn't mean to leave you out. I don't thank by who is who, I usually thank if I think someone contributed something valuable or to show that I get what they said.

I probably don't give near enough thanks, but it's not on purpose or because of favoritism.

There is no sorry necessary, this is a forum where people read, learn and teach....I am thankful it is here.

I just hope Let-it-ride gets some help....I suffer from something (I don't feel comfortable saying what) and I go to doctors, shrinks, take meds, and I still can't beat what I have....I just hope he can.

I knew a couple of heavy gamblers a few years ago and they just quit cold turkey and I asked them how they did it, they said it got easier every time they looked at their bank account as it was growing. Maybe instead of spending money on gambling Let-it ride can buy himself something nice with all the money he will save? Just a thought.