Hello and can you help a PhD student of Gambling?

[winbig]

What more do you want? There's a number of casinos out there already (Including all Rival's) that allow you to self-exclude yourself from playing within the software itself.

And I haven't found ANY casino that will not honor a player's request to be permanently banned from playing once the player makes that request.

And I know for a fact that PokerStars and Full Tilt Poker allows a player to place a limit on how much they can deposit at one time/day/week/whatever....and I'm sure there's others that have that in place, as well.


...you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink.

And I'll be damned if I'll ever let the State/Federal Gov't, or any casino for that matter, tell me how I can spend my money. It's impossible to tell if a person has a gambling problem by their play and/or deposits. Unless they [casino/gov't] truly know that person, then it's none of their business.

 

[3Dice]

Hi Carjaw,

As an operator, and having seen both the B&M as well as the online side of things, I feel that the ability of an operator to step in is crippled severely in a classic online casino setup. It is not as much the anonymity as it is the isolation that is imho the root of a number of problem cases seen online. The social aspect of a B&M casino, people playing together, with others they know, eliminates what I would estimate to be a fairly high percentage of problems .. before they ever develop into being problems (and would show up in statistics). Furthermore, the responsible B&M operator will have his floor people communicating with regular customers so that they can gather the info needed to assess the gambling behavior of a customer and if needed step in.

Humans are habit creatures by nature and can develop addictions to just about any behavior imaginable. Strong emotions, as those seen with gambling, are a catalyst for that. Isolation is another catalyst. I do however feel it would be a mistake to point to the internet as the guilty party for adding the isolation catalyst to this mix. The internet provides in a fast evolving technical framework and features deemed impossible today will be integrated in your cell phone by the time you finish your study. Forums like casinomeister replace the friends you play with and provide in an alternate - albeit still anonymous - social reference frame. It is not technically unfeasible for casino software providers to add these social aspects back to their gaming environments and I predict that this is a trend we will see in the coming years. Forums, chatrooms, online community's, multiplayer gaming, when managed and moderated properly all enable the responsible operator to detect problems before they get out of control.

Certainly, globally organized self-exclusion lists would help. Deposit limits clearly visible and available to all users should be mandatory. And another dozen of things that will help after the problem has become a problem. I strongly feel however that all that is just scratching the surface and the real challenge is making sure that this social reference frame is re-established online. Without it even the operator with the best intentions will simply not have the tools to judge whether or not a player is a perfectly stable highroller - or instead a lowroller spinning out of control.

Enzo

 

[rockycatt]

my biggest dissapointment was in the stock market back in 1987 ,now theres a real gambleing hall .
just how much do you know about free market stock markets the back bone of democracy
did you know that the C B O E was a bunch of under the table against the law ,tax evading criminals
until i think it was 1957 when the powers to be said oh what the hell let them gamble on stock's that thay dont own

im lucky because this time around i was 100% in bank fdica and relized
a profit in my paper as the floor fell out , my brother in law lost 200,000.00
in G E you know g e and boing wer the widow's and orphan's stocks

oh ya martha stewart goes to jail and madoff goes for a ice cream cone

 

[carjaw]

Early results show ...

I just thought some forum members like to know that the early results of my survey show that the majority of survey respondents think that reducing the maximum bet size would be a useful and helpful tool for the small minority of gamblers whose gambling becomes a problem. Other tools of control that are popular are operators providing regular financial statements and the ability to pre-set time and money limits. I am still very keen to hear from as many forum members as possible that can spare the time to either take part in the survey or give me a few comments. This is not a debate the right of an adult in a free society to gamble - it is just research trying to find useful mechanisms at internet gambling websites that can help those experiencing problems. thank you to everyone who has either completed the survey (flaws and all) or who have made a comment

 

[bryand]

I just thought some forum members like to know that the early results of my survey show that the majority of survey respondents think that reducing the maximum bet size would be a useful and helpful tool for the small minority of gamblers whose gambling becomes a problem. Other tools of control that are popular are operators providing regular financial statements and the ability to pre-set time and money limits. I am still very keen to hear from as many forum members as possible that can spare the time to either take part in the survey or give me a few comments. This is not a debate the right of an adult in a free society to gamble - it is just research trying to find useful mechanisms at internet gambling websites that can help those experiencing problems. thank you to everyone who has either completed the survey (flaws and all) or who have made a comment

Ok lockjaw.....what substance are you abusing at the moment? This entire thread is joke, right?

 

[Simmo!]

Ok lockjaw.....what substance are you abusing at the moment? This entire thread is joke, right?

Whichever way you look at it, I think this is a very interesting thread myself. The topic of "responsible gaming" is quite often ignored/overlooked and deserves some air time IMO.

On the topic, a number of casinos are restricted to a degree by their sotware providers. Wagerworks sofwtare provides excellent opions for the player to limit losses, restrict wagering, deposits etc, while RTG has none. MG have it as an "option" I'd suggest as a few have it automated (Belle Rock) so the players can do it themselves while others have to do it manually.

 

[bryand]

Whichever way you look at it, I think this is a very interesting thread myself. The topic of "responsible gaming" is quite often ignored/overlooked and deserves some air time IMO.

On the topic, a number of casinos are restricted to a degree by their sotware providers. Wagerworks sofwtare provides excellent opions for the player to limit losses, restrict wagering, deposits etc, while RTG has none. MG have it as an "option" I'd suggest as a few have it automated (Belle Rock) so the players can do it themselves while others have to do it manually.

The topic is very interesting IMO. I was calling into question OP's "early results" and moreover his representation as a doctoral student.

 

[suzecat]

The topic is very interesting IMO. I was calling into question OP's "early results" and moreover his representation as a doctoral student.

Exactly! Maybe my earlier question, asked in all seriousness, was not lame at all?

 

[carjaw]

Hostility

Whilst i have made a few massive mistakes in terms of etiquette in this forum I have never been rude nor deceptive. I am truly offended that forum members (or just one?) might think that I am pretending to be something I am not - as in doctoral student. I am also very much female and not male as suggested. My mistake was that I thought stakeholders of internet gambling might have great suggestions about features internet gambling sites should offer for the small number of people who gamble - to the extend whereby it gets out of control. I thought this research would be more effective if I could receive an insight into sites - which I dont really have - from regular players. My mistake. However, for what it counts - I am no fraud and I am no man.

 

[bryand]

Whilst i have made a few massive mistakes in terms of etiquette in this forum I have never been rude nor deceptive. I am truly offended that forum members (or just one?) might think that I am pretending to be something I am not - as in doctoral student. I am also very much female and not male as suggested. My mistake was that I thought stakeholders of internet gambling might have great suggestions about features internet gambling sites should offer for the small number of people who gamble - to the extend whereby it gets out of control. I thought this research would be more effective if I could receive an insight into sites - which I dont really have - from regular players. My mistake. However, for what it counts - I am no fraud and I am no man.

Kindly explain the relevance of "operators providing regular financial statements" to "responsible gambling".

 

[suzecat]

Hi
Great to finally be here!! But I need your help!! I need so much help!! My research is investigation the concept of responsible gambling in cyberspace. My first problem is - is it possible to have responsible gambling? And next is it possible to have responsible gamling on the Internet with all the issues of anonymity, accessiility and the aility to go from site to site? We all know aout responsile gambling features, such as slowing play, showing clocks and timers and real money balances and the provision by operators of regular financial statements - but do these responsible gambling features work? I have an online survey I desperately need gamblers to participate in - at www.effectiveresponsiblegamblingfeatures.blogspot.com - which will only take no more than 10 minutes of your time (and does not need registration or personal details) but perhaps if you have a comment you could let me know what your think about the concept of responsible gambling in cyberspace. Thank you - so much

At the end of the day - I guess the stakeholders of gambling in this forum are not concerned about responsible gambling features for a variety of reasons, the most important one being the individual freedom of the player - I see it from the oter way around and that gambling can be a harmful product and that governments have traitionally sought to control it proactively - and now the internet is in the mix - how can governments control it? Like I say - I respect what I have heard - for me - operators need to supply responsible gambling features and i thought players might find certain features more useful than others

Whilst i have made a few massive mistakes in terms of etiquette in this forum I have never been rude nor deceptive. I am truly offended that forum members (or just one?) might think that I am pretending to be something I am not - as in doctoral student. I am also very much female and not male as suggested. My mistake was that I thought stakeholders of internet gambling might have great suggestions about features internet gambling sites should offer for the small number of people who gamble - to the extend whereby it gets out of control. I thought this research would be more effective if I could receive an insight into sites - which I dont really have - from regular players. My mistake. However, for what it counts - I am no fraud and I am no man.

Regrettably, this forum gets a load of fraudsters and sometimes the fraud is so good it takes a lot of time to become evident. Thus, you might understand the "hostile" attitude when it comes to suspicious new posters. For all we really know Carjaw you may be an addicted gambler who is using this research as a defense to justify your gambling losses. We just don't know!

That said, your eagerness to further your research model is refreshing IMO. The advice you have received to slow down is good IMO. If you rush your results it may become apparent in your final paper and thus not generate the result you are seeking.

Carjaw, you are young and react to skepticism like a young person. That's cool but let me give you the benefit of many years of living and making mistakes. The best way to learn is by making a mistake and figuring out how to correct it. Be it writing papers for school or gambling, it works the same way.

Gambling can become addictive very easily and while in the throes of the addiction not many people can recognize it is happening! My personal beef with casinos is what I perceive as an intended, blatant way of marketing to customers which furthers the addiction. I have found the best way to stop this is by becoming very aware of the process. In the final analysis I conclude that casinos are not your friends and certainly put their own interests ahead of yours -- all the while convincing you they have your interests at heart. Quite the conundrum IMO!

If you look further into what has been said on this site you will find valuable info concerning CM's work at regulation of the industry. If I provide you the links for that work then I would be doing your research for you and that would not be what the dissertation process is about. Best of luck to you in all future endeavors!

 

[carjaw]

Not all sites - provide regular financial statements - infact many sites do not provide statements at all. The hypothesis is that for players who are beginning to display a problem - if sites provide detailed financial statements monthly as to what has been spent per session, per week in a monthly form - it might be a useful tool for all sites to regular offer - all registered users receive financial records of their play. This is suggested as being possibly useful - for regular uders of gambling sites however - I reckon there may be much more appropriate measures to assist players control their gambling - that players can see and academics cannot see. of course I am seeking to find answers not necessarily from problem gamblers (although their information is useful) but from players in control - enjoying entertainment - but still with great ideas to help others

 

[bryand]

My personal beef with casinos is what I perceive as an intended, blatant way of marketing to customers which furthers the addiction. I have found the best way to stop this is by becoming very aware of the process. In the final analysis I conclude that casinos are not your friends and certainly put their own interests ahead of yours -- all the while convincing you they have your interests at heart.

Great post suze. Of course the same statement could be said of the marketing of beer, soft drinks, department stores, airlines, ice cream (my uncontrollable addiction) and fast food.

 

[carjaw]

I am a PhD student ! I am female ! I am not that young ! Trust me on that ! I have a colleague doing her PhD and she is 72 !!!! Not that of course I am anywhere near 72 !! This piece of research an investigation into responsible gambling features is not perfect and there are flaws in the design of the survey because - just as gambling legislation in its most recent act covers all kinds of gambling from online poker, to online bingo to online lotteries in just one law - so my survey has been designed to cover many gambling products - but in my chapters - i have identified the flaws in the research and of course - it is not the only submitted primary data - there are pilot surveys interviews, content analyses - but I will always maintain that people who use these sites more frequently than I do - might see useful mechanisms for people who identify that they are beginning to develop a problem - thanks for all your help !

 

[dominique]

Kindly explain the relevance of "operators providing regular financial statements" to "responsible gambling".

I think she means deposit histories - if you see how much you deposited in a given time frame, it may influence whether you want to deposit more at this point or not... addicts can literally lose track of how much they deposit.

I think the issue of individual freedom does weigh heavily in this topic - with proper regulation people can be protected while still enjoying the freedom of deciding what to spend their money on.

Prohibition let's the darker side of gambling proliferate and players have no protection at all.

 

[suzecat]

Of course the same statement could be said of the marketing of beer, soft drinks, department stores, airlines, ice cream (my uncontrollable addiction) and fast food.

Not meaning to be a buzzkill here ............... but I don't partake in any of these addictions either

 

[Tengil]

Some hints.

First look from where the majority of the casinos revenue come from.
Then look further for some psychological studies from the field and you will discover some of the techiniques casinos use to further hook the addict.

You wont find any good answers from players (especially not on forums), affiliates or casino managers IMO (Enzo may be different, 3Dice is the only casino that have taken it seriously). You have to dig up the answers yourself.

The so called responsible gambling features casinos implement is just a cloak from the hardest accusations, why would they cut off their main source of income?

If I were you I wouldnt place much weight on this thread. The survey is ok, but dont put too much weight on that either.

 

[winbig]

One pertinent case you may want to look into is this one:

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

ELIZABETH, Ind. Jenny Kephart's fondness for the blackjack table took her to a world of private jet rides, her own table and dealer in casinos, and lavish hotel suites where iced champagne awaited her arrival.

"My every whim," recalled Kephart, 52, a woman from suburban Nashville, who admits she was a compulsive gambler. She says she has lost more than $900,000 at casinos across the country.

Eventually, her gambling brought her to Caesars Indiana in Harrison County, Ind., and put her deep in debt. Now she is at the center of a court case that tests whether a casino has a duty to protect an addicted gambler from him- or herself.

The casino filed a civil suit against Kephart in January for failing to repay $125,000 she borrowed during a visit in March 2006 to the Harrah's-owned riverboat, a company that had been making her special offers for years.

Kephart, who is unemployed, is fighting back with a counterclaim alleging Caesars enticed her with giveaways and made money for gambling available to her, even though trained casino workers should have identified her as a problem gambler. She said casino executives knew she had come out of bankruptcy four years earlier when Harrah's was one of her creditors.
FIND MORE STORIES IN: Nashville | Harrison County | David Williams | I. Nelson Rose | Caesars Indiana

Caesars' lawyer, Stephen Langdon, argued that Kephart never asked to be banned from the casino or other Harrah's properties, so the casino had no way to know she was a problem gambler. Caesars argued that Kephart's counterclaim should be dismissed. A ruling could come in a month.

Kephart's lawyer, Terry Noffsinger of Evansville, says pathological gambling is widely viewed as a mental illness. He argued that Caesars representatives took "affirmative steps to persuade her to gamble" by calling her at home.

In similar cases, Indiana courts have held that casino operators don't have to prevent customers from gambling and consequently aren't responsible for their losses.

Noffsinger stressed that the law is not fully settled in cases involving problem gambling.

"If she had just gone in (to Caesars) on her own, that would be one thing," he said. He will try to prove casino officials knew Kephart was an addicted gambler and they pursued her because she had money to spare from a $1 million family inheritance she received in 2004.

The casino lawyers declined to comment further.

Indiana gambling regulations allow casinos to lend money to people they deem credit-worthy. Noffsinger previously represented Evansville resident and professed gambling addict David Williams in a federal lawsuit in which the precedent that casinos have no duty to protect a compulsive gambler from himself was upheld.

California lawyer I. Nelson Rose, a gambling law expert, said he believes the court precedent is well-established. He said wealthy gamblers are offered credit of several hundreds of thousands of dollars, so Caesars' decision to lend Kephart large sums is not unusual.

Noffsinger said Kephart's case is different because Caesars sued her first and the casino invited her to visit.

This was discussed here on the forum, as well: https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/woman-blames-gambling-debt-on-casino.19661/

Caesars tried to get the case squashed, but was rejected: Link Removed (Old/Invalid)

This case is still ongoing, as of 9/29/08. Link Removed ( Old/Invalid)

Here's their case, in a nutshell:

2:00 PM EST - Caesar's Riverboat Casino vs. Genevieve M. Kephart - Appellee-Defendant entered a casino owned by Appellant-Plaintiff Caesar's, where she lost $125,000 gambling in one evening. When the checks Kephart wrote to Caesar's were returned for insufficient funds, Caesar's sued to recover the amount owed. Kephart filed a counter-claim alleging that Caesar's knew that she suffered from a compulsive gambling disorder and owed her a duty to refrain from inducing her to frequent their casino. The trial court denied Caesar's motion to dismiss Kephart's counter-claim, and Caesar's appeals.The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Darden, Mathias and Crone

 

[dominique]

She said casino executives knew she had come out of bankruptcy four years earlier when Harrah's was one of her creditors.

and also

Caesars representatives took "affirmative steps to persuade her to gamble" by calling her at home.

Put these two together, and Harrah's looks very very bad.

 

[carjaw]

Graham's 2 million

The example reminds me of the case of Graham Calvert and his allegation that William Hill is responsible for his 2 million pounds gambling debt. A compulsive gambler who lost more than 2 million in a 5month betting spree lost again when the High Court threw out his claim for compensation and damages from the bookmaker William Hill. Graham Calvert, 28, a greyhound trainer, had argued that the company had failed in its "duty of care" towards him by allowing him to carry on betting and even to open a credit account after he had asked it to stop taking his money under its "self-exclusion" policy. It was a test case followed by bookies up and down the land who feared that a successful claim would open the floodgate to similar actions from out-of-pocket punters. However, the judge, Mr Justice Briggs ruled that the bookmaker owed Graham Calvert no duty of care despite the self-exclusion policy. The judge said that although William Hill did agree to exclude Mr Calvert from telephone gambling and failed to take reasonable steps to do so, pathological gambling would still probably have led to his financial ruin, but over a longer period of time. In a summary of his ruling, Mr Justice Briggs said: "William Hills failure to take reasonable care to exclude him from telephone gambling . . . did not therefore cause Mr Calvert any measurable financial or other loss."

Mr Calvert sued William Hill after he said that he had lost not only money but also his wife, health and livelihood. His lawyer, Anneliese Day, told the judge that William Hill should be held liable because it failed to operate its own policy. Calvert was hoping to establish in law for the first time that bookies do owe a duty of care in his circumstances. The scale of Calver's gambling was "staggering" he had lost about 347,000 on one bet alone when he backed the US to win the 2006 Ryder Cup. Calvert ended up borrowing money to fund his habit, was an accomplished greyhound trainer who ran the family business from a farm in Co Durham. He was once "comfortably well off" and had been involved in gambling for most of his life.

Interestingly, between the years 2000 and 2005 he made 50,000 a year profit from gambling. William Hill described it as "a victory for common sense" and that there was no case to answer to Calvert and that no duty of care was owed to him in this instance.

For me - the PhD student - my point is - the Government or the Gambling Commission / the regulators should do more to protect problem gamblers; in particular, that the gambling industry should deal with problem gamblers in a unified manner. And of course, thisis the issue central to my study. Also, the current system, in which each operator has its own stand-alone social responsibility policy, may not go far enough to deal with problem gambling effectively. Should all operators agree that when there is a problem - they are going to act responsibly?

Oh dear - I am sure this post will rile somebody - but it is not meant to - I try to understand where you are coming from - can you agree to disagree with me and my dreadful survey but now see where my study is aiming to go?

Yes?

 

[suzecat]

IMO if the loss of so much money was not a deterrent, then I would look to the licensing authorities to institute policy to protect: (1) problem gamblers who are unable to stop; and (2) casinos who are unable to identify problem gamblers. Once such a policy is instituted. the courts would have more teeth to rule on such issues.

 

[carjaw]

I find your comments really interesting - that in the case of Calvert who was just unable to stop that the regulators or licensing authorities should implement measures to 'help' him in overcoming his problem - and then with internet gambling because the issues of jurisdiction are so difficult without a licensing authority for cyberspace - I suppose these failings will continue with no end in sight unless the industry is willing to self-regulate itself.
Thank you again.

 

[DiamondGeezer]

The example reminds me of the case of Graham Calvert and his allegation that William Hill is responsible for his 2 million pounds gambling debt. A compulsive gambler who lost more than 2 million in a 5month betting spree lost again when the High Court threw out his claim for compensation and damages from the bookmaker William Hill. Graham Calvert, 28, a greyhound trainer, had argued that the company had failed in its "duty of care" towards him by allowing him to carry on betting and even to open a credit account after he had asked it to stop taking his money under its "self-exclusion" policy. It was a test case followed by bookies up and down the land who feared that a successful claim would open the floodgate to similar actions from out-of-pocket punters. However, the judge, Mr Justice Briggs ruled that the bookmaker owed Graham Calvert no duty of care despite the self-exclusion policy. The judge said that although William Hill did agree to exclude Mr Calvert from telephone gambling and failed to take reasonable steps to do so, pathological gambling would still probably have led to his financial ruin, but over a longer period of time. In a summary of his ruling, Mr Justice Briggs said: "William Hills failure to take reasonable care to exclude him from telephone gambling . . . did not therefore cause Mr Calvert any measurable financial or other loss."

Mr Calvert sued William Hill after he said that he had lost not only money but also his wife, health and livelihood. His lawyer, Anneliese Day, told the judge that William Hill should be held liable because it failed to operate its own policy. Calvert was hoping to establish in law for the first time that bookies do owe a duty of care in his circumstances. The scale of Calver's gambling was "staggering" he had lost about 347,000 on one bet alone when he backed the US to win the 2006 Ryder Cup. Calvert ended up borrowing money to fund his habit, was an accomplished greyhound trainer who ran the family business from a farm in Co Durham. He was once "comfortably well off" and had been involved in gambling for most of his life.

Interestingly, between the years 2000 and 2005 he made 50,000 a year profit from gambling. William Hill described it as "a victory for common sense" and that there was no case to answer to Calvert and that no duty of care was owed to him in this instance.

For me - the PhD student - my point is - the Government or the Gambling Commission / the regulators should do more to protect problem gamblers; in particular, that the gambling industry should deal with problem gamblers in a unified manner. And of course, thisis the issue central to my study. Also, the current system, in which each operator has its own stand-alone social responsibility policy, may not go far enough to deal with problem gambling effectively. Should all operators agree that when there is a problem - they are going to act responsibly?

Oh dear - I am sure this post will rile somebody - but it is not meant to - I try to understand where you are coming from - can you agree to disagree with me and my dreadful survey but now see where my study is aiming to go?

Yes?

This case was always going to fail because he could have gone to another bookmaker. The fact he lost his money at William Hill made no matieral difference. Yes they should have excluded him and lost the business to another bookie but it would have not altered his position, only theirs.

The fundamental problem is how do you identify the problem gambler? Large losses at a bookie does not mean the gambler has a problem. They could infact be arbing the nuts off the bookie and making a large profit. This is why it is so difficult. You cant' just look at one bookie account as the person may have dozens.

There is a lot more to gambling than online gambling. In the UK for example the majority of problem gamblers are using Fixed Odds Betting Terminals in bookmakers. These machines have a huge advantage for the bookmaker and produce about 50% of shop profits. Then you also have shop and on course betting which is largely cash.

I think the gambling question is similar to the credit card question. With credit cards it is almost impossible to know if they are being used responsibily or not. One person can have seven cards but be using them intellignetly for a business while another may have two but be racking up large debts. If you simply look at the money patterns you would never be able to tell the good from the bad. And this is how it is with betting.

Contrary to popular belief big betting firms don't like problem gamblers as they give them a bad image. They don't make a lot of money from problem gambling. Bookmakers make money by having good trading rooms and making good pricing decisions.

There will always be gamblers. Infact risk taking is often good for society. I think that you can't stop it in an open society. The best way to prevent people from gambling too much is to educate them about house advantage and the overround. But there will always be victims jsut like alcohol and drugs. It's part of life. Just as printing warnings on a bottle of whiskey won't help a problem drinker, no amount of tinkering will affect gambling.

 

[Elizabeth]

This is so interesting. My belief is that so many factors have to come together to help a problem gambler. The most important is that the problem gambler has to admit they have a problem. This, of course, rarely happens until their life is so ou of control, they have no other option but to admit it. By then, what can online casinos do? If one contacts a reputable casino, stating they have a problem, most casinos will help them by closing and locking accounts, limiting deposits and so forth.ALL business owners should have take some responsibility for their consumers. I's hard to know where to draw the line, though. If a casino contacted me and said they thought I had a problem, hen in fact I did not, I would be offended and feel they were being too controlling. I, personally, do not think financial statements do any good to control ones spending. As to why online gambling can be a problem, 3Dice said it best...isolation and the high emotion that make it so appealing. As far as regulating online casinos, where would one begin? They are located in so many different jurisdictions, with different laws, so first you have to get past that. It would take years to sort out, I believe, because just as an individual would resent being regulated, so would businesses. The bottom line is as everyone here has said... the gambler must regulate him/herself

 

[kauphy]

i agree with all the people on here about it being up to the person to know when they have a promble and to seek help for it. no amount of safegarudes will stop someone when they want to play. if they can,t play on-line they will just go to a landbase casino and play and there r no safegrudes there to stop them from spending every last dime they have. and it is like having a drinking or drug promble. there is no diffdance so i see why everyone keeps bring that up. no bar will kick u out if you tell them you have a drinking promble and no drug dealer will not sell to you just caz they know you have a promble again it comes down to the person themselfs to seek help in stopping. i love reading what ya all write but boy u sure can be hard on people sometimes. but carjaw they r a good bunch of people and some have very good points to what they say.

 

[carjaw]

Once again thanks for all comments - and just to say - i really need more gamblers to take part in my survey - the more responses to the survey - the more powerful the results - many respondents to the survey do like the idea of some tools of control - but i believe if more and more forum members took part - the final results would be somewhat different - so please visit the survey if you can spare the time

 

[DiamondGeezer]

The problem is most gamblers are compulsive liars

 

[jas2587]

The problem is most gamblers are compulsive liars

I would use the words bluffers or bull-shiters

but hey the casino's tell fibs tooo sooo.....


Cindy

 

[jas2587]

Once again thanks for all comments - and just to say - i really need more gamblers to take part in my survey - the more responses to the survey - the more powerful the results - many respondents to the survey do like the idea of some tools of control - but i believe if more and more forum members took part - the final results would be somewhat different - so please visit the survey if you can spare the time

I might have missed it in this thread but where are you getting your PHD from?

Thanks
Cindy

 

[carjaw]

Just to let you know - if I am lucky !!! And work hard - my PhD will be from the University of Wales.

Along the lines of my PhD study - the number of users of gambling sites that have taken part in the survey is very low - much higher is the category of other and over 90% of this category identify themselves as self-identified problem gamblers.

Now - the parameters of my research - mean that it would be unethical to pay participants (and I couldnt afford it anywa) so - do any forum members have any ideas of getting users of gambling sites to take part in the survey?

Interestingly (well it is to me) when the survey was being designed and constructed I had the agreement of 3 large international operators to take part in my research - they approved the questions in the survey and agreed that when the survey was launched that each operator would send emails to its players with a link to my survey. and the interesting part is that of course - the operators have now refused to send out the link because of time and work commitments.

all i can hope is that my research can add to our limited understanding of responsible gambling features - hopefully the results of my survey will add to the knowledge of responsible gambling as a result i would really be most grateful if any members of the forum could complete a survey or else - share with me any good ideas on getting more users of gambling sites to get invlved.

thank you

 

[rockycatt]

ok why dont you open a account or go bonus hunting thats free of charge you know nothing like being there as they say

oh and whatnew thing are they trying to get from this survey

how long did your teachers tell you that the world was rolling bones :notworthy

sory m8 had to get it out

 

[Tengil]

As I already stated I think you should discard your current survey. Firstly I think its aimed at the wrong people. In other words active gamblers, of whom many are addicts even if they dont admit it.

If you necessarely want to make a survey that holds any academic value, aim it at recovering addicts and those who deals with them.

 

[carjaw]

Thank you again for your comments - regarding the criticisms - the survey can be completed by various categories of respondents - and so it is not aimed at just one sector of stakeholders - also i think it will hold academic value to compare the different opinions of recreational gamblers and problem gamblers. there are definitely different perspectives emerging. if the survey was the only part of the study may be it would have a very limited application however, it makes up only one facet of primary data collections and again i have recognised its limitations.

and of course - i dont have teachers Honestly I have professors with many years of experience in the area of gambling studies before they are let loose with students like me !!

Surveys administered over the Internet have been plagued by low response rates and at times have provoked respondent rebellions against researchers !!!

 

[jas2587]

Just to let you know - if I am lucky !!! And work hard - my PhD will be from the University of Wales.

Along the lines of my PhD study - the number of users of gambling sites that have taken part in the survey is very low - much higher is the category of other and over 90% of this category identify themselves as self-identified problem gamblers.

Now - the parameters of my research - mean that it would be unethical to pay participants (and I couldnt afford it anywa) so - do any forum members have any ideas of getting users of gambling sites to take part in the survey?

Interestingly (well it is to me) when the survey was being designed and constructed I had the agreement of 3 large international operators to take part in my research - they approved the questions in the survey and agreed that when the survey was launched that each operator would send emails to its players with a link to my survey. and the interesting part is that of course - the operators have now refused to send out the link because of time and work commitments.

all i can hope is that my research can add to our limited understanding of responsible gambling features - hopefully the results of my survey will add to the knowledge of responsible gambling as a result i would really be most grateful if any members of the forum could complete a survey or else - share with me any good ideas on getting more users of gambling sites to get invlved.

thank you

then shouldnt you be at a site like GA where people go that have a problem with gambling I personally wont take your survey cause I dont trust ya you appear outta no where an ask all these questions I have never heard of any one doing this at all

think I will reseach the U of Wales something just isnt sitting well at all IMO

Cindy

 

[Tengil]

Thanks for claryfying. However Im a bit with Cindy on this, I think the answers from recovering addicts and people who work with them would be truthful. Some gamblers lie to themself and may not answer the survey truthfully (even if it may sound silly).

The survey may be of some value but personally I wouldnt quote it. Maybe analyze it and see if theres something that surprises me and then go more in depth with that.

And dont take my words as an advice, you should ask your tutor (or is it called supervisor) for those.

 

[jas2587]

after your PM if ya can't take criticisms then ya maybe should go back to school we all have a right to voice our thoughts
an I still feel something is not right here

Cindy

interesting topic yes right people to be askin IMO No

 

[catrina m]

What exactly is responsible gambling?

If you are a responsible person you would refuse to gamble.

Responsible drinking?

Responsible is the person who refuses to take part in anything that is irresponsible.

Losing your money to something you cannot control is irresponsible. Like losing your senses to a substance.

If you drink or take drugs you know your judgement is going to be impaired so that is a responsible act?

The term responsible gambling has no meaning.

Think about it.

I have no credentials that should be looked upon as knowing what I am talking about but isn't experience the best educator?

If you want to know how to regulate someone step in their shoes and risk YOUR money then ask yourself when you should stop.

 

[carjaw]

I will try to answer your question - what is responsible gambling ? within the academic frame of my study. Consumer protection, community/consumer awareness and education, harm minimisation and treatment have all been included within the frame of reference of responsible gambling. The practices involved include consumer complaints mechanisms, responsible marketing, gambling information pamphlets/pop ups and messages, restricting access to ATMs and or credit cards, design of game features, self-exclusion procedures and financial support for problem gambling services (Hing, Dickerson & Mackellar, 2001). In addition some technological advances in and of themselves have contributed to the potential range of harm minimisation strategies (e.g. smart card technology and consumer protection proposals for internet gambling (Moneypenny, 2000)). Despite the range of developments, definitions of key elements are rarely given or integrated into strategies. Furthermore there is generally a failure to draw upon existing literature on harm minimisation as it relates to other leisure/pleasure products that impinge on public health (e.g. alcohol and cigarettes) and a failure to develop strategies based on established principles or causal themes in the research literature.

There is however an emerging literature locating responsible gambling within a
public health paradigm (Korn, Gibbins & Azmier, 2001). If one catalyst for this recent interest in responsible gaming has been concern about possible litigation another has been the increasing expression of community concern
about the harmful effects associated with gambling (Costello & Millar, 2000). As social observers increasingly identify gambling-related problems as a public health issue, it is suggested that key stakeholders need to join together to reduce both the incidence and prevalence of gambling-related harm in the community. I hope that the results of my research (which is not the result of my survey) will set out principles to guide industry operators, health service and other welfare providers, interested community groups, consumers and governments and their related agencies in the adoption and implementation of responsible gambling and harm minimization initiatives.

Anybody out there like to take part in this research please take part in my survey

 

[DiamondGeezer]

I think you have got your work cut out on this one Carjaw!

This industry is almost totally unregulated in many areas of the world. Many here would argue the most serious problem is not helping the addictive gamblers but protecting the poor old regular player who constantly risks getting cheated and going unpaid. Who is looking out for us and trying to minimise our harm? Luckily CM is but I don't see many governments stepping up to the plate as many are keen to protect their own interests such as state monoploies.

Internet gambling won't get regulated until the EU monopolies and American WTO disputes get sorted out. It is difficult to see what harm minimisation initiatives can ever work when players can play at unregulated casinos in Malta or Costa Rica. Internet gaming is really a pawn in bigger disputes between powers accross the world.

What is the point of deposit limits and clock timers when so much of the industry is unregulated?

 

[carjaw]

I have probably said this earlier in the thread but problem gambling is a significant problem in many communities - particularly when there are negative effects on children (of those who gamble heavily), loss of employment, marital/relationship problems - massive amounts of debt in the UK 27K - I think that these are the reasons why looking at responsible gambling are important. The rate of addiction is estimated to reach the same proportions as drug addiction by 2026 (Orford) - there are so many opportunties to gamble as well as the online variety. it is almost a new phenomena - the amount of gambling oportunities that exist - the rate of addiction - and no - it does not affect the majority - most of us gamble and enjoy the games and enjoy the thrill - to no ill effect - but that is not how it is for everyone.

 

[3Dice]

What is the point of deposit limits and clock timers when so much of the industry is unregulated?

No single operator will ever be _the_ solution - nor _the_ problem. But - every operator is either part of the solution - or part of the problem.

Government regulations will help in making it more difficult for those operators that have no intention to be part of the solution to continue to run out of jurisdictions that are indeed regulated - but why do we assume they would not just move to another offshore island - or god forbid - run the casino from a 'cloud' - peer 2 peer - instead of a localized server.

The point is that there is no globally accepted authority that can hold operators accountable - and moving a server on the internet is cost-free - it is going to prove impossible to stop operators that have bad intentions with mere regulations.

But, just as any operator is either part of the solution - or part of the problem - so is every player. As a player, do you assess the responsible gambling features of a casino before you decide to patronize it ?
The players have much more power over this than any government ever will .. and as a player - even if you never had or will have a problem with gambling yourself - you are part of either the solution - or the problem.

Enzo

 

[Tengil]

Yes the negative externalities are huge.

Its quite shocking how lightly some of the posters take the whole problem. I think you are on the right way, I have pretty much the same toughts that you seem to have.

Therefore I would still advice you not to "waste" your time here, just look at most of the responses in this thread.

Is your PhD going to be public? So that one could read it after its done.
Edit: At least I would be very interested to read it.

 

[carjaw]

Well - it will be published if it is good enough!!! but seriously I will let the forum have a sneak preview of my main findings - thank you for your interest

 

[Tengil]

At least I find it very interesting. I once planned to do my Master about our national gambling monopoly. Didnt do it in the end but came across quite much information about gambling addiction and its cost for the economy.

And I havent stumbled on to any study which would be similar to yours. So it would be highly interesting and also very valuable to the "industry discussion".

 

[carjaw]

Thank you for your comments Spiderlegz (your legs arent really like a spider are they - like 8 of them) - can i post my request for help in other categories here? I really would like more responses - ust is it worthwhile going in other parts of the forum

 

[winbig]

Thank you for your comments Spiderlegz (your legs arent really like a spider are they - like 8 of them) - can i post my request for help in other categories here? I really would like more responses - ust is it worthwhile going in other parts of the forum

Nah, 1 thread is enough...if it's on the same topic. 2+ threads would only muck things up.

 

[DiamondGeezer]

I have probably said this earlier in the thread but problem gambling is a significant problem in many communities - particularly when there are negative effects on children (of those who gamble heavily), loss of employment, marital/relationship problems - massive amounts of debt in the UK 27K - I think that these are the reasons why looking at responsible gambling are important. The rate of addiction is estimated to reach the same proportions as drug addiction by 2026 (Orford) - there are so many opportunties to gamble as well as the online variety. it is almost a new phenomena - the amount of gambling oportunities that exist - the rate of addiction - and no - it does not affect the majority - most of us gamble and enjoy the games and enjoy the thrill - to no ill effect - but that is not how it is for everyone.

Carjaw I am afraid the cat is well and truly out of the bag. Everything changed with the invention of spreadbetting, the arrival of betting exchanges and the online poker and casino craze.

But despite these revolutions the amount of problem gambling in the UK has not increased greatly over the last few years. My understanding was that most problem gamblers in the UK use betting shops. It is difficult to see how exactly you can prevent people from using betting shops.

I really think the only way is education. That and providing treatment on the NHS for problem gamblers such as is happening in London now. I am not convinced there is anything you can do via the Internet to reduce harmful gambling.

 

[carjaw]

A recent study by Wood and wiliams in 2007 did actually determine through research with problem gamblers that they prefered the traditional venues (in their study they did not explore which kind of venues) to online ones - this research was one that looked at the internet phenomena and was exploring characteristics of online players - problem gambling was not an overwhelming characteristics. Of course a small number of problem gamblers are online - but when one looks at the numbers ie a small numbers 0.6% of the British gambling 'population' are problem gamblers - so that is 500,000 people so a tiny per cent but for me a big number and - now i am guessing if 10% of the problem gambling population are online - there are 60,000 in the uk alone with a serious problem with few if any tools of control if they should want to stop gambling. The 0.6% figures is similar in many countries with an average figures quoted at approx 0.4% in many countries - so a small per cent but it could still translate into a hefty figure - accessibility in Britain, opportunities to gamble are now gargantuan - both offline and online - it was only 11 years ago that betting shops had to have heavy curtains in their shop windows in order to seal ff the den of iniquity inside !!!! and now - last year - sales of scratchcards hit the billion pounds mark! so - anyway i soldier on (somewhat wounded) looking for persons who 'know' gambling sites to take part in my survey

 

[carjaw]

From anyone is willing and interested in helping - I am asking any users of gambling websites, those familiar with gambling websites to take part in my online survey which seeks to find out which websites features could be helpful if a person starts to feel that their play is becoming out of control. Many thanks. It will take less than 10 minutes - promise - and be taking part in research which has bever been undertaken before !

 

[KasinoKing]

From anyone is willing and interested in helping - I am asking any users of gambling websites, those familiar with gambling websites to take part in my online survey which seeks to find out which websites features could be helpful if a person starts to feel that their play is becoming out of control. Many thanks. It will take less than 10 minutes - promise - and be taking part in research which has bever been undertaken before !

Although I do think you are totally wasting your time - it's your study, your choice.

But what I would suggest might help you, is put the link to your survey at the bottom of each of your posts - preferably in your signature. (User CP in the menu bar at the top of the forum page)
You keep asking people to take part, and expect them to search for the link... no chance - gamblers are lazy blighters!