Responsible Gambling Charity supports max bet limit on slots

[News Hound]

GamCare in call for maximum bet stake limit when playing at online casinos

Read the full article here: Responsible Gambling Charity supports max bet limit on slots

 

[L&L-Jan]

Sounds like: GamCare in call to promote unregulated gambling

 

[Webzcas]

No surprises that GamCare have taken the stance they have in openly calling for a maximum bet stake limit of £2.

Standing back objectively I can see exactly where they are coming from, however, if this is introduced it will only speed up the exodus to offshore crypto casinos. For those vast majority of players who are able to gamble within their means and also those who do have a problem with gambling.

£2 in my own opinion is too low. It will make the UK online casino scene no better than a motorway service station. I mean RTP's are heading that way anyhow!

 

[Webzcas]

Looks like the Daily Mail have picked up the baton and are now running with GamCare's response

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

 

[goatwack]

A gambling charity that deals with the fallout from problem gambling, submitting their opinion on betting limits.....I think we all knew that they'd go for the lowest possible proposal.

Couple that with Webzcas' above media link and we can all see where this is headed, can't we!

These things come in stages, I suspect this decision was made long ago. Now comes the justification for it, and how anything over £2 would lead to tales of despair.

New stake limits for online slots games that will be between £2 and £15 per spin. We will also consult on measures to give greater protections for 18–24 year olds who the evidence shows are at heightened risk of harm.

We.....didn't think it would ever be £11 per spin.....did we?

 

[Webzcas]

Why don't they as in GamCare point their service users to BetBlocker? Seriously interested as to why not more responsible gambling charities work with Duncan and his team?

Instead of pretty much trying to eliminate an industry, with suggestions such as a £2 max bet limit.

Another plug, my BetBlocker install and demonstration video will be published soon!

 

[goatwack]

Why don't they as in GamCare point their service users to BetBlocker? Seriously interested as to why not more responsible gambling charities work with Duncan and his team?

Instead of pretty much trying to eliminate an industry, with suggestions such as a £2 max bet limit.

Another plug, my BetBlocker install and demonstration video will be published soon!

Because it would detract from their site, never mind be seen to be actually helpful.

Amazing how many good ideas could be implemented to help problem gamblers, but aren't.

Many charities are biased and don't get a free pass by virtue of being a charity. Their CEOs and company execs mix it up with the best of 'em.

Wouldn't surprise me one jot if useful idiots certain organizations are 'thoroughly convinced' to align with the UKGC's impending vision, through completely innocent means of course

 

[Lemon]

£2 is too low; it needs to be at least £5 to be in line with brick and mortar casinos, otherwise it's too similar to land-based LBOs and so on.

At least online you'd be able to win more than £500, and the RTP% might be a bit better, but other than that it's a shite proposal and they need to ask the opinion of a wider audience.

 

[goatwack]

And of course these decisions aren't met based on any relatable, real- life scenarios either.

They simply assume that gamblers have a ready-made, finite amount to spend, with no thought given to someone gambling say £5-10 spins after having increased their balance considerably.

Would losing £300, after having accrued it from a £20 deposit, be anywhere near as detrimental as having deposited £300 to only then lose it?

It's pretty much all the same to them. I'm just curious as to how much further the UKGC are willing to go. My money's on '£1' limits in a couple of years, then the dreaded 50p

 

[Webzcas]

Would losing £300, after having accrued it from a £20 deposit, be anywhere near as detrimental as having deposited £300 to only then lose it?

This is exactly how I used to play. Bet low stakes around £1 a spin and hit a feature or two building up a decent balance, then up the bet goes. Surely that is half the fun, was for me, especially when cashing out a nice 5 figure sum occurs at the end result.

If I lost my deposit in playing this way, then so be it. Gambling is meant to be a fun past time. Introducing a £2 maximum stake removes the fun.

 

[Smithyy]

Gamcare must be financially backing the next "Curacao" - anjuang or whatever it's called. There's no other way they could be so tone deaf with actual player wants so I am now christening the giant gamcare stake scandal to trap evacuating Brits on their way to crypto sites and herd them into their anjuang clipshot joints like cattle .

Although I suppose whatever stake size gamcare finally settle on the ukgc will reduce it by an additional 75% cause... player protection right...

 

[slot_zombie]

SInce UK players are no longer free to gamble as they see fit, and must play within pre-ordained "responsible limits" (much to be said for that concept, if not the heavy handed implementation of it...), what does it matter their bet size?

£2/spin is more than capable of wrecking the average wage packet in short order on modern volatile games, absent many big hits.

Equinox terminals in the bookies still have £50 spins with the Mega option (pre-game gamble with an average of 25 losing gambles before the reels will even move). Are they all going to be phased out?

All pointless.

 

[Mr_Slot5]

And of course these decisions aren't met based on any relatable, real- life scenarios either.

They simply assume that gamblers have a ready-made, finite amount to spend, with no thought given to someone gambling say £5-10 spins after having increased their balance considerably.

Would losing £300, after having accrued it from a £20 deposit, be anywhere near as detrimental as having deposited £300 to only then lose it?

It's pretty much all the same to them. I'm just curious as to how much further the UKGC are willing to go. My money's on '£1' limits in a couple of years, then the dreaded 50p

This.

There is zero nuance or understanding of context shown by these people. They're basically trying to justify using a sledgehammer to crack open a nut.

 

[Reelsoffun]

Tbh honest when slots are cold you can soon burn through £2-300 even on 20p 40p

So it’s all pointless as usual the people tasked with these decisions are clueless to what really could be done.

 

[Mark_Lottomart]

Why don't they as in GamCare point their service users to BetBlocker? Seriously interested as to why not more responsible gambling charities work with Duncan and his team?

Instead of pretty much trying to eliminate an industry, with suggestions such as a £2 max bet limit.

Another plug, my BetBlocker install and demonstration video will be published soon!

We’ve moved our annual contribution from Gamcare to Betblocker. We’re small so it’s not going to set their world on fire but I wish the bigger players would follow suit. I’m a huge supporter of Gamcare of course but Betblocker has my (our) backing as it actively blocks problem players from gambling.

 

[Reelsoffun]

Stakes isn’t going to be the answer, that just makes it unfair to gamblers that have no issues.

Any gambler that needs this many rules to stay in control, eg banning autoplay, fast spins, bonus buys etc etc. Should not have access to gambling full stop.

where are the similar rules for alcohol? Maybe shops should only allow 1 can of beer or 1 bottle of wine etc to protect the ones that cant control theit alcohol consumption, it’s all madness.

 

[Mark_Lottomart]

Stakes isn’t going to be the answer, that just makes it unfair to gamblers that have no issues.

Any gambler that needs this many rules to stay in control, eg banning autoplay, fast spins, bonus buys etc etc. Should not have access to gambling full stop.

where are the similar rules for alcohol? Maybe shops should only allow 1 can of beer or 1 bottle of wine etc to protect the ones that cant control theit alcohol consumption, it’s all madness.

Did you see Scotland are increasing the minimum per unit of alcohol? It’s like the reverse of the slots reductions.

 

[jasonuk]

Because the £2 cap on FOBTs solved all the problems.... oh wait, it didn't. Plenty of social media videos of people playing 2... 3... 4... machines at once to get around the limits with operators turning a blind eye.

Once again it seems like the focus is on the wrong things... £2 spins on a 88-92% slot will still decimate a balance, £2 spins on an ultra-high variance 96% slot will still decimate a balance, and a lower limit will encourage a race to the bottom where operators lower RTPs even more.

And given they said all online casino games can you imagine Blackjack or Roulette capped at £2 per game round? Nobody is going to play that...

If people are gambling money they can't afford, that is a deposit problem. If the player is able to deposit responsibly and within their means, then they should be able to play how they want - including autoplay, ultra-high variance slots and playing bigger after a big win (and, as much as I dislike the premise of them, bonus buys to a certain extent).

All these changes don't really solve anything - either they'll go offshore, or they'll play multiple sites at once... neither of which improve the situation.

 

[Webzcas]

We’ve moved our annual contribution from Gamcare to Betblocker. We’re small so it’s not going to set their world on fire but I wish the bigger players would follow suit. I’m a huge supporter of Gamcare of course but Betblocker has my (our) backing as it actively blocks problem players from gambling.

It is in short an awesome application and piece of software. Using this alongside self excluding with GamStop is by far the best two actions anyone who wants to stop gambling can do.

Why the likes of GamCare do not actively signpost their service users towards BetBlocker is mind boggling. Seriously.

Any operator that supports BetBlocker gets a big thumbs up from me and should be the same for anyone that supports responsible gambling

 

[Webzcas]

Because the £2 cap on FOBTs solved all the problems.... oh wait, it didn't.

Is this why all these MerkurSlot establishments offering over a dozen machines with maximum payouts of £500 have started to popup throughout high streets in towns and cities across the country in the UK?

 

[Guntis]

Before, i thought that BetBlocker was just another app that blocks all gambling websites for good, and nothing else. But it's not true. One useful function i see is their 'Calendaring' feature that allows blocking access to gambling sites on any chosen days.

Scenario: One might be in a chill mood today because they're skint, but are already planning to play on Friday when their money arrives.

With BetBlocker in such a case, they could set a block in advance from Friday to say Tuesday, keeping their money in a pocket. This could also add a degree of better control over spending when used regularly. Plus there is no registration needed, meaning one does not get placed on that "subhuman list" like in the case with Gamstop, etc.

The thing i'm not sure about is whether a block still works after the app was uninstalled (block set for Fri-Tue and app removed on Sat).

 

[goatwack]

The £2 limit's for show obviously. It doesn't change the online landscape for the better, it's there to appease the sort of people that already despise gamblers, you know, grass- smoothie- drinking Guardian readers.

From the subsequent sensationalist tabloids you'll have pearl-clutching Government ministers get caught up in the hysteria, whose own insular experiences don't even extend as far as ever having played PacMan, let alone online slots, condone these stake reductions.

Because on a superficial level, reducing bet sizes is a proactive step in eliminating problem gambling, with the breadth of other problems this creates not even on their radar.

These are the kind of people that stand up in Parliament decrying how Night Trap or Mortal Kombat is ruining our children and society as a whole, whilst turning a blind eye to FOBTs. Yet there you go!

 

[Webzcas]

Before, i thought that BetBlocker was just another app that blocks all gambling websites for good, and nothing else. But it's not true. One useful function i see is their 'Calendaring' feature that allows blocking access to gambling sites on any chosen days.

Scenario: One might be in a chill mood today because they're skint, but are already planning to play on Friday when their money arrives.

With BetBlocker in such a case, they could set a block in advance from Friday to say Tuesday, keeping their money in a pocket. This could also add a degree of better control over spending when used regularly. Plus there is no registration needed, meaning one does not get placed on that "subhuman list" like the case with Gamstop, etc.

The thing i'm not sure about is whether a block still works after the app was uninstalled (block set for Fri-Tue and app removed on Sat).

I have installed it and am currently in the process of editing and rerecording parts of the video demonstrating the install.

Yes, it is true you can block gambling sites and apps for x amount of days up too indefinitely. Personally, I think that is a good feature to have.

But if you have a gambling problem, like with someone who is an alcoholic, the help has to start with yourself. So when you go to install, it choose forever as the time period.

Other than factory reinstalling your device, you are then snookered when it comes to accessing a gambling site or app on said device.

Yes you are also correct in that you do not have to provide any details and the downloading and installing of the app is completely anonymous. I don't see the issue with this either, in fact I see this as somewhat of a plus point.

Besides if you are installing BetBlocker, surely you would also be registering with GamStop or the equivalent self exclusion service provided in the country you reside in?

Sneak peek

 

[jasonuk]

Is this why all these MerkurSlot establishments offering over a dozen machines with maximum payouts of £500 have started to popup throughout high streets in towns and cities across the country in the UK?

Having a look through their PR section, it looks like they've opened nearly 100 new venues in the past 3 years.

I would expect this is down to the dynamic between betting shops and adult gaming centres (AGC) - the former is capped at 4 machines, the latter is allowed to have 20% B3 (hence the proliferation of £100 machines, those tiny box things, and other tactics to get the total number of machines up).

So in the case of bookmakers, they will have an issue because of the cap of 4 machines - lower stakes and slower spin speeds will have a considerable negative impact on the amount staked, so they lower the RTP to (partially) compensate, or push players online (as they've done during the pandemic) where no such limitations exist for the bookmaker.

It also explains why they are closing vast numbers of retail shops - now they've pushed all those players online, the balance point for the in-shop FOBTs is higher (smaller pool of players) and thus it's an easier decision for them to close the shop and migrate remaining customers to another shop or online.

The AGC by contrast, unless they are full every hour of every day (literally - half of MerkurSlot venues are open 24 hours) then those changes can slow down the rate of loss for a single customer on a single machine, but doesn't really change the overall picture. The player can still easily lose £100, £200, £300... in a matter of minutes, and the AGC continues to make profit regardless.

 

[Webzcas]

Re BetBlocker, you can’t uninstall it