Should Gambling Advertising Be Banned?

2 Scoops

whisky_galore wrote: »

At the end of the day, the house always wins. They're not charities.

Interesting factoid, William Hill was a Black and Tan.

Not sure if you're being sarcastic, you don't play against the house in normal poker, you play against other players. The house rakes a small percentage of each pot or tournament entry fee.

corks finest

Yes

biko

Even though I hate gambling I say "no" - you just have to assume people are adults and can make their own decisions.

valoren

If advertising does get banned make sure you invest in gambling companies.
They'll save millions in advertising costs but people will still gamble and they'll still line the pockets of the gambling companies.
Needless to say, these profits would need to find a home and I'm sure this would involve giving out dividends.
Same thing happened with tobacco companies.

Armani Square Knob

Armani Square Knob wrote: »

The thing about the RNG... - is it really, truely 'Random'.
Do you have the complied source software code (and hardware artifact code) available to freely peruse?

Do banks and gov ever get hacked?
Do secure, encrypted servers ever suffer from code injections or unathorised access?
Have any large poker sites been reported over improper admin key access?
Are you playing on a table against faceless collaborators, even briefly?

You haven't a clue about poker

Canis Lupus

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Is that skill or 'just' memory?

Is any job more than just memory if his level of poker is deemed as that? It's far more technical than the vast majority of jobs.

But no, it isn't just memory. There are so many factors that go into every single decision if you're trying to play GTO. I've got a good handle on what those are but would never be able to be a winning player.

Victor

biko wrote: »

Even though I hate gambling I say "no" - you just have to assume people are adults and can make their own decisions.

But some of them aren't adults.

Grayson

2 Scoops wrote: »

Not true, sorry to be crude but you don't know what you're talking about. Poker is mostly maths and using a solid strategy/adjusting to opponents. I've played online poker for like 10 years and tracked every single hand I've played.

Here's my graph from last month for example. I've won tens of thousands only playing micro stakes cash games. It takes a lot of work/study but it's possible.

So essentially you're running a mini hedge fund. By simply playing odds over smaller amounts you're certain that although you'll lose some small matches, you'll win more overall.

Nice, but it doesn't really have any bearing on the OP's post about advertising except that will bring in more suckers.

Stephen15

Stephen15 wrote: »

Just read that Italy has now banned all forms of gambling advertising in all forms including television, sports sponsorship, online and billboards etc....
Should Gambling Advertising Be Banned?

Yes, including that lunacy which is the National Lottery. I'd also ban advertising alcohol.

seamus

Victor wrote: »

But some of them aren't adults.

Indeed. Some of the more insidious intent of marketing is planting seeds into younger generations. Thet gambling is a fun activity that goes hand-in-hand with watching sport and everyone who's fun is doing it.

Definitely should be banning it on TV at least around sports games. And as much as I'm a fan of a tipple, the same should probably apply to alcohol.

Hector Bellend

Whatever.

People will still gamble anyway.

People still drink, drink and drive, smoke, do drugs and have unprotected sex with strangers. Let's ban gambling advertising and see how that works.

Wanderer78

I've worked with a few serious gamblers, a scary addiction

jack presley

If it means I'll never have to hear Ray Winston telling us he's part of the world's largest betting community ever again, then yes I'll be in favour of a ban on gambling advertising.

Hector Bellend

Hector Bellend wrote: »

Whatever.

People will still gamble anyway.

People still drink, drink and drive, smoke, do drugs and have unprotected sex with strangers. Let's ban gambling advertising and see how that works.

There has been a huge reduction in people taking up smoking and drink driving. Something has worked.

Hector Bellend

Hector Bellend wrote: »

Whatever.

People will still gamble anyway.

People still drink, drink and drive, smoke, do drugs and have unprotected sex with strangers. Let's ban gambling advertising and see how that works.

Gambling and alcohol firms advertise to increase sales. Do you really think they spend so much on advertising just for the craic?

Logically, therefore, banning advertising will decrease their sales. Starve them of the oxygen of publicity.

I agree with a ban on advertising for gambling. I've had to stream the World Cup since it isn't in English where I am and it's frankly ridiculous how much ad time goes to it. It really surprised me just how much of it there was having been away from TV for so long.

evil_seed

also ban gambling apps. it's far too easy to use an app on your phone. I used to call it the pocket tote. you see a number on the screen that doesn't equate to money in your mind.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Chaos Tourist

Deleted User wrote: »

I agree with a ban on advertising for gambling. I've had to stream the World Cup since it isn't in English where I am and it's frankly ridiculous how much ad time goes to it. It really surprised me just how much of it there was having been away from TV for so long.

I happened to be watching Sky Sports News in the pub one evening and the gambling ads were non-stop. It was infuriating. Has gambling and sport ever been this much intertwined? In the past SSN would at least throw in a few car insurance ads now and again.

bot43

Its how the ads are done. Lad "banter" and its all great fun. But when the fun stops, stop. That makes it ok.

But its not just Ladbrokes and PP etc. Look at morning/afternoon TV ads aimed at the bored housewife, mother on mat leave, those who just dont want to work god love them. The ad breaks are wall to wall gambling/pay day loans/ the accident is not your fault.

Something certainly has to be done to address this.

And then you see Off The Ball ttoally not even pretending that they are a ;egit show anymore, but merely a device for Boyle Sports to shill their murky wares. Straight out ads on social media now of Boyles bet enhancers by OTB.

bot43

Then you see an ad like this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGsK6DOYIs0

Honestly the first time I saw this, I genuinely thought the ad was about gambling carefully ie he caught the glass one. It was a pure fluke. Next time if a glass falls out of the press, you wont catch it. Same as your bets, you will not win every time.

4068ac1elhodqr

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Yes, Lotteries are largely private pension funds these days (profit making private companies), with a good bit of state taxation.
Whatever's left over (after prizes and profits) goes to 'good causes' circa only 25-30% of total sales.

In this instance bookie's lotteries can offer better odds and value, as long as you offer % of your winnings, to what you yourself deem 'good causes'.

The reason betting is actually 'currently opening up' in the USA is down to one factor: Tax Receipts. Currently they loose $10's of bns, to the black market. Now the IRS wants their slice of this pie, even after all this time, and likely against the majority public voice.

This highlights the core issue. It's near impossible to stop, therefore it does need strict regulation combined with corporate repsonsibiliy. The sheer amount of ads currently broadcast, does not help in this case.

Realistically only about 10% of people should ever, ever attempt to gamble.

Some of us have incredible self-control, indepth skill, math advantage wizardry, knowledge or insight of real-world events. (not that virtual bingo, casino, poker, games nonsense - stay well clear of ALL of that).

Ability to rise above natural reactions, make 'clear balanced decisions' through undertanding of the dangers. An ability to recognise, and thus avoid patterns of dopamine-release trigger situations. Recognise that neural-pathways can negatively activated, influencing decisions particularly under certain enviromental situations.

If you can't give up years of daily smoking or coffee 'instantly' through pure self-will. If you 'need' sugar, in your tea. If you can't have a single biscuit in a packet without having 'just a couple more'. If you can't have a glass of wine without finishing the bottle. If you can't go to the shops without impuse buying something unnecessary. If you can't kept to exceedingly strict budgets, and have massive innate collections of shoes, collectables and so on...

....it's rather simply, 'not for you'.

Capt'n Midnight

Armani Square Knob wrote: »

On-line it's very little skill, mostly luck
- from an anonymous RNG's machine's Math.random() function.

except it's more likely to be PRNG unless they use a truly independent source of entrophy.


http://www.businessinsider.com/4-time-lottery-winner-not-exactly-lucky-2011-8?IR=T

Joan Ginther, 63, won almost $21 million since her winning spree began in 1993. At the time that she won the fourth jackpot, the AP wrote that her chances of winning the lottery was 1 in 18 septillion, (18 with 24 zeros after it) almost an impossibility.

...
"Once she discovered a pattern, Ginther would have had to wait until a winning ticket was scheduled to show up in a sparsely populated region--the less competition for that winning ticket, the better. It would be crucial to pick a place that she had reason to visit, such as Bishop and the surrounding towns. It would also be helpful if the store owner held the tickets for her."

HappyAsLarE

Try_harder wrote: »

Skill and chance

You can calculate the chance and play accordingly so it’s pure skill.

Birneybau

I despise Paddy Power and their banter sh!te.

bodice ripper

The bookie's is a trap house.

4068ac1elhodqr

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

except it's more likely to be PRNG unless they use a truly independent source of entrophy.

True perhaps only ‘infinite quantum multi-verse level processing’ is ‘leaning^’ towards true random.

But even then ^nature itself isn’t fully random. See: 1.6180327868852. More obvious, is our own planet’s basic reciprocal-lock {40}{23}. ‘The Universe itself displays intelligent predictable design’.

Usually it’s quasi-random RNGs (displays patterns), or pseudo-random. CSPRNG helps but is slower. Any code (thus:deterministic) call to random, must start from a seed value: perhaps timestamp or such.

Hardware/software artefacts can also be an issue, as are quality, source assessor(motive) and actual methods/frequency of testing. Not to mention obvious security, dark code, back-doors or what have ye’.

After all that (phew!), most shop FOBT machines are flawed: commonly and openly hard-wired at 93% rtn (like the people that use them).

Roulette (French) {36} slightly stealthily excludes the ‘0’ in advertised offers (instant house advantage). −1 × ​36⁄37 + 35 × ​1⁄37 = −0.0270 (i.e. 2.70% house edge).

Poker too at e.g. 5% commission, is hardly useful in an AvB scenario. I.e. BEP (break-even, or <4% profit) is actually a ‘loss event’.

De Bhál

Yes, mainly so I don't have to see Ray Winstone.

SEPT 23 1989

Yeah I hate it

never gamble online always in shop but even these are being tarted up into something I don't recognise or enjoy

Donald Trump

2 Scoops wrote: »

Not true, sorry to be crude but you don't know what you're talking about. Poker is mostly maths and using a solid strategy/adjusting to opponents. I've played online poker for like 10 years and tracked every single hand I've played.

Here's my graph from last month for example. I've won tens of thousands only playing micro stakes cash games. It takes a lot of work/study but it's possible.

Yeah but it's a zero sum game. (Less than that if there are commissions and fees).




Every Euro that you win is taken from some poor gobshite. You aren't creating anything, just siphoning money from other people