- This topic has 22 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
“The whole point of the gamble is the risk”.
Alan is, of course, correct. But as we have seen in the last few years (not just in betting), we have become an increasingly risk averse society to the extent where risk is now regarded by many people as A Very Bad Thing.
Trying to get the Gambling Commission and the Brains Trust of our politicians to understand how risk can be a good thing is a waste of time. It is something they are either unwilling or (more likely) unable to understand.
A very sad affair and whatever Alan decides to turn his hand to in the future may I wish him every success.
CAS is quite right about society becoming more risk adverse with ‘do gooders’ exploiting examples of problem gamblers to give a distorted view of your typical bettor and the nanny state not wishing to be thought of as uncaring gladly falls in line.As with other things they who shout loudest being the ones listened to by politicians and I believe this will only get worse under a possible Labour government as they seem to bend in whatever direction special interest groups push in order to look good in the public eye.
Starting with a general health & safety theme all those years ago who would have thought it could have morphed into the monster it’s become with mental being the latest fashionable addition.CAS is correct in saying trying to get the GC & politicians to understand how risk works is an impossible task for I visited their offices here in Birmingham taking with me the book Against the Gods,the remarkable story of risk,in the vain hope of actually talking with someone there.lol no such luck!
What the future holds is very murky but I can easily see bookmakers going offshore as they have done so in the past.
good luck to allInterference from authority is not my cup of tea, for sure.
I see a limit of £500 loss/month will be the ‘going rate’ before the bookie steps in, and this will drop to £150/month i believe, unless i’ve interpreted it incorrectly.
Hmm….i’d imagine it will affect 000s of peeps. We all have bad months and we all have good months.
Guess i’ll have to make sure i spread a month’s bets around my numerous accounts.Grim stuff, glad I ceased punting several years ago
Full circle perhaps: back on-course with a thick wedge of nasty plastic notes stuck down his socks
Cash is king
Drone,
Nail on head – I was busy at Salisbury on Sunday, brightening the afternoon for a couple of rails bookies.
Of course the next problem will be getting my bank to dole out the readies on demand.
Is this the same Alan Potts of the Against The Crowd and Inside Track etc book fame? Loved those books by the way. Really sad to hear a man who has been doing this for so long and proven he’s not a problem gambler is being treated this way. I must admit I’m not gambling in the three figures myself (but not judgemental of anyone who does) and I’m finding myself restricted etc like everyone else, there gets a point where you think yes this is a hobby but you are putting time and effort in and somewhere you need sufficient financial reward when it does go right to justify that effort. Not to hijack this thread but I must admit I’ve found myself questioning how much longer I’ll carry on with this pattern and I’m only a relative youngster, the likes the sport probably needs to keep long term to continue to thrive.
There are two threads to this – one is about protecting people who develop life-harming gambling addictions. The second is about people thinking the way they think life should be lived is the way we all should live it.
For point one – there must be far more effective ways of spotting and targeting problem punters than the ‘across-the-board’ draconian and intrusive checks and snooping being proposed.
On point two – here’s a question. If I had a million pounds in the bank, how much should I be allowed lose gambling with it before the authorities step in and stop me?
I’d say ‘all of it’ as it is my money and I should be free to do what I like with it.
What if I burn it like the K Foundation? Or lose it on the stock market? Or splash out on a few Aston Martins that will rust away? Who is to say what I can or cannot do with my money?
Are these rules being used to force successful punters to keep more money in their betting accounts, so as not to need deposits?
Value Is Everything‘Of course the next problem will be getting my bank to dole out the readies on demand.’
Purely anecdotal and I’ve no idea of the details but I was at the bank a couple of weeks ago and the chap next to me requested a withdrawal of just over a grand. The cashier said it flagged up a security alert and he had to call the relevant people to approve it. Don’t know what happened because I left but I wouldn’t exactly call a grand a particularly large sum of money, especially in this current period of rapid inflation.
‘Who is to say what I can or cannot do with my money?’
We do appear to be heading in a worrying direction with these gambling rules and this graduated smoking ban. I do not wish to get too political but under the Conservatives of all people too, I did not think they stood for such Draconian interference in people’s lives. How long before the pub needs to check my finances before I get a pint or I’m asked for my BMI before ordering a pizza?
Surely whether the bank was doing the right thing when someone tries to get £1000 out of the bank all depends on how regularly the person takes that sort of money out?
If the person has never taken that sort of money out, then a check seems fair enough tbh. Especially when there is so much fraud these days.
In contrast, if it is a regular thing, maybe should not have as many checks – some yes.If someone nicked £1000+ from your bank account, Richard… you’d want to know why they didn’t do more checks.
Value Is EverythingI’ve been following this, albeit not closely, and the one thing I can’t understand is why just racing has been targeted. (My apologies if I am incorrect).
If the issue is with a nanny state concerned about a number of people having gambling problems, then why the focus on racing?
Have any studies been done to identify which sectors of gambling carry the greatest risk to addiction?
ANY gambling carries the risk of addiction, but are these same ‘affordability checks’ made for people gambling via casinos, online casinos, scratch cards, lottery or slot machines?
Without any evidence, I would suggest that these areas carry more of a risk for addictive gambling than horse racing.
I’d have thought a bank employee who can actually see the guy in front of his face is far better placed to carry out an ID check than someone on the phone. I’ve no issue with banks ensuring they are dealing with me as the account holder but what I do (within the law of course) with my legally obtained money is my business.
What happens when they ask for proof of how people obtained their money? AP as a professional gambler has done this perfectly legally but it is also somewhat unorthodox. Could start to get time consuming to prove.
As I said, it’s purely anecdotal evidence and I know few details but if banks’ security bells are ringing over £1k withdrawals with any great frequency then I find that a bit much.
Personally I get around the problem by spending all my money and not having a grand to take out
Just to clarify on the bank issue, when I opened this account I made it very clear to them that my ‘business’ could involve handling large sums in cash and that four figure withdrawals (and hopefully similar deposits) would be necessary. I also made no secret of what the cash would be used for.
I actually made a large four figure cash withdrawal on Thursday, was asked only to produce evidence of identity (driving licence). The counter clerk did ask what the money was for, but made no further enquiry when I told him it was for betting on the racecourse. Obviously my account shows ample evidence of transfers to and from betting sites and again I’ve never had any problems with those. The bank in question is the one that doesn’t close branches and I use the facility within their large HQ a few miles from my home.
I previously dealt with a small sub branch of HSBC during the 90s when all my betting was done in cash. The regular staff there were always friendly, but also convinced I was running a team of girls in Manchester Rd, the local red light district. Hence the piles of grubby, well worn tens and twenties I would deposit! When that small office closed, I found the town centre facility less welcoming, which prompted the move to my current bankers.
Griff,
It isn’t just racing being targetted, more a case of racing being caught up in a general campaign run by people with no understanding of the difference between skill based betting and the machines and online games that offer a quick fix with no prospect of long term profit.
The head of the Gambling Commission is a man called Andrew Rhodes. Since leaving university he’s had four previous jobs. First at the DVLA, then the Food Standards Agency, the DWP and finally as Registrar at Swansea University. So lots of relevant gambling experience on his CV!
But if somebody offers you a job that pays £180 pa plus all the usual public sector perks, you’re probably not going to respond by saying ‘But I know absolutely nothing about gambling’. The rest of the senior staff he manages, all have similar backgrounds. But they don’t let their lack of knowledge get in the way of their crusade, because of course, they know they are ‘doing good’.
Thanks for clarifying, I did not mean to make any presumptions but I did wonder if honest folk are being caught up in anti money laundering regulations.
I’d say in some ways racing gets off easier, you can seemingly throw large sums of cash at course bookies no questions asked whereas that same bet online would potentially be subject to serious scrutiny (assuming you can get on in the first place). Perhaps demonstrates the point that the powers that be don’t fully understand what they’re dealing with.
Thanks apracing. When I’ve read some of the reporting on it, that was something that I couldn’t quite understand. Surely with this subject having multiple and very deep implications to an industry, you would at least put somebody in place who had an in depth understanding of it.
Just a question on your point, “It isn’t just racing being targeted.”
All I read relates to ‘affordability checks’ for racing. If James Bond walks into a casino, does he have to provide sensitive personal information the same as for horse racing, or the same if he has an online account for poker?If he does, then I guess everything is equally targeted. I’m with Richard on this, if it’s my money, then I should be able to spend it as I wish and if that’s on horse racing, that’s up to me.
The efforts should be more focused on helping those that have issues, not putting a blanket over the issue due to the shortcomings of a few.I’m a bit out of touch with gambling on horse racing these days, but I know of more people with gambling issues from online casinos than the ‘osses.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.