What We Do...

Leadership

Innovation

Team Coaching

Sports Coaching

Executive Coaching

Mediation

Change Management

Article

Gambling - You Bet!

06-10-2009

There has been a change in television Rugby League commentary. It now includes regular updates on the odds provided by a gambling company. One can bet on an amazing array of variables. The eventual result seems almost secondary to issues such as first try scorer, first goal kicker, last try scorer etc. etc. The “first to score” variable has been a constant money raiser at footy clubs for years. We can all remember buying those coloured tickets at local club games, whatever code.

The main touch of irony comes when the commentator somewhat disingenuously suggests that we “gamble responsibly”. I often wonder whether the two words are mutually exclusive notions; a classical oxymoron. Does this mean “gamble until just before you can’t afford to feed yourself or your family?”

This was followed last week by the NSW Treasurer’s announcement that he was selling off NSW Lotteries. There goes another valuable income stream for the Government. His rationale was that government could not derive profit from lotteries as well as being the regulatory authority for gambling. No mention was made of short-term financial gain for a struggling government. The terrific oxymoron Roozendahl used was when he described lotteries as “a soft form of gambling”. Two messages described gambling as having discreet sub types. The first was responsible vs. irresponsible gambling. The second was soft vs. hard gambling.

Telling people to gamble “responsibly” misses the very heart of the problem associated with problem gambling. People who don’t have a problem with gambling are already “responsible”, by definition. The core issue with Problem Gambling is that people CAN’T gamble responsibly, again by definition. Hence the adverse effects upon finance, health, relationships and work functions associated with it. The idea that some TV commentators can effect these people’s behaviour with an off-hand suggestion to “gamble responsibly” defies even the most vivid imagination.

Gambling is similar to an addiction. Those who treat its victims have a very clear picture of its toxicity. The classical picture is that of an early windfall. This is followed by a presumption that, despite the odds against it, this “big win” will surely happen again. As the gambler becomes increasingly involved with his/her particular poison, “knowledge” of it increased. Most gamblers genuinely believe they know more about gambling and odds than the average “punter”. Like drug addiction, the behaviour is maintained by the intermittent pleasure associated with it. However, this is far outweighed by the devastating personal price.

Governments see themselves on the horns of a dilemma. Whilst giving lip service to the dangers of problem gambling they also derive enormous income from it. A good percentage of the world’s poker machines exist in NSW. Governments have approved setting up TABS in pubs, knowing the potent combination of alcohol intoxication and gambling. This has effectively turned TABs into defacto mini casinos; where many also have poker machines

A recent “Economist” article (Sept 12, 2009) described how betting on horse racing in New York State was on the decline. They have state-owned Off-Track Betting Parlours (OTBP’s). These were created in 1970, to move betting away from organised crime syndicates. They turned profits of $4.5 billion over the succeeding years. However, in 2008 the OTBP’s lost $17.8million.

Horse racing is a factor in New York State’s economy, with 500 breeding farms and 40,000 workers involved in some way with the racing industry. A new head of OTBP’s has been appointed and suggests a slicker business model involving bets placed on pc’s and ATM style betting “kiosks”. He realised that the more easily accessible gambling becomes, the more people will gamble. He has also tapped into the change in horse racing’s clientele – one in three under 35 and 40% female. Does this ring a few bells? Notice the advertising for horse racing in Sydney – under 35, glamorous females prominent?

Regarding Roozendahl’s suggestion that lotteries are a “soft” form of gambling, he was in some sense correct. Where gamblers have to wait days for the results to come in they are less likely to gamble in a harmful way. However, it is still gambling, and rather than soft, the term “less toxic” is probably more accurate.

There is evidence for the particular toxicity of poker machines. In 2005 the Victorian Government commissioned a study of the effects of its introducing poker machines (“Electronic Gambling Machines”). As in NSW, they allowed their installation by hotels and clubs as well as their monumental Crown Casino. They looked at several regional areas, and compared their findings with those taken in similar places in Western Australia (which only had EGM’s in Burswood Casino).

The findings were ominous. There was an increase in money spent on gambling in Victoria. In Victoria this exceeded $1,000 for every family. The increase in gambling occurred on EGM’s, whilst gambling on horse racing and lotteries remained fairly static or diminished slightly. Females constitute a higher proportion of problem gamblers who present for help.

EGM’s were by far the dominant form of gambling amongst problem gamblers. This is no surprise as there is a very short time period between betting money and a result. This puts pressure on people to make a decision about whether to gamble more money. Also, those occasional “wins” where the whole behaviour is reinforced, occur much more frequently, even though the problem gambler usually plays until they’ve lost everything.

The prevalence of Problem and Pathological gambling is directly proportional to the availability and duration of legalised gambling. World wide, the prevalence of problem gamblers is 0.4 – 3.4%. In Puerto Rico and Australia the figure is more like 7%. This means that something like 290,000 people in Australia have problems with gambling. Another 5 – 10 people are effected by their behaviours (approximately 2 million people).

Problem gambling has adverse effects upon psychological and physical health, finances, relationships, occupational and academic function. Over 40% of people presenting for help with problems here admit to having committed a crime of some kind to support their gambling. A lot of this is dealt with privately and doesn’t come to the attention of the law.

The availability of on-line gambling opens yet another opportunity to expand these problems.

The Victorian study indicated concern about and disapproval of their more sinister forms of gambling by a vast majority in the population. If this is so, it would seem that governments are out of step with the electors.

To suggest that more funds be made available for “treatment” of problem gamblers is a classic case of (dare I say it) “doing something after the horse has bolted”.

Hackneyed thinking predominates here. There is a current acceptance that gambling, in all its forms, is somehow a justifiable part of our lifestyle. Having accepted this the thinking is that if it is “controlled”/”regulated” it is therefore OK for government to make financial gains from it. This amounts to quasi official “approval”. The slick marketing, increased availability and promotion then follow.

If this situation is to change someone needs to challenge this hackneyed thinking. The lip service paid for “prevention” as a superior strategy when addressing any addiction needs to cease.

Latest Articles

19-02-2010
Death in the Luge in Vancouver - Is This a Symptom of Something Else?

22-01-2010
Erwin Rommel - Lessons for Leadership and Management in the 21st Century

09-12-2009
Christmas Business

05-11-2009
Functional Foods, Fads or Pharmacy by Another Name

29-10-2009
Immigration: Populate and/or Perish

Work Fit Analysis

Archive

What We Do...

Article

Gambling - You Bet!

Latest Articles

Newsletter