Bitcoin Forum

According to the source stated , the online Gamblers needs to prove that they can handle the losses . This decision was taken into account after the government had a lot of news regarding the gambling addiction and problem that was arising especially during the pandemic.

It's a proposal by Social Market Foundation therefore still not implemented.

Other than that , one needs to actually follow some rules if this gets cleared:


Therefore even if you loose 100 Euro , you might have to get ready to prove that , the loss was indeed flexible and you can take it . Unfortunately now the Government is looking forward to regulate the online Gambling since , the revenues from the offline casinos have taken a strong loss , online Gambling is now being preferred since it's safer and much needed during the pandemic.

This regulation might be problematic for some  , for sure now the crypto gambling sites will receive a notice and let's see what would be the height of regulation.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/aug/04/online-gamblers-should-prove-they-can-afford-losses-report-finds (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/aug/04/online-gamblers-should-prove-they-can-afford-losses-report-finds)

Since online gambling is preferable during the pandemic the government most likely had put their eye on it because there's no way they can get taxes on land-based casinos.


I'm wondering why the government only had this kind of thought now that online gambling is gaining more demand. They might actually start focusing on regulating online gambling  instead of land-based casinos since they will be getting more taxes on it.

On the other hand, this might both help and put a burden on gamblers since they will have to provide proof that they can afford playing on casinos further if they will exceed £100 losses.

While there certainly are some people dangerously addicted to gambling, I honestly think proving you can afford to lose more than £100 is a silly rule. I don't like it at all when the gov gets their hands inside my wallet and decides where each banknote should go.

Like, isn't it more logical to allow everyone to decide how much money to spend on casinos by themselves without having to "prove" anything and just let them go over the board if that's what they're willing to do? Putting a loss limit in place decreases casino revenues as well - and people will find ways to avoid the limit anyway, so it overall looks like a regulation that doesn't make sense to me..

Already in several countries gambling is regulated. Very few countries follow it in a strict manner, while majority just stay liberal and give importance when something serious as suicide happens. Regulations were a must, but those regulations need to keep both the users and the gambling platform owners on the safer side.

Do you really think so?

Crypto sites are based in tax havens and operate on the basis of loopholes to say the least. They don't usually hold gambling licenses.

It is more likely that they get a notice for operating without the gambling license than for that regulation. However, if after so many years operating in the dark, they haven't received it, I don't see why they are going to receive it now.

I don't know why this has been overlooked for so many years. Maybe it's a mixture of not understanding and downplaying the importance of crypto casinos, but the moment they realize their importance they will force them to buy licenses or they will block them.

That's for UK I guess. There are many registered gambling sites in UK and they might also enforce that to it's users but away from that, the UK government would have no jurisdiction. I think they can't even force their overseas territory as a lot of gambling sites are registered on british overseas territories which are also a tax heaven.

But how can we actually prove it? So every gambler need to provide their saving and assets information to an online gambling site if they want to gamble there?

Such a ridiculous idea it that, and if it has been passed as a law the UK online based gambling sites will be forced to move other countries where regulations are liberal and better for assuring the privacy while betting there.

A bit misleading topic because online gambling IS already regulated (and I guess you are talking about in Europe as you put numbers in euros?

So they are now encouraging firms to go onshore, so they are definitely trying to attract all the Costa Rica licenses and all those I guess. I wonder if this also affects sportsbooks?

If this is about tackling betting addiction, I would suggest that they make certain types of betting games/competition less attractive than they currently are. One of the reasons people get addicted is the "Fun aspect". It's part of what keeps bringing back bettors despite losing and being unprofitable/unproductive.   If they are unable to resist the urge to bet, it's likely due to the fun.
If you must make your betting sites/centers fun, make sure you don't allow bad games, you don't permit gambling, your games are safe, players learn useful things while playing, the games develop the players to become useful members of their societies etc

Interesting proposal, although for UK only, I guess. That might help to prevent addiction however I'm not sure how successful this regulation could be implemented or better to say controlled and monitored. I also think that this might pose another problem for online casinos and many gamblers will not be happy with this solution. But I'm curious to see how and if it's going to work.

Well, when some good things start getting into good status the government always take their opportunity, what I see is: onland gambling casinos aren't yielding much gain during the pandemic compared as before, and government had just discovered that; the online gambling casinos are potential assets to them(in terms of tax generation).

Regulations of these online gambling casinos will surface soon because the government had interest on it development.

For the prove of be able to take the loss, that's a good move to curb the spread of this virus called gambling addiction. This had off-course ruined many lives and families and should be put oncheck.

I think he just missed to put it on the topic about this ↓↓

Well, I think it is. It is still a proposal though unless it kept being pushed but I doubt that a soft cap like that is acceptable especially to those who experience problem gambling yet a high stake roller.

The UK government has been really trying to regulate gambling to prevent addiction, especially now that quarantine can also make people be more addicted to gambling. However, with this restriction, gamblers, and operators wouldn't probably agree with this. It would be more complicated for both if they have to prove that they can afford those losses. Also, according to the gaming industry, further restrictions can cause more job losses from the industry and the reduction of tax revenue.

with this regulation, it's either the gambler will follow such protocol or find ways how to go around it. there are so many ways how to break this regulation, however, this initiative is actually for the welfare of the gamblers. of course, online casinos dont like a regulation like this coz as much as possible they want to rekt the money of the gamblers as much as possible.
 as a gambler during this crisis, you should know your priorities and responsibilities so not to incur debt from others. you will have better sleep at night if you dont owe from somebody, right?

I don't have to prove anything but I can take any losses that I'm aware of gambling with.

There are countries already that have regulated online gambling and some decided to ban and won't operate through it. I think the reason for others to prohibit it so the land-based casinos won't have any competition.

But if they allow so, they might be looking into crypto casinos too.

i thought the topic is about accepting a loss but its all about gambling regulations .

 i cant literally accept my loss but i can show or i can prove to them that i loss that certain amount  . im only thinking if what if i over bet one time and i loose but i cant really afford to loose that amount i made that day  , how will they know that .  no problem of showing a loss but they are also asking other stuffs and they look harder to fullfill .

That does not really matter at all, no one in this world has some mentality to take the loss unless that someone is fully loaded with money. every loss is hurting us in any way, the only problem here is how a person handle that loss. The countries that still implementing ban on gambling, has already known the negative impact of gambling on their people. one might commit suicide if they lose a big amount of money. Like what happened with this one: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-40128776

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/0713/production/_96311810_5ecbe1cf-a422-487d-b319-fba650c261ac.jpg

This must have a big impact to the profitability of the casinos, especially the regulated ones where gamblers needs to perform the KYC before they can gamble. However, in crypto space where gambling is anonymous, I think there will be no effect, and besides how can we prove to them if they don't know us since they are offering an anonymous gambling platform.

Me, I should not worry as I am a crypto casino gamblers for years already.

When we reach certain limits in crypto casinos sometimes they may require KYC in order to let you withdraw the big amount of money you have won.Some of them do not let you withdraw 10.000 Usd in Bitcoin without verification.However this is just between you and the site and the crypto sites most probably different from the Fiat ones do not pass your documents to the government as easily as Fiat casinos do.You,I and every crypto lover are safe for at least 5-7 years to come.

mentality and emotion is not the focus here, but financially. the only thing they will check is if you're financially capable of loosing a £100 a month(which I think is very low).

but this is not a common case. a lot of gamblers gamble even if they are not financially capable of losing x amount of money and implementing what the OP posted will most likely prevent them from losing money that they actually need.

Its easier said than done, most gamblers bets money that they can't afford to loss especially when most people are unemployed and doesn't have any source of income, so they turn into casino's to make money.
The governments decision towards gambling addiction may also affect its economy especially when there's a lot of revenue in online gambling during the pandemic.

Making sure that gamblers have the financial means to take a decent loss in gambling seems quite reasonable from the casinos. Something similar is done with investing in derivatives where you might have to take losses in the multiple of the money invested. You have to fill out a questionaire when opening your broker account. It definitely makes you think more about potential losses.
But more important than financial coverage is the emotional one. I think it's good to try to fight against gambling addiction very early on. It's very sad to read the stories where people bet their home away just because they coudln't stop.

I think the UK government is trying to regulate online gambling for tax revenue, after a few months offline casinos closed
and the government is losing income. Regarding prevent addicted, the only reason is the UK government to regulate online
gambling.Because it is very difficult to prove people can take the loss, and if it is implemented, it will probably fail in my opinion.
Let's wait and see the wishes of the UK government whether it can run well or not.

I guess messing around Crypto Gambling websites already comes with a cost since you are gonna play with your money on it. It would really gain some popularity since people are bored and wanted to kill some time. Crypto websites will always come with the risk of losing money and I guess some people are always ready for that UNLESS they are inconsiderate of the fact that they can lose.

If you've lost a higher amount than 100 EURO you already passed the test, I don;t know how they come out with that amount and will they employ psychologist to prove if you can handle losses, although it's a good move but I don;t think it can and it will be implemented in other countries the regulators will have a body set up for this and they will also spend money too.

Hehe, you got it wrong, at least I think you got it wrong. It's about you proving that you have money and that you can afford to lose 100 euros. Like you have big salary, or saving, like you have for your family needs, for ex-wife alimony, for kids, bills, and that kind of stuff. And in some case if you owe to bank, or to anyone else, how can you afford to gamble with 100 euros?
This is probably one of the reasons why people will choose crypto gambling!

This proposal indeed needs  allocated budget.

If the government will proceed and take this into the account they need to hire professional
to take care of those people / gamblers who already have too much addiction.
in the brighter side, it will help those gamblers who already getting deep from this activities.

How else should you prove you can take the loss of  £100 each month except by providing KYC data?

A "cap" does mean that you are only to lose such amount and nothing more.  Martingale isn't going to work with this kind of policy.  :D
 This proposal will only give these casinos and the government the list of individuals that may be able to join some club that they can exclude the small-time gamblers who just take their luck from time to time.

Most likely for it to happen on which there would be gamblers that will not really abide nor approve this kind of law or regulation yet said limitation was just too small.
And here comes with those VIP clubs  ;D and of course that would be requiring some under the table fees for such exclusion- its nothing something new for these situation because
for those people who does have lots of money will really find a way to play more.When it comes on making such regulation then it would really have pros and cons.

This literally says he can't take a loss at all but not all of us would be taking this way of losing. Not all of us are quite desperate to win in gambling nor look at it to even win money. We have fun with ot that is the reason we stick with it, I guess earning money is just the bonus of it.

I also talked about my friends about this like a way for gamblers to check whether they can afford to gamble in a casino or even take a loss and I think a cap is really what it needs.

Definitely they are eyeing for any direction on how to get a tax since most of people these days are not on their job to be productive and pay for taxes especially in countries that have been experiencing a high unemployment rate like America. And talking about gambling, gambling is one of the highest tax income for the government, houses that pays for millions of dollars each year to operate is the heart of many city's economy.
It really makes sense if they start to work with online gambling regulation.


I think there will be more of online services taxation that would happen in the future since most of us rely on the online, especially when it comes to our transactions every thing under the law must be taxed for the government and its sector to operate. Not only talking about the online gambling, but also the other services that we use online like netflix and youtube.

the amount is high enough for me and i dont think i can be qualified for this rule . im afraid i cant gamble again if these regulations will be implemented .

you can still play martingale but you only need to decrease your starting bet size according to their limits  .
 
that will be thier loss if they do that  .  before when no regulations are implemented , no casinos do that because small time gamblers are still gamblers and its part of the casinos responsibility when they loose or when those gamblers win .

I think bettors that stake big amount of money are mostly betting on fiat casinos, but with this restriction by their government, I'm sure we will get more gamblers to adopt in crypto gambling. $10,000 is a huge money, I never gamble or won that in a crypto casino so I guess I'm safe with the KYC though. But if you look and compare crypto casinos between fiat in case that 100 EUR limit will be pass into law, fiat casino in that particular country might shift its operation in different country as there's no way they can maximize their profit when the government itself are limiting people to gamble.

Hi!
First of all, this article is very exclusive and refers to the United Kingdom, that is, its scope is very regional, although not its impact. Another issue is that The Guardian is not, let's say, an expert website on the subject, in fact it focuses on the UK government effect issue, which is where The Guardian has good arguments, but this website is a "todero" of those web portals that They write all kinds of news, but it is certainly one of the best there is and very influential in the UK.
___
The losses of a player should never be measured by an as specific amount (100) , it is the biggest mistake there is and if you are going to legislate on gambling, that it should never be "100" of any currency.

A player's losses are technically measured by his banking (bankroll) ability.
So,let's go to the Topic  that concerns us in this forum, cryptocurrencies, someone can have a $ 1 to bet, the best thing that can happen to a person who likes to bet regardless of the result, is to get to a crypto casino, depending on the casino and of the currency that the casino uses a $ 1 can bring you as much entertainment as $ 100.

-1-There are bets not based on the minimum Fiat decimal that are 2 decimals, you can use up to 8. And depending on the value of the cryptocurrency, the effect of betting for $ 1 can be quite entertaining, therefore if you use $ 100 based on a decimal limit In some shitcoin, your entertainment may be longer than betting on the traditional currency. -one-

If the article did at least an educational technical analysis on the betting methodologies and told me the number 100 comes out here, I would understand that figure.

The ignorance in the evaluative subject from the qualitative point of view of the gamblers is very great only based on the quantitative point.

A number is not the solution, at least not in the background, it is something partial and merely symbolic.

The article also has its hypocrisy, since Uk is the paradise of many professional poker² players (at least in Europe, in many other countries the rules of online casinos are very rigid and require licenses to register even with a web domain extension) , because the issue of profits and restrictions is flexible.
__
I have known of players who manage monthly losses of up to $ 15,000 not because I read it, I have seen it and the ones that are read are six figures or higher are simply amazing.

In the earthly environment that I handle losses of $ 100 they are so trivial that they can be handled in a single bet, or in different times such as minutes, hours, weeks and months, it all depends on the player and their ability to bet, not on a number 100.

That figure is so disconcerting that they tell you how uninformed these people are.


What should be mandatory and not an option is deposit control on any website. At least for periods of hours or minimum limits that can be established from $ 10 in pre-established periods before starting to play.

GB.

---

-1-: This comment refers to those who read us as an informative part, third parties who feel identified with this basic information. It is not directed to the OP or the participants in the topic who have a good command of that information.
(2) Online casino traditional Fiat. Not only high stakes or high income, I have known Spanish players who earned between 800 and 5000 euros per month, some as partial or total income for their livelihood and have moved to the UK due to the issue of taxes and the laws that regulate the flow of players due to the theme of only Spanish players, domain control (e.g.) .es.
P.D: 100 maybe FOTBs

No need to worry. You can still gamble, even if there are regulations in your country because you will get another way to connect to the gambling site, but you need to be careful because the government eyes can watch your step.

The gamblers must handle their losses, and never blame other people because we use our own money to gamble, and we are not being forced by other people to use that money. But no matter if there is a regulation or not, we must control our money and make limitations, so we don't get any problem.

Trust me, this is going to add yet another vague clause to casinos' already murky Terms of Service, which already prevents professional gamblers, and asks casinos to help players enforce self-exclusion (tell me which crypto or online casino actually does its best to enforce this). Now players have to prove they're betting money they can afford to lose? I'd be watching all those trading sites first.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's good to ask people to do that but how can you prove it?

That's the problem when people got really mentally affected after a huge loss in gambling, you can't fully blame the casino because it is the person's will to have that losses.

Regulation is really required to maintain control and balance between the two variables.

When it comes to gambling, it can really have a huge impact to someone who are not that knowledgeable about the risks of gambling that's why they end up having a miserable life.

Online gambling to become regulated is really a good approach to help gamblers keep on track and control their emotion and have limits to prevent these suicides, mental problems, and addictions. I'm not really a fan of gambling because I'm an investor, although they both have risks, investments are much safer.

For those unemployed: Do they really make the money we're talking about here? I think in the real sense they don't, rather they lose the more. Hardly for anyone to come empty into the gambling hall and make it out with pleasure. Most of these gamblers go home even more frustrated than before.
Even though the decision by the government will affect her economy, it's better for her citizens to be more safe than getting into gambling addiction.

With this kind of proposal, the casino needs to reveals that information once the government ask them.
Though I do agree that it should be the house that supposedly handled this case and start providing such treatments to avoid heavily addictions.

Regulations can be good, but online gambling shouldn't be overregulated, let alone prohibited. Not all countries have land based casinos, and those that have them, don't have them in all regions. Some people need to blow off a little steam once in a while, and online gambling sites are among perfect places for doing so. The thing is that the so-called "gambling addicts" would not turn into "normal citizens" overnight, if there were no gambling anymore. Rather, they would become drug addicts, alcoholics, dangerous criminals, you name it. When there is a limit on how much can be staked online, it's equivalent to "no gambling" for such people. I would think twice of where it could lead to.

But again it should be a confidential thing, the house, or even the government shouldn't get that information without the gambler's approval. We already know what's the effect and the cause of the addiction and it destroys the person's life. I agree that some want to hide their money spent on the gamblings and addictions shouldn't be the conclusion when someone is continuously losing because sometimes having fun is their only purpose and money isn't their problem.

That's probably what is expected for the gamblers, as in reality, gamblers will always find a way to gamble, and since they can't accept the regulation they will find a way to satisfy their gambling needs, and I think crypto casinos is the best answer to that.

If such regulations will be implemented to control the gambling addiction, it would be a great help for those gamblers to know their limitations so that they could keep up that playing must be only limited under restrictions. But such rules won't make sense to prove that implementing it will consider gamblers that they could handle their losses because addiction and the way you handle your stressors when it comes to managing your bets and losses is on a psychological manner. The regulation would just make gamblers to control their expenses but still it cannot state that a gambler can prove that he can handle the losses he have taken on playing gambling.

Also, there might be cases that because there are certain rules about limitations, gamblers might broke into managing his emotions for he feels pressure on how he would budget his bets to avoid making up £100 loss to keep on playing gambling. The regulation can have both pros and cons depending on how the gamblers would take it. Therefore, the management and moderation would still rely on the gambler himself.

Expect the Black Market will make a Big Money out of these rules. Ofcourse addicted users will never try to obey the rules, they'll find a way to play over and over again. Besides these kind of rules only works at the start when it's been implemented,... trust me after years of counting, They'll be back to what they've used to.

Based on the other thread it is said that those casinos which are regulated doesn't need to require KYCs for this. They will continue to do the same except for the new thing which is proving themselves within having a loss of $100 or maybe £100. I don't think it would be that big for them to gamble underground.

I think that every person who is over 18 years old is responsible for everything he does in his own life. If someone is going to play in any casino, that person must be prepared in case they lose money, nobody goes to the casino just to have wins without losing.

I see many topics talking about gambling addiction, but they forget that many people spend a lot of money on beer, but nobody talks about closing the beer factories, why? because it's not the breweries that are to blame

I agree, man. Well laid out. Their idea seemed a bit going overboard, in my opinion. Besides, it will always be the individual's responsbility whether on how much they can spend in such matter. Although, their concern is somehow good (plausible enough, atleast) however I don't think that it is applicable in this case  ;D.

They might be looking at the risk level, if a person is addicted in gambling, he can lose all his money compared to a person addicted in beer where he can't consume everything he can afford to buy. Also, gambling addiction has a lot of side effects, you could be addicted to liquor or drugs, therefore I understand that government are making measures to minimize addiction, but this specific law I'm against with.

Very well said. Gambling addiction is resulted from irresponsible playing. That is to say, everyone should know there own limits.
Some people are falling deep with gambling and will do anything just to be able to play again and again.
The movement of the government to stop the gambling addiction is good. However, putting regulations to casinos just to control the funds of people is no good.

But the casinos has to go through the local government so that they can operate.

So whichever the local govt will instruct them to do so, they'll just have to obey if they want to keep operating. About the high rollers, they certainly want to take care of them, vip treatment and don't want to go to another casino, online or local.

It is just one of those regulations that makes sense for the people that like to feel better with themselves after passing such law because they think they are doing something for the community, but we know the truth, those that are addicted to gambling are going to find a way around it and most likely cryptocurrencies are going to be part of this, it doesn't really make any sense to me that if you have earned the fiat in your bank account that somehow you are restricted in its use and yet people accept this all the time.

Those who'll rush in for the bucks will not be stopped by a £100 gambling limit anyway. They'll seek other ways to get rich out of nothing and fall in the said trap instead, so it's going to have the same (or a possibly even worse) outcome. Some people spend a lot of money on alcohol - should we impose a spending limit per month? Doesn't make sense. We should take care of ourselves.

They would really need to abide or else they would face up violations and penalties if they would violate such laws or regulation.We do know on what they've been thinking about the risk
on where they do limit such amount in monthly basis but we know that it can easily be hit up even on a part time gambler.

For Vip's or huge spender then casinos will really find a way to retain those players because they do know that it will really be a huge loss of them on losing those players
yet we know on how casinos do make profit.

This new rule or law sucks big time on their part.

They know how to treat those customers that they know which are heavy gamblers.

They just can't let go of those people because they are the bread and butter of that casino. It is a matter of compliance on their end while understanding on the side of the government as they are a business that has to be retained if they have a huge number of customers.

I think they have to require KYC during the registration if the £100 monthly losses gets implemented because casinos can't just guess or assume which of their gamblers aren't capable of handling the losses. Anyway even if it's approved this won't be a problem to most of us crypto gamblers since it's only from the UK while most crypto casinos are regulated by Curacao.

I do not know how substantiated these ideas are (perhaps there is something useful in them), but I know one thing for sure - the more government control and regulation, the more expensive the final product is for the consumer. Thank God that for the foreseeable future, blockchain will allow gamblers from all over the world to live the way they want without having to ask their governments for permission.

If the regulations are implemented in the UK, I think the other countries will not get the effect, and the gamblers can still playing gambling, even they will get losses more than $100. I think the gamblers don't have to prove themselves of having a loss of $100 because I think for some gamblers, that will be an embarrassing thing for them because they told other people or government about their losses. I guess that crypto gambling will not be a problem because we can select the gambling website, which doesn't require KYC to play gambling.

I wonder what kind of prove they are looking just to verify that a certain gamblers can handle their losses. Most of the governments will surely try
to regulate any casinos that are operating in their country not only because they are worried about the gambling addiction but
because they need the money that came from the casinos.

Casinos are in disadvantage if limits will be implemented as they will surely take a loss rather than gain and once it will happen then casinos will be forced
to close.

If the results are good in the UK you can bet they will implement it elsewhere. It's not that bad, especially when considering that if the gambler loses a lot the government will have to give them social benefits.

I agree. Online gambling here in our country, as far as I know is illegal since I heard that POGOs here only offer their services to online casinos which costumers are feom other countries. This wouldn't be a problem to most of us here. But, if it is, I guess for me that cap is too much.

This regulation will be problematic to the casinos most especially, because their revenues will surely be diminished because of it. But on the other hand this is actually a good thing to gamblers. Many might be accepting this new initiative with grumbles but this is going to be beneficial to them.

Many will be saved from losing bigger amounts. Many will be saving time. Perhaps many will be kept busy doing something else rather than get too hooked on to gambling.

Not really you can't prove to them your winnings. We had lucky names provided by the gambler before playing in the gambling platform. There is no need to do KYC if gambling platform does not require it but it could be a good way to.inform them.that you had been comeback from losses by using a single username. This will become a trademark on you and this is a very good revenge for the gambling platform you had joined.

Perhaps on countries where social benefits are really good for those with low wages and no work, they might see/feel the need to implement a similar regulation so as to reduce the number of people falling into the debt oblivion. But for real, the general population that gambles contribute to the economy by just losing there alone, and even online gambling opens up jobs for other people especially in these times when one cannot simply visit a gambling house. Why the need for such strict regulations and not something that could help the scene grow?

It's not a good idea to regulate online gambling, because if it comes to regulation, it definitely requires KYC procedures.
And limiting losses is not a profitable action for online casino, if it is realized it will reduce online casino income.Then it is
also possible that many gambling sites will go bankrupt.

I don't know if letting the gambling industry grow as a whole will benefit the population. The way I see it, they want to allow gambling so that the gambling industry can be controlled and parts of their revenue goes back to the government. But not free enough so that the population do not develop massive gambling addictions (which are bad for the society as a whole).

   Wawa2013 these regulations have a goal to control people, it's not about online casinos profit, it's for people to spend
less money on gambling. This will hurt online gambling industry!
   I don't know can use VPN and crypto gambling sites help UK citizens. I would like to hear someone from there to
comment this, it will help us to better understand situation there.

Yeah,,,you are right. This kinda regulations will not gonna change a lot for crypto oriented casinos. After implementing this type of regulations specific gambling platforms who don't allow crypto currency will gonna lose a big number of gamblers for sure and if i am not wrong then gamblers will change looking for crypto accepted gambking destination.

As far as i know professional gamblers don't like to reveal their personal information and when its a matter of gambling they won't love to play with limitations.      

    

I would talk about the situation in US where people are getting stimulus checks worth $1200 and also gambling some bucks out of these. Even if they 'lose and' take those losses for granted, it will be stupid for them to gamble during the worst times of the century. It is not their own money but given as a help to survive the pandemic situation, and gambling is not a thing to do for them till everything settles.

Well, this regulation of the gambling casino that has a limit of loss then, --accept where your limit end and should also have a limit on your loss.
Losses £100 will be fine and should not beyond on that amount, this perhaps controls gamblers from addiction, and no more family will suffer if one of the gamblers has a limit upon spending their money. But I think, this is a case per case basis and it will depend on the player's salary per month versus the amount limit should spend in gambling.

Don't you understand that any costs incurred by the casino will ultimately waste by the players? As in any area where there is a producer/consumer. Players will pay for all changes, and how good they are is a very controversial issue.

What is the government concern with my loss in online gambling as taking loss had been a rule ever since gambling started, I have never seen a case where looser fights over his/her lost tickets for money recovery, this action is out of the box and I don't think bettors can perform such but can only happen in an agent shop.
The important implementation of online gambling kills the trouble aspects of not proving lost bets as the Los happen right in your home with no one to blame for any sort of reasons.

This kind of implementation might help those people dealing with fiat gambling. As you know, there are people who got hooked up with gambling and can really take those losses. Since fiat is heavily regulated, expect that the government will take action at these people. Proving that people can take those losses is not actually hard to do.

Don't worry though at a crypto-gambling activity. This will never be implemented even we count for decades. Crypto-gambling site will all be regulated but will not face those regulations that fiat gambling casino does especially at the part of the subject of the thread.

I believe it will not be effective for the government to limit losses to gamblers who play on gambling sites. Such regulations will make
gamblers and online casinos uncomfortable, because from the start we decided to play gambling of course we have to be prepared with
the risk of experiencing a loss. And most gamblers are adults who can manage restrictions when playing gambling, there is no need for
the government to interfere.

There's no regulation yet. It's a conception.


A thinktank :D it's not even an agency or anything just a group with their own agenda.

They probably want to be hired by the government to start checking people's accounts and their gambling histories and have the pwoer to decide if someone is an addict and should be banned or not.

It would be for the betterment of the country so I think I would agree with the move of the government to regulate online gambling. Traditional Casinos took a big hit right now decreasing their monthly revenue so much already that is why Government are finding another ways to earn at least and online gambling is the one they are seeing right now.
Now the question is how they will do it. I mean how they can regulate it. Still a proposal though and there is no certainties that this will happen soon.

---

Regarding to the subject, I can take my losses in gambling but I don't think that I need to prove it :D.

It  needs to balance the opinions of both business owners and those who are proposing this concepts. Government will decide after everything has been voice out.

And the chance of corrupting them by bribing huge amount of money, especially those rich gamblers that can afford offering huge amount of money.

I wonder how they are going to implement this is this through surveys anyone can lie of course, and if casinos are they going to use lie detector test this is vague and unclear they do want to protect but to the point of proving is like changing the behavior of the gambler totally, they can recommend consultation but not to the point of imposing it to gamblers.

Acceptance is needed in gambling, losing can always happen and it will depend on us how we wanted to stop it. Government can't deal with online gambling limits since we can choose to play in different casinos. If there is a limit in one casino, then we can go in other casino which is useless for implementation of limits. A reminder of addiction in gambling and what it can cause to us can help for those start thinking of gambling.

I am unable to understand that Rule. A gambler is already proving by investing in gambling that he can handle the loss. The government needs to understand that people deposit money in gambling and then play. There is no gambling in credit where you have to show the proof of funds. Those who have funds deposit the money and this is the proof that one can lose all this money or win from it.

There will be no freedom if the government interfere to the rights of the gamblers and online casinos, they should not interfere because it is not their fault if someone losses huge amount of money in gambling. Every gamblers should be aware that there are 5 possibilities whenever they do gambling which is to win big, win small, breakeven, lose small and lose big. With proper knowledge and skills, a certain gambler can minimize the losses and maximize the gains.

The government can make that limit, but it is hard to control the limits if the gamblers are not doing by themselves. We have so many casinos that we can select to gambling, so we can spend the money as we want. And if we are losing the money without stopping for a while, but still continue playing, we will have more chances to lose more money.  But if we don't control ourselves, no matter if there is a limit for the gambler, the limit will be broken, which means we will lose the money, and of course, it will be difficult to get the money back.

Well, it seems that the government is neutral there. It's nice to hear that they are taking actions on these kind of issues.
It's a little bit funny that they also took the advantage to get some taxes on them.
Am I right? If the government regulate the gambling site, they will also be having some money (tax) from the casino?
I'm okay with this since some countries are having trouble economically, it's a good way to add it on their tax collection.

This is insane, I never thought this would become a law, this is not gambler's friendly.
What they did is they want to limit including those gamblers who are responsible in what they are doing, come one, this is not good for the business TBH.

During this pandemic the government find ways to generate income through collecting tax so by having this regulations mostly affected the small time gamblers that needs to prove the lose. What I can see with this regulation it can also avoid addiction to the gamblers. Also depends on how they can manage their loses during the game. And this is an awareness to the new players that there is always a risks in this kind of game.

I hope they stick to UK though.

It will not affect all of the gamblers but the problem might spread to other countries as well. Still, that £100 per month cap is really small. I doubt an online gambler would bet such small amount in a month. I agree that this is not good for the business. Let's hope for the best though.

We can use it as an awareness, I think most of gambler didn't accumulate how much money that he spend to play gambling especially how much money that he suffered to lose. They are only play and if he lose they will add and make another deposit so on it will be like that. If this regulation is applied at least it will avoid foe those gambler who spend a lot of money in it. Although it will be hard thing to do, like gambling online especially that use crypto currency and gambling site that didn't have a licence from the government.

As far as I understood this would be valid for UK. Obviously the government found out that they have big problem with gambling addiction and they want to control it somehow. However, that doesn't mean that this will be successful solution and that will be accepted at first place. I guess it will not be easy to implement it

I think it is not that hard to implement knowing that these online casinos are already regulated. They could just look into papers and documents they have and check these sites for that. These might make gamblers change their sites into online casinos not based in UK, well, if they wanted to evade that.

As practice shows, government agencies are absolutely indifferent to the effectiveness of their work - so you think about such details, but those who promote such regulation do not. That is why I am in favor of reducing government regulation in all areas (and in gambling too), since it is ineffective.

Of course the government can do it, but they dont want to change the rules they have made. Many rules from all lines of government must be changed, but who cares. People are those who have to comply with government regulation and anyone who violates them will be sanctioned. I would also argue that if thats for the best, reducing the rules might be a socially acceptable solution.

I think that the regulations and rules that were set in place by many governments are not sufficient enough to prevent gamblers from making drastic actions in their lives, especially to those facing severe depression, anxiety and addiction in gambling and other things related to it. Mental health I think should also be considered as a big loss would definitely affect their capability to interact in the real world. Make laws that would only allow gamblers with a strong mental faculty and just allow those who don't to only play lottery and small town legal gambling that only needs very small bets.

Maybe the government will revise its regulation, and make it simple, so there is no objection from the casino, and they can obey and follow the regulations. But suppose after the revision of the regulation, the casino is not following. In that case, the government can give sanction to them, and the worst is closing their casino temporarily until they can back on the right track. That can work if the casino and the government can unite to make it possible, so sooner or later, that can help the economy for both sides.

This may not be sufficient but this might help, complying with the requirement to prove that you can handle your loss or to gamble further after reaching the 100£ cap will limit gambling addicts, especially those who are in the lower-income households. Anyway, the government can always change the rules or prohibition depending on the circumstances or what can be beneficial for both the government to collect taxes and to limit gambling addiction.

There is pros and cons if the government will try to push that kind of regulations and laws where a certain gambler can only lose 100£, the pros is the government can help its citizens especially who became addicted to gambling where they keep spending their money on it than to buy important things and necessities for their family. The cons is it can violate the right of the gambler which is the freedom to what they want.

Education my man, instead banning it, making all sort of regulations, isn't it easier to educate people and to teach them how to have fun and maybe win some money, but never to risk more they can afford to lose..Controling yourself is what you can learn to do, also you can learn how you can enjoy in risky gambling but to not get harmed too much if things go wrong way.
Restrictions, limitations, is not good when they are imposed.

Isn't it a wrong timing for government to impose regulation to online gambling? Yes we need to protect people who became addicted to gambling, but we could do it by having advices and ads that will help them reduce gaming activity especially if they are losing. Because having a cap with regards to losses is unfair to casinos (House), gamblers could win allot but could limit loss. Plus, in this pandemic, we need tons of taxes from online casinos which could help our economy's sustainability. I'm sure most of the bigtime gamblers aren't really having a financial problem, the just want to have fun, then let them.

I do think that the regulation will bring a problem to the government when it comes to implementation since as the quoted reply stated, most of the online gambling are based in tax haven territory.  Aside from that since it is online, a citizen of a country can easily access the site and play in it without licenses needed to that country.  So the problem lies on how they can regulate online casinos if a country doesn't have control on where that casino is base from.  More or less blocking the site would do but it can be easily solve by using tor and vpn.

I agree regulation is not a problem for the consumers for it is their safety were being after in this regulations. They can be protected and file a complain against any online casino that are not following or violating rules to which affect the consumers in their gambling activity. This is the mere purpose of regulation. However, regulation may become a problem to the online casino for they should folloe rules and regulations and submit theirselves with transparency to the government. Besides, they need to pay also the government that add their problem with the government regulations. Mostly user or people do not like regulations are those owners of online casino gambling.

I think not because news talk about the rise of gambling online which resulted to higher bets and higher risk to its consumers or the community where government had the mandate to protect. The government action is to control all the possibilty of fraud activities or minimize at least the gambling effect to its users. National security also should be protected and government needed to act ahead before any national threats could arise. Other dark sides in gambling are backed by the terrorist and will be a to for them to get more resources especially to get more funds.

I think it is a good one but there is a loop hole in this and they forgot that this is online and people could just easily create multiple account and use fake I.D's to do the KYC.
But I like their idea on having a soft cap on every gambler it would help a lot for those problematic gambler I think it would lessen those who are already addicted to it,
But they also need the help of the people around them to cure their gambling addiction.

And applying what you have just said, gamblers can fake their info event the government are proposing this it's still up to the gamblers
from how they wanted to be help, this problematic gamblers who are deeply engaged to this business.

They are in need of professional help aside from the one that being provided by their love ones.

I thought this cap might be small but I don't think I would be doing what you've said. Its not worth it. The fact that you will be sending funds or bitcoins in that accounts would be really annoying to do and it is not worth my time finding informations to prove KYC I am legit, some doesn't even need one. Still, not worth it, I could use the fees I will be using on that to gamble in one account.

I think proving that you can afford your losses will be much easier than creating alts and using fake I.D.'s, which will lead to other offenses when caught. It is not actually the government's responsibility if people ended up getting addicted to gambling, that is why there is sin tax that is imposed to any gambling income which is higher compared to any other taxes, to discourage people from gambling. People are expected to be responsible for their own money and actions.

It should be but we do know that not all government on each countries would really have similar mindset on how to run things up and ending with this kind of setting up some limitation
which is actually non-sense because its just too small.You are definitely right when it comes to tax on where these businesses do really give out one of the biggest part yet we know
on how much revenue they do generate on annual basis.If they arent really that much to care on that then they will really be imposing this kind of rule but i dont really believe
that they are much of concern into their citizens.They are just slowly or gradually trying to get rid of it for sure.

Fortunately, most people are capable of controlling themselves, and that's why gambling is enjoyed by millions, making their lives better. But people are different. Even the same people are different in different periods of their lives. So, I can't agree with your next statement:


As I said earlier, gambling should not be overregulated, but, at the same time, we need some restrictions and limitations for our own good. We are not perfect. :)

Faking these kinds of information would be the equivalent of financial fraud right ? If so, people could even go to jail for faking this.

Indeed, especially if you are faking a government issued ID, that's punishable by law.
There's nothing thy can do if they are not allowed to gamble, as long as there's a low prohibiting them, they should follow or face the consequences.

The best option is to gamble in crypto, use VPN, and gamble on sites that does not require KYC.

IMO, this can be done though risky at the same time also on your end.

Saying things like "teach them how to control themselves" or "teach them how to gamble with moderation" or "teach them how to limit their gambling spending" is easy but in reality, teaching them is very hard especially most of them are adults already.

They know what they are doing right now and they are not like 5 year old kiddos out there where you can still teach them and they will follow what you said. They will just follow if they experienced something bad that can change their lives for a long time or maybe forever. Educating gamblers isn't as easy as you said bruh. The best thing to educate them is to let them learn themselves. Let them experience the bad and good things about gambling and they are the one to adjust whether they will continue or not.

If we talking about an addiction it's not about learning. Most gamblers are aware they are playing a rigged game, it's just that their brain is "tricked" into thinking it's having fun. Even if they are aware that gambling is bad, they have a sort of irrational craving that will not go away with education or past experiences.

Absolutely. By doing that, if they got caught, they can get a double punishment, and that can make them in jail for a long time.

The addiction always attracts people to play more, and even if they lose much money, they will still want to play more. What is in their brain is only playing gambling games, whether it's one game or more games, because they find something excited inside the gambling games.

You can take a loss if you allocating a portion of your money only, it's hard to take a loss if the money is coming from your savings and you are not comfortable at your losses, so if you want to prove that you can take a loss then you must prove that you allocate money that you are comfortable of losing.

That is the case.

But they are allocating a small amount that even a small gambler like me wouldn't be accepting. The cap that they are talking about is so small and we are talking about monthly here. I am glad that this is just for UK but still, it doesn't mean that we can't control or we can't allocate the money we are gambling despite the cap being low. We can control ourselves and we can afford those losses.

I hope people in this time do not gamble with savings because future for many would be uncertain as I fear that some of the industries might shut down, jobs cuts are already happening and will continue to happen as well. The economy is not doing well and require magic to happen to bring it back to the state where we were before Covid times. It is going to take year or more atleast to start recovering and so savings will help during such hard times.

Stupid law to be honest. I know people are saying that they are "protecting" their citizen, but in fact it looks like they are trying to control their citizen. Why would an adult person would need the confirmation of the government  to gamble? If a person doesn't have money or can't afford to gamble, though he still wants to, but then being stopped by the government might feel really shitty. Instead of taking proper steps to help the unemployed or people in need, they are taking absurd steps like this which shows how incompetent the government is.

The problem is that gambling isn't really supposed to be legal or tolerated in the first place. A good law would allow people to only bet but not gamble (*bet but don't gamble*). Gambling is taking big risk in bets. It is opposite of safe/responsible bet.
Gambling is irresponsible, unsafe, risky betting.

And this shows why trying to impose limits to those people is not a solution at all, on the surface it may seem to be a solution but the people that gamble compulsively or are addicted to it even if they were unable to get around that limit then they would use that money for something else that will have the very same result, and in the process this law will affect the free market and many casinos and jobs will be out of the economy something that we cannot really afford to lose when we are in the middle of an economic crisis caused by the pandemic.

I think the government with this regulation wants to control financial citizens, so it is reasonable to overcome gambling addicts.
Like the SEC and IRS government agencies trying to track crypto on the grounds of illegal activities.Even though all these things
are done by the government to control everything. I don't think the money-limiting rules for gambling will be runs well, considering
that people will still spend their money in other ways, if they are addicted. The best solution is to expand the rehabilitation center
for gambling addicts for free.

This is the main problem of officials/bureaucracy in any country and system of government: in the end, they are only interested in people needing them. In fact, they are interested in creating problems that can be solved only with their help.

Before we do gambling we must consider the fact that in gambling we cannot really win everytime, there are sometimes loss and we cannot deny it. I believe that if we do gambling we can gain a lot of profit if we have a good luck and if we dont have the luck we can lose our funds or even everything on it. So before we do gambling we also need to take the posible loss, i suggest to make a limit on gambling so that we can take the loss if we loss on it.

There is only two outcomes and it is whether you win or you will incur losses, most of the people who want to make deposit in many online casinos because they are aware ti the potential reward and only few of them understand the risks and it is the reason why majority of them are losing money. When there is money involved, our greed push us where we cannot control out thoughts anymore and we are creating decisions which is really not good. Proper risk management should be master first before a certain gambler invest huge amount of money in a certain online casinos.

Greed will come to people who win, and if they can not control themselves, they will not have a chance to save their money instead, they will use the money to play more. We already see that greed makes someone losing all of the money. Even if they want to recover the losses, it will not easy to get them back. But not all gamblers who lose a lot of money will tell others because they will keep that for themselves.

I agree. For adult people in their right mind this law is a violation of their individual liberties. I think it can be applied to sick people, or the so called "addicted gamblers" (maybe it even should be applied to them), but sane adults should have the right to do whatever they want with their money. Even risking all of it at once should not be prohibited in a free society.

I might agree with such opinion but how would you determine and check addicted gamblers? Do they have some medicine documentation about that addiction? I don't think so, most of them doesn't even know they have a problem. Also, who could monitor such limited implemtation of law? I'm not saying this law is the ideal solution but exceptions would be really hard to determine and performe.

That's why the implementation is set in a whole country whenever someone wants to play, they are need to have this question answered. They need to prove that whatever happened they won't gonna do shitty things like these people did: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7902859/How-500-people-kill-year-getting-hooked-gambling.html
The rate is dramatically high, they need to have something prepared to counter this kind of thing. This should be discussed because to kill yourself just by losing in gambling is a kinda dumb way to die. Why not just move on? and start a new life in the other place?

You are asking the right questions. That is why, seeing the ineffectiveness of their actions, the government, instead of stopping to make stupid decisions, requires more authority and more control. As a result, everything turns into a totalitarian state where a person must ask permission from an official for even the simplest action.

Management is one thing that could save in the likes of that problem. Putting not only limitation in betting but also to other aspects like time management. If one had a lot of time to gamble then pretty sure one will be able to get more losses. I agree with you that we cant really win in gambling everytime. I think time management itself will going to suffice in controlling the betting addiction. However in my opinion since OP stated about how to prove that losses is part of gambling then it is very simple to take the loss. Acceptance of everything that has happen and moving on to the next gambling time and then enjoy or have some fun excitement. This is the real essence of gambling.

Lossing is part of gambling. But it would be a good practice to limit the betting amount in order for one to survive not taking too much of other resources that has been intended for other things like providing the basic needs. In order for one to make a good way to make betting is to make a list of how much money being use to gamble every time as well as the winning money and then see the difference whether you earn or not. And whatever the result with the calculations then you can decide on what to do next.

I think if the casino implements the limitations on the deposit, that will make their member moves to the other gambling website which don't use that limitation. The gamblers will say that they decide to use any money they have to gamble, and they will complain to the casino if they got that limitation. To use big money or not will be every gambler responsibility, and before a gambler playing gambling games, they should know how much money that they will use. And if somehow, they lose half of all of the capital, they need to stop and get out from the casino to save their money. The casino will only be a place for them to having fun, enjoy the gambling games, and spend the money, and the casino will not be responsible for losing money from the gambler.

Most old-time gamblers are good at controlling and faking their emotion I don't think it will be an issue at all it's the newbies that will have a hard time proving if they can take a loss, because while you are learning how to gamble you'll also become good at concealing your real emotion
so it will be no problem for old gamblers.

I agree, the more experience you have with gambling the better you can handle your emotions. I have been gambling for a long time in physical casinos but only with a small bankroll, I got used to having bad beats where the luck just runs against you. It's always great to gamble in a biggger group so you see all kind of reactions.

In the end these kind of protections are mostly for the new gamblers, I think the chances of becoming hooked on gambling is especially high when you are new to all the games.

Newbies will have problems unless they are quite rich already and does not matter to them even if they lose out some money in gambling. For the old gamblers, ones who can have a good self-control those will be fine, but ones like who are sort of an addicted and hardly can stay away might still face some issue due to this notice.

newbie or not as long you will never put all your money into gambling and know how to control your self when you are in loosing streak it doesn't matter  . Self control is needed before you start playing in any gambling casino  website learn not to be greedy when you are at lost or win .

Control is already enough, it will ease everything and you'll be able to limit your gambling expenditures.
It's a sad word right? because we are gambling to win, not to lose but the government knows that we will still lose regardless of how positive we are, so they are making a law to minimize our loses but this law is quite complicated which making your private financial matters public to them.

UK Do not have a liberal stance when it comes to gambling I don't think many countries will adopt this, gambling casinos are government cash cow because of the huge amount of tax they are paying if they do that they will limit the taxes they are going to receive to these casinos, they will let it and they will just issue warning but not to the point that they will ask for explanation.

We dont know if its just really a cover up and trying to pretend that they do care for its citizens but they are actually just trying to know your financial capability?

Who knows the possibility but to know on what government do likes is that they do want to know everything so its likely that this is on high chances for possible reason.

100 euro for a month? even how small time gambler you are, you will surely spent up this money for a day or a couple.Setting up this kind of law is just
really too short or doesnt make any sense.

Newbie or not as long as you know how to manage your money and discipline yourself you will not lose that hard in gambling, in most cases newbies win on their first try. I always advice to minimize the losses and prevent being addict and greedy is learning when to put a bet, analyzing first the game, studying the past results will give you a better position in present. Addiction is the biggest enemy here, coz once you lost you always want it back as soon as possible and tends to become addict rather than wanting to regain the losses which has a negative effects not only in financial but in some aspect of mental being.

If faking an emotion is essential and will good for the gambler, he has to do it so that he can't take further losses.

But most experienced gamblers have that ability because they know how to take the situation correctly and lightly. As with the newbies, they can't take losses and it's hard for them to accept their losses which triggers them to get into more losses.

It's true because sometimes you do not worry about that money that you lost, if you lost it's fine because it's just a game at the end of the day. You don't need to get anger on a gambling game, it'll just stress you out and will just ruin your mindset on playing the game.

The first game of gambling is just like sipping the first alcohol of emotions, you'll not know to do but once you can handle things and overridden, it means that you have a lot of experience on gambling.

I've read a lot about the relationship between gambling and emotion, try to read more here: https://www.gamblingsites.com/blog/weird-relationship-between-gambling-emotion/

No, it is not addiction, it is ourselves. Humans are natural sinners and greed is just a part of us. The biggest enemy here is ourselves, how we will be able to stop those losses, how to stop betting when we don't need to bet anymore, to decide correctly. If we will be able to control ourselves we don't need this cap to stop us from gambling, we can do that ourselves.

With simple awareness, you can know if you are in right mindset where if you are thinking right and good. Greed is part of human nature but we can control it if we have discipline. Actually self discipline is one of the hardest human achievement because it requires commitment after all. A gambler should know when to start and when to stop or to backout. Discipline can also include the money that you are only wanting to risk and spend in order to avoid to lose more money.

In the vast majority of cases, gambling addiction isn't something that arises out of thin air. Current, or potential, gambling addicts often suffer from other mental illnesses, such as obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), post-traumatic stress disorder(PTSD), bipolar disorder, and depression. Most of them do have some medical records, and at least for those people gambling should be prohibited until they recover. And it's not like - these people can gamble, and those can not. All of us suffer from depression or some kind of a stress once in a while. And we shouldn't gamble during those times.

Eventually he can handled it, he can be used to it, he needed to know that in gambling there is always a higher risk that is needed to take, we can never always win in every game that we put our money, there will be times that we will lose the amount we invest sometimes, and maybe sometimes a lose streak will come, but we need to learn and endure the every setbacks in our game, have your emotion be stable as always.

I think  that is exactly why these restrictions are in place to see if we gamblers are actually able to handle these losses. Controlling emotions is one of the hardest things ever, especially after a losing streak. For me personally it's very hard to stop after having bad beats. Because my brain keeps trying to find patterns where are none and wants me to keep trying to earn back my losses. I think every gambler will be at the mercy of his emotions a couple of times in his career. We are no robots afterall.

I think although this might sound like a good move from the part of the government that wants to regulate people to have as much less loss as possible and save them from gambling addiction, I don't think it's good to invade into people's privacy and command them what to do and what not to do with their hard earned money! If a person wanna gamble with their entire years salary, the government shouldn't have any say or order on it. They can advise although.

You got the point mate, it's about privacy and with this new rule in this specific country, I would not be surprise if gamblers will find crypto casinos as the best alternative to gamble, here, they can gamble as much as they want and they can keep that privacy on them.


That's my money, my rule, this is the rule we like.

Hope our government will not follow the same law as gambling addiction is also high in our country.

well that's why that's the reason why gambling establishments have to declare that the age must be over 18 years of age and over because only adults who are adults will be easy to control their emotions, while for people who are not yet mature or still under 18 years of age it will be difficult to control. his emotions when he loses.

Why do you have to prove that you can take losses and whom you have to prove it?. Most people will get hurt if he/she lose so much money unless you are a billionaire. That is why self-control is very important to those who gamble to avoid gambling addiction or worse than gambling addiction.

Every gambler should already be aware that losing is also a big possibility in gambling so they should "technically" should have already the proper mental conditioning if ever they lose all their money in a gamble. Problem is that not everybody has that mentality and that they are going to a casino or gambling house only to win. That is not a good mentality if you ask me. They should bring only the money that they can accept to lose so as not to have any depression or mental issues that will be raised if ever he loses.

Based on the article, if you want to gamble more than 100 euro, you will be subjected to a strict affordability check by an independent gambling ombudsman. This is also proposed since there are a lot of stories in the UK about problems including gambling. It may be easy for us that we can control ourselves but it is not the same for other people. It is a mental problem, that is why they are having these solutions.

Yeah that what he is referring to, that because of addiction, someone might find it really hard to be well disciplined on managing our money.
Greed and addiction correlates with each other, and they can make you to lose money and eventually yourself.
So we must keep plans healthy when we are gambling and we must avoid being addicted where we cannot control ourselves anymore.

Gamblers from UK are the one who should worry because this report is coming out from UK OP did not mentioned in his article whose government implemented this rule, gamblers operator should worry too because they will have less profit and many will not play frequently than they used to be, UK people are to much into gambling that the government have to intervene, and this is not a good intervention.

Fact is there that heavy addictions bring this proposal.

Without any information about gambling addictions, we won't see this news, the government needs to take
actions in finding the right solution to lessen the case of this gambling problem. For now, gamblers from UK
are the subject but who knows after that if this proposal bring every government an idea to adopt and make
it as part of their rules.

Addiction to something is always bad for our mental or physical health. If you go to a casino or a slot table then you will see a lot of different types of people there.
some people are going to casino after finishing their work, they just hang out with their friends and gamble. such type of gamblers is not addicted they spend a certain amount of money for gambling. They take gambling as an entertaining thing and as a result, their mental stress is reduced by going to casino.
On the other hand, there are some people who have not enough money for gambling. but they are badly addicted. they are involved in various social misdeeds to finance gambling. I wanna tell that, gambling is good until you addicted on it.

What is good intervention?, any government that can't help the citizens to save for their future when things go worse like what is going on in the country. We'll know what the coronavirus pandemic has caused and still causing and for any government to make such decisions in order to control their citizens in my opinion is a fair treatment and it's a good intervention.

There are two sides that will be affected actually.

1-Gambling operation is going to reduce their profit significantly.  (bad for operators, bad or good for government)

2-Gamblers (bad or good), bad for high roller gamblers, good for addicted gamblers.

It would really have its pro's and cons but in this case this will affect gambling industry on said country if they are just really concerned into its citizens then why they cant just banned it fully?

They are still giving a new rule or limits but it wont really be that enough.For gamblers who do live into this place will surely find up ways to gamble which is way more that on the amount that had
been restricted.

We know that there are lots of ways to do so.

well when that happens, the government will control the gambling place because in fact the government cannot control the gambling place, because it is a private business, in several gambling places in Las Vegas and others I see the government does not dare to do this.

In my observation, gambling in the UK is heavily demanded especially during the times of lockdown. With this, gambling will be a good source of the government's revenue and can also give jobs to their people.

But the concern is, some gamblers do wreck and as a result, they faced financial problems. So instead of the government fully banning the gambling industry completely, which surely they won't do, they want to implement rules so that people there will be controlled. A good initiative but difficult to implement. The law about this needs to be adjusted.

banning gambling is worster than creating a rule   . i thought your concern about the rules  ? pros and cons have an affect but there were good effects here not only bad .  

rules can change ,  it will be enough or not yet enough depends on their observation but its dangerous if you will push your self outside thier rules  .

They can't control but they can regulate as long as the business is legally operating, so it's still the same because if they will not follow the regulation, they will lose their license and they will operate illegally which is risky for them even if you say they are private.

I agree with you, they can do anything they want but they should also be ready in facing the consequences of their action as they will break the law.

Even in Vegas and other popular casinos, as long as the authorities are strictly enforcing the law, everyone is treated fairly.

And this is because most people do not really care about the results either, whenever a new law is passed in my country I have the tendency to talk about that with my friends and for the most part most laws that are passed today do not really solve anything, however government officials need to do something or they are going to look useless to the public and then they pass a bunch of useless laws that only increase the price for compliance and reduces the liberties of their citizens, but when I talk about this with my friends they do not get it, they only look at the good intentions of the government regardless of the results.

Well gamblers losing  £100/month is going to make them useful when all those goes in to the right project that will also be useful for the people.

Nope, its not like your friends didn't get it. They just knew that talking politics always end up to an arguement and then possibly brawling or worse. I once talked to my in-laws about politics and after one of them shouted. I never engage to them again. Even avoid them anymore.

Atleast, it would still be allowed. This is a point that should still be appreciated. In other countrie,s, both offline and offline gambling are prohibited. So regulation will not be that much of a burden. The rule is to prove you can take a loss of €100 right? If you are wanting to continue, it should be fine to give the demand. Also this would somewhat help the gamblers especially if they do not have that much to gamble. They would be restricted to a certain point telling "this is enough for today", if you don't have that much money to gamble. Which is a good thing, why? Some gamblers are just greedy and frustrated to get that win not being aware of how much have they lose already. And also, if this will be negative to the gamblers, rules may still change for sure.

Gambling addiction, as any other addiction, is a bad thing, and it can't be ignored, even if only from 5% to 10% of all gamblers in most countries can be called problem gamblers. But the regulations should not be harmful for 90%-95% of gamblers who gamble to relax from their hard work, and can work more effectively after that. The importance of relaxation is underestimated big time in economic terms. Deprive people of relaxation, and economy will collapse.

There is no point in creating external restraints in order to contain human gambling addiction. People must change themselves, otherwise they will always find ways to get around the restrictions.
In addition, such restrictions relieve people of responsibility for their actions, they begin to think that the reasons for their addictions are outside of them, while this is not so.

The solution created is not to totally cure gambling addiction, but to prevent people from getting addicted, but it's not 100% guaranteed it will work but this is the initiative of the government.

True, we need to learn from our mistakes, gambling addiction is could be similar to alcohol addiction, but there's no restriction on buying altcoin or limitation from consumers, so this law is quite absurd too but some people would appreciate it especially those who are not gamblers.


Not blaming themselves for gambling addiction when the are in control is a plain stupidity.

actually that 5-10% is smaller than what is reality has,because i believe that almost half of gamblers are addicted maybe some of them don't accept it but it is  indeed they are.

addiction must be faced immediately before it gets worst since addict don't usually accept they are.
they must be cured and must be helped.

There is nothing to do with them. Even though how serious the government imposing such restrain and stop physical gambling, they are still hard-headed not to follow them instead of continuing it. They know that they can't be put in jail for their whole life and they can be freed soon if they can pay their bill. That makes them strongly decide to do illegal cockfighting.

It's clearly stated that the government is trying to regulate even more the gambling casinos because some folks lost their jobs and must get a salary to spend, it's a weird situation and a weird move from the part of the gov but it is logical enough to be implemented. The gamblers should only bet what they only afford to lose and this is why the new rules are going to be implemented, to prevent peoples from risking their salaries, risking bigger amounts and losing all of their funds which is catastrophic.

The thing is, people who are addicted in gambling will not heal themselves from addiction because of their pride and losses, therefore the Government and the gambling site or casinos help each other to cure their citizens who are addicted to gambling. But of course it will never be enough, what you've said was right. People need to change first or help themselves in order to attain peace and forget gambling addictions that became their nightmares which hunts them at night.

The cure to addiction is the dedication of a person to submit himself in the therapy or whatever way of healing he wants to. Otherwise, it is just nonsense.

^ Literally I can say that I should take the loss if I lose right? but the subject says "You have to prove that you can take the loss". is this a question or a survey? because, If I play into a gambling site regulated, or does require KYC or not, how can a Gambler technically, or literally prove that he/she can take the loss? in what way? by losing a huge amount of money? Limiting the amount of money that you can use is not the solution, but limiting the bet and requiring KYC. Nevertheless, this implementation is useless when it comes to using cryptocurrency.

In order to fight against the gambling addiction of citizens, it is necessary to understand where the addiction itself comes from, what is its cause. There are people with a dependent personality type, they become dependent on many things. This is due to their emotions, which are dependent on external things, which as a result leads to addictions of various kinds. Whether it's alcohol, drugs, loveless love or gambling addiction. For such people, restrictions can only create a precedent for the development of addiction.

Actually, government's regulation could do, since if they can't handle themselves, the platforms do. Limiting their depositing and withdrawal amount will be the best tool for them to limit their playing activity. Meaning, if we are really eager to play and gamble if the system is not allowing us, we might choose other platforms to play with, but with the government's regulation applied to almost all of the online gambling casino available to our country, we have no choice but to obey and spend time more on ourselves, until we understand that we are getting addicted.

It is impossible to say exactly what percentage of gamblers have gambling problems, but the number can be estimated because numerous studies have been conducted on the subject. I've read many reports, and I bet most of the researchers would agree on the "5% -10%" estimation, and the actual number would be rather close to 5% than to 10%.

I'll show you just one example of how to estimate the percentage of addicted gamblers.

Take the number 2.6% from this article


and keep in mind that their having "some type of gambling issue" doesn't imply they are gambling addicts, but okay, let's make an upper estimate of the number.

then take 60% from here(again, for an upper estimate):


Now, let's do some simple math here:

2.6% x (1 ÷ 0.6) = 4.333333333%

In other words, only 4.3% of the people who have gambled in the previous year were having "some type of gambling issue". The percentage may vary from country to country, but it is hardly above 10% anywhere. CMIIW.

yeah and knowing  how  gamblers  have so many option to gamble?

though Cockfighting can be interfered  easily because  there  are  many people now that can easily report them to the authority .

But Addict  will always  find ways,and government cannot do anything about this because this is  a personal problem and also family is the first that can help them.

Regulations are somehow a way to keep people and economy in general safe.
If someone gambles without any limit then debt is created and this debt is going to harm all counterparts involved.
In the end, this greedy behavior harms other people apart from the gambler.

Gamblers realizing their addiction is not that easy.

One of the symptoms of being addicted into something is being indenial that you are addicted. That is why it is also hard to realize that they are addicted and that is also why the governments can help by maling laws or bills that would be able to limit their activities in a casino or in an online casino(in this case). Casinos wouldn't care, that is why these might be able to make these gamblers realize that they are already addicted.

well I think only people who have made a lot of profit and suddenly experience losses due to small mistakes so they try to correct their mistakes by continuing to gamble and hope that the lost capital can come back again so they get carried away with emotions and cannot control their emotions and finally they addicted to gambling.

I think the phrase(problem gambler) sounds more like tautology because gambling is a problem... (I have even seen "safe gambling").   
  "Problem Bettor" sounds appropriate in my opinion.   If you really want to solve the problem of gambling (and betting addiction) the word should be clearly understood and applied in the broader sense.
Gambling with your money, time, health etc is a big problem that should be prevented.
People shouldn't gamble or enjoy gambling because it creates problems for them.
Bet responsibily. And bet on safe/good games

No, it's not. Gambling by itself is not a problem for most of the people(see my post above). There are many things that become harmful when abused: alcohol drinking, video games playing, even eating normal food can become a problem, but it's wrong to consider those activities bad by default.


It looks contradictory to your previous statement in the same post. :)

I believe that Government interference is very important in our time now because they are the one who's to blame if these people have no food to eat in their tables.

I love when government make such move because this is for the goodness of the people and nothing personal.

instead of denying the fact lets support the initiative and the process is really helpful not only to the gambler but for the whole country a well.

Well, it is not their fault if these gamblers get addicted to gambling, all they can really do now is to control those people especially if this is really growing as a huge problem that could affect the country. I also think that this is not an interference, I think of it as their way to remind these gamblers that they need to regulate their gambling activities, that they need to control themselves.

no one says that it is governments fault mate because being addicted is either the person itself fault or people around him ,what i am saying is this is a good move from the government to interfere in something that they know can help gamblers.

actually it was not their obligation but to have a good economic country people must be in right mind to help the government make the country great.

Well, im talking about when you says that they will be blamed if these people have no food to eat though I agree with you about the interferance, it is just that I look at it in different term of the word and yeah, a very good move for them. To be honest, as you said, it is either the people themselves or the people aorund them is the reason for that.

I think a gambler is pre_aware about his loss and profit in gambling So he must know how to handle it. No one is playing for free so instead of making tough rules for them government should understand people invest their money to earn something. It is all the gambler’s own skill if he lose all or all something from gambling. I think Good gamblers won’t feel free if government Will interfere their consequences.

As long as the gamblers are not disobeying the law, they are free to do what they want. If they want to spend gambling in full time, let them be, it's their choice and their life. I doubt that the government will focus on this kind of person because obviously, there are more people we should think more and should be prioritized.

Gamblers are probably adults, they can manage themselves, if they did something wrong, they should face the consequences of those actions. Simple as that. If they choose to be broke, then let them be, it's their life, the higher-ups don't have time to help them on each individual problems. Their priority is to focus on the problems that affect the economy.

Exactly ! We as people shpuld be responsble for every decisions that we are made. We need to accept if we lose something because of our negligence. Casinos only cares for their businesses, the life of their customers are not their obligation, as long as the casinos are obeying the law they will continue it, gamblers must take their own responsibilities and take care of their own losses as well.

So this is the reason why government should act directly on casino owners  :) If casino will ban you for some time after some amount you've lost, you'll get calm and have time to do some useful activities. The amount of people which is highly addicted (meaning they will register new accounts through VPN or something like this) is much less than full amount of people who is in danger zone.

So, at least one time, government do their job right.

If that's how gamblers would think, there would be no problem and regulation like this would not be created. Gambling site is not at fault when gamblers lose as we know they are into profit, hence they should operate with an edge which would mean when we are gambling, we don't have the advantage. What people needs to change is their mindset, treating gambling as a way of entertainment than a way to earn way is the best treatment.

Oh i get it,we have look at the different perspective but with the same thoughts,Good government will do such thing but we also know that only few of them has this concern over gamblers.
Because the truth is the more gamblers played and loss is the more taxes they can claim over those casinos so the corrupt country care nothing about Gamblers but their benefits only.

Addiction of the gamblers isn't tolerable especially if they are always doing it. The government can't do anything to but to do things like this that can help these addicted gamblers lessen their addiction into it.

I'm thinking too if the regulation that the government will put into these gambling casinos will affect the tax that they are paying or not. Hmmmmmm but anyway this will be a great help for the gamblers but I doubt that all of them will agree with this move.

We're already done on that.

The Government is just trying to solve one of the problems in their community and there's nothing wrong with that. Because if the Government will not take any action regarding on this matter, they are the one who is going to suffer in the end. What I mean is, the poverty will just going to spread and the Government will be more in tough situation giving aids to those who needs it.

That is why they came up to such solution hoping that would help those people who are addicted in gambling to lessen their addiction slowly.

Except the German government which I think is the less corrupted in the world from what I have seen when I worked there a few years ago,I believe no other government can be really trusted to be fair and a lot of cases of governments abusing their power through government officials who intentionally bribed different businesses including casinos and this cases have been quite some.So I think that the government should be independent from businesses and let them do as they like as long as they don't break any rules of the government laws where they operate.

While I agree that in these difficult times some people may try to multiply their money in the casino and lose all of it in the process, at the same time not much is going to change with this law, think about it if those people were going to lose their money to the casinos it is entirely possible they are desperate enough to try other means of making some quick cash and they will lose their money anyway, so while this law may seem as a way to protect addicted gamblers the truth is that those people will lose their money in other ways and as such it is impossible to protect them no matter what kind of law is passed.

I always wonder why they want restrictions if they don't want people to get addicted, simply ban could be enough right? So I feel there are lot of politics involved in such kind of decisions anyways lets come to the point, is it really going to stop the people from getting into more gambling? Absolutely not they have to work hard to earn more to satisfy their addictive nature.

It seems to me that ordinary players who do not have an addiction and like to sometimes spend time playing, will suffer from such restrictions. A dependent person will always find ways to circumvent the restrictions and continue playing as much as they want. Forbidden fruit is sweet.

Politics and bribe included is I think common on this kind of negotiations, There are more easier ways to stop gamblers to play like what you have said but of course casino owners wouldn't agree with this and they would make any move just not to shut down their casino. That's why I think they just put regulations and limits to it in order to balance out the situation and not by forcing to ban it in the whole country.

I'm in very much on the side of the government if they want to regulate and provide a cap on every user about how much each can gamble because strictly speaking, even though the government makes good profit from casinos, but it shouldn't come at the expense of the citizens by having their hard earnt money ripped by misusing their addictions!

As @Logitech says, the government are also thinking about the taxes they will be getting so they are putting this regulation but at the same time they do worry that the taxations happening might be lessen hence also affecting the government. There are obviously politics in there and we don't know what is happening between those curtains.

It will not be fair to cap each individual with same amount of money allocated for gambling. Some people are rich and they can afford much more amount to gamble than the middle class or the lower class gambler. If government want to implement this rule, they should allot different limit for different categories of people.

I agree with you. Regulation simply has to be.
Of course, no one forces citizens to go to casinos forcibly, but the casino is arranged in such a way as to put people on gzhmbling, which leads to mental and social problems in quite healthy wealthy people.
The state in this case loses, since the level of the state is determined by the consciousness of its citizens.

meanwhile here in Indonesia, gambling is prohibited.
but contradictively, it supports several Indonesian football clubs.
and many Instagram influencers endorsed by gambling site to promote their service. lol.

like many steps behind to become a country with a clear gambling regulation.

The government will forever be blamed by those who are not satisfied with the rules. I dont think that the restriction will create injustice among gambler of different economic status. When the rules were made, I thought they had taken the gamblers economic status into account. But this is just a government plan that has not yet been realized. They will consider the amount of tax that will be received from the casino if the rules are made. Limiting the amount of money a player can bet will only reduce the tax the casino has to pay to the government.

If that person could prove that losing some money would not be an issue and can easily manage after that as well then should not be worry. But for those who are form hand to mouth situation then yes those people will have some tough time as this is government decision and can be seen form both the sides.

It is necessary to regulate the market, but not in similar ways, they will not lead to anything. Everyone chooses to gamble for him or not, but that should always be decriminalised. Regulation should take place on the basis of education and training, so that people grow up with a healthy psyche, and not with deviations that ultimately lead to all sorts of addictions.

The idea might be good but the hardest part will be how to determine the vulnerable groups of gamblers and set limits but at the same time not to violate anyone's rights. The problem I see is misuse of different procedures and then the final result will not be as desired. And gambling platforms will not be delighted with such regulations so a resistance might be expected.

Providing spending limit will not make the big gamblers happy about it.

The government has many ways to check those casinos if they are operating illegally, as for it, they want to put the focus on the gamblers not with the casinos for the spending limit.

They are looking to the spending habit and also, they will take down casinos that operates illegally, this is common worldwide.

As a rule, government decisions may not be ideal for everyone. Because people are different and gambling addiction is different for everyone. Therefore, they cannot meet the interests of absolutely everyone. Someone will be harmed in their own interests and, as is usually the case, most likely ordinary players who do not have problems with gambling addiction will suffer.

I agree, especially those people that can take those losses ten or even maybe a hundred times the set cap by this regulation. I don't think they will be willing to face an ombudsman just to prove that they can take a loss since that might affect their persona negatively knowing that they are gambling like that and in that huge amount.

I very much doubt that people will even want to give out information about themselves that they actually play gambling games in online casinos. In society, as a rule, there is a bias towards people who play in casinos. Therefore, in some cases, even the fact that someone will know about your online casino games will be enough for a person to stop playing in an online casino.

Government or any public or private organization should not intervene or interrupt in any activity that people are doing that may have a bad impression in the public, the general society has a bad impression on gamblers and this will discriminate them, they can just pose serious warnings but it's on the person to imposed it to himself not the government.

Of course that will be no good for casino owners, because more regulations - more headache for any casino. But in that case, this is useful regulations, because every casino is highly interested to take everything from you to the last penny. And is something awful will happen later, this will be out of the casino (like one episode on my mind, when my neighbor killed his wife because of gambling addiction). So now it will be much harder for idiots to lose everything and for casino to take everything from idiots.

Most of the time, if the player is having huge funds and is a gambler by heart they offer something unique that makes the gambler feel that they have good priveleges, but it turns out that they sometimes lose to the casino, it's hard to accept but it is near to the terms: "luring the gambler for house's good". 

On the other hand, I found some casinos that really cares for the players in terms of donating to the charities and having cashback when players could have benefits depending on how often they play.

I think that casinos rarely, if ever, impose regulations of their own on customers. Gambling sites just have to comply with the regulations made by governments of the territories where they operate. I disagree with you, and I agree with @johhnyUA, only to be more polite I would replace the word "idiots" with "gambling addicts".

Also, it is a common misconception that casino wants to take all your money. What casino really wants is to have a lot of players and earn from the house edge. It doesn't care about whether a particular player winning or losing.

Casinos are just imposing at least the minimum law required by the government for them to implement, they would be kind to their gamblers because all they want is to give gamblers some comfort so they can gain the trust and they will earn a loyal gamblers.


That's the common line of the losers, they can't accept that casinos are winning and they are losing.
With house edge, they can win most of the time, but they'll never win all the time, but if you are gambling with a house edge, it's expected that you'll lose in the long run as you don't have the edge, it's pretty simple, so I hope they'll understand that before gambling.

But sometimes Government must interfere to help the people or the addicted person because this can even effect the economy,imagine too much addict in gambling?they  are burden to the community and their family for sure.

i Support government in this kind of action and hoping each government will do the same for the goodness of their own people.

We can view this as a symptom of something else, I think, something in the mind is corrupting the mental faculties of these gamblers, losing their control over their urge to gamble and their willingness to give all they have to win and make big amounts of money. This needs to be dealt with the likes of anxiety and depression and addiction. In my opinion, this is a mental sickness and this needs mental specialists and psychologists to handle these people. Government should fund specialized sectors of the medical establishment that concentrates in combating addiction and depression.

The casino have that capabilities, most from those trusted gambling house they can easily manipulate things to still favor them, if there's adjustment that they needed to follow they'll going to make sure that it won't take that big hit to there business, if it's a requirements that needed to follow there are still ways for bankers to continue alluring the gambler to keep playing.

Government intervention in people's Affairs is a complex thing. Here it is important to observe a fine line, how to set the rules of the game and not directly interfere in people's Affairs. It seems to me that it is impossible to set limits on the amount of loss so that they do not affect anyone. Someone can afford to lose tens of thousands of dollars and still not get serious damage to the wallet. And for someone, losing a hundred bucks will already be a serious loss.

I agree with you, people who like to gamble higher than the set limit might have to divulge their financial information just to pass the requirement to gamble a higher amount, question is, are they willing to do that?  I can already see that majority would say no.

Although I highly appreciate the the efforts made by the government in order to address gambling addiction, they should not meddle on choices based on people's desire to gamble. If the the government regulates gambling by proving that 'you can handle such loss' then this could only be destructive in the long run. In addition, putting a soft cap of 100 euros will not help as people would circumvent and try to find a way in order to get pass through this regulation.

If the government sees gambling addiction as a major disadvantage, then creating job opportunities or providing other means of recreational activities can definitely help. Once you put this regulation, people will only be more inclined to know ways of breaking this implementation.

I partly agreed but most of the time i believe that addiction comes from Desperation to become richer in easiest way,sorry to say but most of addcited gamblers are lazy people that don't want to stretch their body working instead they want easy money and this is why they fell into gambling when at first will let you win consecutively but after that?
all you got is losing and to the max that you don't even know addiction is right on your face.

I agree with you that the hard cap of 100 EUR is just wrong. In my opinion it definitely makes sense to monitor loses of visitors on casinos and you find outliers, where people lose a lot of money in short time. Then there should definitely be a support system it place. But fixing loses to a pre determined number seems wrong, because different people have various amounts of money to gamble with. 100 EUR might be a lot of money for one person and only pocket change for someone else. It all depends on the risk involved.
Addicitions are a problem in every form for the government, including addicitions for acohol, drugs or gambling. It ruins peoples lifes. The economic costs down the road for such addictions are much higher.

I think the governments can make such rules/law "fair & just", by simply focusing on players who bet what they can't afford to lose. That includes both the wealthy and regular people/bettors. Both take big risk with their funds, so I don't see why one would be excluded from it.
This is why it's good to do these things via consensus, so one side does not dominate the other with unjust laws/rules. Besides, thorough and transparent research should've been conducted to help them base their final decision on fact/truth, and not what they think/want/feel.

I'm not sure I understand what are you trying to say. :) If it is expected that you'll lose in the long run(and by the "long run" we mean millions of games played, right?), you shouldn't gamble at all? Is that what you are saying?

I personally think that it would be more right to say that it is expected that casino will win in the long run, but it's not necessarily that casino will beat you in particular.

Most likely they were saying is that Gambling is a selfish business that all they care is about the money of players, which is normal because that is why it's called "business". However, those players who are always losing concluded that gambling sites or casinos will never let you win but will going to take all your money, which again is normal.

Casinos or gambling sites works that way because that's how they make bankroll every single day. Gambling sites never force anyone to play, therefore gamblers are the one who is responsible for their actions, whether they win or not.

This is a law that does not benefit anyone and at the same time it affects the majority of gamblers that have their gambling under their control but that now need to follow this dumb regulation, and if you really think about it you will realize that the law is completely pointless because those that are addicted to gambling and that are losing huge amounts of money in it will find another way to gamble or they will find another way to lose their money and at the end they will end up in the same situation as before.

Most of us have that same sentiments, it's not going to benefits those gamblers who know how to take their losses, the approval of this rules will really affects those gambling sites who are legally facilitated, while gamblers will choose to find other ways to hide their activities.

It wont help either way, as while helping gambling addicts you also removing gamblers from playing inside legit casino house.

Indeed. It is the reason why casino owners earn money in their gambling business that they take all away the money of every gamblers losses, which is definitely normal. So gamblers are really the one's who is responsible for their action because it is their choice to risk all of their money. It is why if you want to enjoy gambling, even you experiences losses you should only overcome greed.

Some part of it I agreed. The problem here is not those who run casinos but the gamblers who are greed. Casinos are just being how are they supposed to be, such as earn profit from players and entertaining them at the same time. While on the other side, players can play along with it but few of them are getting indulge in pleasure and being greedy. In fact, the government receives a great kickback out of it and that was the tax. Hence, they have no much reason for them to intervene.
However, this could also be have an impact on the country in the way that, people are getting lazy and unemployed thus make give more effort for them to support their people.

Just in one case it will be harder to do than in another. It's enough hard to get everything from a man if he can lose only 100 euro per week (or month)  :)


It's like an ideal engine and real engine, i think. Casino does not care about how their customer wealth and where they get money. This is questions out of this business. (the same as barista doesn't interested where you've took money for his coffee). Casino just want to make you spend your money as many as you can (the same as barista want's you to buy his drink. And it would better if you buy more expensive). And yeah, of course in both cases they trying to make client come back again.

But the difference is that in barista case, you change your money for his coffee. Trading. Product or service for money. And casino is just spending money into the hole (if we are talking about "pure" casino games - dice, slots, roulette) 

Learning to take a loss is a secret to success in trading also, not surprised it would be a dynamic to gambling since they are so similar in requiring some discipline under pressure.


Revenue is the key to many businesses.   Its hard to keep high margins vs competition but economies of scale benefit a high flow of customers vs standing costs so that the greater the number of people even with a low percentage margin it becomes a more profitable business because online serving scales so well.

Actually, it's a general value that should apply to ourselves that accepting defeat on every situation we are facing is a must to grow ourselves and learn from our mistakes. This is a fact that will help you to attain your goals in life.

That's why I really support devs who really spent their time on searching the platforms' flaws to attain more users in their business. The more users they have, the more revenue will come to their business, this is a business mindset that most businessmen are applying also in life.

The problem comes into place once you get hooked on gambling. Only a fraction of player have problems with addicitions but it can definitely happen. And once you are addicited to gambling it's very hard to stop. Checking if someone can take a big loss could also help to prevent addicits from losing everything in a casino. I agree that most people can handle their emotions and are stable in life. For them it's just another form of regulations that is probably unnecessary. But for a few unlucky people it could really make a difference.

Having a businessmen mindset is great because you think in terms of risk and reward. This definitely helps in gambling and investing.

In purely luck-based games the outcome is independent of your actions. The only thing it depends on is luck. You can save your money by not playing at all, but, as they say, "you won't win a lottery if you don't have a ticket". :)


But not all gamblers' money are going "into the hole". Even in games with huge house edge, like 5%, 95% is returned to player. Not to a particular player, but to all players combined. It breaks down like this. If $1 million is wagered, $50,000(5%) is taken by casino, and $950,000 is won by players. Now, since less is returned than what was staked, surely some gamblers will find themselves in a loss, but a big win by some others is not ruled out. That's why so many people keep playing luck-based games, like dice, slots, roulette etc. - some of them win big.

Gambling addiction is a hard case for an individual, you also need a long term solution to this for a full recovery. Some people don't know that they're already addicted to gambling and they thought that it's still normal.

This means that gambling addiction is a critical condition and should be avoided, emotions must not apply when playing gambling because it will just ruin and can cause a losing streak.

Its government right to regulate anything inside their land, even in democracy you can't ask questions if it has been made a law.And not much people going to consider themselves as gambler community,they will just move to online gambling where there is no restriction and no documentation.

No restriction at the moment  ;) This will be not easy to do, but as we see trough few topics in this section, government starting to make regulations even about online casinos. 100 euro per week and no more  :)

Maybe only dex and ethereum casinos can stand up against that.

That is the main goal of gamblers. But how can you tell if your winnings are already enough and that's enough for you? How do you define "in the end" here?


But that will be a long way to go. Right now, gamblers can enjoy playing  on these reputable casinos that are not requiring KYC at the moment.

There's no need to prove as long as you're learning from that mistakes everytime you fail in gambling. However every single instance would bring more chances of winning, so it doesn't matter to me as long as I'll win those potential bets I had.
Those betting games that has no assurance will bring proof once I begun to take courage with my funds risked, just for expectations of lucky winning profit.

Based on what you said, if this is widely regulated it would also affect the country's economy. Some countries are also getting a lot of taxes from these casinos and online casinos and I think if there will be a regulation like these in a lot of casinos or online casinos, I guess it would affect the taxes the government are getting since these people that you say might find a way to gamble and it would end up illegal..

This law has good intentions but it is still lack basis for the gamblers. I understand that they are trying to save those gamblers who are having financial problems but I think this is not the solution, they can try to provide professional help for those gamblers maybe, but they are trying to pass a law that has so many loopholes.

And the law can affect the casinos and other gamblers too. I may not have the right solution but I hope they can really find the best one for their good intentions, but I think this ain't it.

Also, gamblers find their ways too.

The government are just concerned in their citizens that is why they are creating these regulations as you said but we can't just say that it is the government's fault of having these loopholes since people are also finding a way to walk around that regulations. Also, it doens't just fall to the government's hands, it also falls to these gamblers how would they behave and control their bettings.

No one can save someone from addiction without their co operation,its better to create more rehab centre for addiction if they are concerned about the gambling addiction in their country and also have to create awareness about it but they are restricing the desires of a common man just because they can't afford much.

I do not see any good intentions in considering an adult as incompetent. I think that this is a limitation in rights and quite serious - in fact, we have to prove/obtain permission to use our own money. I think this is a step towards totalitarianism. I am sure that if the government does not receive a rebuff with such initiatives, then it continues to invade all spheres of life and dictate conditions (often absurd), of course, "with the best of intentions."

This is something that we shouldn't be done. Our own hard-earned money is something that we should freely use. If this law will make require us to prove and obtain permission to use our money, then it seems that they don't have any good intentions. It will look like "our money, is their money."

All it need is a seminar regarding to financial literacy. This is all it need to prove losses that could be recover. The mathematical calculation for this is very simple. If you are currently employed now with not that much salary but could have make some extra allowance then try this and see if you could have save some money for yourself.

The formula is that SALARY - SAVINGS = EXPENSES. This should how one can make savings with discipline in spending it can overcome losses over a period of time. Just set aside an extra money whe you like to bet in casino.

I know right?

It is our money, why should we even ask them permission how we will use that? If we buy a lot of things in a grocery, they don't require us to ask them a permission, isn't it? Maybe that is because of how they can get taxes on that grocery while on the money we lost in gamlbing, they can't get anything. That is why it is better to use cryptocurrency.

I agree that it is our money and should be able to use it freely but if our gambling habit endangers ourselves or our family because of financial instability because of gambling then I would happily comply to the law. I know the law sounds restrictive but it is actually for our own good.

buying grocery and gambling is two different things and it has nothing to do with tax. I hope you realize that there are tons of people lose financial stability because of gambling and the cases is probably so bad that a government decided to act on it and put a law for it.

I know that it is a problem.

To be honest I am not against the limit. They could put a limit to a gambler every month or even a week if they wanted to but for us to go to an office of an ombudsman to prove that we can take a loss, for me is just extreme. If that limits doesn't work, the government doesn't need to adjust, it should be the gamblers. It is not always the restrictions, it is also the people.

It's little bit harder to predict what will happen. But at all you have to "accept" your losses no matter what. It's part of the life, everyone had loss, there is no person who is only doing profits or anything like that. We're taking notes from our losses, like they're teaching us to be better and better therefore to do not do the same wrong thing again as before.

Winning over and over again in gambling alone is not an easy task. Very good knowledge throughout you can't make money from gambling. A lot of the time it doesn't work knowingly, because the team you gamble with can lose at any time. But one thing that came to my mind very well is that if you lose in gambling and quit gambling, you will not get back the money you lost.  So you have to have the courage to win the gamble. You can play little by little if you want.

We don't have other choices but to accept the losses.

A gambler that can't take his losses potentially can lose more than he can. And if it gets serious and the government recognizes that problem, they have all the means to give a cap for the gamblers as a law.

If, they saw a lot of people being affected.

Well, you can't say that unless you can't even control your own money. That is the reason people should really be taught about financial literacy. The government will not be this strict if the people are actually reducing their money used in gambling. In other countries gambling addiction is a problem, if people can't do anything about it the government need to step up.

Only a few people who can win over and over in gambling and that person will have much luck which can give him the chance to win. Having good knowledge will not help if you don't have luck because the luck will be the one factor besides the other things that will determine. If we lost in gambling, especially lost big money in gambling, we need to think twice to continue or to stop gambling. But the best solution will be to stop gambling for a while, so you can refresh your mind by taking a relax. If you can accept the loss after you stop for a while, you can know if your luck will not always stay beside you.

It's quite unrealistic to believe that there really are some person that is lucky. Because for me, everyone could be lucky at a time, it is just that, some people wins allot because they are atleast trying their luck often. But the percentage of those who won too much in just a small amount of game is too low. That means that if we cannot win a jackpot by playing small amount of games, we should try to play allot and lower our bet.

With regards to whether to continue or not when lost, there is a strategy which is called martingale, basically, doubling your bet after losing in order to get back your money fast.

Well, you have decided that you are going to lose from the beginning.
Losses are those who made us better players or people.
If you don't lose you don't win so it is good to have experienced them in order to take your lessons and do not repeat your past activities.

If you dont risk then you won't win in this gambling activities.

There are many gamblers that always seek for winning that's they all Got is losses,If you gamble
then you must expect defeat so with this there is a chance that you'll learn how to manage the losses and control your emotion that will
 lead you to maintain small losses than chasing wins all the time.

and th best thing is?Don't gamble if you don't have enough money to spend or risk.

It is as if those politicians cannot really see the forest for the trees, they are so obsessed with the idea of creating laws that they do not see that not only they are damaging the freedom of the people they are also damaging the government itself, the gambling industry is huge around the world and it generates a lot of taxes, these kind of regulations will force many people that are spending their money responsibly to no longer spending it in gambling reducing their tax income just in the moment in which they need it the most.

But there are a lot of people that would take that losses so differently. Just think of those people that are addicted to gambling, I know that most of them are not addicted because they are losing but still, they view their losses so differently. Some actually think that they can get those losses back not knowing they will lose more. Looking at this thread,  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5271198.0)we could say that not all of us will be able to look at losses like that.

Everyone could be lucky, but all of them could not be lucky together because luck will only pick one or two or three people who deserve luck. So that will make sense if a few people can win much money from gambling. I think it is realistic if only a few people can get lucky in gambling games or even in other things. Playing a lot and using lower bets will not always give us a chance to us. The important is we know how to control ourselves and limit ourselves. Don't force us to play a lot if we can't accept the risk.

Doubling your bet after losing will be on your side temporary, so you don't have to depend on that for a long time because if you still use it for a long time, you can't always win.

gambling is created for entertainment while goes by it becomes a habit and profiteering,But the majority losses thats why we need to be aware of many chances that we will lose.
never look for always Win because this is just a dream.
Start Dealing in gambling with proper manner and that is only gamble small amount no matter  how enjoying this is.

Indeed, gambling must be used as entertainment or pleasure to fill spare time and limiting betting capital is the most important thing and can control yourself when playing.
play in a relaxed and calm manner when gambling for entertainment or pleasure and stop playing when you are in a winning position because it is the right choice and do not have the ambition to continue to win because it will result in losses and ultimately lose everything.

obviously because there is no point of playing too fast when your goal is supposed to play to kill and past the time .

im not playing for pleasure but i do practice relaxing my self whenever im betting because i notice that i can attract lady luck when im not in a hurry  but except if there is a competition where you need to act faster .

i sometimes join those and i activate my rush mode for a while .

You said to play as an entertainment, I don't think anyone would be relaxed and calm at that time.

It is not bad to be happy when you win and be sad when you lost as long as you know what you are doing. Also, when we gamble, we already know that people will not always win so we know they already added the idea of them just having fun in the casino or a gambling site despite losing or winning, still it doesn't matter because what matters is we are having fun.

Being calm always is not the answer because any moment the calm that you are feeling can turn into frustration if you experiences consecutive losses but this can be prevented through good emotional awareness and understanding. Controlling is not good way to regain positive emotion because sometimes controlling can boost more the frustration and the anger that you keep feeling. People should be aware to the outcomes that they may encounter after they spend their money in gambling, the problem is a lot of people who are becoming broke because of their poor money management. The government is just doing their way in order to protect and prevent other people to become broke so for me it is good if they will continue their plan about it.

True. I hope conscientious citizens will take the initiative and explain to legislators that this law violates the basic principles of freedom. In general, it infuriates that in order to remain free it is necessary to constantly monitor such seemingly absurd but very dangerous legislative initiatives.

I agree with you, mate. ;)

By far that is the best attitude to have when you are gambling, I understand that for many people it is very important to win in almost any activity that they perform, however we must understand that when we are gambling we are playing at a disadvantage thanks to the house edge and as such it is a given that over the long term you are going to lose money, and this means that the right attitude that we must have is to gamble only for fun and for entertainment and I'm sure that if everyone was like that we will not have to endure ridiculous laws like the one that we are discussing right now.

As from my personal experience, many gamblers are hard with that task. For many of them this is impossible burden. So only government can do something about that. As i said many times above, neither casino or gamblers are interested to be more calm in betting. For first this is business, for second - way of life and their main drug.

"Junkie will never tell that he is junkie" (c) William Burroughs

 

It is true that the rules made by the government regarding gambling that we are discussing were made because there are still many
gamblers who cannot control themselves when playing gambling. Gamblers should be aware that the house will always be advantages,
so don't be make gambling a source of income. Make gambling as entertainment only, by using money that we can afford to lose.That
way the government doesn't need to impose ridiculous rules by limiting the amount of money for playing gambling.

But this is not what happening now,Only few of them are really enjoying the Game in the right essence instead majority are playing and
 betting to Win and Gather more money By which they always fail.
That is why the best way to Enjoy gambling is to Play with friends,i mean those people that closest to you so no matter what happens the Game is just a game and all will be happy with the result.

I agree. I do realized that I am addicted in gambling in the past but I guess that is also the product of the pokes, jokes and even gossips to/about me. With the support of my partner, I have that will to stop that addiction and attend some therapies to help. Luckily I am not that deep in the scale, unless people are not putting attention to these people, they won't go out there alone.

When we play gambling with friends, we might have a competition between us because I see that some people who play gambling can turn out serious playing. They don't use gambling to enjoy the time or have fun, but they feel that is the real competition between them.

But if they can feel have fun and enjoy gambling, they will not have a problem when someone loses at the end of the games because they can accept the result. So at this point, I think it's about how the gamblers can be wise and get the consequences inside the gambling games, even if they lose in the end.

As long as you consider gambling as a hobby or entertaining things, it will not have any bad effect on you. When you take it seriously you may get involved in various crime. I know a lot of gambler, who lost their everything only for addiction on gambling. On the other hand, there are some of my friend, who gamble regular and go to casino regularly. They hangouts with friend and drinks. But they are not addicted, they know what their limit is. as my perspective of view, I want to say that, if you take gambling as a game that it has no bad effect but if you are addicted, then no matter how rich you are. It can make your life hell.

I think depend if which kind of friends do you have,for me?our circle of friends Binds as brother and everything we do together is all for fun and for each other,we gamble sometimes together but all the winnings will go to either Beer or foods that we will be having together.
thats why i think i understand @peter0425.

actually gambling with real friends we losses nothing,because we can give and take after the end of the game.

Thanks for sharing.

To be honest, I don't know how you people deal with addiction and I think that makes it clear since I also heard that most of them don't know or don't realize that they are already addicted to gambling. I guess the government stepping up is also a good thing but I just hope they don't really strict policies at it might lead for other gamblers to go to other online casinos.

One more thing about the government stepping up is that it is just another form of making gambling more main stream. It's about protecting the ones that can't protect themself and we should respect that. For me I see it very similar to when opening a brokerage account. Once you decide you want to go into investing and trading you need to understand that there are huge risk involved that could lose you all your money.  Filling out a questionaire before opening an account to check your understanding seems a good way to do protect us. If you can show you are experienced then of course those safety measures shouldn't apply.

Yes, you are right. It will be better if we use gambling as an entertaining thing to enjoy and have fun playing gambling. No matter if we play gambling alone or with our friends, we will not have any bad effect because we know the limits, and we know about addiction to gambling. We will always play moderately, and we will stop playing gambling when we think it is enough for us. The addicted to gambling is a serious matter that every people must concern, and don't let us get inside the addicting to gambling.


Although I don't always gamble with my friends, yes, I agree with both of you that we will have a good moment and passionate about what we do when we can spend time with them. And as you say, we do it together and have fun together.

This has a pro and cons both. Good for those who earning is not much and only have limited money for their survival so in such case losing in gabling will prove to be fatal. On other hand those who have lot of money now will have to also prove it and they might just stay without it.

If we are a responsible gambler we will not having any difficulties about these things and the government will no need to make sure actions.

Yes you're correct: the government wouldn't have in any way bring into action the "prove that you can take the loss". Although as much as we have addicted gamblers among us the government move was in the right direction.

Kindly take a look at this thread to ascertain the injuries co-gamblers had inflected themselves with.  Greatest Gambling losers  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5271198.0) some of these victims died while some with severe health issues, at this junction if you can't "prove you can take a loss" then stay low.

It seems to me that the government can not influence the dependent players... After all, there are a huge number of gambling-sites in different jurisdictions, where anyone can play!

I don't think those people with a lot of money would be going to face an ombudsman just to prove that he himself can take those losses. If I am one I would just visit other gambling sites or maybe just create another account where I could gamble or maybe just play with other people not known by the government. They would stay gambling but I don't think they would be staying at the same online casino though.

Those people will not visit the ombudsman because I think they will feel embarrassed, and they don't want others to know if they have a problem with gambling. And if those they are forced to meet the ombudsman, he will cover his face and don't let others know. I think if I were on those people, I will stop for a while and not visiting on the gambling websites. I need to calm myself down, and I will try to do something else because the media will search for other news and blow up to the public. We can stay away from gambling until the situations are conducive to come back again in the gambling websites, but with having control for ourselves.

That's actually a silly idea but let them implement and see if it will yield results in their favor I can easily prove a loss, would they use a lie detector to prove that I can take a loss and how they are going to trace people playing online, their rules is very vague and unclear, it will not stand and will just a waste o time trying to catch people who will prove them right.

If we talk about my country (Russia), casinos have long been banned here... But in fact nothing has changed - just everyone started playing on the Internet! ;D And now it's already impossible to fight with it! So it seems to me that any state fight against such things is useless!

I think it wasn't the right way to prove that someone can really take the lost. Its just that there are other ways to do it. And anyone can really avoid there law, or make themselves appear like "they can take the loss", a lot of loopholes but totally agree with the government's move ause they are in the right direction. They are trying to create a prevention but its not that polish yet.

I suggest that they should focus more on professional help programs for gambling addicts.  Its also a way of stopping the problem, preventing more damage, and helping the gamblers to assess themselves. In this way, its more solid, more research base and actually helped to stop a gambling addict.   

So you are saying that you can still gamble without any problem?

Are you constantly gambling in crypto casinos here? I'm just curious as I believe Russia's government is very strict with their regulation.