Is player protection fair to casinos or too much responsibility?

[hedgeh0g]

Just wondering, because this is a very different view of gambling compared to places where casinos mostly leave players on their own.

Im wondering if this player protection works in the Philippines. Likely not, as those authorities might let those gamblers keep playing and if they losing big money their likely wanted it to happen. Most of the casinos in PH are privately owned and I never heard such news that there were stoppage happened prior to this rules of players protection.

But this rule if followed is likely a good one and I admire owners or management that stepped up to fully stop anyone who are into gambling so badly.

Few casino owners actually want to implement such protection because they're interested in making money, no matter how much they try to tell you otherwise. But of course, there are more conscientious ones who understand the importance of protecting players from huge losses during games and similar situations, as players can sometimes gamble with their last money and end up starving, for example. Of course, this responsibility lies primarily with the player, because they think for themselves and should understand the risks they're taking, although I often see players only begin to consider their actions after a loss. A casino simply provides a service, and if it decides to take care of players in certain cases, it's certainly a good gesture, and such casinos deserve respect, at least from me.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

To know whether such players protection policy is fair to the casino or not, you must have to first find out whether it's what they already agree to or it's something that was imposed on them. In such country where regurgitation is tight like this, the casino is already aware what the protection policy looks like and they agreed to it, so you can not actually say it's unfair to them. In such a country, the responsibility of the casino is simple, if maybe they are demanded to stop any customer that have exceeded a certain amount, then they can just set that target for every customers and once the person spend such amounts, they won't be allowed to play again.

[KiaKia]

I believe that it's part of the responsibility that they accepted during the time of regulation. But the fact is that, most casinos don't abide to the law and they allow gamblers to gamble recklessly because they want to make more money.

I believe that majority of gamblers don't know that they can sue a casino for this reason if not, some would have done it. Sometimes, the body in charge of monitoring the casinos that they abide to the strict regulations are only after their pockets. If the casino gives them fat envelopes, everything is going smoothly.

It is so unfair, all these people are adults not underage children, this type of protection should be for kids and youth at a certain age, a grown ass man shouldn't be relying on someone else to protect them when they stupidly throw their money away.

This is very unfair, because if we turn the whole thing around the gamblers wouldn't want to let go either, let's say a protection is on for a gambler and they have reached their limit and yet they choose to go one more try and they hit the jackpot.

The casino also have the right to reject the win simply because they are in control of baby sitting their grown asses, it's ridiculous as f**k, casinos are run by humans and gamblers are humans too, we all have that greed in us.