Daily Archives: July 21, 2021

There are a lot of misconceptions about gambling. Some misconceptions arise as a result of a lack of understanding. Others have been repeated so many times by anti-gambling activists that they have become regarded as fact. There are many myths about online gambling especially, and some of them are so commonly accepted that they prevent individuals from betting and gambling online.

We believe it is unfortunate that some people choose not to take advantage of all that online gambling has to offer for the wrong reasons. There are certainly good reasons why it isnt right for everyone, but no one should miss out because their heads are full with concepts that arent right for them.

You just have to trust the process. Finally, wed like to point out that not all information found on the internet is accurate. Make sure to check the facts before jumping to any conclusions concerning real dangers in online casinos. In Sweden, 90% of online casinos are legal because of the valid licensing.

You can gamble online with confidence at a reputable casino with a legal operating license in Sweden. Swedes love online gambling as they can gamble online with the ease of being home. You can play games like bingo online or blackjack without even leaving your house. Sweden being one of the most popular countries in gambling, you have real good chances to win if you play strategically.

Here are some gambling myths debunked by Amy Martinsson who is a gambling expert with more than five years of experience.

This is without a doubt one of the most common online gambling myths. The truth is that there is no law that specifically prohibits any form of online gambling in Sweden. There is a lot of associated legislation, and a lot of it isnt very clear, but its largely aimed at the people and companies who facilitate online gambling without an appropriate license.

Operators of gambling sites or financial institutions that conduct gambling-related transactions fall under this category. In most places of the world, it is unlawful to launch and operate a gambling site without the necessary licenses. However, we are not aware of any jurisdictions where using a gambling site is a crime. Hence, Online gambling is legal until it is licensed by an apt authority.

Many individuals used traditional casinos before online casinos first came into the market, and they struggled to promote their services to casino players. As a result, they devised the strategy of offering incentives to entice some gamers to use their service. These deposit bonuses can double or triple your money, and if you deposit a lot, you can get high roller bonuses that will multiply your money by ten.

Depending on the size of the business and the market, each casino website has its unique set of incentives and promotions. Those incentives are real, and they have helped some players win real money. But before making any bonus payments, make sure to read the terms and conditions, which contain vital information such as wagering requirements.

Another common misconception is that casino websites admit individuals who are under the legal age of gambling. This isnt entirely accurate. For a variety of reasons, any reputable casino website takes user identification verification seriously.

They will ask you to verify your age and that you are the cardholder before allowing you to make a deposit and begin gambling. As a result, anyone under the age of 18 will be unable to play real money online casino games.

Online gambling is identical to any other type of gambling and especially the traditional gambling methods. If you dont know when to quit, it can be harmful. However, there is no proof that online gambling is more addicting than conventional forms of gambling.

Apart from that, casino websites take addictions very seriously and make every effort to protect their customers. Players can set a daily or monthly budget for themselves on casino websites.

Naturally, this is a myth, as many online casino gamblers win large sums of money on a daily basis. There are several stories online about people who have won the jackpot and become wealthy simply by playing online slots. Recently, a tourist from Alaska recently won over $2 million on a Cosmopolitan of Las Vegas slot machine after only investing $40.

Gambling can be a total game changer for anyone! Any reputable gambling site can help you earn real money. Simply read the terms and conditions before withdrawing your winnings from online casinos.

See more here:

Pay Attention To The Myths About Online Gambling: Which Ones Are Not True, But Which Ones Are Real? - South Florida Caribbean News

Twitch needs to better regulate gambling content on their platform, or remove it entirely

Getty Images

Bangkok, Thailand June 10, 2019 : iPhone 7 showing its screen with Netflix and other video streaming applications.

Twitch saw an explosive period of growth over the last twelve months as a result of the lockdown brought on by the outbreak of COVID-19. But a recent controversy over gambling shows the problems that come with this new increased viewership.

Twitch has allowed gambling to flourish on the site. Considering the viewership of Twitch includes a large number of children, the company needs to take action and ban these streams from the platform.

Twitch has had a gambling scene for some time. However, it has been blown into the spotlight over the past few months, and the debate over it has turned streamers against one another. Big Twitch streamers have been indulging in the gambling scene as of late, such as Flix Lengyel, known as xQc on the platform, and Tyler Nikam, known as Trainwrecks.

Because many of the viewers who watch these channels are young and easily influenced, they are drawn into gambling by watching these streamers participate. Knowing that 41 percent of Twitch viewers are between the ages of 16 to 24, the problem becomes the fact that these are highly impressionable children who, by their very nature, are prone to get addicted.

They are not fully mentally matured to exhibit even the slightest form of self-control or restraint. If there was a perfect age group for gambling sites to target, its them.

In a review of 140 different studies on gambling and its effects, the National Council on Problem Gaming found an astounding 75 percent of students surveyed in 2018 had gambled by that point.

Twitch can stop this problem very easily by banning any demonstration or form of gambling from their platform outright. It claims to take the responsibility of monitoring content very seriously and does not hesitate to uphold its terms of service guidelines. It bans certain types of content from its platform, as well.

But when it comes to gambling, knowing full well many of its users are susceptible to its allure very easily, its stance is nothing short of pathetic. The only thing Twitch says on its website under its community guidelines in regards to controversies such as this is that users and streamers are required to, respect all applicable local, national, and international laws while using [Twitch] services. Any content or activity featuring, encouraging, offering, or soliciting illegal activity is prohibited.

While this is not surprising coming from a corporate entity like Twitch, which is owned by Amazon, this language is infuriating and only cements that they do not care about the effects gambling can have on young, impressionable viewers. The subject of moderating content in aspects of streaming is open ended, but allowing streams of people gambling, knowing full well young viewers could take away from it gambling is fun, why dont I try it with Moms credit card, is dangerous.

Gambling laws exist for a reason. There is a reason why those under a certain age are banned from partaking in any form of it. It is well known that children and even young adults are especially susceptible to the addiction of gambling, and the adrenaline brought on by the game of chance. If Twitch does not find a way to moderate or outright ban gambling content from the platform, consequences would be dire for everyone involved.

Columns reflect the opinions of the authors and are not necessarily those of the Editorial Board, The Daily Iowan, or other organizations in which the author may be involved.

Read the original:

Opinion | Twitch needs to ban gambling from its website - UI The Daily Iowan

LINN COUNTY, Iowa (KWWL) A resolution approved by the Linn County Board of Supervisors will allow voters to decide on Nov. 2, 2021, whether to reallow gambling games in the county.

The state statute says this measure must be voted on, approved twice and eight years passed between the two votes to have gambling in Linn County permanently. Voters first approved a gambling vote in 2013.

The November vote will be yes/no to allow gambling facilities in Linn County. The vote does not mean a casino will be created in Linn County. Approval of a specific gambling facility in the county has more requirements, including an application and approval by the Iowa Racing and Gaming Commission.

Recently, Cedar Rapids Mayor Brad Hart and mayoral candidate Tiffany O'Donnell have both voiced their support for a casino in Cedar Rapids. O'Donnell says it would create a vibrant and diverse downtown, more high-paying jobs, and a new revenue stream for City services and area non-profits. Hart also agrees that it would provide another entertainment option, draw attraction, and create jobs.

However, if a casino is to be built in the county, Hart says the city doesn't get to choose the location.

RELATED: Mayoral candidate Tiffany O'Donnell announces her support for Cedar Rapids casino

View post:

Gambling in Linn County on the 2021 November ballot - kwwl.com

The Iowa Racing and Gaming Commission has hired two companies to do socio-economic studies of the gambling industry.

Racing and Gaming administrator, Brian Ohorilko says they will take a look at several social issues. Does it increase bankruptcies, divorce rates, crime rates? That is the socio-economic piece that will be studied as part of this, he says. The other piece is a market component that looks at the overall health of the industry.

Ohorilko says the study is required by the legislature every eight years.Well look at both parts and really try to give Iowans a good view of how gambling is impacting our state, he says. Ohorilko says they decided a couple of different reviews was the best way to get the information.

The two companies that were selected, they both are independent companies, they do different things. The commission felt like it was important to get two separate opinions, according to Ohorilko.

Ohorilko says the two companies will present their findings at the IRGCs January meeting. The state will pay $245,000 for both studies.

The rest is here:

Studies will look into the impact of gambling on Iowa's economy, way of life - Radio Iowa

In a press release dated 12 July 2021, the Ministry of Home Affairs of Singapore (MHA) announced that it is seeking feedback from the public on certain proposed amendments to the existing gambling legislation. The proposed amendments seek to address two trends in the gambling landscape. First, advancements in technology relating to the internet and mobile computing that have made gambling products more accessible. Second, the blurring of boundaries between gambling and gaming and the introduction of gambling elements in products that are not traditionally perceived as gambling.

Currently, the definition of gambling differs across different pieces of gambling legislation in Singapore, depending on the gambling product.

The MHA proposes to broaden the definition of gambling to make it technology-neutral, so that it can cover existing and emerging gambling products. The MHA acknowledged that a wider definition may inadvertently cover products it has no intention of treating as gambling products, such as financial products already regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore through other legislation. To prevent this, the MHA stated that it will adopt the approach taken in other jurisdictions (e.g., United Kingdom, Australia, Switzerland, and Denmark) and carve out these products from the definition of gambling.

The MHA observed that mystery boxes are similar to lotteries, in particular those that promise high-value prizes that can easily be traded for cash. As the value of prizes increases, their potential to induce gambling behavior increases. It also observed that arcades have begun to offer high value to entice patrons. This trend, coupled with the fact that arcade games and claw machines can have elements of chance, is of concern as it brings the operation of these machines close to gambling. The MHA recognizes that such activities are considered a form of entertainment but has taken the view that safeguards need to be introduced to ensure that these activities do not induce gambling behavior and cause social problems.

To address the blurring boundaries between gambling and gaming, the MHA proposes to introduce a prize cap of $100 for mystery boxes, arcade games and claw machines. It is of the view that the cap will be sufficient to address the inducement effect of high-value prizes, without increasing the regulatory burden on operators.

The MHA observed that it is increasingly common for online and video games to incorporate in-game micro transactions (e.g., loot boxes) that can resemble gambling.

Currently, Singapore gaming laws and regulations do not consider games of chance with virtual prizes as gambling so long as there are no in-game monetisation facilities that allow players to exchange virtual prizes for real-world payouts (i.e., money, or items that can be exchanged for money). The MHA proposes to update existing laws and regulations to address virtual items that can be transferred out of the game, and potentially be exchanged for money or moneys worth on a third-party hosted exchange.

First, it proposes to introduce conditions to ensure that transferable virtual items are retained in the context of gameplay and entertainment, as intended by game developers. Online games of chance that allow players to use virtual items from other games as a form of stake on casino games or match outcomes, such as skin-betting sites, will not be allowed.

Second, it proposes to allow in-game monetisation facilities for free-to-play games (i.e., players do not have to pay to play or receive virtual prizes), subject to conditions similar to those imposed on currently-exempted business promotion lucky draws (which will remain exempted in the new legislation), such as:

While the above proposed changes expand the scope of Singapores existing gambling laws and regulations and increases the regulation of nontraditional gambling products such as mystery boxes, arcade games, and online games, the MHA is also proposing the relaxion of regulations in respect of social gambling.

The MHA recognizes that gambling among family and friends in homes is socially acceptable, and poses low law-and-order concerns. Hence, it proposes to exempt physical social gambling among family and friends, subject to conditions that safeguard against criminal exploitation. Social gambling among family and friends will be expressly permitted under legislation, subject to the satisfaction of certain criteria, such as:

The MHA warned that strong enforcement action against syndicates which exploit the proposed exemption to conduct illegal gambling activities. Online social gambling among family and friends remains prohibited under the Remote Gambling Act due to enforcement difficulties (e.g., the difficulty in establishing if individuals are sufficiently and meaningfully acquainted with each other in the online context to qualify as social gambling).

Finally, the MHA proposes to rationalise penalties across various gambling legislation. The Remote Gambling Act currently provides for a three-tier penalty structure for illegal online gambling, with the highest penalties imposed on operators, followed by agents and then punters. The MHA proposes to apply this differentiated penalty structure across all forms of gambling activity, so as to ensure consistency between online and physical gambling activities.

The MHA also proposes to raise penalties for repeat offenders who facilitate or operate illegal gambling services, to increase deterrence. The MHA however clarified that it is not proposing to raise the penalties for repeat offenders for punters of illegal gambling services for the time being as it intends to focus enforcement efforts on illegal gambling agents and operators.

The public is invited to submit feedback to MHA by 10 August 2021. Read the full report on the MHA's proposals.

The proposed amendments to existing gambling legislation in Singapore relating to the expanded definition of gambling and the increased regulation of games with gambling elements come as no surprise. The MHA had previously announced in April 2020 that it was looking into amending all gambling legislation by 2021 to ensure that its regulatory mechanisms can effectively address evolving gambling products and business models and had expressly mentioned the need for regulation of products such as mystery boxes. There has also been an increased focus in the media on the link between loot boxes and problem gambling.

Game developers and other stakeholders in the gaming industry may wish to consider whether any of the elements in the games that they develop, in particular the games in-game monetisation facilities and transferability of transferable virtual items, would run afoul of the proposed amendments to the law in their current proposed form, and to provide feedback to the MHA. They may also wish to seek greater clarity and detail on the conditions proposed to be imposed on transferable virtual items and in-game monetisation facilities for free-to-play games.

The proposed exemption for social gambling represents a relaxation of Singapores prohibitive stance against gambling, other than in licensed land-based casinos or through exempted betting outlets and operators. It remains to be seen how the MHA intends to further define the conditions for social gambling, and whether it will introduce any presumptions or deeming provisions (e.g., whether there will be premotions as to what constitutes a bona fide social relationship among participants).

[View source.]

Read more from the original source:

Public Consultation on Proposed Amendments to Singapores Gambling Laws - JD Supra

T

he Netherlands Gaming Authority, the Kansspelautoriteit (KSA), has established the policy rules for people to be involuntarily excluded from participating in any kind of gambling.

As a result of the Remote Gambling Act, which went into force on April 1 this year to regulate online gambling for the first time in the country, there will be a player exclusion register called Cruks (Centraal Register Uitsluiting Kansspelen), where players can be included both voluntarily or involuntarily, in order to prevent and tackle gambling addiction. It will be operational as of October 1.

Per the new policy rules, someone close to the player such us family members or employer, but also gaming operators or providers, must submit a request to the Gaming Authority for registration.A condition for being included in the exclusion register is that the measure prevents further damage financial, social, personal. It should also be clear that less drastic measures will not help.

If an operators less severe measures do not prove effective in preventing problem gambling for a player, and if such a player disregards the operators advice to register voluntarily with Cruks, at this point the operator should lodge an application with the regulator to register the player involuntarily.

From October 1, all gambling operators must connect to Cruks and check whether there is a registration there before a player starts playing. If that is the case, the player should be denied access to the game.

Applications may be submitted electronically or by post, and must detail an explanation of the third partys relationship with the player, and the motives for requesting exclusion. Cruks is accessed through DigiD system, a form of online ID that allows Dutch residents to access online services and government websites in the Netherlands.

When a player registers with an online operator for the first time, or if the player wants to access a land-based casino, they enter their public service number, which leads to the generation of a Cruks code. This code is then compared to the list of codes for self-excluded players and if it matches, the player must not be allowed to register or enter.

Go here to see the original:

Netherlands regulator sets online gambling exclusion rules - Yogonet International

During a live segment of the FOX networks broadcast of the All-Star pre-game show on Tuesday night, FOX employee David Ortiz promoted a FOX betting app that he also participates in by taking cash out of a briefcase and throwing the cash into the crowd. If you happened to miss that not-so-impromptu promotion Tuesday night and the previous sentence confuses you, thats certainly understandable. There were many aspects of the scene that raised several questions but perhaps answered some as well.

In order to fully frame how odd the current relationship between baseball and gambling is, right up to Ortizs current involvement, we have to take a quick step back to review how baseball got to this point. In full disclosure, by a quick step back, I mean over 150 years back in time.

Gambling originally wasnt a residual side effect of baseball it was a driver of the games popularity as soon as the game became what we now call baseball in the mid-19th century. Baseballs initial gain in popularity came only after professional gamblers took interest in it. Gamblers realized there would be more interest, and therefore more money to be made, if fans could make side bets during games. Baseball was a tool used by gamblers, not the other way around.

Esteemed baseball historian John Thorn has said, I dont think you could have had the rise of baseball without gambling. Box scores, statistics, player evaluations, and the reserve clause only came about due to the value they provided gamblers. Game fixing dates back as early as 1865 that is when we had our first scandal and three players were banned, Thorn reminds those of us who believe scandal started with Chick Gandil. (Read Thorns book Baseball in the Garden of Eden for an in-depth exploration of this topic.)

If that didnt make it clear that dealing with gamblers and gambling, in general, was a pretty big roll of the dice (pun intended), the Black Sox scandal certainly did. We all know the story. Books have been written and movies have been made about it, so theres no need to rehash it here, but there is an important point and lesson that we should take from it thats pertinent to this discussion. Its certainly open for individual interpretation among reasonable baseball fans whether or not the scandal left the game for dead and only saved by Babe Ruth. What is unquestionable is that it left a Kennesaw Mountain-sized obstacle of poor public perception regarding fair play for the sport to overcome.

In a similar vein, theres no need to digress with an extended discussion about Pete Rose and his many departures from what would be considered normative behavior. However, there is a key point from his case that is often overlooked that again, may be pertinent to todays chat: A common refrain from Roses defenders is that he only bet on the Reds to win games. That is to say, he didnt bet on the Reds to lose games which would suggest he would have to try to throw those games if he did the games he bet on, he was really trying to win.

What that logic overlooks, is that if Rose bet on the Reds to win a particular game, then did not bet on the subsequent game, that is a de facto implication that he expected the team to lose, thereby giving gamblers an edge. Of all the justifiable criticisms of Rose you can make, hes never come across as a dumb person therefore, he was well aware of the extent to which he was helping his partners in literal crime, regardless of the specifics of his bets.

That brings us back to David Ortiz, one of baseballs spokespeople for gambling. In 2005, Ortiz had a friend who was close enough to him that the friend was allowed in players only areas in the Boston clubhouse. After an investigation, evidence surfaced that Ortizs friend was betting on Red Sox games in a Boston barbershop that was a front for an illegal gambling parlor. (In one instance, the friend bet Boston would lose to Chicago and took the over he won both bets.) Enough evidence in fact, that the friend would no longer be allowed in Red Sox facilities without proper background checks, ID, credentials, etc. MLB for their part, still allowed the individual on the field with Ortiz for the 2006 Home Run Derby, with then-EVP Rob Manfreds knowledge and blessings.

When Ortiz was confronted by MLB security that his friend was still illegally betting thousands on Boston games, Ortiz pled ignorance. Yet coincidentally, shortly after the meeting ended, Red Sox security got a call from an informant that the gambling room of the barbershop had been shut down and cleared out. Then in 2007, Ortiz's friend was arrested on numerous charges at Ortizs home. (Read Baseball Cop by Eddie Dominguez for the full account, and the receipts.)

MLBs current relationship with, and promotion of, gambling is holding a gas can in one hand and a lit match in the other. Even devils advocates arguments dont hold up to even a modicum of scrutiny.

If you believe players make far more money relative to average American incomes than they ever have, so they wont be susceptible to game-fixing, I have news for you. First, most MLB players are not set for life from their baseball income, and perhaps more importantly as writer Joe Sheehan has pointed out, the umpires are the lowest-paid employees on the field and wield as much influence on game outcomes as anybody. Additionally, if you believe rich people would never circumvent rules to become even richer, then the help you need exceeds the time we have today.

If youve noted that MLB and Rob Manfred have been clear, especially with new collective bargaining talks coming up, that players are aware that the gambling is for fans only, and there will be strict enforcement of such, I have more news. There are very few absolute truths in baseball, but one is that MLB will look the other way when serious issues arise if it suits them. Theyve done it with PEDs, domestic abuse, literal human trafficking, sticky stuff and yes, gambling, for as long as baseball has been baseball. When someone shows you who they are, in this case, a century and a half ago, believe them the first time.

The number of fans who watch baseball without betting on it far exceeds the number of fans who watch baseball and bet on it. So why would MLB risk alienating the majority of its fans with even a hint of impropriety regarding the games and their outcomes? Of course, because MLB wants both fan bases and will try to accommodate both until the hypothetical gas can and lit match meet. Work fast, break things, worry about consequences later has long been a mantra of billion-dollar industries.

That said, its hard to envision a scenario where this does not end with some sort of scandal that damages the sport. The working historical relationship between baseball and gambling is not dissimilar to the working relationship George Steinbrenner and Billy Martin had everyone seemed to know it wouldnt end well except the parties involved. The slight difference was that there were rare occasions in which George and Billy got along baseball and gambling have never worked well together.

Read more from the original source:

MLB and gambling dont mix well, and Big Papi is an odd match maker. - Pinstripe Alley

T

he previous high for revenue in a state fiscal year was during 2018/2019 when revenue was slightly more than $3.3 billion. Since that time there has been significant growth in the nascent sports wagering and fantasy sports contests markets along with the establishment of both the iGaming and VGT markets. Those four markets combined constituted almost 33% of the total revenue achieved in Fiscal Year 2020/2021.

The year over year increase of revenue this past fiscal year compared to Fiscal Year 2019/2020 was significant, primarily as a direct result of casino shutdowns and other factors related to Covid-19 restrictions. This included closure of casinos for three months in the second quarter of 2020 affecting slot machine, table games, video gaming terminals (VGTs), and retail sport wagering revenue, along with the stoppage of play of major sporting events which further affected sports wagering.

Estimated combined tax revenue from these gambling initiatives for the Fiscal Year 2020/21 was $1,593,642,159 compared to $1,123,665,601 in the previous fiscal year. Tax revenue figures reflect amounts generated prior to any adjustments by the PA Department of Revenue.

Slot Machine Revenue

Fiscal Year 2020/21 gross revenue from slot machines at the casinos was $1,887,573,437 an 11% increase in revenue when compared to the $1,697,955,473 generated in Fiscal Year 2019/20.

Slot machine revenue for each of the casinos, with the percentage change reflected over the previous year, is as follows:

Table Games Revenue

Fiscal Year 2020/21 gross revenue from table games at the casinos was $721,763,471, a 11.98% increase in revenue when compared to the $644,543,736 generated in Fiscal Year 2019/20.

Sports Wagering Revenue

Fiscal Year 2020/21 revenue from sports wagering was $308,849,184, a 171.58% increase in revenue when compared to the $113,724,759 generated in Fiscal Year 2019/20.

Sports wagering revenue for each of the casinos, with the percentage change reflected over the previous year, is as follows:

Fantasy Contests Revenue

Fiscal Year 2020/21 revenue from fantasy contests was $28,186,529, a 35.07% increase in revenue when compared to the $20,868,176 generated in Fiscal Year 2019/20.

Internet Casino-Type Gaming (iGaming) Revenue

Fiscal Year 2020/21 revenue from iGaming was $897,216,020, a 272.45% increase in revenue when compared to the $240,894,852 generated in Fiscal Year 2019/20.

The first iGaming provider became operational in July 2019. At the end of the fiscal year there were ten iGaming operators in Pennsylvania.

Video Gaming Terminals

Fiscal Year 2020/21 revenue for Video Gaming Terminals at Truck Stops was $31,334,744 a 361% increase in compared to the $6,798,123 in Fiscal Year 2019/20. The first VGTs became operational in August 2019. At the end of this fiscal year, there were 49 VGT facilities operating in Pennsylvania compared to 28 facilities in operation at the end of Fiscal Year 2019/2020.

Read the original here:

Pennsylvania breaks gambling fiscal year revenue record - Yogonet International