The Pokie Debate - My Personal View

[Slattery_20]

Of course.

Not saying that they are doing it out of the goodness of their own heart but people having a go at TW are really fighting the wrong fight as pokies and tatts are the real killers in regards to gambling due to their enormous take out rates.

Well yes... but that's like saying you shouldn't try and stop smoking in America because there are so many guns.
Both need reigning in.
Saturation media works. TW's advertising is no different to any of the others but the industry still needs to be regulated. Far too many kids I know in their mid-teens are right up on their odds & betting. Just by watching sport (as I'm guessing of us grew up doing) it's been drummed into their brains.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

Actually TW is quite a responsible provider of gambling as his take out rate would be in the vicinity of 4% - 7%. Compare that to the state sponsored pokies and Tattslotto where it is around the 25% to 30% and TAB's (16%) and there really is no comparison.

I've mentioned before but gambling only becomes an issue when you lose. With the extreme take out rates, winning becomes an impossibility and you lose money at sometimes 5 times the rate of the operators such as Waterhouse etc.

If take out rates were reduced, punters would not lose so much and there would be less issues via gambling.

Admittedly though this is a fanciful solution as governments across the board are too much in love with the gambling dollar for this to be implemented.

If you or I bet $100 on something and lose, we still lose $100 regardless of what anyones takeout rate is. I don't see how a lower takeout rate makes someone more responsible in their serving of gambling, to me it just means they've got to chase the gambler harder to make more money.

Wholeheartedly agree with your last paragraph. It will be the biggest obstacle particularly at State level.

 

[Daytripper]

If you or I bet $100 on something and lose, we still lose $100 regardless of what anyones takeout rate is. I don't see how a lower takeout rate makes someone more responsible in their serving of gambling, to me it just means they've got to chase the gambler harder to make more money.

The maths explain it.

Lets assume two gamblers start with $100 betting $10 apiece. One is betting with TW at 5% take out, the other is betting on the pokies at 25% take out.

It would take 200 bets with TW to go broke whilst with the second gambler it would take 40 bets to go broke.

So theoretically, the second gambler could lose $500 in the same timespan that it would take for the first gambler to lose $100.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

The maths explain it.

Lets assume two gamblers start with $100 betting $10 apiece. One is betting with TW at 5% take out, the other is betting on the pokies at 25% take out.

It would take 200 bets with TW to go broke whilst with the second gambler it would take 40 bets to go broke.

So theoretically, the second gambler could lose $500 in the same timespan that it would take for the first gambler to lose $100.

Huh?

What are the results of each $10 bet?

If I start with $100 and bet $10 at a time, if each bet loses then I expect I'll have no money left after 10 bets.

Or are you suggesting that if I punt with TW that I would be backing horses that are paying $1 for the win and every single one of the 200 bets would be a winner, and he'd take 50c every time?

You need to come up with a better example.

 

[Daytripper]

Huh?

What are the results of each $10 bet?

If I start with $100 and bet $10 at a time, if each bet loses then I expect I'll have no money left after 10 bets.

Or are you suggesting that if I punt with TW that I would be backing horses that are paying $1 for the win and every single one of the 200 bets would be a winner, and he'd take 50c every time?

You need to come up with a better example.

Understand what you're saying but the results don't really matter if you are looking at it mathematically.

For example if we are tossing a coin then the odds are that it will be heads 50% of the time and tails 50% of the time.

Now of course we might start with that hypothetical $100 and it might go ten heads in a row when you are backing tails but for maths purposes you have to assume a 50% win rate.

I'll try and think of a better example as understand that its not completely clear.

 

[Ash Grant]

Of course.

Not saying that they are doing it out of the goodness of their own heart but people having a go at TW are really fighting the wrong fight as pokies and tatts are the real killers in regards to gambling due to their enormous take out rates.

I see what you're saying and you do have a point. People like TW prey on the gamblers. They do so by encouraging them to risk their money, obviously. TW is asking them to do it with his help. Although he won't be the one risking anything. Just the one that will benefit win or lose. TW may have a small take out rate but in many ways he's even worse then poker machines.

Let me tell you another story. I moved out of home when I was 20 and shared a house with a work mate and his finace. Every thursday we would be paid and he would ask me to meet him at the local pub for tea. We finished work one day at 5:30. I met him at the pub at 7:30. By this time he had spent EVERY dollar in his pay on the TAB.

He asked me straight to my face if I would lend him $200 for rent and bills for the week. I knew that if I did that wasn't going to be what he spent it on. I moved out serveral months later after many moments of fighting between my mate and his fiance. They went on to get married and have many fights before she left and eventually divorced him as he never changed his way. He ruined his life because of his gambling addiction and almost killed himself twice because of it.

 

[Z_K]

If I can attempt to wade into Daytripper's minefield of analogy and intrigue.....

The bloke who drops the $10 but has a higher return than the other bloke is unlikely to stroll away and pocket his increased winnings, happy with his days work. He's likely to throw the winnings back in after the rest and will end up pissing the lot against the wall anyway.

We will look back at the current state of gambling advertising and overall status in the community in 25 years like we now look at smoking adverts and general acceptance of tobacco use in 1985. It's prevalence in sport is scandalous.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

If I can attempt to wade into Daytripper's minefield of analogy and intrigue.....

The bloke who drops the $10 but has a higher return than the other bloke is unlikely to stroll away and pocket his increased winnings, happy with his days work. He's likely to throw the winnings back in after the rest and will end up pissing the lot against the wall anyway.

We will look back at the current state of gambling advertising and overall status in the community in 25 years like we now look at smoking adverts and general acceptance of tobacco use in 1985. It's prevalence in sport is scandalous.

Correct. Pokies may legally have to return 80 whatever % back to the punter, but they do it in dribs and drabs so that the gambler just ends up gambling it all again.

If the gambler inserts $100 into a pokie and is playing $1 per spin. After 100 spins they may only have $85 left. What do you think a lot of them are going to do? Take the $85 and count their losses or keep on going trying to get that $15 back until they've blown the lot?

 

[Ash Grant]

I've seen pokie addicts and punters do it. They all keep betting until it's all gone. My wife works at a club with about 40 pokies. I think she said each machine makes the club about 100k a year. I'm not sure if that's before or after the government get their share.

Yes they have to pay back 84% or whatever but they get it all eventually. I was watching a man play a machine one night. It was one of those $1 machines that are bigger then the rest and have more bells and whistles. It was also louder.

This man was betting about 20 or 25 lines a spin. Every line of course being a dollar. I was watching and counting as he hit the button over and over again. He was winning every 4 of 5 spins. Sometimes as much as $100 but I remember it mostly being around the $60-$70 dollar mark. Each time he won the machine would go into meltdown. Flashing lights and sirens. People gathered and started to watch the high roller and his run on the pokies. "Wow" I heard more then a few say. "This guy is winning big time".

He indeed was getting his 84% back. However that's the thing. The winnings don't go into a "can't touch this till you leave" place. They go straight onto what's left of the initial amount you put in.

People looked on in wonder at how much this man was winning and he was grinning the whole time. Surrounded by the masses of wide eyed hopefuls with their dreams that this could happen to them.

That guy walked away from his machine a while later as I watched him from a distance feed the beast probably well over $500. I couldn't help but notice a kind of flat and drained look in his eyes.

 

[Northalives]

How much who takes what from where is less than him but more than them wah, wah, wah wah.
My point is that it is the push to make gambling/wagering a "normal" part of life that is disgusting and those who profit from this misery and jump up and down when regulation is talked about, ought to be flogged within an inch of their lives.

 

[Kram]

A few years ago my mum went on a holiday for a couple weeks in QLD to visit my brother. Only gambling she'd previously ever participated in was the odd lotto ticket or scratchie. Whilst there they regularly went for lunch or dinner at the Irish Club and according to him even within that small time frame she seemed to get a bit too much into playing them.. I remember her enthusiastically commenting a few times on return that they were good 'fun'.

The things are evil pieces of s**t that should be abolished nationwide. Sure, betting on stuff like horse racing, sports and cards at the casino still cause many problems. But at least there is generally some thinking and usually human interaction involved often with a break in between - with the pokies people just sit there like zombies slowly whittling their pay/dole/pension checks away.

Living in WA can be frustrating at times for its often conservative ways, but not allowing these stupid machines in is something the state has got absolutely spot on.

 

[evo]

I've seen pokie addicts and punters do it. They all keep betting until it's all gone..

Pokie designers are smart in that they take advantage of probably the best understood psychological behaviour analysis there is: operant conditioning. Think Pavlov's Dog, Skinner Box experiments. It is a focus in most first year psychology courses.

Pokies pay out at regular but varied intervals; the payouts are frequent but relatively small rewards. Therefore the user comes to be conditioned to believe another win is just around the corner and a big win is a realistic expectation due to the variable nature of the payouts. They are almost helpless.

It's very well researched and known as VR scheduling

 

[Ash Grant]

Thankyou for that info evo. I will look into that out of curiosity.

How much who takes what from where is less than him but more than them wah, wah, wah wah.
My point is that it is the push to make gambling/wagering a "normal" part of life that is disgusting and those who profit from this misery and jump up and down when regulation is talked about, ought to be flogged within an inch of their lives.

Maybe a little harsh but sure why not.

 

[CLUBMEDhurst]

Pokie designers are smart in that they take advantage of probably the best understood psychological behaviour analysis there is: operant conditioning. Think Pavlov's Dog, Skinner Box experiments. It is a focus in most first year psychology courses.

Pokies pay out at regular but varied intervals; the payouts are frequent but relatively small rewards. Therefore the user comes to be conditioned to believe another win is just around the corner and a big win is a realistic expectation due to the variable nature of the payouts. They are almost helpless.

It's very well researched and known as VR scheduling

Spot on, Evo.

The other factor is negative reinforcement, due to the hypnotic effects of the machines in enabling cognitive escape. Most pokie addicts describe being able to "zone out" whilst in front of the machines, therefore providing an escape from whatever stressors they may be experiencing.

'tis good to see the industry are spending that R&D buck on trapping the younger player

But now, a new class of machines, aimed at attracting younger players who grew up with video games, is demanding something else — skill.
Adding an element of hand-eye coordination, however simple, is just one way slot makers are laboring to broaden the appeal of the insistently bleating devices that have proved so popular among older players. Besides new devices that provide an extra payoff for game-playing dexterity, manufacturers have developed communal games that link clusters of machines — which are proving popular with people under 40.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/10/business/10slots.html?ref=gambling

And this from the industry . . .

At 8 p.m. on a warm midsummer's night, Baerlocher watched a woman dressed in green polyester pants and a yellow-and-white-striped short-sleeved top play a slot machine he designed called ''The Price Is Right.'' At first, the woman's body language was noncommittal: she stood half-turned from the game, as if no more than mildly curious about the outcome of her wager. ''Price'' is what slot pros call ''a cherry dribbler,'' a machine that dispenses lots of small payouts while it nibbles at your stash rather than biting off large chunks of it. ''You want to give the newbie lots of positive reinforcement -- to keep 'em playing,'' Baerlocher told me. As if on cue, the woman hit a couple of small jackpots and took a seat. ''Gotcha,'' Baerlocher said softly under his breath

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/09/m...creened-drew-carey.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

 

[Bombertastic]

^ As sad as it is to read that was a very informative post. Thanks.

 

[Tim_in_Philly]

Don't know if this has been posted before:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/05/gambling?fsrc=scn/tw/te/mp/thebiggestlosers

 

[Kwality]

Big Teddy has come out in support of the clubs & their pokies income.

Now there is a fair bit of self interest in that Victoria reaps (or should that read rapes) big dollars from taxing these machines, funded largely as they are by addicts.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/b...ck-on-gillards-pokie-laws-20101204-18ksb.html

Not that I'd suggest the Vic Govt is ignoring problem gamblers any more than the footy clubs !!! Both parties are happy to cop a drop in revenue.

Refer to the graph from The Economist IF you are in any doubt about THE BIGGEST LOSERS (thanks Tim):
http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/05/gambling?fsrc=scn/tw/te/mp/thebiggestlosers

 

[Northalives]

Big Teddy has come out in support of the clubs & their pokies income.

Now there is a fair bit of self interest in that Victoria reaps (or should that read rapes) big dollars from taxing these machines, funded largely as they are by addicts.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/b...ck-on-gillards-pokie-laws-20101204-18ksb.html

Not that I'd suggest the Vic Govt is ignoring problem gamblers any more than the footy clubs !!! Both parties are happy to cop a drop in revenue.

Refer to the graph from The Economist IF you are in any doubt about THE BIGGEST LOSERS (thanks Tim):
http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/05/gambling?fsrc=scn/tw/te/mp/thebiggestlosers

They are not ignoring them: they are positively in love with them and encourage them by every means possible!

 

[Bombertastic]

Interesting reading. The pollies need to man up.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/mo...-cross-the-floor/story-fn7x8me2-1226244913652

 

[Daytripper]

Interesting reading. The pollies need to man up.

No, Xenephon and Wilkie need to do their job and put together a realistic proposal instead of living in la la land.

And Wilkie is dreaming if he thinks he's going to get any Coalition support.

 

[little graham]

With the launch of NXT, Nick Xenaphons own political party, do the esteemed intelligent contributers to this forum think Nick's stunning successes ten years ago with his no Pokie stance in politics be reproduced federally?

 

[Shane Hird]

Jesus what a confronting thread that was to read. Some really sad, disturbing tales of humans destroying their lives.

It's a god damn ####ing disgrace that this issue is hardly touched on by any political parties these days.

####ing pathetic the lot of them.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Well, well, well................

Jeff Kennett's tech company in Crown casino pokies dispute

James Packer's Crown Resorts is preparing to sack its poker machine technicians and outsource the work to a company directed by former state premier Jeff Kennett.

Crown has told the workers, who install, fix and transport the gaming machines at its Melbourne casino, that they will be laid off at the end of July.........

As premier of Victoria in the 1990s, Mr Kennett was responsible for approving the massive Southbank entertainment complex and granting the casino licence to the Crown Consortium.

Independent Senator Nick Xenophon, who has previously criticised Mr Kennett's links to his gaming machine company while he was chairman of mental health group beyondblue, said the details of Amtek's new contract should be made public. He said the deal revealed a need for new disclosure obligations for former government ministers.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/work...n-crown-casino-pokies-dispute-20170705-gx5673

 

[tonygeeks]

I lived in QLD for years and I like a punt but proving I'm a better judge than the odds makers is the buzz for me. Pokies have never interested me , I used to watch a couple of my mates pump their whole pay packet into them during Friday arvo beers. Lines of poor people outside the door of pokies dens waiting for 10am on a weekday put me off them for good. In saying that I'm back in the west now paying 15 bucks for a pint so that sux as well


On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Garlic muncher]

I lived in QLD for years and I like a punt but proving I'm a better judge than the odds makers is the buzz for me. Pokies have never interested me , I used to watch a couple of my mates pump their whole pay packet into them during Friday arvo beers. Lines of poor people outside the door of pokies dens waiting for 10am on a weekday put me off them for good. In saying that I'm back in the west now paying 15 bucks for a pint so that sux as well


On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

I'm the same, love a punt and will play the pokies when in the East, but like anything moderation is the key, if you have a problem with pumping money in, dont take your wallet, or leave it in your car etc, once you walk outside to get it, it changes your perception.

Thousand upon thousands play pokies, drink responsibly, gamble responsibly etc etc etc, but no doubt they will catch people out for a variety of reasons.

i used to like playing them with mates and also on occasion i would slip down to the club and play by myself, it can be pretty relaxing having a beer mindlessly playing a pokie for an hour or so, you slip into your own little world.