Gambling Violence

SavySeph's manga referred to a case in Scotland where a man was given life sentence for causing violence in a betting shop. After losing £200 Mark Rutter, 40 smashed up a few machines and attacked two bookie shop's staff demanding to get back his money. He punched one man and injured the other with a pair of scissors then fled after taking £200 from the till in a William Hill's shop.

Rutter's case was seen as an angry punter losing control and resorted to violence. In another reported case of enraged punter using violence, David Brogan smashed up 4 machines with a hammer after losing £700 in a William Hill shop which I cover in my blog Beserk Addiction. Since nobody was hurt, Borgan got off the hook by paying compensation for the machine which he destroyed. In comparison Borgan's case differs significantly with Rutter.

• Borgan was a first time offender while Rutter had criminal history of criminal violence,
• There was no life threatening situation Borgan's case,
• Borgan destroyed property but hurt nobody,
• Rutter threaten staff and took money from the till.

Rutter case was deemed as robbery and thus had his previous offenses stacked against him. Jim Keegan QC, Rutter's defense, claimed that the gaming machines had sparked violence throughout Britain. He pointed out that many incidents were unreported because it would jeopardize the shop's business operations and admitted: "I don't say that excuses the level of violence which was used after the accused went across the counter and attacked the two men. But the machine was the catalyst". Keegan QC is trying to associate Rutters case to that of angry punters to divert it from being deemed as armed robbery resulting in life threatening injury but Judge Lord Uist was not convinced.

Looking at the merit of both cases they do not qualify as precedence. If Britain is serious about curbing the violence in Fixed Odds Betting Terminal (FBOT) premises that the former Treasury Minister fear will spill over to the High Streets, then cases similar to Beserk Addiction should be given a steep punishment to act as a deterrent.

Gunshot at Casino

A 23 year old Milwaukee woman was shot in the leg after a fight broke out at Potawatomi Casino, Menomonee Valley, Milwaukee on June 16 2013. A 27 year old Wauwatosa man was arrested at the scene. The suspect had a history of bad criminal records, the 620WTMJ (Wisconsin's Radio News) reported.

Gabriella, an eyewitness to the incident, had expressed her fears and dissatisfaction over the way the matter was handled. Security is clearly lacking in this casino. The gun should not even be in the casino in the first place. The metal detectors will buzz like crazy when you try to pass a gun through it. For it to go unnoticed the safety crew must be sleeping on the job or could not care less. No matter how they beef up security it will happen again because of this apathetic attitude. Ironically, incidents such as these will not deter Gabriella or other hard core gamblers from revisiting the premises.

Add Betting Shops to Pubs

In a move to revitalize high streets pubs are allowed to set up betting shops, the the UK Daily Mail reported on 29 May 2013. The ruling come into force on the date of publication. Again tax revenue from gambling is seen as a solution to boost the economy (see SavySeph's Blog for a similar line of argument). While policy makers use fear of Britain’s high streets turning into ghost towns to justify themselves, critics expressed their concern about high street being ‘overrun’ with bookmakers and payday lenders. Progress at the expense of social ills is the central theme for debate.

As long as gambling is present the complimentary industries will also mushroom along with it. A related article reported that payday lenders are experts when it comes to preying on minors because they are easier targets. Instead of churning out prosperity, it will only create more ghettos. A Labour source added: ‘This would mirror the unfortunate system in Australia where betting shops are found in large bars. They are placed in a defined area within the pub where beer cannot be consumed but have led to real problems where people go out on a night out and end up blowing a lot of money on booze and gambling.’

This are the typical stigmatization attached to gamblers. They see all gamblers as irrational and consuming alcohol will add on to it. Casinos had been offering alcoholic beverages to patrons without much incidents. I don't see a difference as betting shops are not new to Britain. Surely there would be a pub in the vicinity of these betting shops. The greater concern should be on the payday lenders targeting minors.

Betting System Had Fantastic Payback

Listen up gamblers. I just searched the internet and found an amazing betting system. It offers fantastic returns on your capital. Returns as high as a monthly dividends of £70,000. The system works well in the Betfair gambling website. The bets there are not only fair but prone to this system to offer you this amazing returns.

Sorry, did I catch anyone off guard? If you had bought my story, you will find me living it up with your money and behind bars for five years. This was the fraud by Elliott Short, 26, of Chester, Cheshire (see dailymail.co.uk news). Short indulged in a lavish lifestyle after conning family friends £400,000. He frequented exclusive night clubs and lived in plush hotels. Splash the money on branded clothing and vacations.

He proclaim himself the ‘King of Betfair’. He managed to get the now-defunct newspaper into running a write up about his success. He convinced the newspaper that he was a former City trader who netted more than £21million from his betting system. Short set up an impressive office at Knightsbridge as a front to lure potential investors. Potential investors soon realized that Short's super return never materialized and the tabloid was forced to print a retraction after Betfair affirmed the returns Short had promised were impossible.

In a five-week trial the London's Southwark Crown Court convicted Short of nine counts of fraud and one count of making or supplying an article for use in fraud. The price for Short's brief moment of luxury was five year of confiscated freedom. Would you make this exchange?

Berserk Addiction

Gambling addiction had always been thought of as the irrational behavior of pumping more money into casinos in hope of winning back all that was lost. This is one incident where some form of violence was involved. Clydebank Post reported that a betting shop at Radnor Street had been smashed up by a gambling addict after 8pm on September 7, 2012.

David Brogan a father of three, returned to the premises where he lost £700 with a hammer. Enraged by blowing away his monthly wages in a few hours, the 26-year-old began his rampage at the premise. A customer service assistant and the store manager could only watch as Brogan raised the hammer above his head and start smashing away. The witnesses kept out of his way as the move to the rear and lock the door. They could hear him leave a few minutes later.

A total of four machines worth £1800 worth were destroyed. Brogan pleaded guilty and was told to pay a compensation of £1850 to cover the cost of the damage. Sheriff Simon Fraser told Brogan: "I can understand your frustration at your stupidity at gambling away £700 in an afternoon but that does not entitle you to smash up other people's property."

I see Brogan's behavior as a form of justice or payback seeking. Since he can't get it form the machines that cruelly gobbled up him money. He could just smash it up to get even. I believe it would cost him a lot more if he had decided to borrow money to attempt to get his payback. There will be no end to his borrowing.

Bad Loser

It is not easy to come by a winning streak. According to +savy seph such occasion are rare (see her website) but these events do happen. We do not need gamblers to attest to that. Even the average Joe who does not gamble knows that. To be denied payment if you did come by a lucky streak is daylight robbery. This blog is a sequel to my previous blog Cry Baby Casino.

Let’s get the story from the Grantland’s article that Savy Seph used. Ivey won £7.8millon when he was already down half a million. That is a total win of £8.3millon coming from a half million loss. At this point the maximum bet was raised to £150,000 at Ivey’s request. For easy of calculation, assume Ivey parlayed maximum bet all the way. This would require a net win of 55 times to make £8.3millon. My question is, can a net win of 55 times be regarded as unfair advantage or would it fall under the category of super lucky days?

In a statement Ivey said, "over the years, I have won and lost substantial sums at Crockfords and I have always honoured my commitments" (from gamblingkingz.com). This is a clear cut case of a bad loser on the part of the casino. They would happily swipe Ivey’s money when he lost. When he had won a substantial amount, they conveniently accused him of cheating.

Even experts from the Casino’s home base in Kuala Lumpur (KL) had not found concrete evidence of cheating. If they did, they would had nailed Ivey. A simple letter to the fraternity of casinos worldwide to ban Ivey for cheating is enough to nail Ivey. Soon word gets around and the whole world would know that the poker superstar is actually a cheat. What does it tell you in view that these KL experts had sat on the thing since last August without taking the necessary action?

Cry Baby Casino

There is a Chinese saying, "nine out of ten who gambled will lose". Since there are more losers than winners, it is more common to hear gamblers put the blame on anything. People who do not gamble don't even give a damn with their justifications and excuses. They can whine all they want about it. If the amount was substantial these non gamblers may lend a sympathetic ears but deep down inside they thinks these gamblers deserve it. They should know better the risk that was at hand and should stop being a cry baby.

When there is nothing else to blame, gamblers will accuse the casino of using black magic. This not an exaggeration. It is a common accusation in Malaysia. It just amazing that they can come up with such ridiculous justification. Once you run out of excuses you had exhausted the rational so what remains is the irrational.

Read this news for the account of the biggest sore loser behaving like a cry baby. Now the situation is the other way around. The casino is the cry baby. I never expected a casino that had always been under constant fire for using witchcraft to resort to an equally ridiculous accusation.

(Ivey's profile pic on twitter)

Phil Ivey, an American who is one of the world's top professional poker players, was accused of cheating in a baccart game by Crockfords, one of London's oldest and most respected casinos now owned by the Malaysian based Genting Group. Quoting from foxnews.com

The casino group said in the court papers that Ivey's "illegal acts" void his claimed winnings. It said he was able to have a "significant advantage" over the casino by using improper means to determine whether the first card being dealt in the baccarat hands would be a powerful or weak card, allowing him to place his bets accordingly.

That is like saying Ivey here has an "uncanny" ability to predict cards. Ivey racked up winnings of roughly 7.8 million pounds ($11.9 million). When it involves millions the Malaysian based Genting Group will sulk like a baby and refuse to let you redeem their worthless chips to cash. You have to go through the long process of legal proceeding to get it.