'Consultation over the Gambling Introductory Offer Loopholes board' blog discussion

HeimRoller

I am a matched better of a few years and have made a very tidy sum, risk free, from it. If I think an offer may be risky (after lots of research_) then I will back away from it, if I think it is saf eI will go in at my risk.

Now before I did matched betting I was a regular gambler. Football, horses, in fact anything. And i lost money. And then I found matched betting, and it highlighted something. Whatever the result this was a way to make money with no risk. And not only that, but the more I did it I realised what a mugs game gambling is. One example, NZ Rugby League team had not lost a world cup match for I dont know how many years, and at half time in a match they were at odds of 1/16, for those that do not know I would have to bet £16 to win just £1, a cert eh?? Well no, but because I was matched betting it did not mattter who won the game, I was guaranteed to put £50 into my account (it was a free bet). To win £50 on NZ in that game I would have had to stake £800. And it would have lost.
So matched betting actually showed me that gambling is a waste of money, it is bad, there is only one winner and it is not me. Thanks to matched betting I no longer gamble (and I have been diagnosed as having an addictive personality). Without matched betting there is ever ychance that I would now be bankrupt, with matched betting I have become confortably off, have had some lovely holidays, and have just purchased a new car. So I think those that say it will lead to gambling should, PLEASE, take a long hard look at this post and reflect on it.

Matched betting taught me that there is no such thing as a certainty when betting and has STOPPED me gambling.

HeimRoller

Mat_P wrote: »

Would you like the same trusted stars of the board who ramped PRS or different ones ?

I do not think it matters who is the moderator, it is up to each and every one of us to research any investment we make. There is no one else to blame but ourselves if it goes wrong.
YOU do the research, YOU decide whether to invest or not, and YOU take the end result.

Odd_Kalculator

I write as one who has benefited considerably from the GIOL forum. As with all Internet forums (Tripadvisor spings to mind) it is important to employ a healthy dose of scepticism and, particularly when it comes to spending money, not take up a special offer one does not fully understand. But GIOL has a strong core of very helpful, knowledgeable and clever regular contributors who have undoubtedly enabled many MSE members to make considerable amounts of money.

However, it is clear from reading questions and comments from some members that people are being tempted by the lure of easy money to take up bookmaker offers despite being unwilling or unable to understand the mathematics or the conditions that apply. They will download a spreadsheet from someone completely unknown to them and immediately trust it to tell them what to do with their money.

The point I am trying to make here is that all exploitation of gambling offer loopholes carries risk and the greatest risk is that the user makes a mistake. This applies to the most simple offer as well as to the most complex. Martin's blog quoted an example of a risk-free offer: "Free £20 to play at an online casino". So you put £9.50 on red, £9.50 on black, £1 on zero and then took your money out. But what if I blindly follow that advice with a casino using an American roulette wheel and it comes up double zero?

So I don't see a distinction between risk-free and risky offers. I see a whole spectrum of increasing risk from the roulette example through straightforward matched betting, to bet refunds if specified events happen, and to sports spread betting. And, as with financial investment, different levels of risk are appropriate to different people.

Forum moderators cannot possibly assess what risk is appropriate to each forum member in the way that financial advisors are obliged to for their clients. So if MSE / Martin Lewis is in any way legally or morally responsible for forum users losing money as a result of undertaking bookmaker offers that aren't suitable for them, then I can only conclude that MSE must stop hosting GIOL.

A phased shutdown is the best option. The knowledge will not be lost. It will migrate to an alternative home where the operator does not carry the same level of reputational risk as does Martin Lewis.

Goonie

I am a matched better of a few years and have made a very tidy sum, risk free, from it. If I think an offer may be risky (after lots of research_) then I will back away from it, if I think it is saf eI will go in at my risk.

Now before I did matched betting I was a regular gambler. Football, horses, in fact anything. And i lost money. And then I found matched betting, and it highlighted something. Whatever the result this was a way to make money with no risk. And not only that, but the more I did it I realised what a mugs game gambling is. One example, NZ Rugby League team had not lost a world cup match for I dont know how many years, and at half time in a match they were at odds of 1/16, for those that do not know I would have to bet £16 to win just £1, a cert eh?? Well no, but because I was matched betting it did not mattter who won the game, I was guaranteed to put £50 into my account (it was a free bet). To win £50 on NZ in that game I would have had to stake £800. And it would have lost.
So matched betting actually showed me that gambling is a waste of money, it is bad, there is only one winner and it is not me. Thanks to matched betting I no longer gamble (and I have been diagnosed as having an addictive personality). Without matched betting there is ever ychance that I would now be bankrupt, with matched betting I have become confortably off, have had some lovely holidays, and have just purchased a new car. So I think those that say it will lead to gambling should, PLEASE, take a long hard look at this post and reflect on it.

Matched betting taught me that there is no such thing as a certainty when betting and has STOPPED me gambling.

I was about to post something similar to this. I wouldn't say I was a 'gambler' but over the years I've had a fair few flutters, especially at times like Cheltenham, the Grand National, World Cup etc. Nothing major, just stakes of around £20 - £30 but one thing that matched betting has taught me is that no matter how likely something is to happen, no matter how certain Manchester United are to beat Chrystal Palace or how guaranteed a certain horse will win a certain race, those kind of bets lose day in, day out!

I used to look forward to Cheltenham as it was one of the biggest racing events of the year and maybe a chance to win some money, but on the flip side there was also the chance I could lose money. This year I am looking forward to it because I know, 100%, I will make money. The same goes for the Grand National, the Euro's this summer, etc

Matched betting has taught me how silly gambling is, it has taught me more discipline with my money, and a way to make a guaranteed profit from betting NO MATTER WHAT THE OUTCOME OF THE EVENT

kilapot

Firstly I don't see how opening a forum page for discussion will genuinely get the opinion of people who use the board. Surely the opinions of people who don't use the board either through lack of understanding or some morale judgement are not best placed to give an informed opinion of any problem with the board.

Secondly are the mods really going to read every message and make a fair and considered judgement?

So I can only assume that this consultation is infact a farce, having said that it is Martin's site and he is entitled to remove certain content if he wishes to do so.

However, if the reason for removal is purely down to risk, then that is a false position. If I follow some of the advice on this site I may be encouarged to make purchases which involve cashback (such as quidco, or claiming as per mobile phones)..... these cash back offers can go wrong and with the best will in the world not everyone will be treating the cash back as a bonus.

I may chose to open a savings account with a current top payer, only to find next week there is a much better offer but I am now locked in.

In an ideal world there would be a match betting 'test' you have to sit to get your 'licence' and that would hopefully minimise risk. Maybe I have been fortunate but I chose to steer clear of PRS and bet770 amongst others as I deemed them to be a bit risky. I have made errors but any losses pale into insignificance compared to the actual real profits I have made. My first error was only getting a £20 free bet with Coral with no cash back 5 yrs ago! Other errors have been more painfull but a mere reminder of the dangers of true gambling.

Just because some people don't get it, is it right to scrap the board?

If there really had to be a change, the only one that would make sense would be for it to be a log in only access board rather than public. That might protect some hapless fools, you only have to watch a couple of episodes of Deal or No Deal to realise how the general public misunderstand probability and matched betting is way more complicated.

darkniven

Mat_P wrote: »

Would you like the same trusted stars of the board who ramped PRS or different ones ?

Is this a serious question or just a lazy snipe? Looking at your previous posts on this subject (very nice of you to class us all as "degenerate gamblers") I think the latter.

Both sides could do with reigning in the insults & hyperbole and get on with some proper discussion.

valleysvc

MSE MARTIN

It really isn't rocket science in determining if an offer is risk free or not.

It appears by your own admission that you and the forum moderators don't really fully understand the concept so shouldn't the first step be trying to understand it rather than considering closing the one part of the site that has proved most beneficial to myself and many many more like me as shown by numerous posts on this thread.

And the posts on your blog vilifying gambling and gamblers on the GIOL thread should be deleted as it shows the total ignorance of some do gooders who feel the need to poke their nose into something they obviously know nothing about.

Self regulation by the members of GIOL has imo been very good to date and should be applauded but if stricter regulation is required then so be it but please don't close it down through ignorance !

Rant over

northernpunter

kilapot wrote: »

Firstly I don't see how opening a forum page for discussion will genuinely get the opinion of people who use the board. Surely the opinions of people who don't use the board either through lack of understanding or some morale judgement are not best placed to give an informed opinion of any problem with the board.

100% agree with this, how can a vocal minority of people who have never used, or probably read, the board decide whether GIOL should stay in existence or not?

As I said in my previous post on this subject the lack of understanding as to what is actually discussed on the GIOL is amazing!

Roland_Flagg

Get together a few of the more respected posters (JM, Darloscot etc) and let them draw up a list of allowed bookmakers.
The main UK ones: Hills, Lads, Corals, Vic, Fred, Paddy etc,
and throw in a few of the well know Euro based ones such as Expekt.

Only offers from this list of bookies will be allowed.

CountryLad

To those who think that GIOL closing would help them, really, I'm not so sure that it's that black and white. First of all, some of the books will probably look to other ways of marketing if this cheap publicity method was removed, secondly, it's going to be much more difficult to hide from the gubbings once they stop concentrating on this constant influx of more blatant bonus abusers; they'll have more time available to worry about the rest of us! The realignment of the whole scene in the aftermath of GIOL closing is probably going to be quite complex, and not all of it is going to be for the better!

Reading through the posts already made, most of what I wanted to say has already been covered, so I can concentrate on my view of what is the bottom line.

I agree, with very great sadness, that the status quo cannot be an option, the PRS situation was waiting to happen, and future events of various kinds are a real possibility.

Your forum team is no doubt correct in that shutting down this board would make their jobs much easier, but I feel I need to remind you of how much help GIOL can be to people in very difficult circumstances. I don't feel I'm exaggerating to say that to many users this one board can be many times more helpful in getting those users out of their difficulties than all your other boards put together.

Given my above view of the importance of the board in helping people out of a hole e.g. when they lose their job in the middle of the current recession, I wonder why do you not have people on your teams who have experience in this. The stuff in GIOL isn't rocket science, it's just experience (and by the very nature of the board many of it's members just don't have that experience). If you recognise the value of GIOL, and you should, then you know that you need to have that experience on your team. There are many ways in which MSE towers could achieve that.

As I have said many times GIOL's board guide jobbingmusician does an incredible job with both hands tied behind her back due to the policies (I'm realise that Tim broke your BG rules when he felt it necessary, and so at times was 'under attack' from all sides! - that's simply not JM's way), she is following the remit for the board guide volunteers as they are presented to her, and I don't know how she manages to put up with it. You are asking the impossible of her or any other individual; she needs at least two further BGs to help her.

Again, my view is that given that this board is so important in helping people out of a perilous situation, it has proved to be a very important part of MSE. I strongly agree that it cannot continue as is, but sadly I'm pretty sure that if the will was there to properly support it, it would already have been given that support long ago.

I can foresee a response along the lines of "we don't have the resources", and I want to head that one off; you do have the resources, but your priorities on how they are allocated are wrong.

My vote is; keep it, but fix it; although it can't continue as it is, please recognise its importance. Thank you.