The Unpleasant Reality of Casual Gaming – iGB
For a considerable period, lottery wagering has been perceived differently from other types of wagering. But as the boundaries between operators, games, and sectors become increasingly indistinct, is it time to reconsider that? Joanne Christie reports.
Home > Casino & Gaming > Bingo > The Unpleasant Reality of Casual Gaming
The Unpleasant Reality of Casual Gaming
For a considerable period, lottery wagering has been perceived differently from other types of wagering. But as the boundaries between operators, games, and sectors become increasingly indistinct, is it time to reconsider that? Joanne Christie reports.
In July, the UK government declared it would consult on increasing the minimum age for participating in National Lottery scratchcards and instant win games to 18, a move that attracted criticism for not being comprehensive enough.
Labour, and even some Conservative members, stated that Sports and Civil Society Minister Mims Davies’ initial opinion that the age for draw-based games should remain at 16 was incorrect. They argued that the age for all types of wagering should be increased to 18.
Many would concur with them, but there is also evidence to suggest that Davies may be correct in distinguishing the more traditional weekly draw-based activities of lottery providers (often considered “casual” gambling) from the expanding global revenue of instant games offered by lottery providers.
For instance, GamCare’s yearly data from 2017 to 2018 revealed that zero percent of calls across all age groups cited the National Lottery as a concern, while two percent mentioned scratch cards.
Troublingly, twenty-one percent of callers under eighteen mentioned that scratch cards had caused them issues, compared to just two percent who mentioned the National Lottery. GamCare’s statistics do not offer specific information on online games for the National Lottery or scratch cards.
Back in the early 2000s, Mark Griffiths, a leading addiction psychologist at the International Gaming Research Unit at Nottingham Trent University, published research suggesting that scratch cards were a distinct form of gambling from weekly lottery drawings and should be considered “hard” gambling, rather than an expansion of the National Lottery.
“I return to the Home Office definition of hard gambling from 1996, which stated it was a colloquial term for high stakes or rapid betting, and clearly if you have the time, money and resources you can play scratch cards repeatedly, and for me, according to that particular definition, it is a form of hard gambling,” he stated.
Shifting online
While Griffiths states that scratch cards are less associated with problem gambling than other forms of gambling, such as slot machines, he believes that the move online has increased the potential for harm. “Offline, individuals tend to purchase five scratch cards at a time.”
Individuals do not scrape lottery tickets at the point of purchase – they might scrape them at their residence and if they win any prizes, they return.
“Currently, scratch-off lottery tickets can be purchased electronically, and we observe issues because individuals will constantly scrape them. It’s accessible around the clock, every day of the year, you can scrape them repeatedly.”
Johanna Lipponen, CSR and accountable gaming director at Finnish monopoly enterprise Veikkaus, concurs that online scratch-off tickets pose a higher risk than lottery games. “That’s why when participating in electronic instant lottery tickets [online scratch-off tickets], customers must set personal daily and monthly mandatory spending limits. This spending limit also encompasses all comparable casino games and electronic bingo games (so-called fast-paced games) offered by Veikkaus.”
Blaine DeGracia, accountable gaming manager for the Michigan Lottery, states that while there are no distinct risk profiles currently implemented within their product range, “from a problem gambling viewpoint, all Michigan Lottery products adhere to the same accountable gaming industry best practices, as the Michigan Lottery acknowledges that any form of gambling can be problematic for individuals.”
He adds: “It’s crucial to note that based on reported sales data across the US, scratch-off tickets are more favored than draw tickets, and this fact may naturally lead to a greater number of instant lottery problem gamblers compared to the draw ticket player population.”
Ensuring player safety
DeGracia highlighted that the state lottery is currently investigating the potential for partnering with local academic institutions on a research endeavor to determine if specific lottery games are more prone to causing problematic gambling habits compared to others. This research would aid in identifying individuals struggling with gambling addiction.
Griffiths indicated that while lottery operators don’t actually enforce different limitations on various games, the heightened risk associated with instant games is frequently a factor in establishing their limits. “I’m aware that the Irish lottery has a €75 limit. This applies to all products, but it’s primarily intended for its instant games.”
Mark Knighton, Head of Operations at Multilotto, stated that this principle also applies to alternative lottery providers, such as betting companies. “We are acutely aware that these games can be highly unpredictable, and we have internal mechanisms in place to monitor player behavior. As a result, we have responsible gambling measures implemented for our players. If we observe a player’s risk level escalating, we intervene promptly.
“We can track this through data, unlike physical scratch cards, where such monitoring isn’t possible. You can’t track that behavior.”
In this context, online gaming can offer enhanced protection for players, as numerous websites implement mandatory restrictions and automated responsible gambling procedures.
In Sin City, Lipone stated, “When patrons utilize any self-exclusion choice, they are given the opportunity to contact the Pelluri helpline. If the patron consents to the helpline call, a Pelluri helpline representative will call the player from an unidentified number to discuss and assist the player in addressing their gaming habits or potential gambling issues.”
The danger of lotteries
However, Nayton, who joined Multilotto earlier this year, has been involved in numerous responsible gambling initiatives, including the early promotion of Playscan by Swedish gambling firms, he pointed out that operators must also be aware that lottery-based games are not entirely free from the risk of problematic gambling.
“From a volatility perspective, weekly lotteries may not be as high as scratch cards, because you can purchase multiple scratch cards in 10 seconds.
“There are definitely distinctions, but I know that from a problematic gambling perspective, lotteries are also within the scope of problem gamblers. Lotteries are the final step in a problematic gambling pattern, because they are seeking a dream win. So, if you have a large lottery draw, someone might invest a significant amount of money into the lottery, hoping they can win the lottery to pay off all their debts. We know from the history of problem gamblers that this is a step they take.”
Griffith highlighted that one factor contributing to the lower association of lottery draws with problematic gambling is the inherent structure of the game, particularly the frequency of drawings. If this aspect were to change, problematic gambling could potentially escalate.
“I believe you can create the most secure single slot machine, or you can design the most addictive lottery game; it all hinges on manipulating the structural characteristics,” he elaborated. “We shouldn’t differentiate based on game type, because if individuals perceive lotteries as safe and slot machines as risky, then you’re essentially opening the door for the creation of automated lotteries occurring hourly or even every minute, and these products would be more strongly linked to problematic gambling than our traditional bi-weekly lottery draws.”
Nayton mirrored this sentiment. “You can engage in fast-draw games that, from a player’s viewpoint, can provide immediate satisfaction, so in my opinion, they could be equally susceptible to problematic behavior as scratch-off tickets.”
This is one reason why he advocates for restricting all gambling to individuals aged 18 and above. “I’m astonished that they even permit teenagers, 16 years old, to participate in any form of gambling, considering their maturity or financial standing — 18 is the standard for most things.”
Griffith concurred: “I’ve been researching problematic gambling for three decades. To me, gambling is undeniably an adult activity.”
Within this nation, nearly all types of wagering have rules that mandate you must be eighteen years old to engage. Even in games resembling lotteries, I would advocate for raising the age threshold to eighteen.
The British government’s verdict on this topic will require some time to become apparent, as the consultation’s final date is October. However, it is evident that certain games offered by the national lottery operator are potentially more detrimental than the public generally believes – and this affects more than just those under eighteen.
This scenario is only going to worsen as the varieties of games offered by the monopolistic provider expand, and the quantity of alternative lottery models available increases – signifying that responsible gambling will become increasingly crucial.
We reached out to the lottery enterprise that operates the UK National Lottery for a statement, but sadly they were unable to furnish one.
Image: Bdviets
Sign up for the iGaming newsletter
