The betting company ran two TV ads, described as "pastiches of documentary-style filming", telling the story of two adrenaline junkies who came to a sticky end after taking one risk too many.

One of the ads featured a fictional eyepatch-wearing character called Willem Snyman, described as a "mentor and oceanic guru", who talked about the demise of a shark-diving student.

Snyman explained that the student's headstrong attitude and extreme appetite for risk-taking led him to tie raw bacon and sausages to his wetsuit and dive in shark infested waters in a seal costume.

"All we could bury was his flipper," explained Snyman.

The other ad was narrated by the fictional J "Snake Eyes" Kowalski, a pilot and skydiving pioneer, talking about the death of his student Ted.

Ted was said to have died after experimenting with smaller and smaller parachutes, until one day he jumped using just an empty 30g potato chip packet.

Both ads ended with the line "If only he'd seen ladbrokescasino.com it would have quenched his thrill buds."

The Advertising Standards Authority received one complaint that the TV ads portrayed gambling in a context of toughness and linked it to risk-taking and reckless behaviour.

In its defence, Ladbrokes said that the humour was "deliberately exaggerated and ridiculous" and that the cautionary nature of the of the stories "actively encouraged caution and moderation over extreme behaviour and recklessness".

Ladbrokes TV ads banned for linking gambling to reckless behaviour | Media | guardian.co.uk.

It’s wonderful that one complaint can stop an ad campaign in its tracks. Or that it’s taboo to air a comedic portrayal of gambling as a surrogate for reckless behavior. Shouldn’t Ladbrokes be applauded for their candor? The subtext of the ads is that if you seek too much risk, you’ll end up regretting it. It doesn’t really make me want to go out and get some action down on the Eagles this weekend.

PLANS to build Britain’s first supercasino in Manchester were THROWN OUT by the House of Lords yesterday.

In a disaster for Prime Minister Tony Blair and Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell, peers blocked the Government’s Gambling Order by 123 votes to 120.

The shock result leaves the vision of Las Vegas-style casinos in Britain in tatters. And plans for 16 smaller casinos are also on hold.

Ms Jowell won’t put a fresh order before Parliament until at least May.

Any new scheme is not likely to come to Parliament until after Chancellor Gordon Brown has taken over as Prime Minister — and he is lukewarm about the supercasino plans.

Ministers had heralded the plans to allow unlimited jackpot machines and roulette tables in huge leisure complexes. Last month Manchester was the surprise choice by an independent panel for the first supercasino, beating Blackpool and London’s Millennium Dome.

The Sun Online – News: Lords wreck hope of gambling

I think this will actually open the door for more than one “supercasino” within the next few years.

Amazement, anger, bewilderment – the list is endless when trying to describe the sense of feeling against what many see as a gross injustice.
“Blackpool had the best case, proved it and still lost” is a sentiment shared by a town in shock at the decision to award the lucrative prize to Manchester.
Our North West neighbours were, said the CAP, the best bet on all counts – for helping assist regeneration of a poor district and as the social impact test bed for Las Vegas-style glitz and gambling.
Not so, say MPs, council leaders and Gazette readers who today made an 11th hour appeal to Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell to think again ahead of the crucial Parliamentary vote on the matter.
Blackpool will lose millions in potential regeneration revenue by the decision to hand the one-and-only licence to a modern, cosmopolitan city already having benefited from £2bn of private sector investment in the last five years.
The reason for such strong support for Blackpool’s case locally comes from the 180-page CAP report – the same one which so publically damned the resort’s bid.
It stated the casino was not enough to boost Blackpool’s fortunes, would not be instrumental in its rebirth and claimed
Blackpool was not in terminal decline.
The Fylde’s four MPs have branded the Casino Advisory Panel report as littered with “inconsistencies” and “contradictions”.
They have accused the panel of missing the point when it came to assessing the “catalystic potential” of the super casino to trigger further massive investment in Blackpool.

Blackpool Today Blackpool news – Casino – a colossal blunder

I really feel for the people of Blackpool. The whole casino selection process strikes me as bizarre. Why not just let citizens of Blackpool vote in a referendum on whether they want casino gaming or not? Is that too much democracy? I guess it’s just a politico-cultural difference between the UK and the States.

If it’s any consolation, the first bid to get casinos legalized in Atlantic City failed as well.

Speaking of AC, I watched the Louis Malle movie Atlantic City last night. It was the first time that I’d seen it all the way through. I’ve got to say it’s an interesting depiction of the city circa 1980–I’m not sure how accurate it was (I was only 7 at the time). A few things rang true, a few rang false. It might be that movie audiences are much more sophisticated now, but the whole “stolen drug shipment” storyline didn’t seem very well thought out–not compared to True Romance, anyway. I was also a little bummed out that no one spoke with a real Philly/South Jersey accent. Still, it was nice seeing the old Resorts, and the old boards, and what I think was the inside of the Knife and Fork. I’ve got a feeling that if they’d shot a scene inside the Baltimore Grill, it would look pretty much the same today.

Someone who’s got a better memory of the city at the time of the shooting could answer this question: Is the apartment building where they all lived on the site of today’s Flagship? I kind of think so, but I couldn’t tell for sure.

One funny note: most of the vacant lots that you see in the movie are, after 27 years of “redevelopment,” still vacant.

London casinos are bracing for a possible onslaught of gamblers equipped with a device that claims to provide a big edge to roulette players.

The gadget uses software to calculate where the little white ball is most likely to land. However, it has not yet been declared illegal by British gambling regulators.

Gambling analysts told The Guardian that the Gaming Commission appears unwilling to ban the devices because it would be an admission that roulette can be biased.

The Commission has urged casinos not to pay players caught using the gadget, which consists of a concealed clicker that records the ball, and a computer that calculates its speed and motion and then delivers a prediction of where it will land via an earpiece.

The devices cost about 1,000 pounds $1,268. It came to the commissions attention a couple of years ago when a suspected gang of professional gamblers used them to win more than 1 million pounds $1.64 million at the Ritz casino in London.

United Press International – NewsTrack – London casinos brace for roulette cheats

A few years ago I wrote this up somewhere online, saying that I thought it was impossible. I then got an email from a guy who says that it really, really works, and he has the money to prove it.

So even though I tend to be skeptical of these kind of high-tech “schemes” (it’s not cheating if it isn’t against the law, is it?), I’m willing to concede that this may work.

But it seems that the Commission is putting the casinos into a tough spot–how can they refuse to pay out if the device isn’t illegal?

I have the feeling that there is more to this story than was published here.

From zeenews.com:

A gambler placed his last bet on his way to his own funeral. Ernest Stephenson enjoyed betting on horses and his last wish was that he wanted his daughter Tracy to back a horse of her choice and spend the money on a holiday.

When the 70-year old gambler breathed his last, his last wish was duly honored and his funeral cortege was stopped off at his favorite bookie on the way to the crematorium.

Tracy, 35, aptly put 100 pounds on Sir Ernest, but the horse failed to win.

“My dad loved horses, but I joked he backed more donkeys than horses – this must have been another of his donkeys”, The Mirror quoted Tracy, as saying.

Gambling habits die hard!

Tracy’s pretty stoic for blowing a hundred pounds on a losing horse, I think.

Stephenson might have something with the idea of betting after death. The whole idea of the wheel of fortune is that life grinds on, mercilessly, no matter what good or ill luck happens, so continuing to gamble after you have departed is perfectly apt.

“I don’t want to be the one to call it the dumbing down of Britain, but I think its the dumbing down of Britain.”
–Warren Lush, chief oddsmaker at Ladbrokes, on the huge upswing in novelty betting on everything from televised talent shows to whether someone will live to be 100. You can read the full story of novelty betting here: baltimoresun.com – English risk odds on oddest of wagers.

This came to my attention because I’m currently writing the chapter of Roll the Bones dealing with the initial English gaming mania (1660-1750), and novelty betting was huge back then, too.

From This is London:

The enormous teddies given as prizes in gambling arcades are facing extinction after being labelled too much of a temptation.

Ministers fear the huge cuddly toys are so appealing they could lure youngsters into a lifetime of gambling. They say the furry animals must be downsized to reduce the risk. But the plans have been ridiculed by opposition politicians, who are accusing the government of running a nanny state.

The threat to ban the big bears comes in the controversial new Gambling Bill. Ministers are under intense pressure to show that the legislation, which paves the way for Las Vegas-style super casinos, will not fuel gambling addiction and organised crime.

Under the new plans, they want to introduce tougher regulations on seaside arcade machines.

The Department of Culture, Media and Sport argues that young people should still be allowed to play at the arcades but believes the prizes should not be too big. A spokesman said: “The Government believes that children should be able to play these machines but the stakes and prizes should discourage them playing too much.”

Ministers to kill off cuddly gambling bears

Why not allow the big animals, but make sure all of the games are rigged against the kids? Then they get discouraged from ever gambling and the operators make a big profit. Everyone wins. Except, of course, the kids. But wouldn’t it be better for them to lose now and learn that gambling doesn’t pay?

If the cuddly bears are allowed to remain, I’m sure that future generations of Britons will spend all of their time haunting the streets, looking for a quick Teddy Ruxpin fix.

From Politics.co.uk:

The Government has apparently listened to some of these concerns and today announced that it would be setting a limit of eight on the number of casinos in each category – regional, small and large – that can be built in the first phase.

In addition, no new casinos will be allowed unless “the Gambling Commission advises on whether their introduction has led to an increase in problem gambling and Parliament votes to allow an increase. This assessment will take place no sooner than three years after the award of the first premises licence for these casinos”.

The location of the casinos will also be subject to the recommendations of an independent panel, which will take into account the needs of the area and ensure a geographic spread.

Explaining today’s move, Minister for Sport and Tourism Richard Caborn said: “The overarching priority of this Bill is to protect children and vulnerable people. That’s why we’ve adopted a cautious approach throughout, listening to the people’s concerns and responding to them.

“Limiting the number of Regional casinos to eight in the first phase is a cautious move that will allow us to test the impact of a new kind of casino on the levels of problem gambling. We also believe its right to apply this same level of caution to Small and Large casinos.

Domestic Policy news : Watered-down casino plans published

This is certainly a development to folly.

from Business Week:

Now the $7.4 billion online industry, which operates thousands of sites legally outside the U.S., is fighting back against what execs say is a heavy-handed and possibly unconstitutional assault on a free-market enterprise. Casino City Inc., a Louisiana operator of Internet gambling portals, is suing Justice for violating its First Amendment rights. And Internet gambling companies are hiring Washington lobbyists to burnish their image, establish alliances with the $70 billion U.S. wagering business, and tantalize lawmakers with a potential new source of significant tax revenue. “Our revenues are greater than Yahoo!’s. Our profits are greater than Amazon’s. It’s ridiculous,” says Alex Czajkowski, marketing director for Sporting Bet PLC in London, which processed $2.5 billion in wagers last fiscal year for a $39.5 million operating profit.

While many in the U.S. still view gambling as a matter of morals, the tiny island nation of Antigua has managed to turn it into a trade issue. On Nov. 10, Antigua won a World Trade Organization ruling that the U.S. violates international trade rules by, among other things, allowing credit cards to be used for domestic gambling but not online wagering. And Britain is set to liberalize online gambling rules and could allow its operators to accept wagers from U.S. customers.

For advocates of click-to-play, the timing could be right. All states but two allow some form of gambling, New Jersey is experimenting with an interactive online lottery, and an Idaho tribe last year won a key court ruling allowing it to sell lottery tickets on the Web. Texas Hold ‘Em is the new national pastime, and World Poker Tournament players boast of using gaming Web sites to hone their skills.

U.S. casino operators say cybergaming is inevitable and reject Justice’s claims that the online industry is rife with fraud. “We frankly find attempts at prohibition to be very shortsighted,” says Alan Feldman, senior vice-president of the MGM Mirage (MGG ) in Las Vegas. Its online gaming site on Britain’s Isle of Man, Playmgmmirage.com, folded last year after 21 months because it couldn’t turn a big enough profit. Part of the problem: To avoid risking its Nevada and Mississippi state casino licenses, the site refused wagers from U.S. players, who make up an estimated 70% of the global online take. “It’s clear the public is [gambling online] in ever-greater numbers,” says Feldman. “The logical thing to do is legalize it, regulate it, and tax it.”

Can Online Betting Change Its Luck?

It’s a very good article that is, I think, evidence that more people may be willing to listen to reason on this issue.

From the Prauge Post :

The government has found itself on the losing side in the fight against online gambling. Foreign online gambling sites are increasingly targeting customers in the Czech Republic despite the practice being illegal in the country.

British company Sportingbet recently introduced a Czech Web site, making it the fourth UK-based online casino to offer services in the Czech language. The others include Worldbet, Betsson and Eurobet.

The invasion of foreign betting firms is likely to increase, said Martin Hajek, owner of www.esazeni.cz. “The Czech betting market is very attractive and we can expect more firms will attempt to get a share of it,” he said.

The government has been unsuccessful in its attempts to block online gambling sites. Finance Ministry spokesman Marek Zeman said the targeting of Czechs by foreign gambling sites was a clear violation of the law and the ministry would work with local police to prosecute violators.

“We do all we can in order to force them out of here,” he said. “The problem is that the Internet has no borders, so it’s very difficult to get the upper hand.”

The government launched a campaign against foreign online gambling sites in the spring after British company Betsson not only added the Czech language to its Web site but also took out advertisements in local media promoting its site.

“Betsson made a breakthrough after it began openly communicating with the media and also with state authorities regarding the legitimacy of their business,” Hajek said.

Betsson Communications Director Martin Bunge Meyer has previously said Betsson was aware that online betting was illegal in this country. His rationale for continuing to operate was a decision by the European Court of Justice, which ruled that an Italian betting firm could collect bets for a British Internet-based company.

Meyer said Betsson’s Czech-language operations were based on a British license and so the company, in his opinion, could continue to operate legally. “Our response to that appeal is that we are not present in the Czech Republic,” he said.

Representatives from Sportingbet were not available for comment as of press time. Guidelines published on the its Web site, though, make it clear that the company takes no responsibility for clients who place bets from countries where the action is prohibited by law. “Internet gambling may be illegal in the jurisdiction in which you are located. It is each customer’s responsibility to ensure that they comply with their own local laws with regard to betting,” the guidelines state.

George Merodoulakis, marketing director for Eurobet, insisted the Czech government was obliged to respect business licenses issued within the EU. “When we hold a British license, we are legal in the EU region and so the Czech government cannot label our business illegal,” he said.

Even if the state had the right to enforce its national laws against offshore gambling Web sites, it possesses no effective way to keep them out, said Hajek of www.esazeni.cz. “If a company holds a British license, it follows British law and its servers are located in Britain. Hardly anyone can order them not to introduce a Czech-language site,” Hajek said.

Hajek said the government would be better off changing the national lottery law and opening the gambling market to other European companies.

State rolls snake eyes against Web gambling

Here’s the whole US/Antigua case in a nutshell: a sovereign nation protesting against Internet gaming, which is apparently allowed under a super-regional trade agreement. With the US, it is the General Agreement on Trade in Services, and here, it is the European Union.

How long before an international summit to discuss problems of jurisidction? It seems obvious that the current situation will continue to get confusing, as gaming companies continue to usurp other countries’ gaming monopolies.

The new law, if approved by Parliament, will allow casinos with up to 1,250 slot machines and unlimited jackpots.

It would ban slot machines from fast food outlets and minicab offices, restrict internet gaming and introduce a new industry regulator.

But opponents, including the Salvation Army, say the bill will lead to an explosion in problem gambling.

Some points of the bill:
- Casinos open 24 hours

- Immediate access for public, no 24-hour joining period

- Unlimited jackpots in largest casinos

- Betting allowed on Good Friday and Christmas Day

- A new criminal offence of inviting, permitting or causing a child to gamble

- Compulsory age checks by gambling websites operating from the UK

- Mystery shopper surveys by the Gambling Commission to check rules followed

- Tighter restrictions on betting exchanges

- Allowing casinos to advertise for first time

BBC NEWS | Politics | Gambling law shake-up is unveiled

Will Britain become the “Las Vegas of Europe?” Will more scholars follow Sir Professor Peter Hall’s example and read Suburban Xanadu to get some insight into the trajectory of the industry in the United States? Will anyone go to British casino buffets? Only time will tell.

A mathematics graduate from Belfast, Northern Ireland, who snubbed a 40,000 pound a year banking job to earn a mere 4,500 a week playing internet poker, is all set to earn 234,000 pounds a year as earnings.

According to The Sun, Lee-Anne Smyth began playing at university and in the process made so much money, that she refused a banking job

“Who needs a proper job when I can make what most people earn in a month in a couple of hours?” the paper quoted her as saying.

Lee who logs on to Ladbrokespoker.com and plays for five hours against other gamblers, betting by credit card says, that her 2.2 honours degree in pure and applied mathematics helps her to calculate the odds regarding the number of cards left in the pack.

Lee whose favourite variety happens to be the Texas Hold ‘Em, where players make up their hands from dealt cards and communal ones which are left face up, has reportedly won as much as 7,600 pounds on one single day.

Online gambling more lucrative than banking profession!

Maybe she plays against Nicholas Leeson, the banker who single-handedly brought down Barings bank. In a Casino [ptz] post last month, I discussed his presence at celebpoker.com.

The dubious part of this story is the idea that gambling is an easy road to quick wealth, something that, a a historian of gambling (though not a gambling historian) I have to dispute. I’m glad that Lee-Anne is proficient at “the Texas Hold Em,” but I’d hardly recommend professional poker as a career path for most graduates.

The fantastic part of this story is something I never cease to wonder at; how borders have completely collpased. A guy in Las Vegas using the Internet to quote an Indian news article about an Irish woman who plays online poker is about as much proof of this as you need.