People make a strong argument in favour of poker machine players winning more frequently and losing less often by winnings being limited to $200 and thus requiring less losses to fund them. Should players' decisions be influenced by alcohol? Surely machines should not be rigged against players, but be as capable of losing as winning.Can we have good clubs, cheap meals and children’s sport, without taking the family housekeeping or mortgage repayments from the families of addicted players? Should gambling gains be taxed just like our pay packets and capital gains are with gambling losses only deductible against gambling gains? Do you think gambling losses are really good for society?
What do you think?

Welcome, and thanks for the thread.
We have visited it before and it generates many views.
Not every one knows what clubs existed and what services they had before the once one armed bandits.
I have no doubt they fund better clubs and services.
And without them we would have fewer clubs, and very smaller ones.
But remain convinced we would be better without them.
Built in to all gambling is the fact owner of the game never faces loss.
A percentage to be retained is set before the first bet.
Any winner on these machines wins other players cash.
And far too many are hooked just as surely as any addict, to play them.
Curse is my answer.
In NSW pubs and Polly's acted like criminals , not in the public interests in this area.

nothing is all good
nuthin is all bad

too much of anything..can hurt
we know..the machine is rigged
yuet in usa..they vote by machine
and wonder why their guy dont get up

heck computers can be made to do
anything they like...

[no doudt with facial recognition
they soon will taylor...our plays and wins..
INDIVIDUALLY..according to our google search footprint..and my space..'favourites'..or other phycological annalisis..

indeed push the right buttons
we can all get adicted...cause our lives are just so empty

i gamble with food
comfort food...yes i know its killing me
but thats my own business..not govts

if you gamble...its not chance..your calling up
its about revenue raising..with state govt kickbacks
that tell police..to go police some other thing

[but not gambling/prostution...
cause they..*are on our side]..give them plenty of cash

its about revenue raising
so limits must be put on the addicts
not to spend more than they earn...or police will investigate fully

legislate facial recognition
ohhh..nope..they will know who you are
push your own buttons..dont gamble..or pay for sex

what is getting the curse
but cure spelt wrong

Owners of poker machines should give players a fair go. Machines should be un-rigged so the players can win all the money, just as they can lose it. Jackpots should be kept small to allow maximum fun for minimum loss. If pollies are to blame then maybe we should unelect those who support big losses by players.

I find all this talk about "rigging" and "unrigging" very odd.

>>Machines should be un-rigged so the players can win all the money, just as they can lose it.<<

A poker machine is designed - not rigged, designed - to deliver a specific return on the amount of money put into it. If you designed a machine where the odds were evens, i.e. where the punters would over time get all their money back, what would be the point of anyone installing one in the first place?

The science - or art, if you like - of putting one of these machines together is simply to keep the punter sufficiently interested that they actually imagine they may have a chance of beating the system, and therefore continue to play. And continue to lose.

I grew up in an age where these things were mechanical, rather than computer-driven. The design was purely mathematical, based upon the probabilities with which each winning line could physically appear. But the principle was precisely the same. You put money in. You got 90% back. You put that back in, and are left with 81%. You put that back in and have 72.9% left... and so on, until you run out.

Personally, I think that a poker machines is one of the most potent and revealing symptoms of how people today are losing touch with reality.

The reality is, the machine always wins.

It is designed to.

That is its purpose, it has no other.

It has no personality, no feelings, and cannot react to pleading, cajoling or weeping.

One of the most disheartening sights, in terms of hopes for a brighter future for mankind, is the row upon row of these machines you see in a club, with their flashing, tawdry lights and their incessant, tinny cacophony.

By definition, people who actually put money into these things are mathematically challenged, to the point where it should really be described as a profound disability.

Excellent post, Pericles.

The disheartening thing is that those eastern states clubs have become reliant on these machines to stay afloat (it seems), so that people seem to think they're an indispensable feature of a club's social amenities.

For a West Aussie, this seems odd....I've mentioned before that there's a long standing ban on their introduction in WA (except for Burswood Casino)

In light of the problems engendered by them and the moronic debasing behaviour they induce, they should be outlawed.

Pericles yes a good post.
I am not aware how the machines are programed today.
Once the club or pub Representative went to the back of each machine and set percentages.
No doubt it is a computer program now, hopefully legislated and controlled.
I think, well know, the idea of returning all input while nice is just not going to happen.
Why install them?
First in my view they are not for entertainment.
I remain convinced while good and bad and very ugly come from them, we would be better without them, or far less of them.

belly/quote..""I am not aware
how the machines are programed today.""

not many are
but mate..think...[your seeing a short movie]
of options..APPARENTLY randomly assorted

but
the computer
Picked which movie..you watch

ie not the one..with thre in line
unless the computer says ok

""Once the club..or pub Representative
went to the back of each machine and set percentages.""

its ionteresting to note how that was done

first he opens..the machine..to expose..the wheels
next he puts a picture..over the slot..he is planning to plug up
[so that option cant come up]

its patyoff hole is blocked

BUT
[anyone..opening the machine..
can see the sticker..over the cherry
[and notice the plugged up payoff..slot}

in short..you knew physicly..it was a chance
not rigged..[unless the whels brake has been filled away
so that one cant stop on a win]

""No doubt it is a computer program now,""

no mate..its a selection of vidio's

""hopefully legislated and controlled.""

compter expert's..cost BIG*/money
better a boy to learn the tricks
on commisioon..of the fines

""the idea of returning all input""

lol

""while nice..is just not going to happen.""

yep
ya right again

""Why install them?""

mates rates
[mate ya now..this canbera 'trial'
is paying 30 million to those on trial
noting one third..[?]..are owned by unions

so 10 million to the re-election
just there alone..then the then alp kled state..getting their kickback

to mostly spend it on sports stadium's
and other tokenistic gifts..but mainly fotr shareholder return.

""they are not for entertainment.""

you'r right again

""we would be better..without them,}}

yes
if by them
you mean the computer?
'programed'..ones..

that chose..which film/clip..you watch*

Next time you feel inclined, slip 10 bucks into a poker machine and see how long it lasts. Place 1 line at a time for 10cents.

Here's how it works. They say you'll only lose 13% of your stake. Bunkum.

It goes like this:

$10.00
$8.70
$7.57
$6.59
$5.73
$4.98
$4.34
$3.77
$3.28
$2.86
$2.48
$2.16
$1.88
$1.64
$1.42
$1.24
$1.08
$0.94
etc etc

You end up with nothing.

In its current form it is a dreadful form of gambling.

Sporting clubs promote fair play on the field and unfair play off it.

RSL clubs across the country puff their chests out while gouging the gullible. Don't even think of ever giving money to an RSL fundraiser.

The pokies need to be redefined as a pastime and as such should have a set fee to play for an hour. Let's make it $10. If you're still playing at the end of an hour you collect your winnings or what's left of your stake. Then you can ;put in another $10 and repeat the process.

If you do your dough before the hour is up you can't invest another $10 (or part thereof) until the first hour is up.

If you want a cheap and longer lasting, thrill bet one line at a time for 1 cent.

Just as the Government has introduced plain packaging for cigarettes it needs to introduce plain packaging for poker machines: a black and white box with a black and white screen with black and white synmbols.

Play needs to be limited to 10 hours a week. It's not healthy sitting in front of a poker machine screen for 40 hours a week.

Plus, no bells, whistles and music when you win, just a noise like a goose fart when you lose.

The great tragedy is that governments are the main benefactors of this dreadful excrescence.

Frank Blunt

Is woolworths the biggest holder of poker machine licenses.
They should never have escaped from casino's.
Licenses should be revoked so many at a time.
Business is dependent on them.
Govt; dependent on them.
Addicts dependent on them.
Business that has them stole the custom from the business that don't.
They should be seriously decreased.

Responding to Pericles, Poirot, Belly & One under God, WA has the right idea. However, banning machines might lead to illegal casinos controlled by criminals. Better to get politicians to even the odds so that there is an equal chance of the machine or player winning or losing the same amount on each push of the buttom. Pure gambling. Players would be happy as they would stand to win more and lose less. Politicians are more likely to make changes that players agree with. The incentive to put in poker machines would be removed because people installing them would risk big losses as well as big profits. Eventually the machines would probably go away & governments raise other taxes. This requires people prepared to lobby politicians as the clubs and pubs do. Let's make the most of our democracy. For 25 years FairGO has helped voters in every state and territory get governments doing what they wanted on a wide range of issues. We can win this!

Hi Belly, nice to see you on-line again, I have been busy throughout the Summer so far, but ventured into OLO again after checking emails.
The Poker machine is a very debatable subject. Yes, organizations such as Woolworths do make a lot of money. However, this is a free country, and if people are silly enough to send themselves (and possibly their family) broke,then I don't think that all should be punished because of a few who cannot discipline themselves to play sensibly. When I lived in NSW, my Husband and I used to go to the local Leagues club with $4.00 (yes! four dollars) each, four for the Pokies and Four for the drinks. That was all we would take each. (Four dollars went a long way in those days.). When the money was gone, we went home after having a good time. People who know their limitations and stick with them are not the problem. But gaming, such as the Gee-Gees et al, will mainly be conducted by sensible people. But if the Government is going to ban Poker Machines, then they should ban all types of gambling. Politicians cannot and should not
interfere with addicts of the game. People should always take responsiblity for their own actions. There are places people can access which will help them with their problems with gambling.

Cheers my good friend,
Noisy Scrub Bird.

As Martin Luther King Jr. said decades ago “History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people.”

Check out our “Poker Machine” campaign at www.voterland.org. Click “like” on one of the two opposing sides or Join a team. The more people from more electorates that can join in, the quicker a result will be achieved. That is because politicians get to understand the spread of an opinion and the depth of reasoning. MPs are always most interested in the views of people from their own electorate, because their job depends on it. Experience shows that politicians are very willing to do what voters want. Voters often tell their local member, or the minister, but with parliaments of 100 or 200 members, this is often ineffective. Parliaments are voting forums. To get what we want, we must convince more than half of the MPs. It is really the failure of voters to effectively communicate their wishes, which causes bad government.

I'm not sure that banning poker machines is the
answer - but certainly we do need law reforms to
deal with the problem gambler scenario. However realistically
due to the very powerful vested interests (Clubs
Australia), and the support they get from
politicians - I can't see it happening any time
soon.

People should be able to deal with their own problems -
but realistically - that doesn't happen as we know with
other social problems (alcohol, drugs, tobacco).

I'm all for setting limits - but as I said - it won't be
happening any time soon - especially if the Opposition get
into Government.

Reform will be out of the question with a coalition govt; I think it comes up about mid year. Without help from the opposition it may be wasted time.

There is an entire city (called Las Vegas) built in the desert and entirely funded on the proceeds of gambling.
That should give an obvious hint as to which way the odds are stacked.

Gambling addicts don't need pokies removed, they need psychological help

St G a mug is born every day, so too are folk who dream of a better life and get hooked on a dream.
I will never understand why the poorest are over represented there.
I will and do understand the Gold Fever like drug gambling is, for some.
From age 5 I bet on horses, my dad did so I did.
6 pence was about 5 cents, but much more then.
If dad won he gave me, that what we then called a Zack, 6 pence.
I had 3 pence each way some horse ridden by my Jockey Neville Selwood.
In the nature of mug/first time punters I won often.
So was hooked, while my working life meant I could afford loss I both won and lost for 61 years, then went cold turkey.
I will never blame the victim but reading about Casino owners in America tells it all ,its a mugs game.
No pokies no clubs, but is that bad?
It is not going to happen, we value other things more than victims.

Victim? I don't agree. It's like calling a druggie a victim. The victims of such things are their family and friends. The people they con to keep their habits running, and their kids. You know who deserves a medal when a junkie becomes a functioning member of society again? The person that stood by them through the entire selfish episode and never gave up on them when everyone else did.

I'm tired of people making excuses for others who can't control themselves like the rest of us have too. Sure, I'll agree that it may be a chemical or genetic thing, but I love smoking. I'd love to smoke and I'd love to drink, but I can't because I know that both will end in disaster so I control those urges to buy smokes and go to the pub. Instead, I go to work and work mammoth hours for money so I can spoil my partner with holidays and a life together.

I'll support subsidised psychological help for those who need and want it. But don't expect me to applaud them when they pull themselves out of it. I'll applaud whoever stood beside them.

Sorry, won't happen.

>>Better to get politicians to even the odds so that there is an equal chance of the machine or player winning or losing the same amount on each push of the buttom.<<

Let me explain why.

Let's say that that to be legal, a pokie must be able to demonstrate, mathematically, that it operates on an "even money" basis. That is, over time it will deliver the full stake back to the punter.

Does that sound like the sort of legislation you had in mind?

If I were devising the computer program that runs such a machine, I would include a $1m jackpot payout (against a 20c stake) that mathematically "evens the odds", but in real life is most unlikely to pay out. A five million to one chance against, in fact. I would then insure my club against paying such a jackpot (insurance companies love odds of five million to one), and have myself a license to fleece.

To illustrate the point even further, that model above assumes that no other payouts are actually occurring between jackpots. If I set the machine to a level that in "normal play" gives the punter 87% return (and me my standard margin of 13%), the actual odds against the million dollar jackpot appearing would be absolutely astronomical. Certainly longer than the operational life of the machine.

Apart from being totally impractical, what else?

Oh, yes. As you said:

>>The incentive to put in poker machines would be removed because people installing them would risk big losses as well as big profits. Eventually the machines would probably go away<<

If by any chance you were able to pass legislation that avoided the scenario above, the machines would disappear instantly, not "eventually". If you eliminate the profit motive, there is no other rationale for club management to install and maintain them.

None at all.

So your "solution" is to cause them to disappear, overnight. Why not just come out with it, and say "they should be banned". Much more honest.

On the contrary, clubs provide many benefits for members that are not related to earning profits. Remember, clubs are owned by members, so any pokie losses by members belong to the members. There is no need for a profit motive in clubs at all. If there is, they should be income taxed on all their revenue.
The extreme example of a $1m jackpot is not constructive. A $250 jackpot would be better. The idea of the club knocking off 13% each time so that after 8 such runs it has taken all of the player's money is not a gamble.
I don't want them banned at all. I want them to be fair to players which they are not at present. Perhaps a warning on each machine showing how much players have lost historically on that machine would be a beter option.
Politicians seem much more interested in the idea of taxing gambling gains like capital gains, with gambling losses deductible against gambling winnings.
Still, it would be nice if people could continue playing the machines but win more and lose less. I think it is going to happen and that pollies will be delighted to pass such legislation.
Your thoughts are much appreciated. It is good to other views.

What do you think of the Draft National Gambling Reform Bill released on the 17/2/2012?