Quote from: Lungyeh on July 13, 2018, 04:28:49 AM
Glen, I really admire your passion for the game and the time taken to share your experience with all of us. To all intents and purposes I would say what you have written applies aptly to the majority. I think given the diversity of the human populace, it is my humble suggestion that perhaps there is a tiny percentage of people who sees the game differently, are able to control their emotions differently and find it easy to deal with the many issues and problems you have correctly written about. But by and large, I agree with your eloquently presented articles.

Just like there are the minority of people who can be a Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckenberg, Bill Gates or Jack Ma

And you are pretty well spot-on with the minority.  Actually, what is sad, is the way the game literally and physically changed since right around 2000, with the intro of Midi/Macau style and the virtual elimination of the big-table.  That was pretty much 95% in favor of the casino, IMO and that of countless others. 

Fooled by Reality--Fooled by Desires

What is so sad, is that we really just fool ourselves. 

Be careful what you fail to check at the doors, as you walk through the entrance of the casino!  I have written about it before and specifically, I am talking about consciousness and reality.  I am not talking about being awake and alert, I am talking about remembering, being 100% conscious of and putting your knowledge and experience right there in front of you, recognizing them and paying extreme attention to them while you are playing.  Not an easy task.

The highest majority of the players sit down at the casino table, buy-in and then, 'game-on'.  Not much else really happens until the player begins to lose.  Then the emotional and the reactions come about.  Rather than being constantly pro-active, they become reactive to their deluded minds.  Sheer reactions to attempt damage control, getting even, recouping previous losses, trying to place themselves in another player's frame-of-mind and virtually everything except, playing the game the way it should be played. 

Problem being, as I see it, is that there are two different forms of, 'Probability', 'Variances' and most importantly, 'Dealing with our Ignorance'.  First of all, the highest majority of all players enter a new session with an attitude and belief that they have been there, done that and although handled too many sessions the, 'wrong way', they suddenly convince themselves that everything has changed and really nothing at all has.  When they win, they get more obnoxious, more de-tuned and more self-righteous than ever before.  Because they have all convinced themselves they are finally on the right track and that special time has come.  When really nothing at all did, they just failed to allow themselves to deal with their own ignorance.  They also coupled that with locking themselves into uncertainty failing to actually apply themselves to what is about to happen. 

Whatever you want to entitle the upcoming shoe presentments, 'Variance', 'Results', 'Randomness', etc., it will happen.  It does not matter one bit what side you are wagering on, what side you did not wager on or in fact, if you sat out and did not wager at all.  It will happen.  That is when the damage occurs the highest majority of the time.  Say a player believed what he read on a gambling message board or in his, 'elite pay-per-month internet club' of professional baccarat players that it is wiser to wager on 1's and 2's because they happen the most rather than streaks, patterns, trends and other presentments that also happen.  So here this player bought in with several thousand dollars and got into a wagering war with himself of going for 1's and 2's at the baccarat table.  Just about the same time he was doing that, the shoe presented 2 long streaks of say 8 to 12 Bankers in a row, followed by the same amount of Players in a row as well.  The person repeatedly wagered for the, 'cut' because of the proven statistical odds (The probability) that what just happened, should not have happened at all.  But it did.  And, it could have been one of several other shoe presentments such as, 1's and 4's, 2's and 6's followed by 3's and 5's with one long streak.  Countless other presentments that do come about. 

The damage happens when that player has just lost a straight $1,700.00 and has $300.00 remaining of his buy-in.  His mind is clouded, his vision is blurred and his frame-of-mind is extremely dangerous.  Now, he observed a player that caught the highest amount of the past 20 or so hands and won well over $10,000.00 with just a few hundred on the table, when he sat down.  That other person says something like, "Now the cut is coming, it has to because it was too strong", all the while pointing at the score board.  So, you are down the $1,700.00 or so, the guy that just won what you desired to and knew you could, is speaking and you are gullible.   Here is what you really do not realize, here is what really happens with 'Probability' and the computation of the odds of shoe presentments coming about in baccarat.   Probability is not a computation of the odds of making winning and losing hands based upon what has happened or based upon what has not happened.  It is actually, accepting the lack of certainty of your knowledge and dealing with the reality of your ignorance.  In other words, harsh and real words--you beat yourself, you talked yourself out of wagering what would have won.  Simple and done.  Of course, that is like saying you are unhygienic and physically unattractive and unpleasant to be around because you are simply gross.  But our brains will not allow us to really do that, even if it was factual and 100% true. 

Here, let me explain where I am coming from.  Outside of textbooks and casinos, probability and variance really never continually presents itself as a problem or something that constantly has to be figured out.  Yet, within a casino, it always does, 100% of the times we play.  Here is where it is complicated on one hand and yet, not really so.  IMO, there are really two areas that have to be realized and addressed.  1)  Randomness and Non-Randomness, and 2) Certainty and Uncertainty.  This is where 100 gamblers will have 99 varying methods to decipher, understand and convince themselves that they are on the right track and will soon be on 'easy-street'. 

Simply, 'randomness' is what the shoe will present, or the dice or the slot machine wheels, or anything else within a casino.  Randomness is not in any way purely mathematical, neither is non-randomness.  If you view randomness and non-randomness as skepticism, rather than attempting to apply and decipher it down to micro-managing levels mathematical interpretations, you will be far better off.  As well, 'probability'.  It is not in any way purely an engineering theorem and able to be broken down as well, you would be far better off viewing it as a type of applied skepticism. 

And the problem most all will not or ever admit, is that when they are wrong according to their methodical and probability deviant, they were merely taking the educated and best guess as to what should have won.  When they do wager and won, they build their persona into a larger and more destructive belief that they have it all figured out and that is when the real destruction can do greater damage to their play.  Basically, if you really do decide something with uncertainty that was in your belief decided upon with risk-based method, rather than ignorance or outside the textbook mathematical statistical variance, you will be much better off by far and large.  Because eventually your eyes will open, your frame-of-mind will realize and you will understand that you capitalized on visions, chance and opportunities rather than science, mathematical and discovering what the multi-billion dollar corporations wished you never did. 

The naysayers will label what I just attempted to lay out above, as saying, "being on the right side of luck and chance will only last for so long", etc.  Then they will always say, "If you really had something, you would be able to use it over and over and over again without failure, time constraint or losses".  Which is not true. 

Here, let me break it down a bit further.  Chance, being correct, taking advantage of an opportunity, etc., all might seem similar to saying, 'luck'.  But, in reality, since no one really knows with mathematical or scientific certainty, what presentments will ultimately come out of the shoe and in what order, mathematical and statistical formulas that define what wagering protocols should be, really do not matter.  Why?  Because when you are at the casino table, you are at a highly random environment with certain windows of opportunity that can be successfully taken advantage of.  Unlike the practice of medicine, engineering or anything else that requires the highest majority of correct results to originate from non-random and non-variant sets of protocols, determining the outcome.  And in those endeavors, knowing the protocols will award you the knowledge to have the correct answers.  It is virtually the opposite, when we are at the casino table. 

The whole other, 'half-way educated' group, maintains a firm belief that there is only a few types of plays that will profit from wagering and those are all elementary in their repetitive writings and one-liners.  They are very good at attempting to have everyone believe that there is actually only one or two ways to wager and everything else is 'false belief' by the gambler.  They insist that it is all non-rocket science and yet, while they actually will never actually divulge their 'correct and only' ways to properly wager, they really do put on a good show.  I would have to put them in the same league as to those women that actual curl up with a bowl of potato chips and soda and get lost in watching those old fashioned soap-operas on television.  Great entertainment, even losing yourself in 'make believe' but sorry pal--not reality by any means! 

However, what most people know in their hearts--but will never ever admit is that we are into the new-age of info sharing, instant everything and no need for, 'blood-sweat & tears' any longer.   It turns out that we aren't very good at distinguishing the knowledge we keep in our heads from the information we find on our phones or computers. As Dr. Wegner and Dr. Ward explained in a 2013 Scientific American Journal article when people call up information through their devices, they often end up suffering from delusions of intelligence. They feel as though, "their own mental capacities" had generated the information, not their devices. "The advent of the 'information age' seems to have created a generation of people who feel they know more than ever before", the scholars concluded, even though "they may know ever less about the world around them".  And, it is no different for the gambling crowd.  I read and researched on the internet, I know everything you learned over 20 or 25 or 30 years, etc., I know it all, so what? 

That insight sheds light on our society's current gullibility crisis, in which people are all too quick to credit lies and half-truths spread through social media by Russian agents and other bad actors. If your phone, tablet, I Pad, or laptop, has sapped your powers of discernment, you'll believe anything it tells you.  Which is reality.  It's your money, spend it the way you see fit and make yourself comfortable with all the fake reassurance that you give yourself by simply believing what is not true and what makes for 'good print', because in reality, that is all it really is.

Quote from: esoito on December 14, 2013, 11:27:12 PM
�There is no truth. There is only perception.�

Am I the only one who finds that quote somewhat frightening? If it's true...

When two witnesses to the same event give different accounts (as so often happens) then the quote has a ring of truth -- according to my perception.

Interesting, hmmm?  (According to my perception.)

See?  It's a sort of endless loop -- according to my perception.

That is 100% correct, and it is the perception that hurts people, not anything else about it. 

But it is usually always perception and how we each interpret it or attempt to use whatever it is--even outside of gaming when you come to think about it.

https://kdvr.com/2017/11/15/casino-customers-prosecuted-for-playing-abandoned-slot-credits/

I really have moved away many years ago from the steady and repetitious 'anything' in baccarat.  Being repetitious in baccarat is almost a guaranteed loss, unless you are playing an extremely short amount of time.  And, in which case, if you lost right away which will happen more so than wins, your wins will have an extremely hard time to catch up, replace the previously lost money and third, give yourself a nice profit. 

I really only do the parlay wagering once or twice out of win money, or set aside a certain amount of win money to split up and attempt my '1 + 4' parlays, or start the 1-3-2-6/1-3-2-4 parlay.  But, I do not do them on an on-going wagering thing, hand after hand.  Or, the other one I do, is win and parlay 1/2 or 3/4 of the win and then pull down the win amount in full if I win and leave the original bet or pull the bet down and save it for another hand, etc. 

Quote from: Sputnik on July 07, 2018, 04:27:28 PM
Alrelax thanks for taking time and effort to explain.

(Your welcome, no problem)

I like the method of taking 1/3 out of the winning pot and continue with what remains.
Will try this my self.

(I verify, but my own benchmark to start this, is if I triple my buy-in or more, but depends on how long or how bad the struggle was to get there, etc.)

I don't fully understand you staking strategy, but i assume you play 1326 at Banker or Player side and on the other side you play up as you go, for example, 12345 on a winning, if not you flat betting 1111  and 1326 kick in - everything between loses or break even.
Is this correct or am I missing something or did I misunderstand your staking strategy?

(Yes, the 1-3-2-6 or 1-3-2-4 with the win, after some wins off the flat betting paid off, etc.  I cannot say how many times I would flat bet?  But generally the easier the wins come, if they do, I would be more aggressive moving towards the positive progressions to continue, rather than sticking to a flat betting stake.  I view everything in sections, most of the time.  Losing, winning, pushing back and forth, hitting side wagers, losing side wagers, etc.  I found out after the first 20 years of playing, that the wins are the shortest sections and when they come, you have to be aggressive.  If you flat bet or wager scared or sit out and wait, you will ever do well at baccarat.  But, IMO, the whole key that helps turn the lock to open the door, is hitting the winning section real hard and aggressive and then backing down.)

(The sections, help me control my emotions and desires I guess.  Sections, the same as I wrote about with turning points, regarding chop-chop, steaks, doubles, 1's and 3's, etc., etc.  Everything I try to view as sections, that way I am not looking 50 hands later for the same thing, which the majority of times will not happen anyways.)

Cheers

I tried to answer as short as I could, but I have numerous variables I use to, 'milk a winning session' and how I can safely do it without ever giving back all my win money.  Any questions, ask, thanks.

Quote from: Sputnik on July 07, 2018, 01:13:48 PM

  Hello Alrelax, what is your loss limit and how do you handle your money playing with positive progression.
How and when do you stop playing?

(As a general rule of my own--my loss limit is my initial and dedicated buy-in.  I have written about this numerous times in different perspectives.  But on a local level, (versus going every so often to Vegas or Atlantic City)  I bring and buy-in with what I am willing to risk and lose for the session.  The highest majority of the time, that is what I subscribe to.  After years of playing, I found that when I win--I win.  When I lose on a consistent basis for the immediate session, I keep losing.  When I push money back and forth, meaning--win 3, lose 4, win 5, lose 6, win 4, lose the next 3, etc., I will generally either take off on a great win or go straight down hill.  Since I do win larger with numerous side wagers up to 200 to 1 or the 40 to 1's, etc., I take all that into consideration about continuing or stopping).

For example, sometimes you make a few units as the strike comes later during the game and sometimes you strike in beginning and win serious money. Do you stop playing in both situations?

(At times I will hit it very nicely/large in the beginning of the session.  I then convert to my 1/3rd money management system I adopted that suits me extremely well and has made me a lot of larger wins over time and i do believe allowed me to keep 2/3rds of what I have won, when I most certainly would have given it back.  So, the majority of times, if I won--I would have re-pocketed my buy-in and hopefully 2/3rds of the initial win money and possibly further win money, depending on what the outcome of the continued play was with the initial 1/3rd or so of the win money.  But I keep breaking it down and not stacking it up, in front of me like almost everyone does.  I play better with a clearer mind when the win is off the table and put away. 

When I do win the 'serious money', I usually continue the play, but 99% of the time with the 1/3rd MM System to govern myself.  Because I learned the hard way, stack it all up in front of yourself and then when you lose, you persist to, 'get it back' and lose consciousness of the situation, at least I do.  My proof to myself of what I just said was, I know all my repeated buy-ins when I have a losing session, will far outweigh my winning ones, if (IF) I continued to repeatedly buy-in with the pursuit of winning or getting even.  Does not matter if I have a $5,000 or $10,000 or $100,000 bank roll with say 10% buy-in amounts for each session.  Example, $500 buy-in with a $5,000 bank roll.  That would give me 10 solid chances to win something 'good/nice/sizable'.  When a repeated buy-in type of playing, puts it all at risk where I might not recover it, that same session.  One session I can and do lose.  Same with 2 and 3 and 4 sessions.  It is not rare, but infrequently I seldom lose more than 4 or 5 sessions consecutively.  I will and have always made my, 'local bank roll amount' back before it becomes completely depleted with all losing buy-ins straight, without replenishing it.  The key to my system of MM is also, say I lost 4 sessions over a few weeks.  Then on the 5th or even 6th sessions I started to win.  The first amount of the win money has to go back to my bank roll to make it whole.  Then my buy-in comes off the tale and added back to make my bankroll whole or in as profit/win amount.  Then, play of the win with 1/3rd, etc. 

Prior to playing this way I mentioned above, I would easily lose an entire bank roll or lose all continued repeated buy-in's versus winning and getting even.  And the few times I did win, with a repeated buy-in attempt to continue a session, would far outweigh the times  was able to make a come back.  IMO, that has to do with becoming frustrated, aggravated and just plain pissed-off.  Clouded judgement and the inability to play correctly.

As far as the progressions, once I start to win, I will start with 1-3-2-6's or just my side parlay besides my regular flat betting wager amount.  I try to take one win or a win and split it up into 4 or 5 attempts, called my 'side parlay wager'.  Say I won $500.00.  I take that $500 and try 5 times with $100 each bet.  I try to parlay it '1 + 4' times.  $100, then $200--$400--$800--$1,600.  Those are my 2 different types of progressions, but my positive progressions are 90% of the time out of my win money, not trying to catch up or recoup losses.)

Cheers
   

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/02/sports/sports-betting.html

Sample from within the article:

"The sudden premium on sports data is likely to set up an array of conflicts in the betting industry that have been mostly unknown in the United States. Adrian Ford, general manager of Football DataCo, the official handler of data for the English Premier League and others in Britain, said that in dozens of stadiums each weekend, the hooded scouts show up for companies aiming to collect the data and sell it to betting operators without buying rights to the league-approved stream originating in the press box.

It goes to the heart of this issue, the data debate, Mr. Ford said.  Clearly the data from the source, a stadium, it's valuable. Some people believe it's appropriate to cheat".

BetSelection was down for a couple of days, sorry for not giving notice.

We had to update and upgrade some of the website and perform numerous admin changes. 

Board went down before we had realized.

Thanks for understanding!

Glen.

For a short section or period of time, I occasionally will do the wagering on the 'one that won previously', that way--you have a chance to win more outcomes that just following the last win.  You will catch the streaks and the chops, but doubles you will lose and then you can also lose the next one if it fails to alternate, etc.  But for a short period of time, I have done okay with that.  I do not often employ it, only if I was up with a win and started to give it back, but not ready to stop the session coupled with missing everything else I normally attempt, etc.   

Quote from: Sputnik on July 02, 2018, 10:07:07 AM

I don't comprehend everything you write and have difficult to see that you have another opinion.
Assume we have to agree that we disagree.

(It is not agreeing or disagreeing in reality.  It is not textbook, such as learning a language, science or even math.  Sure there are variables of those also, but not the basics and the reality of the fundamentals of those.  Yes, there are fundamentals of baccarat as well.  We are not talking about those.  We are talking about actual play and attempting to win, not manipulate, cheat or those things.  We are talking about what is optimum for each player, which might be the same for you and I, different for the next 3 people.  But, my point is, a research point, a reference point, a path to, explore and find what fuels your positive sessions rather than dwelling on negative and what might work over a test of 10,000,000 shoes, etc.)

For example, Banker has a slightly higher strike ratio then Player but is so insignificantly small that you will never have the ability to take advantage of such difference.

(That is correct, ratio is over 10 million shoes or 80 million hands, or 50 million shoes and 400 million hands, so on and so forth.  It is impossible to sit down and win on any type of regular and consistent basis wagering the banker and the banker only.  Sure a player might win 5 times out of 5 sessions playing a limited amount of hands on banker.  But then it turns and he will give it all back and then sums of his bankroll to continue playing.  That will happen 100% of the time, no matter what anyone says by any test. 

There is no formula or count to wager a small amount of banker wagers and hit them, winning greater than 50% of the times using the same formula on each attempt.  Every one every attempting this has failed.  You will get the theory and math wizards that will come up with a positive win formula based upon statistics that will allow them to manipulate their figures down from a large amount of test shoes into play sessions, those will not follow their numbers in any casino or RNG on-line, etc. 

Their numbers are not necessarily wrong.  But they just cannot apply to the majority of the actual gaming shoes at any casino, the way they say they should or will based upon the testing performed.  The same as a certain auto can do a max of 150 miles per hour.  The theory of how long the auto can travel at that speed, is measured by its gas mileage.  When it was tested and the max speed was calculated and set, it was done with a certain set of conditions with different wind speeds, road conditions, fuel type, driver tendencies, and many other items that come into play.  That does not mean you can take that auto and drive at 150 mph endlessly without anything happening along the way.  The same as many shoes of b the shoe presentments and how each player handles them.  But once again, each test produces a slight edge for the banker.  That is a proven statistic.  So many authors and so many gamblers will always say, when in doubt, wager banker.  That does not mean that 25 players might present itself to one banker each time for 4 times, etc., within section of 29 hands played.) 

 
Just mention fluctuation and variance make it disappear in the short, middle run and only manifest in the long run - when we all are dead.

(Yes, you are correct.  Others will challenge that statement, but you are correct because  virtually all gamblers cannot and will not have an infinite bank roll, the same as a casino has.  That is why a gambler has to hit it and 'refresh and reset' every single time which is one of the toughest and most difficult things to do.)

Upon this Banker side has a huge fee opposite to Player side.
So when we look at the hose edge we get a great advantage playing only Player side.

(If you are talking about the 5% commission, many of the baccarat tables have converted to the newer 'EZ Baccarat' version where there is absolutely no commission at all.  But still continuously wagering banker will not allow the person to actually continually win by any means.)

Trading currency comes with any amount and I am referring to bitcoins.
Not talking about stocks.

(I spent many years in NYC and know numerous Wall Street people.  Not tycoons or firm owners, just traders and investors of all types.  Some of them did fantastic on certain investments is what I was getting at.  The 100 to 1's or the 500 to 1's made up for all the losses they incurred which was plenty.  More losses than wins in most cases, but some of the people were able to take those larger wins, get their profit and continue off the win money to replace all their losses and forge ahead at the reset and refreshed amounts.  The same as I talked about baccarat.  Same thing with Bit coin.  If you bout it at a small amount and e a larger amount, you can take the profit and continue to buy and wait.  However, if you buy it and sell it at say only double and then take all that money and place it back into Bit Coin, say the price drops, then what?  Same with anything in investing. 

Say I bought real estate here in the USA prior to 2008 when it was very easy and possible, no money down (in most cases) prices rising out of control, selling it and getting say $600,000 for a $350,000 purchase.  Then take the $600,000 and buying more property, money to fix up and make even larger profits and selling them all once again, making well over one million dollars profit.  Then you are sitting with all those properties you purchased for say, $200,000 which were once selling for $500,000 and the market drop out virtually overnight.  No one knew it.  Then everything changed and all the banks are virtually broke.  They cannot lend one dollar on real estate under the old rules.  Now it is strictly 25-35% down, qualifying, worst thing, every piece of real estate virtually lost 40-75% of its prior selling value, NOT WORTH VALUE, but the trading value.  BOOM!  Done, finished, the great market crash of 2008 that effected everything here in the USA.  Now you are holding numerous properties with all your profits and all your net worth tied up and you cannot even get near the purchase price of them.  You cannot even sell them for even money. Even at a great loss it will be many months or a year or two to sell to a qualified buyer because  of the lending conditions and down payments required.  And well, the house will also be upside down in taxes because  of what was paid for the house and its assessed value.  It would be the same as losing money at a gambling table and then when you win, you get 40% back on a winning wager that used to pay even money.

Same with baccarat and gambling.)

Cheers

But when trading, it is a payoff of much greater than one to one, when it does hit. Kind of comparative to 40 to 1 or 200 to 1, on the side Wagers in baccarat.

Attempting to master a certain thing could be lucrative in the very short run, but to maintain that short run on a consistent basis is virtually impossible in my own opinion. However a plus or minus of the 10 count, to a high peak/wave of plus or minus a 20 count, depending on what hand of the shoe it is, can be extremely beneficial to the player. However in my opinion limiting yourself to one thing is detrimental as that one thing will only hit the smallest fraction of the shoe and that might not be on the consistent and continuous basis, shoe after shoe, session after session. That is the problem.

Many will undoubtedly disagree, challenge and possibly attempt to belittle those statements as well. But doing just that will limit one's getting, 'into the groove' type of playing, where you can profit on many different things of course when and if they hit. Sitting at your desk or couch playing online, you will never know what I am talking about. However at a brick-and-mortar casino you most certainly will.

Now playing one side continuously is a road to large losses and those with some kind of real bankroll will not adhere to it for more than just a little bit during his sessions. With that said, wagering on one side of the coin you will see lots of losses and at times close catch ups. Those times will be exactly what will psychologically play on the person with his expanding thoughts of why he lost and how he was betting wrong, no matter even if he was betting right.   Those small Profitt holds will only fund your pursuit to continue playing if you're lucky, as nothing will always excel and keep excelling continuously especially if you are counting on not replacing your bank roll from outside sources rather than from the wins on a consistent basis.

Huge bankrolls are seldom risked to make a very small profit, as there are so many other things in the business world that will make a much greater profit with absolutely less risk than baccarat or any gambling to most people.

"United Kingdom regulator investigating 17 online gambling operators

January 8, 2018

Online gambling regulation, Money Laundering, Licensing Issues, United Kingdom

In the United Kingdom, the Gambling Commission has reportedly announced that it has launched a formal investigation into 17 online gambling operators over alleged social responsibility and anti-money laundering concerns and may be forced to revoke the licenses of up to five firms.

According to a report from The Guardian newspaper, the regulator has sent letters to every one of the unidentified operators to express the 'serious nature' of the supposed findings discovered via an initial review, which looked into all licensed firms' controls to combat problem gambling, money laundering and terrorist financing.

"Due to the serious nature of our findings, we have already begun investigations into 17 online operators and are considering whether five of these require a license review," reportedly read a statement from the Gambling Commission.

The Guardian reported that the regulator's preliminary review had allegedly found failings at the 17 operators such as the hiring of money laundering reporting officers that had no formal qualifications and had been 'unable to provide suitable explanations as to what constitutes money laundering'. The Gambling Commission purportedly also declared that some of the firms had demonstrated 'a general lack of understanding of how criminal spend could affect the business' and had not handed over sufficient information regarding suspicious betting activities to law enforcement bodies such as the National Crime Agency.

The newspaper reported that the initial review was launched in October in order to determine how well licensed operators are meeting their current responsibilities and additionally found that some of the 17 operators may have failed to intervene even after some customers showed signs of problem gambling.

In a statement, Sarah Harrison, Chief Executive for the Gambling Commission, declared that it was 'vital that the gambling industry takes its duty to protect consumers and keep crime out of gambling seriously' and that the regulator's current action is 'just one example of how we will be relentless in turning that vision into reality'.

"As the online sector continues to grow and now accounts for a third of the British gambling market, it is right that we maintain a sharp focus on online gambling," read the statement from Harrison, who is set to step down next month. "That is why in addition to our work on compliance among online casino operators, we have also been conducting a wider ranging review of online gambling looking at how the market has evolved and to identify where further action can be taken to make gambling fairer and safer for consumers."

From National News Sites:

"Australia launches investigation into JustBet.cx

March 12, 2018

Reference:  Illegal Cryptocurrency, Australia, Online gambling regulation, Christmas Island, Unlicensed Operation, Sports betting, Licensing concerns.

In Australia, the Bitcoin-friendly online casino at JustBet.cx is reportedly being investigated by the local media watchdog for allegedly breaching the nation's Interactive Gambling Act 2001.

According to a Sunday story from Asia Gaming Brief citing 'local media reports', JustBet.cx features a sportsbetting facility offering pre-match and in-play markets on a wide range of competitions including matches from the Australian Football League and A-League while its web address is purportedly registered with the Christmas Island Domain Administration.

However, the Australian Communications and Media Authority has reportedly launched an investigation after determining that JustBet.cx' Internet protocol (IP) address may in fact be headquartered in the Central American nation of Costa Rica, which would violate the Interactive Gambling Act 2001 and prohibit the domain from offering its services to Australia-based punters.

Asia Gaming Brief reported that the Australian Communications and Media Authority initiated its examination of JustBet.cx after Andrew Wilkie from the Australian House of Representatives had earlier called for the Christmas Island Domain Administration to immediately shutter the site."