Latest News
GambleAware: New gambling prevalence methodology review published
GambleAware has today published commissioned research, authored by Professor Patrick Sturgis and Professor Jouni Kuha of the London School of Economics, which investigates how methodological differences between surveys affect the accuracy of estimates of gambling harms. The research was commissioned following a 2019 YouGov study which found substantially higher rates of gambling harms across Great Britain than had previously been reported by the 2016 and 2018 Health Surveys for England.
The research was commissioned to identify the best way to determine gambling participation and prevalence of gambling harms in Great Britain and to develop a better understanding of how methodological factors might account for the differences between the results of the YouGov study and the Health Survey for England’s results. The surveys reviewed in the report produced widely varying estimates of ‘problem gambling’[1] in Great Britain, indicated by a PGSI score[2] of 8+, ranging from 0.7% to 2.4% of adults.
The research reviewed eight different surveys into gambling participation and prevalence of gambling harms to identify differences in results and what causes them. The key finding is that surveys using predominantly, or exclusively online self-completion responses produce consistently higher estimates of gambling harm compared to surveys which use paper self-completion techniques as part of a face-to-face interview.
The primary cause of this discrepancy was found to be selection bias in online surveys. Selection bias in this instance refers to the fact that online surveys skew towards people who are comfortable using online technologies and who use the internet regularly. These people are also more likely to be online and frequent gamblers, meaning online surveys tend to over-estimate gambling harm.
Given these findings, the researchers shared the following recommendations for future prevalence surveys:
- Given the high and rising cost of in person surveys, measurement of gambling prevalence and harm should move to online surveying.
- The move to online interviewing should be combined with a programme of methodological testing and development to mitigate selection bias.
- In person surveying should not be ceased completely; probability sampling and face-to-face interviewing should be used to provide periodic benchmarks.
GambleAware commissioned this study to better understand the true demand for treatment and support for gambling harms across Great Britain and will use the findings of this study to inform and direct the future Annual Great Britain Treatment and Support surveys. Data from the surveys will continue to be used to update GambleAware’s interactive maps, which show in visual format the prevalence of gambling participation and harms at local authority and ward level across Great Britain.
Professor Patrick Sturgis, Department of Methodology at the London School of Economics, said: “Our research has found that online surveys tend to systematically overestimate the prevalence of gambling harm compared to face-to-face interview surveys. However, given the very high and rising cost of in person surveying, and the limits this places on sample size and the frequency of surveys, we recommend a shift to predominantly online data collection in future, supplemented by periodic in person benchmarks.”
Alison Clare, Research, Information and Knowledge Director at GambleAware, said: “We want our prevention, treatment, and support commissioning to be informed by the best available evidence, and having survey data we can be confident in, within the constraints of data collection in an increasingly online world, is key. GambleAware’s annual GB Treatment & Support survey is an important tool in building a picture of the stated demand for gambling harms support and treatment, and of the services, capacity and capability needed across Great Britain to meet that demand.
Powered by WPeMatico
Latest News
Texas Hold’em vs Omaha for Players Comparing Poker Formats
Poker formats share a surface: private cards, community cards, betting rounds, and a final five-card hand. The difference between variants, however, is not cosmetic. Texas Hold’em gives players 2 private cards, so the first decision is narrow and readable. Omaha gives 4, then forces exactly 2 of them into the final hand. That single rule changes the way every board is read.
Adding variety to your poker playing routine can be great fun, but it’s crucial to understand the formats before you do – or you may find yourself struggling at the table!
The Format Is the First Practical Filter

Once the basic rules are familiar, format choice becomes easier to understand when the games are seen side by side. A player comparing Hold’em with Omaha is not only comparing two sets of rules. They are comparing the amount of private information available before the flop, how many possible hand combinations need to be tracked, and how quickly each decision starts to feel comfortable.
That is where an Australian online poker setting gives the comparison more practical shape. A page focused on online poker Australia places Texas Hold’em, Omaha, Omaha Hi-Lo, and Zone Poker in the same playing context, which makes the differences clearer without treating poker as one generic format.
Hold’em starts with 2 hole cards and 5 community cards, giving players a cleaner starting point. Omaha starts with 4 hole cards but still requires exactly 2 private cards and 3 community cards for the final hand. Omaha Hi-Lo keeps that same construction while asking players to think about high and qualifying low hands. Zone Poker changes the rhythm by moving a folded player to a new table and a fresh deal. Seen together, these formats show that poker choice is not only about hand rankings. It is about the kind of attention each version asks from the player.
A recent Ignition Australia post makes the same point in cultural terms, noting that poker in Australia has changed over the years while the heart of the game has stayed intact. The format conversation is not only technical. The same game can move from a physical room to a phone screen, from Hold’em to Omaha, or from a standard table to a faster online format, while still centering on timing, reading, and the next card.
https://www.instagram.com/p/DVM_bPlErLf/
Hold’em Gives Cleaner Reading
Texas Hold’em is often easier to explain because the relationship between private cards and the board is direct. A pair in the hand, a suited ace, or two connected cards creates a clear starting point. After the flop, the player can ask a simple question: did the community cards improve the hand, threaten it, or create a draw worth following?
That clarity does not make Hold’em shallow. It makes the decision tree easier to see. Position, bet size, board texture, and opponent behavior still matter, but the player is not juggling as many private-card combinations. This is why Hold’em has become the main reference point for casual poker viewers and newer online players. The game gives them enough structure to follow the action, while leaving room for deeper judgment as experience grows.
Omaha Creates More Temptation
Omaha can look generous at first because 4 private cards seem to create more routes to a strong hand. That impression is where many Hold’em habits become unreliable. More starting combinations also mean opponents can connect with the board in stronger ways. A hand that feels powerful in Hold’em may be ordinary in Omaha if the board is coordinated.
The exact 2-card rule is the point beginners must absorb early. If the board shows 4 hearts and a player holds only 1 heart, that player does not have a flush. If the board shows pairs, a full house still depends on the required combination of private and community cards. Omaha asks players to slow down the first instinct and rebuild the hand under the format’s rule.
Omaha Hi-Lo adds another reading layer. A player may be looking for a strong high hand while also watching whether a qualifying low hand is available. The board can divide attention, and the clearest decision may depend on whether the hand has a path to one side of the pot or both.
Pace Changes the Same Cards
Zone Poker shows that format choice can also be about rhythm. In a standard table format, folded hands create waiting time. That delay lets players watch other hands finish, notice tendencies, and settle into the table’s pace, but it can feel slow and under-engaging. In a fast-fold format, folding moves the player quickly into a new hand, which makes the session feel sharper and less observational. The cards stay familiar, but the table observation window changes.
Poker formats are easiest to understand when the reader stops treating them as labels and starts treating them as different ways of processing incomplete information. Two private cards, four private cards, a split-pot rule, or a faster table rhythm can all change how a hand feels before the river arrives. The social layer also remains part of online play, as described in 2025 open-access work on multiplayer online games and social connection.
The post Texas Hold’em vs Omaha for Players Comparing Poker Formats appeared first on Americas iGaming & Sports Betting News.
exclusive-content
Lottomart launches S Gaming slot Dragon’s Rage as permanent UK exclusive
Lottomart has launched Dragon’s Rage, a new S Gaming slot available as a permanent exclusive to Lottomart players in the UK.
The release follows the partnership’s previous exclusive title, Fisherman’s Fortune, and adds another game to Lottomart’s exclusive-content portfolio.
Set in a dragon’s treasure lair, Dragon’s Rage uses a 1,024-ways-to-win format. Features include the Coil Collect mechanic, choice-led Free Spins, and Rage Spins. The game also includes three fixed-level jackpots: Inferno, Flame and Ember.
Chris Ruddock, Commercial Director at Lottomart, commented: “We’re delighted to launch Dragon’s Rage as a permanent UK exclusive. Developed in close collaboration with S Gaming, the game combines a strong fantasy theme with engaging features designed with our players in mind. We’re looking forward to seeing how our customers respond to the launch.”
Charles Mott, CEO of S Gaming, added: “Dragon’s Rage is the latest title developed through our close collaboration with Lottomart. It has been a pleasure working together on the concept and development of the game, and we’re proud to bring this new fantasy adventure exclusively to Lottomart players in the UK.”
The post Lottomart launches S Gaming slot Dragon’s Rage as permanent UK exclusive appeared first on EE Gaming | Global iGaming & Tech Intelligence Hub.
DATA.BET
DATA.BET reports 39.7% GGR growth in year one of sports betting vertical
Supplier cites 147.6% active user growth and increased bet activity across football and basketball in the first 12 months.
DATA.BET has published first-year performance results for its sports betting vertical, marking 12 months since the product’s official launch. The supplier said results from newly acquired clients show 39.7% GGR growth and 147.6% growth in active users over the period.
The company also reported turnover up 30.7% quarter-on-quarter. It said betting activity increased, with the number of bets and stake volume up 83.5%, while combo bets rose 160.5%.
By sport, DATA.BET said football led engagement, with bet counts up 107.5% and active users up 173.1%. Table Tennis saw a 172.5% increase in its player base, while tennis posted bet counts up 33.6% and active players up 35%. The supplier pointed to basketball as the strongest commercial contributor, with turnover up 83.7% and its user base up 96.8%.
DATA.BET attributed performance to product features including Bet Builder (football, basketball, baseball, and American football), streaming within the betting interface, and widgets for match and player data. The company also highlighted official data partnerships with Infront (tennis), Odds Composer (basketball), Genius Sports, and BETER.
At tournament level, DATA.BET said the England Premier League was the most profitable tournament over the full year, with event count up 45.7% and “close to half of total betting volume” generated through the 1X2 market. The supplier added that top-tier tournaments outperformed low-tier disciplines across turnover (102.7%), profit (187.2%), and bet count (196.6%).
“Taken together, the first year demonstrated that scale and stability are not opposing forces — broad coverage, official data, and engagement-focused features directly contributed to growth across turnover, player numbers, and betting activity”, said Yevhenii Ilchenko, Head of Sports at DATA.BET. “We built the vertical on the right foundations from the first, and the numbers reflect that. “
The post DATA.BET reports 39.7% GGR growth in year one of sports betting vertical appeared first on EE Gaming | Global iGaming & Tech Intelligence Hub.
-
Gmonitor.ai7 days agoGmonitor llega a Latinoamérica: la plataforma de inteligencia de mercado para operadores debuta en seis mercados regulados
-
Latest News7 days agoSportradar Report | World Cup 2026: Opportunities for the Latin American Sports Betting Market
-
Baltics6 days agoDigitain Named Best Sportsbook Provider at HIPTHER Baltic & Nordics Gaming Awards 2026
-
DBET6 days agoHockeyAllsvenskan names DBET main partner in three-year deal from 2026/27
-
Blazing Flower6 days agoCT Interactive Strengthens its Presence in Romania with Newly Certified Games
-
Asia6 days agoS8UL’s League of Legends roster qualifies to represent India at Asian Games 2026
-
Australia4 days agoFormer Star Entertainment Executives Mathias Bekier and Paula Martin Disqualified and Ordered to Pay Penalties
-
CFTC5 days agoNovig Secures CFTC Designation, Bringing the First Prediction Market Built for Sports Fans Nationwide



