Latest News
Majority of gamblers hit with affordability checks have handed over info, but wider betting population unwilling
- Most bettors asked to undergo financial checks agree
- Higher spending players more willing than lower spenders
- Most who’ve not yet faced affordability checks say they will refuse
The majority of bettors who have been asked for proof they can afford to gamble have provided it, but there are big questions over how things will play out if checks become mandatory or more common, the results of a new study by sports betting community OLBG show.
A survey of bettors carried out online by YouGov for OLBG found that the majority of those who had been asked by gambling operators to provide documents such as payslips, bank statements or other documents had complied with the request.
The survey, which polled 1,007 bettors, found that 21.8% of bettors had already been asked for documents by at least one bookmaker. Of these, 74.3% had provided them, but 17.9% had refused and started playing with a different licensed operator instead. Of the remainder, 4.1% refused and moved to an unlicensed operator, while 3.7% stopped betting entirely.
The willingness to provide documentation was less widespread among those who had not yet been asked to do so, however.
Of the 78.2% of punters who had not yet faced affordability checks, 37.3% said they would refuse and simply stop betting, 35.0% said they would move to a different licensed operator and 4.1% said they’d go to an unlicensed company. Only 23.5% indicated they would be willing to provide the documents.
“Most bettors who have been asked to provide documents have done so. More importantly, very few of those who were asked stopped gambling or went to the black market, the latter being the worst unintended consequence of measures aimed at making gambling more responsible,” said Richard Moffat, CEO at OLBG.
“However, there is a stark difference between those who have been asked and those who haven’t in terms of willingness.”
As the below table shows, overall 65% of bettors reported not being willing to comply with affordability checks. Those betting lower monthly amounts were the least open to handing over financial documents, with more than three in four (75.4%) of those betting less than £5 a month and 72% of those betting £6-15 a month unwilling to undergo affordability checks.
“Few people who are spending at this level are likely to think it is proportionate for a bookie to ask for proof they can afford it and it’s quite surprising how many lower spending players report already having been asked. From the rumours about what level mandatory checks might come in, it seems unlikely checks will be forced on players at levels under £100 per month,” said Moffat.
Players spending less than £100 per month
| Have you been asked by a gambling company to provide payslips, bank statements or similar documents as part of an affordability or proof of funds check? | All bettors | Less than £5 | £6-15 | £16-25 | £26-50 | £51-100 |
| Unweighted base | 1,007 | 235 | 224 | 147 | 154 | 93 |
| Yes, I have and I provided the required documents | 16.16% | 6.00% | 10.08% | 20.86% | 16.55% | 14.27% |
| No, I have not but I would provide the documents if asked | 18.45% | 18.20% | 18.06% | 23.14% | 20.31% | 21.62% |
| Yes, I have, but I didn’t provide the documents and bet with a different licensed company instead | 3.92% | 0.40% | 1.77% | 4.22% | 4.53% | 6.57% |
| Yes, I have but I didn’t provide the documents and bet with a different unlicensed company instead | 0.90% | 0.00% | 0.47% | 0.71% | 1.29% | 1.08% |
| Yes, I have but I didn’t provide the documents and stopped betting | 0.79% | 0.00% | 0.43% | 0.70% | 1.94% | 1.10% |
| No, I have not and if asked I wouldn’t provide the documents and would bet with a different licensed company instead | 27.40% | 20.40% | 31.52% | 24.80% | 35.25% | 38.36% |
| No, I have not and if asked I wouldn’t provide the documents and would bet with an unlicensed company instead | 3.20% | 1.30% | 3.57% | 4.17% | 3.27% | 1.11% |
| No, I have not and if asked I wouldn’t bet | 29.18% | 53.60% | 34.10% | 21.40% | 16.86% | 15.88% |
| Total willing to provide documents | 34.61% | 24.20% | 28.14% | 44.00% | 36.86% | 35.89% |
| Total unwilling to provide documents | 65.39% | 75.70% | 71.86% | 56.00% | 63.14% | 64.10% |
Players spending more than £100 per month
| Have you been asked by a gambling company to provide payslips, bank statements or similar documents as part of an affordability or proof of funds check? | All bettors | £101-200 | £201-300 | £301-500 | £501-1000 |
| Unweighted Base | 1,007 | 57 | 16 | 16 | 20 |
| Yes, I have and I provided the required documents | 16.16% | 30.04% | 31.87% | 50.63% | 40.65% |
| No, I have not but I would provide the documents if asked | 18.45% | 19.41% | 12.94% | 0.00% | 4.79% |
| Yes, I have, but I didn’t provide the documents and bet with a different licensed company instead | 3.92% | 12.40% | 6.73% | 0.00% | 15.35% |
| Yes, I have but I didn’t provide the documents and bet with a different unlicensed company instead | 0.90% | 1.77% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Yes, I have but I didn’t provide the documents and stopped betting | 0.79% | 1.70% | 0.00% | 6.45% | 0.00% |
| No, I have not and if asked I wouldn’t provide the documents and would bet with a different licensed company instead | 27.40% | 24.19% | 36.36% | 30.49% | 28.90% |
| No, I have not and if asked I wouldn’t provide the documents and would bet with an unlicensed company instead | 3.20% | 5.19% | 12.10% | 6.45% | 5.12% |
| No, I have not and if asked I wouldn’t bet | 29.18% | 5.31% | 0.00% | 5.98% | 5.20% |
| Total willing to provide documents | 34.61% | 49.45% | 44.81% | 50.63% | 45.44% |
| Total unwilling to provide documents | 65.39% | 50.56% | 55.19% | 49.37% | 54.57% |
* Players spending more than £1,000 per month were excluded as numbers were too small to be statistically significant.
However, while willingness to undergo affordability checks does seem to increase among players who spend more on a monthly basis, even among those spending £100-plus per month, less than half were open to affordability checks.
One big difference between players at lower spend levels and those spending more than £100 was the likelihood of players stopping gambling if asked to undergo checks. While 53.6% of those betting less than £5 said they wouldn’t gamble if faced with affordability checks, just 5.31% said the same in the £101-200 per month category.
Higher spending players were more likely to have moved to a different licensed company rather than provide documents, but across all spending amounts a significant proportion of players reported plans to do so if asked to provide documents.
“Many players reported either having already moved to a different licensed operator or being willing to do so over affordability checks. Therefore, there is now a big question mark over what might happen if affordability checks become mandatory and all licensed operators have to impose them at certain levels,” said Moffat.
The survey also found that younger players were more willing to submit to financial checks. About one-third (33.34%) of those aged 18-24 said they had been asked for and provided documents, while 22.86% said they hadn’t been asked but would do so. In the 55-plus age group, the percentage of players reporting the same fell to 6.40% and 15.37%, respectively.
More details on this breakdown can be found in the full survey report, along with various other findings on the UK’s gambling habits.
Powered by WPeMatico
Football
BOYLE Sports signs as Northern Ireland Football League title partner in three-year deal
Sponsorship covers the Premiership, Championship and Women’s Premiership and is NIFL’s first deal valued above £1m, per the league.
BOYLE Sports has signed a three-year agreement to become Title Partner of the Northern Ireland Football League (NIFL), expanding its existing relationship with the competition. The sponsorship spans the BOYLE Sports Premiership, BOYLE Sports Championship and BOYLE Sports Women’s Premiership.
The operator had been the League’s Official Betting Partner since December 2025. Under the expanded deal, BOYLE Sports retains existing rights including title sponsorship of the BOYLE Sports Women’s Cup.
NIFL said the agreement is its first partnership valued at more than £1 million. The league also pointed to what it described as a record-breaking season, citing over 100 million digital views last season alongside its strongest performance for viewership and commercial revenue.
Activation will include branding across clubs’ playing kit, matchday environments, broadcast highlights, scoreboards, player of the match activations and league content across social channels. BOYLE Sports will also launch a responsible gambling awareness initiative across NIFL clubs, using matchday and digital platforms to promote safer betting information and conversations.
Vlad Kaltenieks, CEO of BOYLE Sports, said: “Football in Northern Ireland has real momentum and we’re proud to deepen our partnership with the Northern Ireland Football League at such an important time for the League.
“Becoming Title Partner across the Premiership, Championship and Women’s Premiership reflects our belief in the clubs, supporters and communities that make the game so strong. This partnership gives us the opportunity to support that growth, enhance fan experience and use our platform to positively engage with fans and the wider football community.”
Gerard Lawlor, Chief Executive Officer of the Northern Ireland Football League, added: “We are delighted to extend our relationship with BOYLE Sports through this landmark title partnership. This is a major commercial moment for NIFL and reflects the growing strength and ambition of our competitions. BOYLE Sports has already shown real commitment to football in Northern Ireland, and this agreement will deliver meaningful value across our clubs, competitions and communities.”
The post BOYLE Sports signs as Northern Ireland Football League title partner in three-year deal appeared first on EE Gaming | Global iGaming & Tech Intelligence Hub.
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.
-
DBET7 days agoHockeyAllsvenskan names DBET main partner in three-year deal from 2026/27
-
Baltics7 days agoDigitain Named Best Sportsbook Provider at HIPTHER Baltic & Nordics Gaming Awards 2026
-
Asia7 days agoS8UL’s League of Legends roster qualifies to represent India at Asian Games 2026
-
Blazing Flower7 days agoCT Interactive Strengthens its Presence in Romania with Newly Certified Games
-
Australia5 days agoFormer Star Entertainment Executives Mathias Bekier and Paula Martin Disqualified and Ordered to Pay Penalties
-
CFTC6 days agoNovig Secures CFTC Designation, Bringing the First Prediction Market Built for Sports Fans Nationwide
-
LatAm6 days agoInnovative payment solutions provider teams up with leading LATAM fintech platform to expand digital wallet access for online betting customers in Mexico
-
Alberta6 days agoMediaTroopers lines up eight operator partners ahead of Alberta launch



