Big Debut: A Look at New Slots for 2024

Matt Bourie2023-12-13T16:01:50-05:00

Video Poker Player Goals

Matt Bourie2023-12-13T16:11:03-05:00

The NHL’s decision to suspend Ottawa Senators forward Shane Pinto for 41 games over’ activities related to sports wagering’ is, in a word, ironic.

Did Pinto break the rules? According to the NHL, the Ottawa Senators, and Shane himself – yes. This is apparent as the team released an official statement^[1] on the matter, including an apology from Pinto which addressed his family, fans, teammates, organization, the city of Ottawa, and the NHL.

The statement also went on to say that “While saddened to learn of this issue, the entire organization remains committed to Shane and will work together to do what is necessary to help provide the support to allow him to address his issues and become a strong contributor to our community.”

Part of the suspension agreement between Pinto, the NHL, and the NHLPA does not permit an appeal process – as the league now considers this matter to be closed.

The irony of this suspension stems from the role that sports gambling has played since May 15th, 2018 – the day the Supreme Court officially struck down the federal law that had previously prohibited state-authorized sports gambling (with only a handful of exceptions such as Las Vegas).

Americans have spent $220 billion^[2] on sports betting at various legal gambling outlets within the five-year span following the ruling.

Gambling operators haven’t been the only fortunate benefactors of sports gambling as several professional sports leagues, including the NHL, have been raking in millions in additional revenue thanks to sponsorship deals and other betting-related partnerships.

To take the irony of it all a step further, the Sens were the first team to ever don a gambling-related helmet sticker back in 2021 with Bet99. To this day, Ottawa players still hit the ice each game bearing the ‘Betway’ logo – the team’s current home game helmet sponsor.

Does the Punishment Match the Crime?

Rules are rules, and NHL players can’t gamble on NHL games according to the current CBA – whether it’s on their own game or otherwise. That said, there’s no evidence or anything from the available information surrounding Pinto’s case to suggest that’s what actually happened.

At the end of the day, will a sports gambling suspension of this severity tick off any partners and negatively affect current and future business deals? It’s definitely possible.

The secrecy around the nature of the offence is somewhat fishy, as well as the league not looping in the Senators on the investigation in any capacity until it was essentially a done deal. At least, to our knowledge.

If Pinto didn’t bet on any NHL games in particular, is he really in the wrong? If he is, should the suspension be this harsh when he has no effect on the outcome of other sports whatsoever?

Given the recent onslaught of sports gambling segments and commercials during NHL broadcasts, shouldn’t the NHL be celebrating the idea of a potential bonus ambassador in Pinto? After all, the pro athlete ad ban doesn’t go into effect until February.

Conversely, there’s the chance Pinto did something worse than what is being described. That could explain why he was so willing to apologize without appeal, and why the NHLPA didn’t fight back harder on the 41-game length.

Regardless of what the situation is, the ambiguity allows for speculation and it would have made a lot more sense for the NHL to offer a clearer explanation as to what has occurred.

Have Other NHL Players Ever Been Penalized for Sports Gambling?

Pinto is actually the first NHL player suspended for a gambling-related offence since 1948.^[3] At that time, then-NHL President Clarence Campbell banned two players for life – Billy Taylor and Don Gallinger.

Campbell had apparently obtained conclusive evidence that Taylor had placed a bet on his own team earlier that year. He had actually lost the bet, and doubled down by subsequently losing his career.

Gallinger was also banned for the same offence, as he and Taylor had a mutual connection in known Detroit-area criminal James Tamer – who had apparently facilitated the betting.

These bans were actually lifted in 1970, but it was too little too late as Gallinger and Taylor were now 45 and 51 years old respectively. All it resulted in was Taylor becoming a scout for a time with the Pittsburgh Penguins.

With two players essentially losing their careers due to sports gambling in 1948, Pinto’s suspension seems soft. Especially since both the league and the team are framing it as an honest mistake, whereas Campbell made the 1948 infractions seem a lot more malicious.

And they are. Betting on your own NHL games is definitely a lot less ethical than betting on another sport. Keep in mind that this was also 1948, so the stigma around gambling was naturally a lot worse in general.

On the other hand, Taylor and Gallinger got pretty unlucky by not being the very first NHL players to get caught. Two years earlier (in 1946), Babe Pratt was the first player in NHL history to be suspended for gambling.

The main difference between the incidents was the difference in NHL rules surrounding players who were caught betting. Before Pratt, there wasn’t anything in the official league rulebook that clearly outlined what to do in the event of a player caught gambling.

Pratt was reinstated less than two weeks after being disciplined, which may have been helped by his forthright apology taking full responsibility for his actions. Following his career, Babe was even inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame.

It’s naturally hard to compare these incidents given the different time periods, league rules, and other relevant nuances. That said, the common themes are ambiguity and inconsistency.

With lucrative betting partnerships not going away any time soon, and the controversy surrounding them, the NHL will certainly be under a microscope if this happens to another player.

Especially given that a player who will be returning from a gambling-related suspension will be wearing a helmet with a sponsorship logo from a popular sports betting operator in Betway.

All’s to say, it would be in the NHL’s best interest to re-establish what is meant by the current rules. If not now, another incident could certainly force their hand.

Sources

The case has been ongoing for a while, and a settlement was finally reached on 24 November 2023. We will go into detail about how this decision was reached and which UK gambling laws the company had alleged to have broken.

Entain PLC Company Background

Entain PLC is a sports betting and gambling company which owns many well-known international brands, such as Ladbrokes and Coral.¹ Previously known as GVC Holdings, the company is headquartered in the Isle of Mann and rebranded to its current name in 2020.

This alleged bribery case would not be the first time the company faced legal issues. In 2019, the UK Gambling Commission imposed a fine of £5.9 million on Ladbrokes Coral (now part of Entain) for failure to protect vulnerable customers.²

It was ruled that Ladbrokes and Coral had failed to implement effective safeguards to protect customers at risk of problem gambling and failed to protect against money laundering. One customer in particular displayed clear signs of problem gambling, spending £1.5M in just under three years, but was never checked on.²

Overview of the Bribery Case

Our dedicated team has been following the Entain case since the beginning. The investigation was first disclosed in 2019 and involved the sale of the company’s former Turkish business, Sportingbet. They sold it in 2017 just before their £4billion takeover of Ladbrokes.³

Former CEO Kenny Alexander oversaw the sale to an IT service provider, which he had ties to. It was always claimed that these connections were fully disclosed and that the sale followed a fair and transparent process, but there were concerns and scepticism.³

This is when HMRC stepped in to investigate.⁴ It was argued that the alleged offences fell under section 7 of the Bribery Act under UK gambling law, “a company has failed to prevent an individual from bribing another person or entity on their behalf”.⁵

Here’s a timeline of the key events involving this case:

Analysis of the HMRC’s Decision

When reaching this decision and the figure of £585 Million, it’s likely that the HMRC took into account the severity of the offence. Also considered would be the level of cooperation from the company during the investigation. Entain has stated on multiple occasions that they cooperated fully and assisted HMRC.

It’s not the first time gambling companies like Entain have given out generous payouts, although, in more legitimate circumstances to their customers. If you are looking for a high payout whilst playing at a casino, you can check out our page on the best payout online casinos for more information.

In comparison to similar cases, other companies involved in bribery-related investigations have also faced substantial fines and reputational damage. We can look at instances like Rolls-Royce, when the company faced a penalty of £671 Million for bribery-related offences and subsequently implemented stringent compliance measures.⁶

Entain PLC’s Response and Future Actions

The current chairman of Entain PLC was keen to highlight that this was a ‘historical issue’ and stated that the company is far from what it was when this took place.⁴ Entain are clearly keen to move on from this and improve their public image.

Impact on the Industry and Regulatory Landscape

Despite the chairman wanting to distance the company from this case, it is likely to still have an impact. Firstly, reputation damage – stocks have plummeted. Shares sank 0.6 per cent, or 5.4p, to 859p.⁷ News of legal settlements like this and breaches of gambling laws in the UK, can often impact consumer trust, potentially leading to a loss of customers.

It’s possible that this could also prompt stricter regulatory oversight within the gambling industry. Regulators may intensify their focus on gambling compliance and ethical practices, imposing tighter rules and monitoring mechanisms to prevent similar incidents in the future.

Conclusion: Securing Your Gameplay

To sum up, the HMRC’s investigation and subsequent settlement with Entain over the bribery-related offences, mark a significant juncture in corporate compliance and regulatory enforcement. The £585 million settlement reflects the gravity of the situation and underscores the importance of stringent anti-bribery measures within companies, particularly in the gambling industry.

FAQs

If you still have some lingering questions about this case, then you’ve come to the right place. In this FAQ section, we delve into some commonly asked questions.

References

The Evolution of Tennis Court Surfaces

Tennis is steeped in history, with its surfaces evolving together with the natural evolution of the game. Made of different materials, the tennis court surface area has changed over time. This significantly impacts the game’s dynamics. The origins of tennis trace back to grass courts, renowned for their association with the prestigious Wimbledon Championships.

As grass courts provide a game with low ball bounce and a relatively moderate speed, accentuating fast reactions, they are a very skill-demanding surface to play on. Tennis dynamics changed as a result of clay courts, most notably the red clay at Roland Garros.

The slower tempo and increased ball bounce were introduced by this particular surface. However, the red clay tennis court surface, made of crushed brick, generated an uneven, gritty texture that inspired lengthier rallies. With that came a more defensive style of play, which the crowd loved.

Later on, hard courts featuring asphalt or concrete brought about versatility. They offered a medium-paced game and many winner shots. Needless to say, the crowd loved that as well as this gameplay lends itself to a wide range of playing styles.

Tennis Court Surface Comparison

After the trip down memory lane, it’s time to present each surface type individually. Above all, understanding their unique characteristics, advantages, and disadvantages will be essential to understanding the game and tournaments as a spectator.

First off, it should be noted that a standard tennis court, regardless of its material, has a surface area of 2,106 square meters (or 23,697 square feet). The tennis court surface types are divided into four primary categories:

Recognising the subtleties of each surface material is pivotal for making an informed tennis court surface comparison. It’s a known fact that tall players like John Isner and Daniil Medvedev like the speed of the harder courts.

Speaking of legendary athletes, it’s worth deviating a bit in the direction of sports betting. The best tennis betting sites in the UK make an effort to feature betting lines from hard, clay, and grass tournaments all-year long.

So, let’s start off by discussing the advantages and disadvantages of hard courts, clay courts, grass courts, and synthetic grass courts, unveiling how they influence the game:

Hard Courts

Hard courts, consisting of asphalt or concrete covered with an acrylic surface, are prevalent worldwide.

They provide medium-paced play with a consistent bounce. Events like the US Open are synonymous with hard courts.

Advantages

Hard courts, typically constructed from asphalt or concrete with an acrylic surface, offer a consistent and versatile playing experience. Their medium-paced surface accommodates various playing styles and adapts well to different weather conditions. Additionally, hard courts are known for their durability, making them a long-lasting investment.

Maintenance

Hard courts demand relatively low maintenance compared to other surfaces. Cleaning the court regularly to remove dirt and debris usually does the trick. Occasional re-coating of the acrylic surface is also needed, but not that urgent unless there’s visible damage. This maintenance is not only cost-effective but also straightforward.

Disadvantages

The faster balls on hard courts proves challenging for players’ reflexes. It is not for everyone – to put it simply. Players with quicker reactions who take the ball early usually thrive on this surface, but of course, that’s not everyone. Additionally, the high-impact surface may lead to more physical strain over time.

Clay Courts

Clay courts are made from finely crushed brick, shale, or red clay. This kind of surface grants a slower pace of play, a higher bounce, and extended rallies.

That requires players to possess exceptional endurance and sliding skills to stay in the rally. One of the most renowned clay court tournaments is the French Open.

Advantages

Firstly, the slower pace of play on clay allows players more time to react and strategise. If you are anything like the genius of our time, Rafa Nadal, you are going to like that. What’s more, this is an excellent surface for developing shot-making skills. The high bounce allows players to improve their defensive abilities.

Maintenance

Maintaining clay courts requires regular attention and cost investment. The material of which the court is made sticks to everything and dissipates over time. For that, it needs to be replenished. Groundskeepers play a crucial role, performing daily grooming, line marking, and moisture control to keep the surface in top condition.

Disadvantages

The sliding required to navigate clay courts can be demanding on the body and may lead to injuries if – again – your name is not Rafael Nadal or Carlos Alcaraz. Additionally, maintaining clay courts can be moderately expensive and labour-intensive.

Grass Courts

Grass courts are another natural surface, but it is the polar opposite of clay in that it makes for fast-paced play with a low bounce. Grass requires a special set of skills, including quick reflexes.

In fact, Wimbledon, the oldest tennis tournament in the world, is played on grass courts.

Advantages

A grass tennis court surface provides a traditional experience with a slower pace and lower bounce. This material inherently favours serve-and-volley play, encouraging players to approach the net and engage in agile, finesse-based tactics.

Maintenance

Maintaining grass courts can be a costly and labour-intensive endeavour. Regular mowing and watering are essential to keep the grass in good condition. As you can guess, this necessitates special equipment and personnel, so this is one minus of grass courts.

Disadvantages

Grass courts have some drawbacks. They require high maintenance due to the delicacy of grass. These courts need to be mowed, watered, and pest controlled. Additionally, the playing season on grass can be limited due to weather constraints, particularly during rainy periods.

Synthetic Grass Courts

Synthetic grass courts are a different beast. They are referred to as “artificial grass” or “Astroturf courts” and are designed to mimic the look and feel of natural grass.

Combining the look of grass and easy maintenance, the synthetic grass tennis court surface offers a medium-paced game at an affordable cost.

Advantages

Synthetic grass courts provide a consistent and relatively low-maintenance playing surface. They offer a medium-paced game with a consistent bounce that is easy on all playing styles.

Maintenance

Maintaining synthetic grass courts typically involves regular cleaning and covering the surface to keep it clean from dirt and algae buildup. Occasional brushing or rolling may be necessary to maintain the desired playing characteristics. In general, synthetic grass courts generally require less maintenance than natural grass.

Disadvantages

While the synthetic grass tennis court surface material has its advantages, it also has some drawbacks. For instance, the surface can be somewhat abrasive and may cause damage to players’ shoes and clothing. Also, it may not provide the same level of authenticity and tradition.

Main Factors Influencing the Surface Selection

When deciding on the ideal tennis court surface, various factors must be considered. Each of the discussed tennis court surface types has its upper hand and following. Starting off with climate would be fitting because climate dictates the hardness of the balls and some courts.

For instance, clay courts may not be suitable for areas with frequent rain, while synthetic grass courts can be versatile in various weather conditions. Maintenance is another critical consideration, as we explained earlier. Given those factors and the role they play, we investigated further:

What should be noted is the importance of choosing the right tennis court surface. It’s worth remembering this decision involves considering factors such as climate, budget, impact, maintenance, and intended usage. Different tennis court surface types provide distinct advantages, and selection should align with the players’ goals.

Famous Matches and Players on Different Surfaces

Ultimately, it should be noted that the influence of these different tennis court surface types on the legacies of tennis legends is undeniable. Each surface has noticeable characteristics that serve specific playing styles.

Take Wimbledon’s grass courts, for instance. The tournament has seen not one and two serve-and-volley players.

Pete Sampras and Roger Federer are two of the most notable names. Roger Federer, in particular, is celebrated not only for ambassadorship but also for orchestrating one of the greatest tennis comebacks in history.

Meanwhile, the clay courts of the French Open have showcased the extraordinary dominance of Rafael Nadal. One of his rare defeats was against Robin Söderling in 2009.

On hard courts, versatile players like Serena Williams and Novak Djokovic have displayed their adaptability and stunning retours.

One of the most recent reminders of that is the match Novak Djokovic v Daniil Medvedev in 2023. The Serbian was too much for the Russian giant, always beating him to the punch.

FAQ

As we conclude this article dedicated to the different tennis court surface types, we’d like to address some of the most frequently asked questions we’ve seen on the topic. Below, we’ve provided concise and clear answers to these inquiries, so be sure to look.

One important thing to note is that there is no official ‘gambling tax’ in Canada; however some winnings are taxed as income. Read below to learn pertinent information you need to know about each type of gambling profit, and whether or not it is taxable as income.

How Gambling Profits are Defined and Taxed

The CRA’s ‘Income Tax Folio S3-F9-C1’ states that ‘An individual’s gambling activities may result in taxable business income, or a business loss.’ The laws surrounding this are very case-specific as the commerciality of gambling can be tough to accurately determine.

Technically, someone’s gambling activities can be taxable – if they are determined to be a legitimate source of income. Seeing as very few people gamble for a living, or gamble as an act of business, cases in which gambling winnings are taxed as income are often exceptional.

An example of this stems from the case of Luprypa v. The Queen (1997) when a pool player was found to be challenging inebriated players to cash games whilst he was completely sober. As a result, his winnings were held to be taxable.

The CRA further cites that ‘The issue of whether a taxpayer’s activities are such that he or she can be considered to be carrying on a gambling business is a question of fact that can be determined only by an examination of all of the circumstances and the taxpayer’s entire course of conduct’.

Suggested CRA criteria for making a determination is as follows:

• ‘The degree of organization that is present in the pursuit of this activity by the taxpayer.’
• ‘The existence of special knowledge or inside information that enables the taxpayer to reduce the element of chance.’
• ‘The taxpayer’s intention to gamble for pleasure as compared with any intention to gamble for profit as a means of gaining a livelihood.’
• ‘The extent of the taxpayer’s gambling activities, including the number and frequency of bets.’

The taxability of gambling profits is then broken down into various sub-sections including ‘Lottery schemes’, ‘Pool system betting’, and ‘Other schemes’. The ‘Other schemes’ section is further subdivided into ‘Employer-promoted contests’, ‘Internet, television, and radio programs’, and ‘Annuities as prizes.’

Read on for a brief summary of each gambling profit type, and whether or not it’s taxable in Canada.

Lottery Schemes

In the words of the CRA, ‘A lottery has been defined as a scheme for distributing prizes by lot or chance among persons who have purchased a ticket or a right to the chance.’ Essentially, a taxpayer can receive a prize of a certain amount or value, but it cannot be taxed as income or as a capital gain.

They also go on to cite that ‘If real skill or merit plays a part in determining the distribution of the prize, the scheme is not a lottery.’

Basically, a prize may be taxable if it’s determined to be business, property, employment income, or a prize stemming from an achievement. The lottery ticket retailers themselves must also include the amount or equivalent value of any winning ticket or prize commissions.

Pool System Betting

The CRA defines pool system betting as “…a pool on any combination of two or more professional athletic contests or events.” Simply put, pool system betting is when gamblers pool money and compete only against one another as opposed to against a sportsbook or ‘house’.

This type of betting is seen most often in horse racing betting, and all of the pooled money is divided amongst the players in the pool based on how they place.

In terms of its taxability, the degree of skill involved in making decisions at sports betting sites differentiates it from lottery schemes. Thus, it saves pool system betting from being subject to tax as it is not completely a matter of chance.

Other Schemes

The taxability of prizes that are not won through lottery schemes or pool system betting varies depending on the nuances at play. The CRA measures the tax implications of each prize based on considering the following factors:

• ‘When the prize has been received as a gift, it is not included in computing income at the time of receipt.’ It doesn’t matter whether skill and/or chance played a part in winning this prize.
• ‘The prize will be received as income where it is received by virtue of the recipient’s employment.’
• ‘Where the prize is not received as income and is not a gift…no amount will be included in income upon receipt of the prize’ as alluded to in the previous two bullet points.
• An example given following these factors cites ‘Such a situation would arise where the contestant has incurred a cost towards winning the prize such as purchasing a ticket or paying an entrance fee entitling the contestant to participation in the contest. In such a case, while there are no tax consequences resulting from receipt of the prize, any subsequent disposition of that prize may result in a capital gain or loss.’

At its core, all of this essentially means that most lottery schemes are considered ‘gifts’ and don’t require declaration with income reports. This mostly changes when a prize is won through skill, but even then it’s case-by-case and requires other variables such as when a prize is won due to a recipient’s employment.

Employer-Promoted Contests

The CRA defines employer-promoted contests as instances ‘Where an employer accustomed to awarding employees with a bonus establishes a scheme or giveaway contest in which the bonus or some amount in lieu of a bonus is divided among the employees as prizes following a draw.’

This particular scheme isn’t necessarily defined as a lottery. The nature of the prize and how it’s won can be a big deciding factor when determining if it will be treated as employment income and/or a win from a lottery scheme such as won on Canadian online lotteries.

The criteria laid out by the CRA which can characterize an employer-promoted contest as a lottery scheme is as follows:

• ‘Must account for only a small percentage of the participants in a scheme.’
• ‘Must not be given a favoured position in relation to the other participants.’
• ‘Must be subject to the same contribution requirements (if any) towards the scheme as other participants.’

Internet, Television, and Radio Programs

According to the CRA, ‘The value of a prize or other award received by a person for being at or participating in an Internet, radio, or television program is generally not included in income…” Often times, this can happen as the result of a random luck contest.

For example, through a radio draw where a random caller is selected and correctly answers a skill-testing question to achieve a prize. The person is considered to be in a ‘lucky seat’ as per the verbiage used by the CRA, meaning the use of ‘some minor degree of skill or knowledge’ to achieve the prize still doesn’t make it taxable.

This also applies to consolation prizes and any other type of merchandise or gift that someone can receive for simply being in a program. This can change if a prize or other award is won by someone who does so while being a party to some form of employment or business contract.

The CRA states that when ‘a professional actor, an entertainer, or some other person appears on a television show as a celebrity and receives a giveaway prize or wins a prize by skill or chance for appearing or participating in a contest on the show, the prize will be subject to tax as business or employment income.’

But again, this does not apply to most people.

Annuities as Prizes

The CRA states that an annuity ‘…includes an amount payable on a periodic basis whether payable at intervals longer or shorter than a year and whether payable under a contract, will or trust or otherwise.’

This category of gambling profits isn’t as common as the others, and in most cases, you will not have to pay tax on prizes that are annuities within a lottery scheme.

Conclusion

Now, you have the knowledge you need to navigate the waters of taxable gambling winnings in Canada. Many of these scenarios will likely never happen to you, but it’s always smart to remain prepared and to be proactive as opposed to reactive. Best of luck in your Canadian gambling journey!