Gambling, Losses and Self-Esteem

An Interactionist Approach to the Betting Shop

Cormac Mc Namara

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• eBook ISBN: 9781000739862
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Scienze sociali
• Subtopic: Salute mentale e benessere

This book provides new insights into contemporary betting shops, with a particular focus on the manner in which losing bets are dealt with by customers. Drawing on research undertaken in Ireland, it demonstrates that customers tend to shift responsibility for monetary losses onto factors external to themselves as part of a collective process engaged in to restore self-esteem, and considers the role played by announcements made in betting shops in creating an atmosphere of inclusion - and the implications of this for 'problem gambling'. Through an analysis of newspaper representations of the first legally operating betting shops in Ireland, which opened in the 1920s, the author places the contemporary betting shop in historical context and examines trends in gambling across the British Isles with reference to social class and the security or precarity of work. An interactionist study not only of gambling but also of responsibility and the connection between the micro-world and social structures, this volume will appeal to sociologists with interests in symbolic interactionism and strategies of blame.

1 Introduction

Books are of course always about something, but they are usually about more than just one thing, and so it is with this book, about gambling. One tends to hope that a book might implicitly or explicitly speak to subject matter that do not at first appear to be the concern of the book, in other words, that the scope of its subject matter might be suitably broad so as to interest readers who may have no particular interest in the subject of the book per se. One generally hopes that a book will take us beyond the main subject of the book, and many are the books that do so, to find a good example we need not look beyond what became Durkheim’s classic Suicide where we are presented with fascinating insights into the impact of war on a society, and the influence of religion on human behaviour. Books, or articles for that matter, about deviancy often tend to be seen as just that, studies of deviancy, whether it be suicide or drug taking, or gambling, or deviancy of some other kind, but of course it can safely be said that never is that actually the case. We can hear Howard Becker (2015) explain in a recent interview that his classic article on marihuana use (1953) is ‘about education’ because ‘it’s about somebody learning something, and somebody teaching somebody something’ – a fact, he explains, that is often lost on people when he asks them ‘Do you think my marihuana paper is an article about education?’ Similarly, with particular reference to Henry Lesieur’s The Chase – an ethnographic study of compulsive gamblers – Robert Prus (2004) has shown ‘how the study of gambling can contribute substantially to the study of human group life more generally’ and advised ‘that the careful, detailed study of gambling as activity can contribute notably to the broader social science venture’. With these thoughts in mind, it is my hope that the ideas that I present in this book will interest not only researchers of gambling but also those with a general interest in interpersonal behaviour and the sense-making processes of everyday life.

The dominant theme of this study is responsibility-shifting and, though only called out by name in Chapter 3, the ideas I present regarding it can be used as points of comparison to similar attribution processes in gambling environments other than betting shops or, alternatively, as points of comparison with attributions of responsibility outside the sphere of gambling altogether, for such processes are not epiphenomena unique to betting shops or other kinds of gambling environments but are evident in all areas of life among all social classes. Many studies, not to mention our everyday personal experiences, are indicative of this fact, for example, one might consider Richard Sennett’s description of how skilled professionals made redundant by IBM ‘focused on finding external forces to blame’ (Sennett, 1998, p. 126) or Abell and Stokoe’s account of how Princess Diana in the context of a Panorama¹ interview attributed blame for the failure of her marriage to ‘sources external to her’ (1999, p. 300). But responsibility-shifting as a social process goes far beyond the offering up of rationales for being made redundant by a company, or for the failure of a royal marriage. And more importantly, it is the great similarity between the ways in which responsibility for very different events is attributed by people in very different circumstances that gives wider relevance to a study such as this one, which focuses on gambling. To find agreement on this point, we need look no further than Charles Tilly, who explained that ‘In firing an unsatisfactory worker, setting up a truth commission, and a thousand other assignments of credit or blame, people are making surprisingly similar judgements. They are making judgements of outcome, agency, competence, and responsibility’ (2008, p. 11). It is perhaps when we consider higher levels of social action² such as found in the domain of politics or economics that we begin to realise the great importance of considering how people attribute responsibility, whether it be for deeds deemed good or bad. As Tilly noted, ‘A great deal of public politics in the United States and elsewhere consists of taking or denying credit, assigning or resisting blame’ (2008, p. 22). Although the truth in this case might be, as Tilly put it, that ‘deals and compromises fill the back streets of politics’ (2008, p. 22), the true causes of events are usually secondary to the attribution of responsibility for the events (Tilly, 2008, p. 13). Despite that, of course, the actions taken by the attributer or attributers in response to an event will be no less real than if the perceived, or merely attributed, cause were perfectly in tune with the actual cause (William I. Thomas & Thomas, 1928), although the course of action taken is almost certainly going to be quite different than if the true cause had been known and accepted as truth. And it is this that makes the consideration of responsibility-shifting so important and worthwhile, whether it takes the form of shifting responsibility from one individual or group to another or from oneself to some other individual or group. Ultimately, responsibility-shifting is a self-protecting strategy for explaining negative events in one’s own life and in the life of one’s group, or as it may be, positive or negative events in the lives of others. For a recent example of responsibility attribution at the higher levels of meaningful social action, one could consider the way in which the global financial ‘crisis’ of 2008 was presented in a German weekly news magazine (for this, see von Scheve, Zink & Ismer, 2014), and, more specifically, to what or whom responsibility for the crisis was attributed. The features of the social process that is responsibility-shifting are applicable to the world of politics and economics, as well as social life which is unavoidably entangled in those other domains anyway.

The betting shops

Before proceeding to outline in a little more detail the main contributions of the book it is necessary to first provide the reader with a concise description of betting shops as they exist in Ireland. Betting in Ireland, as in Britain, can take place via telephone, online, and in person at race courses or betting shops. Betting shops are located in retail areas and make available to customers information about the racing form of horses and dogs that are going to be running at various race courses throughout the day – the racing form includes details such as the finishing position of each horse in past races, what the racing surface was like on those occasions, the name of the jockeys who rode the horses on each of those occasions, if a horse wore blinkers etc., and a short summary of how each horse performed more generally in those races. Horse racing and dog racing and other sports are broadcast live on television screens in the betting shops and customers can place over-the-counter cash bets on those events throughout the day. People can enter betting shops freely from the street and place bets on a variety of sporting events from across the globe. They are open for business seven days a week from 10 a.m. until 6:30 p.m., while some remain open until 9:30 p.m. Business hours are slightly more restricted on Sundays. The busiest period of the day is typically between 1 p.m. and 5 p.m., but this can vary depending on location, and even the time of year. No longer the rough and ready places they once were, most betting shops now provide comfortable seating and free tea and coffee for customers. Banks of television screens display the betting odds for the horse races and dog races soon to take place, and show sports of various kinds, although for the greater part it is horse racing and dog racing that is shown, which are still among betting shop customers the most popular events on which to place bets. The Irish betting shop, like the British betting shop (Cassidy, 2014), is a male space; although small numbers of women do frequent betting shops, the clientele is almost exclusively male. Although in recent years there has been an increase in gambling among the middle classes (Reith, 2007, p. 35), Rebecca Cassidy (2012) has testified that despite all the changes the British betting shop has seen in recent years it remains a ‘working class space’ (p. 268). It can be said that this is also observable of betting shops in Ireland. Noticeable to anyone familiar with betting shops in Britain is the absence in Irish betting shops of what came to be known as fixed odds betting terminals, which remain contentious in Britain, to the extent that British Member of Parliament Tracey Crouch recently resigned from her position as UK sports minister due to what she felt was going to be a delay of six months in implementing a new law that would reduce the maximum possible amount that can be staked on fixed odds betting terminals³ from £100 to £2 (Davies, 2018). The most significant change regarding the regulation of betting shops in Ireland has been in response, and it has been a very slow response, to the emergence and rapid growth of online betting. While the largest betting shop chains provide online betting options as well as over-the-counter betting in their shops, it was not until the Betting (Amendment) Act of 2015 that a level playing field was created for physical betting shops that are located in Ireland and online betting service providers that are operating outside Ireland. This new act (“Betting Act, 2015,” 2015) requires online betting providers operating outside Ireland to apply for a license from the Irish Government and to pay tax on their transactions with customers who are living in Ireland.

A short preview

Over the years, many different aspects of the betting shop and off-track betting more generally have been examined; it can be seen that varying degrees of consideration have been given to gambling in relation to ‘risk’ (Bruce & Johnson, 1994, 1996; Downes, Davies, David & Stone, 1976; Neal, 1998; Saunders, 1983), ‘social class’ (Cassidy, 2010, 2012, 2014; Downes et al., 1976; Newman, 1968, 1972; Saunders, 1983; Zola, 1963), ‘compulsive’ (Dickerson, 1977, 1979) or ‘problem’ (Rosecrance, 1986) gambling, the betting patterns of apparently different types of bettors (Bruce & Johnson, 1992; Saunders, 1981), as well as ‘luck’ (Neal, 1998; Newman, 1972). From some of the literature we are able to catch glimpses of the betting shops of old (Cassidy, 2014; Dickerson, 1977, 1979; Newman, 1968, 1972) as well as learning of suggestions once made as to how they ought to change (Saunders, 1983) and how they have changed (Cassidy, 2010, 2012, 2014; Neal, 1998). But what all of these studies, without exception, have in common is the idea that there is a social component to off-track betting and betting shops, with most of the studies suggesting that sociality is the primary reason people frequent betting shops, or that it is at least the bedrock without which the betting shop would cease to function as we know it.

In this book on the subject of betting shops in Dublin, I engage to varying degrees with several of the areas noted above, such as ‘luck’ and ‘social class’, and I offer fresh insights on these areas, as well as providing new ideas on the historicity of betting shops by considering the first legal betting shops in Ireland. Another area addressed in this study and which has not previously been addressed in the literature on betting shops is the function of the shop announcements that are made frequently and regularly throughout the day in the shops, and their likely impact on the shop atmosphere, and how that may impact on the betting behaviour of customers. Another new contribution made by this study is a detailed treatment of how bettors react to losing bets – a feature of off-track betting that has been touched on by other researchers but never much developed by them and seemingly seen as not very significant, with the exception of Rosecrance (1986). For example, Zola (1963), Newman (1968, 1972), Neal (1998) and Rosecrance (1986) all make reference to the kind of things bettors say after a losing bet, but it is only Rosecrance (1986) who really gives those statements much attention. Newman (1968, 1972) noted that ‘once the race is concluded, … laconic comment’ (1968, p. 28, 1972, p. 134) such as ‘“They must have been preparing him for a killing”, “I fancied his chances” (but backed another), “Wouldn’t touch him at these lousy odds”’ (1968, p. 28, 1972, p. 134) is ‘addressed to the assembly in general … strangely pronounced with equal authority by the majority of losers … ’ (1968, p. 28, 1972, p. 134). Zola (1963) noted that during races the bettors said such things as ‘“See, look what’s happening”, and, “Why is the jockey holding him back?”, (1963, p. 355), but in contrast to the bettors observed by Newman (1968, 1972), Zola (1963) observed that ‘the announcement of the winner always led to the same discussion. All attention focused on the winners’ (p. 355), whereby the losers asked of the winners such things as ‘“How did you figure it?”’ (p. 355) and the winners went on to explain how by saying such things as ‘“Did you see the weight shift? Well … ”’ (Zola, 1963, p. 355). It is interesting that the customers observed by Zola (1963) seemed to focus on success rather than failure, which may be reflective of a different mentality and attitude to success in American society.

More recently, Neal (1998) has written of how discussions about racing take place in the betting shops, ‘about the previous day’s racing, particularly about spectacular failures … or unexpected successes’ (p. 592) and that ‘There was a lot of humour in these discussions with many disparaging references to trainers or jockeys … ’ (p. 592: my emphasis). He also observed that when a race was underway there were some encouraging ‘cries … as if they could influence the run of the race’ (p. 594), but when ‘things were not going so well … they addressed jockeys or horses in m...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Series Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• Acknowledgements
• 1. Introduction
• 2. Research approach
• 3. Responsibility-shifting Part I & part II
• 4. Betting and belonging
• 5. The early days of the Irish betting shop – 1926–1930
• 6. Gambling and work in the 21st century
• 7. Concluding remarks
• Index