Misplaced Pages

Independent Betting Adjudication Service

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

Controversy is a state of prolonged public dispute or debate, usually concerning a matter of conflicting opinion or point of view. The word was coined from the Latin controversia , as a composite of controversus – "turned in an opposite direction".

#643356

20-702: The Independent Betting Adjudication Service (IBAS) , founded in 1998, is a third party organisation that settles disputes between gambling establishments registered with IBAS and their customers in the United Kingdom. The organisation, which was originally part of the Sporting Life's Green Seal service, was formerly known as the Independent Betting Arbitration Service . The Service dropped Arbitration from its name in 2007, opting instead to use Adjudication to better reflect its role after

40-462: A case study on one of their past rulings. These case studies provide gamblers with examples of previous disputes to help prevent future problems between gamblers and operators. The studies focus on aspects of gambling that are often confusing or misinterpreted. Case studies are available for several betting options offered to UK gamblers. One football study published stated that all football bets are based on 90 minutes, unless otherwise specified by

60-411: A ' bounded rationality ' – in other words, that most judgments are made using fast acting heuristics that work well in every day situations, but are not amenable to decision-making about complex subjects such as climate change. Anchoring has been particularly identified as relevant in climate change controversies as individuals are found to be more positively inclined to believe in climate change if

80-676: A controversy is a purely civil proceeding. For example, the Case or Controversy Clause of Article Three of the United States Constitution ( Section 2 , Clause 1) states that "the judicial Power shall extend ... to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party". This clause has been deemed to impose a requirement that United States federal courts are not permitted to cases that do not pose an actual controversy—that is, an actual dispute between adverse parties which

100-429: A credibility heuristic. Similar effects on reasoning are also seen in non-scientific controversies, for example in the gun control debate in the United States . As with other controversies, it has been suggested that exposure to empirical facts would be sufficient to resolve the debate once and for all. In computer simulations of cultural communities, beliefs were found to polarize within isolated sub-groups, based on

120-489: A result of a lack of confidence on the part of the disputants – as implied by Benford's law of controversy , which only talks about lack of information ("passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available"). For example, in analyses of the political controversy over anthropogenic climate change , which is exceptionally virulent in the United States , it has been proposed that those who are opposed to

140-456: A statistically optimized system for decision making. Experiments and computational models in multisensory integration have shown that sensory input from different senses is integrated in a statistically optimal way, in addition, it appears that the kind of inferences used to infer single sources for multiple sensory inputs uses a Bayesian inference about the causal origin of the sensory stimuli. As such, it appears neurobiologically plausible that

160-597: Is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available. In other words, it claims that the less factual information is available on a topic, the more controversy can arise around that topic – and the more facts are available, the less controversy can arise. Thus, for example, controversies in physics would be limited to subject areas where experiments cannot be carried out yet, whereas controversies would be inherent to politics, where communities must frequently decide on courses of action based on insufficient information. Controversies are frequently thought to be

180-483: Is capable of being resolved by the [court]. In addition to setting out the scope of the jurisdiction of the federal judiciary, it also prohibits courts from issuing advisory opinions , or from hearing cases that are either unripe , meaning that the controversy has not arisen yet, or moot , meaning that the controversy has already been Benford's law of controversy , as expressed by the astrophysicist and science fiction author Gregory Benford in 1980, states: Passion

200-419: The global warming controversy context – in spite of identical evidence presented, the pre-existing beliefs (or evidence presented first) has an overwhelming effect on the beliefs formed. In addition, the preferences of the agent (the particular rewards that they value) also cause the beliefs formed to change – this explains the biased assimilation (also known as confirmation bias ) shown above. This model allows

220-509: The abolishment of the UK's gambling tax. Again, IBAS saw another increase in cases to panel, this time as a result of the 2005 Gambling Act. In 2007, nearly 1700 disputes were handled by the IBAS panel, 372 of which were of the internet variety. IBAS claims to have awarded customers over £365,000 from dispute resolutions in 2007. There are also instances when IBAS rules in favour of the establishment, rather than

SECTION 10

#1732855547644

240-481: The brain implements decision-making procedures that are close to optimal for Bayesian inference. Brocas and Carrillo propose a model to make decisions based on noisy sensory inputs, beliefs about the state of the world are modified by Bayesian updating, and then decisions are made based on beliefs passing a threshold. They show that this model, when optimized for single-step decision making, produces belief anchoring and polarization of opinions – exactly as described in

260-408: The customer. IBAS will become involved in a dispute only after the gambling establishment and the customer(s) have made attempts to resolve the issue amongst themselves. If a deadlock remains, the dispute will be reviewed by IBAS if the following conditions are met: If the dispute merits involvement, IBAS will accept written statements describing the conflict from both parties involved. IBAS verifies

280-442: The enactment of the 2005 Gambling Act . IBAS deals with several sectors in the realm of gambling. The sectors include: Since its inception, IBAS has been handling the majority of gambling disputes in the UK. In 2000, the first year that IBAS was fully operational, approximately 800 disputes went to panel, a number which remained relatively constant the following year in 2001. In 2002, the number of cases to panel rose to 1126 due to

300-471: The establishment has upheld their own rules and regulations for gambling. If no rule that covers the dispute exists, IBAS will set forth its own rule based on what would be acceptable by industry standards. Both parties are bound by IBAS's ruling. One objective of the UK Gambling Commission is to ensure that all gamblers are treated fairly in accordance with the rules and regulations established for

320-557: The gambling industry. This includes disputes between customers and gambling operators. By law, any sector in the realm of gambling under the jurisdiction of the Gambling Commission must use an independent, third party to resolve disputes. Because IBAS is recognised as the third party adjudicator for nearly all bookmakers in the UK, the Gambling Commission works closely with IBAS to reduce the number of disputes between customers and gambling operators. From time to time, IBAS publishes

340-405: The mistaken belief of the community's unhindered access to ground truth. Such confidence in the group to find the ground truth is explicable through the success of wisdom of the crowd based inferences. However, if there is no access to the ground truth, as there was not in this model, the method will fail. Bayesian decision theory allows these failures of rationality to be described as part of

360-477: The outside temperature is higher, if they have been primed to think about heat, and if they are primed with higher temperatures when thinking about the future temperature increases from climate change. In other controversies – such as that around the HPV vaccine , the same evidence seemed to license inference to radically different conclusions. Kahan et al. explained this by the cognitive biases of biased assimilation and

380-487: The scientific consensus do so because they don't have enough information about the topic. A study of 1540 US adults found instead that levels of scientific literacy correlated with the strength of opinion on climate change , but not on which side of the debate that they stood. The puzzling phenomenon of two individuals being able to reach different conclusions after being exposed to the same facts has been frequently explained (particularly by Daniel Kahneman) by reference to

400-438: The use of the words outright, win trophy or another suitable phrase that leaves no doubt as to the preferred settlement criteria. Bettors need to specify which option they desire prior to placing the intended wager, otherwise, the bet is assumed to be based on 90 minutes of play. Disputes In the theory of law , a controversy differs from a legal case ; while legal cases include all suits, criminal as well as civil ,

#643356