F1’s newest team has arrived, the Stake F1 Team. Sponsored by the gambling website Stake, the name instantly courted controversy, many noting that the team would have to change its name in countries with strict policies on gambling advertising.[1] Still, their international social media presence strides forward promoting the brand, utilizing their trademark colours on most of their posts, offering competitions and giveaways, all on an Instagram page with more than double the followers of the Stake page itself. This in-your-face advertising for gambling pushes against a recent trend in the UK, where widespread acknowledgement that gambling in sports is harmful is starting to emerge. Recent examples include Premier League teams being pressured to remove these adverts from the front of shirts by the 2026/27 season and banning betting ads during live sports broadcasts.[2] Yet, like in the 90s with tobacco advertising, F1 seems to be swimming against the current trend.[3] Thus, one of the ten faces of F1 is an online, cryptocurrency-based gambling company. The rest of this article will examine these three elements, cryptocurrency-based gambling, online gambling and gambling itself, to explain why this move is deeply problematic.

Firstly, cryptocurrency-based gambling is a terrible business model, even by the standards set by gambling companies. Whilst most reporting on the issue has characterized this form of gambling as being banned in the UK, the full picture is even more enlightening.[4] Whilst there is no specific law banning use of cryptocurrencies for gambling, any operator attempting to use them needs to prove that they comply with anti-money laundering and safe gambling measures.[5] However, as the value of cryptocurrencies fluctuates so much and are commonly linked to illegal activities ‘there have been no instances of licensed operators making this declaration [that they comply with Gambling Commission regulations] and accepting deposits directly in cryptoassets.’[6] They fundamentally break the rules of fair play, as customers have no guarantee that their winnings have any consistent value, meaning that these customers would essentially be gambling twice, on the gambling product itself and on the earnings from that product. Thus, when trying to access Stake from the UK, you are redirected to their UK website, which does not use cryptocurrency. Yet many people can find out how to use a VPN to bypass this. And whilst Stake’s terms ban the use of VPNs, Stake simultaneously sponsors articles that explain how to use a VPN to bypass security checks.[7] Furthermore, a recent report from The Observer found how easy it was to bypass these safeguards, utilizing a VPN to access their website and a picture of throat sweets as age verification.[8] For 48 hours, the reporters were able to illegally gamble, countering Stake’s claims that their safeguards were robust.[9] Additionally, when advertising for Everton, Stake used their international brand [rather than the UK website] on the front of player’s shirts and gave away free crypto giveaways to Everton fans.[10] This does not come across as a company genuinely concerned with following UK rules and regulations, providing primary evidence that Stake needs to be pushed out of sports advertising.

Secondly, whilst not illegal in the UK, I personally have a problem with the way online gambling creates a space that fuels addiction. Whilst the majority of people who gamble, both in-person and online, do so safely, there is evidence that online gambling increases problem-gambling. NHS statistics indicate that whilst 5.8% of those who had gambled in the past 12 months engaged in at-risk or problem gambling, this figure increases to 18.2% when solely focusing on online gambling.[11] This makes sense, as online gambling is far easier to access than traditional forms. If one were addicted to casino-based gambling, one would have to choose to get up, get changed, walk or drive to the casino, walk in the building, talk to multiple people, be visibly present gambling at that casino and then return home. In this process, there are a number of safeguards that loved ones can take to help the individual avoid addictive behavior. When traditionally gambling, there has to be a physical space to access, incentives to go to that place and people that have to be interacted with in order to participate in addictive behaviors. Loved ones can take measures to bar the individual from that space, remove incentives they see, find out the locations of casinos in the local area and provide support to prevent relapses. On the contrary, with online gambling, all one needs to do is access the internet and gamble their money away. It is far harder to regulate this space, due to the instantaneousness of the process, the wide variety of gambling options available and the speed in which a relapse can happen. Someone could wake up, open their phone, see an advertisement, click on it, play a few games and lose thousands of pounds, all before brushing their teeth. Whilst the government does not want to ban online gambling, partially due to fears that this would encourage a black market, I would concur that online gambling removes the geographic aspect that allows for potentially dangerous behaviors to be regulated.[12] I would further concur that if their was a widespread product that allowed for people to instantly access alcohol directly from their phone, with no physical limitations, there would be instant calls for this to be banned to protect those with alcohol addiction.[13] Whilst a slightly absurd hypothetical, this is essentially the space that online gambling allows gambling addicts to access. Because of this, I would personally be in favor of heavily regulating, if not banning, online gambling and believe that one of the first steps that needs to be taken is kicking online gambling advertisers out of sports.

Finally, gambling advertising in of itself is problematic. I arrived at this position through empathy with those who are impacted when they see this advertising, those with a history of addiction. Research varies on the extent to which problem gambling is prevalent in the UK, figures varying from 0.3%, to 0.7%, to 2.7%.[14] A minimum of 300,000 people in the UK are problem gamblers, with a further 1.8 million at risk.[15] For those who have struggled with gambling addiction, seeing advertising can be incredibly harmful and triggering to them.[16] I believe that people with a history of gambling problems should have a right to watch and enjoy sports without risk of triggers and relaspes. Whilst the gambling industry claims to take problem gambling seriously, 43.5% of money spent on gambling in the UK is at from at-risk or problem gambling, so I doubt the sincerity of these claims.[17] There is no easy solution to this problem, as when gambling exists, there will naturally be some advertising for it. But this in-your-face advertising across popular sports, on the shirts of football players, or all over an F1 car, has to be stopped. If not, those with a history of gambling addiction are being denied the right to watch their favorite sports, or risk relapsing.

So, for these reasons, one should not be surprised to know that I’ll be rooting against the Stake F1 Team. It is never my wish to be overtly negative, but when I see a car that is advertising so many pernicious ideas pull off the road and retire, I’ll feel relieved that I won’t have to see it for the rest of the race. Besides, their livery looks like if Ben 10 drove a Formula One car. Bold, at the very least, but I’m not a fan.

---

[1] Stake F1 Team’s Gambling Links Could Be Problematic, Saajan Jogia, Sports Illustrated (3 January 2024) https://www.si.com/fannation/racing/f1briefings/news/stake-f1-teams-gambling-links-could-be-problematic-sj4

[2] Premier League clubs agree to withdraw gambling sponsorships on front of shirts, Sky Sports (13 April 2023) https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12856367/premier-league-clubs-agree-to-withdraw-gambling-sponsorships-on-front-of-shirts; Children Unable to See Betting Ads During Live Sport, Betting and Gaming Council (11 September 2020) https://bettingandgamingcouncil.com/news/w2w-football

[3] Blair intervened over F1 tobacco ban exemption, documents show, Rachel Stevenson, The Guardian (12 October 2008) https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/oct/12/tonyblair-labour

[4] How UK gambling safeguards fail to defend online punters, Rob Davies & Matei Rosca, The Observer (1 October 2022) https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/oct/01/uk-gambling-safeguards-no-match-for-online-bookie-stake-com; What’s at Stake? A crypto casino’s shady marketing tactics revealed, Matei Rosca, Reporter.London https://reporter.london/?p=490

[5] Policy Paper: High stakes: gambling reform for the digital age, Department for Culture, Media and Sport, Gov.UK (27 April 2023) https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-stakes-gambling-reform-for-the-digital-age/high-stakes-gambling-reform-for-the-digital-age

[6] High stakes: gambling reform for the digital age https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-stakes-gambling-reform-for-the-digital-age/high-stakes-gambling-reform-for-the-digital-age

[7] What’s at Stake? A crypto casino’s shady marketing tactics revealed https://reporter.london/?p=490

[8] How UK gambling safeguards fail to defend online punters https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/oct/01/uk-gambling-safeguards-no-match-for-online-bookie-stake-com

[9] How UK gambling safeguards fail to defend online punters https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/oct/01/uk-gambling-safeguards-no-match-for-online-bookie-stake-com

[10] What’s at Stake? A crypto casino’s shady marketing tactics revealed https://reporter.london/?p=490

[11] Health Survey for England, 2021 Part 2: Gambling behaviour, NHS England (16 May 2023) https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/health-survey-for-england/2021-part-2/gambling#:~:text=According%20to%20their%20Problem%20Gambling,and%201.1%25%20of%20women

[12] High stakes: gambling reform for the digital age https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-stakes-gambling-reform-for-the-digital-age/high-stakes-gambling-reform-for-the-digital-age

[13] More than merely ordering drinks from delivery services, which at least requires some human interaction through the deliveries, if alcohol was instantly available, this technology would likely face instant bans.

[14] Experts warn of £12.6bn scale of UK gambling problem, Paul McInnes, The Guardian (27 April 2017) https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/apr/27/12-billion-pounds-scale-uk-gambling-problem-experts-warn; UK gambling addiction much worse than thought, says survey, Rob Davies, The Guardian (19 May 2020) https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/may/19/uk-gambling-addiction-yougov-research; Health Survey for England, 2021 Part 2: Gambling behaviour https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/health-survey-for-england/2021-part-2/gambling#:~:text=According%20to%20their%20Problem%20Gambling,and%201.1%25%20of%20women

[15] High stakes: gambling reform for the digital age https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-stakes-gambling-reform-for-the-digital-age/high-stakes-gambling-reform-for-the-digital-age

[16] High stakes: gambling reform for the digital age https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-stakes-gambling-reform-for-the-digital-age/high-stakes-gambling-reform-for-the-digital-age

[17] High stakes: gambling reform for the digital age https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-stakes-gambling-reform-for-the-digital-age/high-stakes-gambling-reform-for-the-digital-age