A gambling operator may know exactly who its customers are without knowing whether they can afford to keep playing. That distinction exposes a weakness in player protection standards, where identity verification is widely enforced, but affordability assessments remain comparatively uncommon.
The introduction of artificial intelligence adds another complication. Technology designed to identify harmful gambling behavior can also be used to develop increasingly targeted promotional offers.
For Quirino Mancini, a member of 1xCare’s Advisory Committee, this raises concerns about how player protection is designed, whose interests it serves, and whether the rules are supported by sufficient evidence.
Speaking to Yogonet, Mancini examines the shortcomings of existing safeguards, the limits of AI-driven monitoring and why independent research and stronger accountability should shape the next generation of gambling regulation.
Player protection standards vary significantly between regulated markets. What do you see as the biggest gaps or inconsistencies between jurisdictions?
The biggest gap is affordability. Almost every regulated market now requires operators to conduct a fully scoped KYC on the players, with much less focus on whether they can afford to keep playing. The International Player Safety Index for Latin America, commissioned by 1xBet and produced by SBC Media, found 84 per cent of operators surveyed ran KYC protocols, but only 19 per cent carried out affordability checks and 16 per cent limited bonus offers.
AI is the newer inconsistency. In this regard, Malta is developing a charter of principles for its licensees. The Italian regulator more generically requires operators to address responsible gambling “also with the use of AI”, and that is close to the whole instruction. Then there is evidence.
Fourteen African countries now have regulated online markets, but in a way that does not appear to be sufficiently supported by research. Some variation is legitimate, because markets may well differ from one another, but regulating without local evidence is harder to defend.
1xCare operates as a non-profit with an external Advisory Committee. How does that structure affect the way you approach research, education and player protection compared with a commercial organisation?
In a commercial organisation, compliance recommends, and the business decides. Here, the committee holds full authority and independent judgment over policy, funding and ethical standards, and that makes a whole lot of difference.
On research, we can fund questions an operator might prefer not to ask, and we publish findings in full, even when they are unwelcome.
On education, EduCare’s modules are aimed at operators, affiliates and the public, not only at our own network. They are still in development, but we are confident that when they are fully implemented, results will follow.
What role can independent research and external specialists play in identifying risks that operators or regulators might otherwise overlook?
A large one, because the overlooked risks are usually the ones nobody was paid to look for. Most gambling research still concentrates on clinical questions in a handful of mature markets. Product design, advertising and debt get far less attention. SBC’s research report cites a Brazilian survey in which 47 per cent of people who bet in 2024 had overdue debt. That is a different problem from the one most frameworks were designed for.
External specialists also bring a different eye and approach to the problem. A clinician or a sports governance expert will notice things that look normal from inside the industry.
As artificial intelligence and new technologies become more involved in player monitoring and risk assessment, what opportunities do they create and what risks concern you most?
The opportunity is real. Monitoring that picks up loss-chasing or a sudden change in staking lets an operator step in earlier, before the damage is done. But the information gathered to protect a player can just as easily be used to profile them and build a customised offer around what they like. That dual use is my main concern, and current rules can be used in a literally binary way.
I also worry about false positives. If you intervene with the wrong player at the wrong moment, the next intervention becomes harder to accept. That is why the human oversight required by the EU AI Act is absolutely essential to prevent possible misuse of an AI-powered tool. Someone has to review what the model flags and take responsibility for the ensuing decision. Regulators also need to be clearer about where the boundaries lie.
What should a strong player protection framework look like from the moment a player registers?
I would start with the basics done properly. That means age and identity verified, a check against any self-exclusion register, and an invitation to set deposit limits at sign-up, while the player is thinking clearly. Bonus terms should be readable and easily digestible by someone who is not a lawyer, and I say that as a lawyer.
There is a balance to strike.
Make registration too heavy, and some players go elsewhere, and the Index found unlicensed sites already drawing players away in Latin America. So, I would keep the front door reasonably light and put more of the work into what follows. Learn and constantly monitor each player’s normal pattern, so that changes show early, and make affordability checks more stringent as the risk rises. Keep a full record thereof, so a regulator can see what was actually done.
Looking ahead, what changes do you expect to see in regulation and player protection over the next few years?
I expect AI rules to tighten, with human oversight and relevant ultimate say moving towards a specific and standard license requirement in all regulated jurisdictions. Affordability controls should also be prioritised regulations-wise. Independent research input, coupled with more market data being openly shared between operators and regulators, will be the key factor going forward to deliver more balanced and sustainable rules all across the board for a better gaming ecosystem.