I did a post last week on Michael Sokolove’s excellent cover story in The New York Times Magazine detailing the rise and fall of the Foxwoods casino in Connecticut. Now comes an interesting Q&A with Sokolove that offers some insight in the story behind the story.

Sokolove offers a great analogy of his personal interest in gambling, which equates with bowling: something to do about once a year. Sokolove is a terrific reporter and his treatment of Foxwoods was even handed but very revealing. But I take issue with his one statement that said most people in casinos are NOT problem gamblers.

The studies vary, but a number of them indicate that casinos do in fact get a large chunk of revenue from problem gamblers. The industry and lawmakers play down this fact or ignore it because who wants to admit they are in a business that thrives from addicts. But it is a hard reality that needs to be confronted as more states expand legalized gambling. (Don’t be fooled when gambling backers say 1 to 3 percent of the population has a gambling problem. That figure is misleading since that is measured against the entire population. The question to ask is this: how many regular casino customers have a gambling problem?)

Here are a couple of links worth reading here and here. Some highlights: Economist Earl Grinols calculated that 52 percent of casino revenues come from active problem and pathological gamblers. University of Minnesota researchers calculated that 2 percent of gamblers account for 63 percent of the money legally wagered in the state.

A thorough 2004 study by the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre asked participants to maintain a diary logging their gambling expenditures. The study estimated that 35 percent of Ontario casino revenues were derived from moderate to severe problem gamblers. Those gamblers accounted for 30 percent of revenue from table games and a whopping 62 percent of revenue from slot machines.

In other words, the business model for casinos depends on problem gamblers.