Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
with serious breaches of the Rules of Racing
Following an investigation into suspicious betting activity on a number of races, the British Horseracing Authority has charged nine individuals with serious breaches of the Rules of Racing. The allegations focus on horses being laid to lose on betting exchanges in races that took place between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011.
Former licensed jockey Andrew Heffernan (who is currently licensed to ride in Australia) and eight unlicensed individuals (Rocky Michael Chopra, James Coppinger, Paul Garner, Kelly Inglis, Yogesh Joshee, Douglas Shelley, Pravin Shingadia and Mark Wilson) have all been charged with a breach of Rule (A)41.2 of the Rules of Racing in that they conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by:
In the case of Heffernan, communicating directly or indirectly to one or more Betting Exchange account holders information relating to the prospects in the race of that horse
In the case of the unlicensed individuals by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to to place bets on the horse Andrew Heffernan rode in the race using information they had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse.
Andrew Heffernan is also charged with breaches of:
Rule (A)36.1 in that he communicated directly or indirectly to one or more account holders on betting exchanges, for material reward, gift, favour or benefit in kind, information relating to the prospects of his rides, which was or included Inside Information knowing, such information was Inside Information
Rule (A)33.4 in that he offered to receive or receive a bribe
Rule (B)59.2 in that he intentionally failed to ensure that a horse ridden by him was run on its merits (Wanchai Whisper, Gallantry, and/or Silver Guest).
Of the unlicensed individuals, Rocky Michael Chopra, Paul Garner, Yogesh Joshee, Douglas Shelley and Mark Wilson have also been charged with breaches of Rule (A)33.1.2 in that they offered bribes to Andrew Heffernan.
Kelly Inglis is also charged with a breach of Rule (A)33.4 in that she connived with Andrew Heffernan to offer to receive a bribe or bribes from Rocky Michael Chopra, Paul Garner, Yogesh Joshee, Douglas Shelley and Mark Wilson.
Paul Garner is also charged with a breach of Rule (C)64.2.1 in that he placed lay bets on horses trained by Alan McCabe at a time when he was entered on the Register of Stable Employees at Alan McCabe’s yard.
THE CHARGES
In relation to the running of:
1. WANCHAI WHISPER on 28th January 2011 at 15.25 at Lingfield, and/or
2. GALLANTRY on 2nd February 2011 at 19.20 at Kempton and/or
3. SILVER GUEST on 9th February 2011 at 13.55 at Lingfield.
AND in the period between about 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011.
AND in respect of the Races identified in the Table in Notes for Editors.
Andrew Heffernan
Did ANDREW HEFFERNAN on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by communicating directly or indirectly to one or more Betting Exchange account holders information relating to the prospects in the race of that horse which was or included information (i) obtained in his capacity as a licensed person and (ii) which was not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’) specifically that he would take steps or omit to ride the horse so as to prevent the horse from achieving its best possible placing, knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case and knowing that such information would or might be used to gain an unfair advantage in the betting market?
2. Did ANDREW HEFFERNAN on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST and/or between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 and/or in relation to the horses named in the appended table act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit corrupt or fraudulent practice by communicating directly or indirectly to one or more Betting Exchange account holders information relating to the prospects in the race of that horse which was or included information (i) obtained in his capacity as a licensed person and (ii) which was not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case and knowing that such information would or might be used to gain an unfair advantage in the betting market?
3. In relation to WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, SILVER GUEST, and/or the horses named in the appended Table and/or other races unidentified in the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011, did ANDREW HEFFERNAN on, and/or before, the date of the race act in breach of Rule (A)36.1 in that he communicated directly or indirectly to one or more account holders on betting exchanges, for material reward, gift, favour or benefit in kind, information relating to the prospects of his rides, which was or included Inside Information knowing, such information was Inside Information?
4. In the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 did ANDREW HEFFERNAN offer to receive or received a bribe or bribes from ROCKY MICHAEL CHOPRA, MARK WILSON, PAUL GARNER, DOUGLAS SHELLEY, YOGESH JOSHEE, and/or persons unknown in breach of Rule (A)33.4
5. In relation to WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST, did ANDREW HEFFERNAN act in breach of Rule (B)59.2 by intentionally failing to ensure that the horse was run on its merits?
Rocky Michael Chopra
1. Did ROCKY MICHAEL CHOPRA on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST and/or in the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 and/or in relation to the horses named in the appended table act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to to place bets on the horse ANDREW HEFFERNAN rode in the race using information he had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
2. In the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 did ROCKY MICHAEL CHOPRA offer a bribe to ANDREW HEFFERNAN in breach of Rule (A)33.1.2.
James Coppinger
1. Did JAMES COPPINGER on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST and/or in the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 and/or in relation to the horses named in the appended table act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets on the horse ANDREW HEFFERNAN rode in the race using information he had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
Paul Garner
1. Did PAUL GARNER on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST and/or in the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 and/or in relation to the horses named in the appended Table act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets on the horse ANDREW HEFFERNAN rode in the race using information he had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
2. In the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011, did PAUL GARNER offer a bribe to ANDREW HEFFERNAN in breach of Rule (A)33.1.2
3. In the period 9th January 2011 to 18th February 2011, at a time when he was entered on the Register of Stable Employees at Alan McCabe’s yard did PAUL GARNER act in breach of Rule (C)64.2.1 in that he placed a lay bet on horses that Alan McCabe trained namely:
(i) CITY LEGEND in its race on 10th January 2011 at 14.05 at Wolverhampton and/or
(ii) ELUSIVE WARRIOR in its race on 17th February 2011 at 14.20 at Southwell.
Kelly Inglis
1. Did KELLY INGLIS on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST and/or in the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 and/or in relation to the horses named in the appended table act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that she conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets on the horse ANDREW HEFFERNAN rode in the race using information she had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
2. In the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011, did KELLY INGLIS connive with ANDREW HEFFERNAN to offer to receive or receive a bribe or bribes from ROCKY MICHAEL CHOPRA, MARK WILSON, PAUL GARNER, DOUGLAS SHELLEY, YOGESH JOSHEE, and/or persons unknown in breach of Rule (A)33.4
Yogesh Joshee
1. Did YOGESH JOSHEE on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST and/or in the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 and/or in relation to the horses named in the appended table act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets the horse ANDREW HEFFERNAN rode in the race using information he had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
2. In the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011, did YOGESH JOSHEE offer a bribe to ANDREW HEFFERNAN in breach of Rule (A)33.1.2
Douglas Shelley
1. Did DOUGLAS SHELLEY on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST and/or in the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 and/or in relation to the horses named in the appended table act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets the horse ANDREW HEFFERNAN rode in the race using information he had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
2. In the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011, did DOUGLAS SHELLEY offer a bribe to ANDREW HEFFERNAN in breach of Rule (A)33.1.2
Pravin Shingadia
1. Did PRAVIN SHINGADIA on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST and/or in the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 and/or in relation to the horses named in the appended table act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets on the horse ANDREW HEFFERNAN rode in the race using information he had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
Mark Wilson
1. Did MARK WILSON on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST and/or in the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 and/or in relation to the horses named in the appended table act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets on the horse ANDREW HEFFERNAN rode in the race using information he had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
2. In the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011, did MARK WILSON offer a bribe to ANDREW HEFFERNAN in breach of Rule (A)33.1.2
Notes to Editors:
1. A comment from Paul Scotney, Director of Integrity Services, Compliance and Licensing, will be issued separately. Please note that it is BHA policy not to comment further on ongoing investigations or pending a Disciplinary Panel hearing.
2. The date of the hearing will be announced in due course.
3. Details of Rules and guideline penalties for the offences in question are as follows:
Rule (A)41.2
A Person who conspires with any other Person for the commission of such a practice shall be taken to have contravened a requirement imposed on him by these Rules.
Entry Point: Disqualify/Exclude 3 years
Range: 6 months - 10 years
Rule (A)36.1
Inside Information is information about the likely participation or likely performance of a horse in a race, which
36.1.1 is known by an Owner, Trainer, Rider, stable employee or any of their service providers as a result of acting as such, and
36.1.2 is not information in the public domain.
A Person must not communicate Inside Information directly or indirectly to any other Person for any material reward, gift, favour or benefit in kind.
Entry Point: Disqualify 3 years
Range: 18 months - 5 years
Rule (A)33
A Person must not give or offer a bribe, or promise a bribe, to a Person who is a Trainer, Rider, agent or other Person having charge of, or access to, a horse must not accept or offer to accept any bribe in any form.
Entry Point: Disqualify 3 years
Range: 3 months - 10 years
Rule (B)59.2
A Rider of a horse shall be taken to have contravened the requirement imposed on him by Rule 58.1 where the Stewards or the Authority consider that the Rider has intentionally failed to ensure that his horse is run on its merits.
a) Deliberately not riding a horse to obtain the best possible placing for personal reward or knowing that it had been layed to lose
Entry Point: Disqualify 8 years
Range: 5 - 25 years
b) Deliberately preventing a horse from winning
Entry Point: 3 years
Range: 1 - 5 years
c) Purposely not riding out a horse that would otherwise have won
Entry Point: 3 years
Range: 1 - 5 years
Rule (C)64.2.1
A Person whose name is or has been entered on the Register of Stable Employee Names must not lay with a Betting Organisation any horse under the care or control of the trainer for whom he is employed to lose a race,
Entry Point: Disqualify 18 months
Range: 3 months - 10 years
4. Table of Races
No.
Date
Course & Time
Race Details
Horse
4.12.10
Southwell 12:20
Toteplacepot Win Without Backing A Winner Maiden Auction Stakes
MUJAPISTE
10.12.10
Southwell 11:20
Toteplacepot Win Without Backing a Winner Selling Stakes
HIGH KICKIN
11.12.10
Southwell 13:10
40 Live Football Markets At Totesport.com Selling Stakes
CROCODILE BAY
28.1.11
Lingfield 15:25
Fred & Ron Gibson Memorial Handicap
WANCHAI WHISPER
2.2.11
Lingfield 16:40
Play Rainbow Riches At Bluesq.com Handicap
JUNGLE BAY
2.2.11
Kempton 19:20
**** Mobile Apps Handicap
GALLANTRY
4.2.11
Wolverhampton 18:30
Stay At The Wolverhampton Holiday Inn Handicap
PETOMIC
9.2.11
Lingfield 13:55
Ashurst Wood Classified Claiming Stakes
SILVER GUEST
8.3.11
Southwell 13:40
Hospitality at Southwell Racecourse Handicap (Div I)
IT’S A MANS WORLD
For more information contact:
Robin Mounsey
British Horseracing Authority
t:02071520048
m:07584171551
e: rmounsey@britishhorseracing.com
Following an investigation into suspicious betting activity on a number of races, the British Horseracing Authority has charged nine individuals with serious breaches of the Rules of Racing. The allegations focus on horses being laid to lose on betting exchanges in races that took place between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011.
Former licensed jockey Andrew Heffernan (who is currently licensed to ride in Australia) and eight unlicensed individuals (Rocky Michael Chopra, James Coppinger, Paul Garner, Kelly Inglis, Yogesh Joshee, Douglas Shelley, Pravin Shingadia and Mark Wilson) have all been charged with a breach of Rule (A)41.2 of the Rules of Racing in that they conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by:
In the case of Heffernan, communicating directly or indirectly to one or more Betting Exchange account holders information relating to the prospects in the race of that horse
In the case of the unlicensed individuals by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to to place bets on the horse Andrew Heffernan rode in the race using information they had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse.
Andrew Heffernan is also charged with breaches of:
Rule (A)36.1 in that he communicated directly or indirectly to one or more account holders on betting exchanges, for material reward, gift, favour or benefit in kind, information relating to the prospects of his rides, which was or included Inside Information knowing, such information was Inside Information
Rule (A)33.4 in that he offered to receive or receive a bribe
Rule (B)59.2 in that he intentionally failed to ensure that a horse ridden by him was run on its merits (Wanchai Whisper, Gallantry, and/or Silver Guest).
Of the unlicensed individuals, Rocky Michael Chopra, Paul Garner, Yogesh Joshee, Douglas Shelley and Mark Wilson have also been charged with breaches of Rule (A)33.1.2 in that they offered bribes to Andrew Heffernan.
Kelly Inglis is also charged with a breach of Rule (A)33.4 in that she connived with Andrew Heffernan to offer to receive a bribe or bribes from Rocky Michael Chopra, Paul Garner, Yogesh Joshee, Douglas Shelley and Mark Wilson.
Paul Garner is also charged with a breach of Rule (C)64.2.1 in that he placed lay bets on horses trained by Alan McCabe at a time when he was entered on the Register of Stable Employees at Alan McCabe’s yard.
THE CHARGES
In relation to the running of:
1. WANCHAI WHISPER on 28th January 2011 at 15.25 at Lingfield, and/or
2. GALLANTRY on 2nd February 2011 at 19.20 at Kempton and/or
3. SILVER GUEST on 9th February 2011 at 13.55 at Lingfield.
AND in the period between about 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011.
AND in respect of the Races identified in the Table in Notes for Editors.
Andrew Heffernan
Did ANDREW HEFFERNAN on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by communicating directly or indirectly to one or more Betting Exchange account holders information relating to the prospects in the race of that horse which was or included information (i) obtained in his capacity as a licensed person and (ii) which was not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’) specifically that he would take steps or omit to ride the horse so as to prevent the horse from achieving its best possible placing, knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case and knowing that such information would or might be used to gain an unfair advantage in the betting market?
2. Did ANDREW HEFFERNAN on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST and/or between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 and/or in relation to the horses named in the appended table act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit corrupt or fraudulent practice by communicating directly or indirectly to one or more Betting Exchange account holders information relating to the prospects in the race of that horse which was or included information (i) obtained in his capacity as a licensed person and (ii) which was not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case and knowing that such information would or might be used to gain an unfair advantage in the betting market?
3. In relation to WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, SILVER GUEST, and/or the horses named in the appended Table and/or other races unidentified in the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011, did ANDREW HEFFERNAN on, and/or before, the date of the race act in breach of Rule (A)36.1 in that he communicated directly or indirectly to one or more account holders on betting exchanges, for material reward, gift, favour or benefit in kind, information relating to the prospects of his rides, which was or included Inside Information knowing, such information was Inside Information?
4. In the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 did ANDREW HEFFERNAN offer to receive or received a bribe or bribes from ROCKY MICHAEL CHOPRA, MARK WILSON, PAUL GARNER, DOUGLAS SHELLEY, YOGESH JOSHEE, and/or persons unknown in breach of Rule (A)33.4
5. In relation to WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST, did ANDREW HEFFERNAN act in breach of Rule (B)59.2 by intentionally failing to ensure that the horse was run on its merits?
Rocky Michael Chopra
1. Did ROCKY MICHAEL CHOPRA on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST and/or in the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 and/or in relation to the horses named in the appended table act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to to place bets on the horse ANDREW HEFFERNAN rode in the race using information he had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
2. In the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 did ROCKY MICHAEL CHOPRA offer a bribe to ANDREW HEFFERNAN in breach of Rule (A)33.1.2.
James Coppinger
1. Did JAMES COPPINGER on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST and/or in the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 and/or in relation to the horses named in the appended table act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets on the horse ANDREW HEFFERNAN rode in the race using information he had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
Paul Garner
1. Did PAUL GARNER on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST and/or in the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 and/or in relation to the horses named in the appended Table act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets on the horse ANDREW HEFFERNAN rode in the race using information he had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
2. In the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011, did PAUL GARNER offer a bribe to ANDREW HEFFERNAN in breach of Rule (A)33.1.2
3. In the period 9th January 2011 to 18th February 2011, at a time when he was entered on the Register of Stable Employees at Alan McCabe’s yard did PAUL GARNER act in breach of Rule (C)64.2.1 in that he placed a lay bet on horses that Alan McCabe trained namely:
(i) CITY LEGEND in its race on 10th January 2011 at 14.05 at Wolverhampton and/or
(ii) ELUSIVE WARRIOR in its race on 17th February 2011 at 14.20 at Southwell.
Kelly Inglis
1. Did KELLY INGLIS on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST and/or in the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 and/or in relation to the horses named in the appended table act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that she conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets on the horse ANDREW HEFFERNAN rode in the race using information she had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
2. In the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011, did KELLY INGLIS connive with ANDREW HEFFERNAN to offer to receive or receive a bribe or bribes from ROCKY MICHAEL CHOPRA, MARK WILSON, PAUL GARNER, DOUGLAS SHELLEY, YOGESH JOSHEE, and/or persons unknown in breach of Rule (A)33.4
Yogesh Joshee
1. Did YOGESH JOSHEE on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST and/or in the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 and/or in relation to the horses named in the appended table act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets the horse ANDREW HEFFERNAN rode in the race using information he had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
2. In the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011, did YOGESH JOSHEE offer a bribe to ANDREW HEFFERNAN in breach of Rule (A)33.1.2
Douglas Shelley
1. Did DOUGLAS SHELLEY on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST and/or in the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 and/or in relation to the horses named in the appended table act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets the horse ANDREW HEFFERNAN rode in the race using information he had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
2. In the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011, did DOUGLAS SHELLEY offer a bribe to ANDREW HEFFERNAN in breach of Rule (A)33.1.2
Pravin Shingadia
1. Did PRAVIN SHINGADIA on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST and/or in the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 and/or in relation to the horses named in the appended table act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets on the horse ANDREW HEFFERNAN rode in the race using information he had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
Mark Wilson
1. Did MARK WILSON on, and/or before, the date of the races of WANCHAI WHISPER, GALLANTRY, and/or SILVER GUEST and/or in the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011 and/or in relation to the horses named in the appended table act in breach of Rule (A)41.2 in that he conspired with other persons to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice by placing bets and/or causing one or more other Betting Exchange account holders to place bets on the horse ANDREW HEFFERNAN rode in the race using information he had received directly or indirectly from the Jockey or other licensed person relating to the prospects in the race of the named horse which was or included information (i) obtained by the Jockey or other licensed person in their capacity as licensed persons which was (ii) not publicly available or authorised for such disclosure by the Rules of Racing (‘Inside Information’), and knowing that (i) and (ii) were the case, and that such information would provide an unfair advantage in the betting market?
2. In the period between 1st November 2010 and 31st March 2011, did MARK WILSON offer a bribe to ANDREW HEFFERNAN in breach of Rule (A)33.1.2
Notes to Editors:
1. A comment from Paul Scotney, Director of Integrity Services, Compliance and Licensing, will be issued separately. Please note that it is BHA policy not to comment further on ongoing investigations or pending a Disciplinary Panel hearing.
2. The date of the hearing will be announced in due course.
3. Details of Rules and guideline penalties for the offences in question are as follows:
Rule (A)41.2
A Person who conspires with any other Person for the commission of such a practice shall be taken to have contravened a requirement imposed on him by these Rules.
Entry Point: Disqualify/Exclude 3 years
Range: 6 months - 10 years
Rule (A)36.1
Inside Information is information about the likely participation or likely performance of a horse in a race, which
36.1.1 is known by an Owner, Trainer, Rider, stable employee or any of their service providers as a result of acting as such, and
36.1.2 is not information in the public domain.
A Person must not communicate Inside Information directly or indirectly to any other Person for any material reward, gift, favour or benefit in kind.
Entry Point: Disqualify 3 years
Range: 18 months - 5 years
Rule (A)33
A Person must not give or offer a bribe, or promise a bribe, to a Person who is a Trainer, Rider, agent or other Person having charge of, or access to, a horse must not accept or offer to accept any bribe in any form.
Entry Point: Disqualify 3 years
Range: 3 months - 10 years
Rule (B)59.2
A Rider of a horse shall be taken to have contravened the requirement imposed on him by Rule 58.1 where the Stewards or the Authority consider that the Rider has intentionally failed to ensure that his horse is run on its merits.
a) Deliberately not riding a horse to obtain the best possible placing for personal reward or knowing that it had been layed to lose
Entry Point: Disqualify 8 years
Range: 5 - 25 years
b) Deliberately preventing a horse from winning
Entry Point: 3 years
Range: 1 - 5 years
c) Purposely not riding out a horse that would otherwise have won
Entry Point: 3 years
Range: 1 - 5 years
Rule (C)64.2.1
A Person whose name is or has been entered on the Register of Stable Employee Names must not lay with a Betting Organisation any horse under the care or control of the trainer for whom he is employed to lose a race,
Entry Point: Disqualify 18 months
Range: 3 months - 10 years
4. Table of Races
No.
Date
Course & Time
Race Details
Horse
4.12.10
Southwell 12:20
Toteplacepot Win Without Backing A Winner Maiden Auction Stakes
MUJAPISTE
10.12.10
Southwell 11:20
Toteplacepot Win Without Backing a Winner Selling Stakes
HIGH KICKIN
11.12.10
Southwell 13:10
40 Live Football Markets At Totesport.com Selling Stakes
CROCODILE BAY
28.1.11
Lingfield 15:25
Fred & Ron Gibson Memorial Handicap
WANCHAI WHISPER
2.2.11
Lingfield 16:40
Play Rainbow Riches At Bluesq.com Handicap
JUNGLE BAY
2.2.11
Kempton 19:20
**** Mobile Apps Handicap
GALLANTRY
4.2.11
Wolverhampton 18:30
Stay At The Wolverhampton Holiday Inn Handicap
PETOMIC
9.2.11
Lingfield 13:55
Ashurst Wood Classified Claiming Stakes
SILVER GUEST
8.3.11
Southwell 13:40
Hospitality at Southwell Racecourse Handicap (Div I)
IT’S A MANS WORLD
For more information contact:
Robin Mounsey
British Horseracing Authority
t:02071520048
m:07584171551
e: rmounsey@britishhorseracing.com
Show More
This passing of this type of information imo is happening many times a day.
Been going on for years and will continue to go on for years. Probably happening more now that it easier to profit from non-triers since the advent of exchanges but easier to catch them now tho with an audit trail rather than in the days of Banks throwing brown envelopes into the back of John Francome's car.
I suppose it's a coincidence that these were AW meets..
pixie, it is impossible through lack of manpower and finance to police horseracing properly
where one or two supposed or alleged crooks might be investigated hundreds of others who may
or may not have been detected are filling their boots.
where one or two supposed or alleged crooks might be investigated hundreds of others who may
or may not have been detected are filling their boots.
wee eck, before exchanges they came to us on-course bookmakers and asked us to take a couple of grand out of a 10/1 chance at lingfield on a january a/w meeting, there were loads of mugs with readies just waiting to back drifters.
barry, I agree with what you say, but the scenario you paint, with the advent
of the exchanges has escalated a hundredfold.
of the exchanges has escalated a hundredfold.
THESE TYPE OF PEOPLE ARE OUT THERE IN THE COMMUNITY ,THEIR DRESSED AS JOCKEYS,PLUMBERS ELECTRICIANS,NEIGBOURS FRIENDS AND DRESSED AS NAPOLEAN ANDTHE SPICEGIRLS AT FANCY DRESS PARTIES ALL TRYING TO GET MONEY FROM YOU BY DECEIPT
YOU CANT TRUST ANYONE WHO YOU DONT KNOW AND THERES VERY FEW WHO YOU CAN TRUST THAT YOU KNOW
YOU CANT TRUST ANYONE WHO YOU DONT KNOW AND THERES VERY FEW WHO YOU CAN TRUST THAT YOU KNOW
ITS A VERY CORRUPT WORLD THAT WE LIVE IN ,AND PEOPLE WALK ABOUT AS THOUGH THEIR LITTLE ANGELS
03 Oct 2012 12:55
British Horseracing Authority comment following betting-related charges being issued
Paul Scotney, Director of Integrity Services, Compliance and Licensing for the British Horseracing Authority (BHA), said:
“The charges BHA has issued today are the result of a long and complicated investigation. This process has taken significant time and resources. However, investigations such as these are very similar to fraud investigations and as such are complex and time consuming. Furthermore, we encountered difficulties in obtaining telephone records from certain individuals who refused to co-operate. This resulted in us having to make a number of applications to the High Court for orders against their mobile telephone service providers for disclosure of the relevant records.
“We hope that today’s announcement demonstrates our commitment to deterring and detecting wrong-doing and taking action against those who we believe to have breached the Rules. However, racegoers and those betting on British Racing should be reassured that instances of this nature are extremely rare and that the overwhelming majority of races are free of suspicion.”
Notes to Editors:
1. It is BHA policy not to comment further on ongoing investigations or pending a Disciplinary Panel hearing.
2. The full notice detailing the charges issued can be found here: http://www.britishhorseracing.presscentre.com/Press-Releases/Former-British-...
For more information contact:
Robin Mounsey
British Horseracing Authority
t:02071520048
m:07584171551
e: rmounsey@britishhorseracing.com
British Horseracing Authority comment following betting-related charges being issued
Paul Scotney, Director of Integrity Services, Compliance and Licensing for the British Horseracing Authority (BHA), said:
“The charges BHA has issued today are the result of a long and complicated investigation. This process has taken significant time and resources. However, investigations such as these are very similar to fraud investigations and as such are complex and time consuming. Furthermore, we encountered difficulties in obtaining telephone records from certain individuals who refused to co-operate. This resulted in us having to make a number of applications to the High Court for orders against their mobile telephone service providers for disclosure of the relevant records.
“We hope that today’s announcement demonstrates our commitment to deterring and detecting wrong-doing and taking action against those who we believe to have breached the Rules. However, racegoers and those betting on British Racing should be reassured that instances of this nature are extremely rare and that the overwhelming majority of races are free of suspicion.”
Notes to Editors:
1. It is BHA policy not to comment further on ongoing investigations or pending a Disciplinary Panel hearing.
2. The full notice detailing the charges issued can be found here: http://www.britishhorseracing.presscentre.com/Press-Releases/Former-British-...
For more information contact:
Robin Mounsey
British Horseracing Authority
t:02071520048
m:07584171551
e: rmounsey@britishhorseracing.com
anybody betting on AW racing deserves to be taken to the cleaners.......its as plain as the nose on yer face......its rotten to the core.....jockeys ......owners....trainers..........they are all the same......the north of england flat isnt far behind......but the AW is out on its own......if ya get caught then put the license in the wifes name......and carry on regardless.......
Andrew heffernan has been stood down by racing New South Wales stewards on Wednesday. Ray murrihy says these are very serious charges
He will have to return to England to face the charge which include not letting horses run on their merits and soliciting and taking bribes
He will have to return to England to face the charge which include not letting horses run on their merits and soliciting and taking bribes
I can't wait to see ATR (and RUK for that matter) getting to the very bottom of all this. My guess is that they have carried out their own fearless investigations into this matter, doorstepping every name involved at the very least, and getting some on-camera quotes from all concerned.
Not for ATR the easy option of having presenters on shows like 'Get In' telling us all that jockeys, trainers and owners are all 'lovely lads'. Perish the thought.
Not for ATR the easy option of having presenters on shows like 'Get In' telling us all that jockeys, trainers and owners are all 'lovely lads'. Perish the thought.
alun, when one of these varmints gets suspended for breaking
the rules the Momsers on ATR and RUK form a guard of honour
to welcome the midgets back when their suspension ends.
the rules the Momsers on ATR and RUK form a guard of honour
to welcome the midgets back when their suspension ends.
AW racing is the equine version of WWF.......most of it is simulation......the pictures should carry a warning.......
Word reaches me that Mick Fitzgerald will head up the crack team of investigators, with the unrelenting support of Zoey Bird and Simon Mapletoft to assist him in cracking down on such wrong-doing.....
until the penalties are stiffer, they will carry on regardless.
My guess is that hard men of ATR, Weasel and Lukewarm will tear up every tree to find and publicise any wrongdoers in racing. No way back for any miscreants when these lads get hold of their prey.
wee eck 04 Oct 12 13:09
pixie, it is impossible through lack of manpower and finance to police horseracing properly
where one or two supposed or alleged crooks might be investigated hundreds of others who may
or may not have been detected are filling their boots.
I couldn't agree with you more. Roger has a point too tho, if they massively increased the penalties and dished out life bans less may be inclined to risk making an easy buck.
pixie, it is impossible through lack of manpower and finance to police horseracing properly
where one or two supposed or alleged crooks might be investigated hundreds of others who may
or may not have been detected are filling their boots.
I couldn't agree with you more. Roger has a point too tho, if they massively increased the penalties and dished out life bans less may be inclined to risk making an easy buck.
The idea that it is all to do with the AW and the exchanges is ridiculous. The difference is that we get to know about the skullduggery these days. Do people really think, that in the old days little went on and the bookmakers would tell us all about it?
No this can't be true, they wouldn't target a struggling low profile jockey like Andrew Heffernan, they would obviously use a then current and 6 times champion, multiple Derby and Group 1 winning jockey Like Kieren Fallon, just as they clearly did with Ballinger Ridge. 
what a fookin mess - you wonder if you can believe what ye fookin watchin sometimes.....
What I will continue to disagree agree with is people blaming the introduction of the exchanges for wrongdoings.
There always has been,and always will be,means of doing wrong,in one form or another.However it doesn't mean you have to do wrong.
Money creates corruption,not the exchanges.
As an example how many of us have said no to adultery,but the opportunity was there,and ,in many cases,no chance of getting caught out.Speed if we know there isn't any radar around.
So opportunities always abound for wrongdoing,with or without exchanges,just that it has become a bit easier to break the law,and that is quite simply what it is.Breaking the law.
I wholeheartedly agree that the penalties are nowhere near severe enough,and the time it takes to bring a case to a hearing is totally farcical.
Blame people,NOT the exchanges.
There always has been,and always will be,means of doing wrong,in one form or another.However it doesn't mean you have to do wrong.
Money creates corruption,not the exchanges.
As an example how many of us have said no to adultery,but the opportunity was there,and ,in many cases,no chance of getting caught out.Speed if we know there isn't any radar around.
So opportunities always abound for wrongdoing,with or without exchanges,just that it has become a bit easier to break the law,and that is quite simply what it is.Breaking the law.
I wholeheartedly agree that the penalties are nowhere near severe enough,and the time it takes to bring a case to a hearing is totally farcical.
Blame people,NOT the exchanges.
The AW is where it is most prevalent.......low grade horses......running regularly.......trained ridden and in many cases owned by lowlife.......
It is a certainty that Weaver and Harvey will have a good chuckle, mention 'cookie jars' and continue to say that any guilty verdict could be the making of Heffernan. In other words treating ATR viewers with the usual contempt and sticking up for 'a good lad who've they've shared a beer with'...
unbiased - surely the existence of exchanges has made it 'a bit easier to break the law' - so in effect are largely responsible for what many suspect is rife corruption since their inception...
I used to say blaming exchanges is liking blaming airlines for terrorism but let's face it, the exchange interface effectively allows THEM to monopolise trading on their horses. If 10,000 people wanted £100 @ 2.0 on heads and 10,000 people wanted to lay heads for £100 @ 2.0 then if someone (who was able to manipulate the coin) offered heads for a million at 2.1 betfair would accomodate them at the expense of the 10,000 customers who were only laying at 2.0.
Ipswich striker Michael Chopra has revealed he has gambled away up to £2million - and he played with injury to cover a debt.
The former Newcastle, Cardiff and Sunderland player recently checked into the Sporting Chance Clinic to address his addiction.
Chopra said: "Your first bet's your worst bet. As the years have come along and I've earned more money I've started to gamble more. I was gambling up to £20,000 a day at times. As soon as I'd step over the white line I would focus on football - but as soon as I got to the dressing room I would check my phone to see if I'd won."
He added: "As a gambler you want to be playing to get the appearance money. I was playing through injury to cover a debt."
Self-confessed Newcastle fan Chopra revealed he left Cardiff for Sunderland because the signing-on fee would pay off a gambling debt.
He continued on Sky Sports News: "In my first season at Cardiff I had a gambling debt from when I was at Newcastle. I had to leave Cardiff and sign for another team to pay that debt off.
"I have probably lost between £1.5 million and £2 million on gambling."
However, with the help of Sporting Chance Clinic, Chopra wants to repay the faith Ipswich have shown in him and help them back to the Premier League.
He added: "The main thing now is to get promoted with Ipswich. They've backed me and I want to pay them back."
The former Newcastle, Cardiff and Sunderland player recently checked into the Sporting Chance Clinic to address his addiction.
Chopra said: "Your first bet's your worst bet. As the years have come along and I've earned more money I've started to gamble more. I was gambling up to £20,000 a day at times. As soon as I'd step over the white line I would focus on football - but as soon as I got to the dressing room I would check my phone to see if I'd won."
He added: "As a gambler you want to be playing to get the appearance money. I was playing through injury to cover a debt."
Self-confessed Newcastle fan Chopra revealed he left Cardiff for Sunderland because the signing-on fee would pay off a gambling debt.
He continued on Sky Sports News: "In my first season at Cardiff I had a gambling debt from when I was at Newcastle. I had to leave Cardiff and sign for another team to pay that debt off.
"I have probably lost between £1.5 million and £2 million on gambling."
However, with the help of Sporting Chance Clinic, Chopra wants to repay the faith Ipswich have shown in him and help them back to the Premier League.
He added: "The main thing now is to get promoted with Ipswich. They've backed me and I want to pay them back."
Ipswich striker Michael Chopra has revealed he has gambled away up to £2million - and he played with injury to cover a debt.
The former Newcastle, Cardiff and Sunderland player recently checked into the Sporting Chance Clinic to address his addiction.
Chopra said: "Your first bet's your worst bet. As the years have come along and I've earned more money I've started to gamble more. I was gambling up to £20,000 a day at times. As soon as I'd step over the white line I would focus on football - but as soon as I got to the dressing room I would check my phone to see if I'd won."
He added: "As a gambler you want to be playing to get the appearance money. I was playing through injury to cover a debt."
Self-confessed Newcastle fan Chopra revealed he left Cardiff for Sunderland because the signing-on fee would pay off a gambling debt.
He continued on Sky Sports News: "In my first season at Cardiff I had a gambling debt from when I was at Newcastle. I had to leave Cardiff and sign for another team to pay that debt off.
"I have probably lost between £1.5 million and £2 million on gambling."
However, with the help of Sporting Chance Clinic, Chopra wants to repay the faith Ipswich have shown in him and help them back to the Premier League.
He added: "The main thing now is to get promoted with Ipswich. They've backed me and I want to pay them back."
The former Newcastle, Cardiff and Sunderland player recently checked into the Sporting Chance Clinic to address his addiction.
Chopra said: "Your first bet's your worst bet. As the years have come along and I've earned more money I've started to gamble more. I was gambling up to £20,000 a day at times. As soon as I'd step over the white line I would focus on football - but as soon as I got to the dressing room I would check my phone to see if I'd won."
He added: "As a gambler you want to be playing to get the appearance money. I was playing through injury to cover a debt."
Self-confessed Newcastle fan Chopra revealed he left Cardiff for Sunderland because the signing-on fee would pay off a gambling debt.
He continued on Sky Sports News: "In my first season at Cardiff I had a gambling debt from when I was at Newcastle. I had to leave Cardiff and sign for another team to pay that debt off.
"I have probably lost between £1.5 million and £2 million on gambling."
However, with the help of Sporting Chance Clinic, Chopra wants to repay the faith Ipswich have shown in him and help them back to the Premier League.
He added: "The main thing now is to get promoted with Ipswich. They've backed me and I want to pay them back."
Anybody punting up to 20 grand a day no matter their income wants locked up imo.
The Sporting Chance Clinic must have had a more negative impact on Laddies share price than any other factor (imo)...
It doesn't matter that the exchanges have made it easier,at the same time it leaves the audit trail,who has done what.There will always be opportunities to cheat,as I posted earlier,but they don't have to be used.
I know for sure,as do many others that it went on before the exchanges came along,just that it wasn't so apparent,now the drifts are there forALL to see.
Out of interest to want serve yourself fuel filling pumps done away with,because some drive away without paying?
I know for sure,as do many others that it went on before the exchanges came along,just that it wasn't so apparent,now the drifts are there forALL to see.
Out of interest to want serve yourself fuel filling pumps done away with,because some drive away without paying?
feck i am normally in agreement with everything you say and there is, imo, plenty of truth in what you say above, too
i also think that sparrow makes a very valid point
i don't think your two positions are entirely mutually exclusive
i also think that sparrow makes a very valid point
i don't think your two positions are entirely mutually exclusive
The rancid AW game is just the playground of those that love to cheat
unbiased - your analogy doesn't quite work. If someone drives away from a fuel pump it becomes a criminal/Police matter. If someone perpetrates a fraud in horse racing the Police won't touch it with a sh1tty stick. As someone mentioned earlier the penalties are so light for fraud in horse racing the chance is worth taking when the worst that can happen is you are warned off. This indeed is not the fault of the exchanges but Feck makes a valid point why the way they operate makes them in essence 'complicit'. As for the 'audit trail' any half decent Analyst with access to exchange data could bring down countless numbers of wrongdoers in no time at all imo - but would that be in the best interests of the sport or the exchange?
credit to chopra imo,after years of doing his cobblers in he has finally seen the light,hopefully betfair has changed his life.
Thanks HV. I don't really disagree with sparrow's post but I think the exchange interface practically begs THEM to come and shaft us. It does not need to be that way.
fel sorry for the POOR blind owners and trainers who dont even realise there horses are being nobbled, lets have a whiparound for em.
Disagree Aviboyd.The blame lies on the shoulders of the BHA.Penalties,when proved guilty, must be severe ,in order to deter others.They are not,as mentionede by a poster,not severe.A wrongdoer is not too bothered about being warned off,if that is their penalty.
BUT wrongdoings cannot take place WITHOUT THE AID OF THE JOCKEY..Start banning them for longer periods,and making the penalties far heavier,and it will be greatly reduced.Of that there can be no argument.
BUT wrongdoings cannot take place WITHOUT THE AID OF THE JOCKEY..Start banning them for longer periods,and making the penalties far heavier,and it will be greatly reduced.Of that there can be no argument.
Feck.If the exchange interface enables THEM to " come and shaft us",does it not also enable YOU to "shaft" less knowledgable punters than yourself ? I can't see the difference.It's all about degree of knowledge.
Not really artie. I'll never be in a position to push what looks a 7/4 shot out to 4.0 offering to lay any amount knowing the horse hasn't a chance.
Yes but feck is alaways punting on his merits and we are aware of that , horses are NOT running on thier merits
unbiased - agree with the severity of penalty being insufficient, be interesting to see if Paul Bittar will advocate a 'zero tolerance' approach similar to that in Australia. Your comment that 'wrongdoings cannot take place WITHOUT THE AID OF THE JOCKEY' is patently incorrect and I'm surprised you could think this...
artie, the majority of my money ends up being placed at odds worse than bf sp. Does that sound like a big advantage to you?
Strange.The majority of my money ( 50 -60 bets per day )ends up at BFSP or better.What am I doing wrong ??? To get back to your original point .If the interface enables people with more knowledge than you to take advantage of you,then it must also enable you to take advantage of people who have less knowledge than you.There's no difference.
So your saying the passing of imformation concerning horses that will not win so crooks can steal off you is the same as someone having a normal bet on the strength of his opinion
Try and get rid of the moral indignation ,and read what I said.
If the interface enables people with more knowledge than you to take advantage of you,then it must also enable you to take advantage of people who have less knowledge than you.There's no difference.
Of course there's a difference that being the degree and certainty of the advantage. If a tradesman does a job for you does it make no difference to you what he charges you?
Of course there's a difference that being the degree and certainty of the advantage. If a tradesman does a job for you does it make no difference to you what he charges you?
But it works
I'm not deriding you artie (I got the impression you were deriding me) but that is the reason why most of my backs are placed at shorter than bf sp. If a horse drifts I increase my stake as it's better value. I consequently end up with much more on the drifters than I do on the shorteners because the odds on the latter collapse to below my level fairly quickly. The only time I get decent money on shorteners is when I've drip fed the money in before the insider poison hits the market.
I'm not deriding you artie (I got the impression you were deriding me) but that is the reason why most of my backs are placed at shorter than bf sp. If a horse drifts I increase my stake as it's better value. I consequently end up with much more on the drifters than I do on the shorteners because the odds on the latter collapse to below my level fairly quickly. The only time I get decent money on shorteners is when I've drip fed the money in before the insider poison hits the market.
ellison's on ruk, strap a lie detector to his nuts with 10k volts if it detects a lie.
Unfortunately race fixing is something that has gone on since sports and betting first emerged but unlike conventional bookmakers , exchanges are able to monitor its customers and highlight fowl betting practices to the correct authorites.
Yet again a feather in the cap of sporting exchanges
Yet again a feather in the cap of sporting exchanges
I put some of my money on around 3.0am.Here,Bettor,Smarkets and bookies BOG.Do you not do this ? It all adds up.
I have no bookmaker accounts I can get money on with artie. I've been through all my friend's & relative's debit cards. I can no longer be bothered with the hassle.
Unfortunately race fixing is something that has gone on since sports and betting first emerged but unlike conventional bookmakers , exchanges are able to monitor its customers and highlight fowl betting practices to the correct authorites.
So where are all these miscreants bff? Either the game's practically straight or bf & bha monitoring is sh1t.
So where are all these miscreants bff? Either the game's practically straight
or bf & bha monitoring is sh1t.
Would a fowl betting practice be swanning around after backing a winner or maybe picking a winner and then chickening out of placing the bet?
The only reason the audit trail was able to track these individuals was because there was so many of them involved, too many fingers in the same pie, greed will often force their guard down the cuter ones remain anonymous and virtually untouchable,
Whats going to happen to them anyway, nearly all of them are unlicensed individuals apart from the jockey in question, they'll get a warning off but still be able to place a bet in any betting shop in the land or even be back on betfair through 3rd party accounts, even if they're spotted on a racecourse the only power racing has is to eject them from the racecourse premises, there is no prison sentence hanging over their head so why wouldn't they take the risk if the reward is greater?.
Whats going to happen to them anyway, nearly all of them are unlicensed individuals apart from the jockey in question, they'll get a warning off but still be able to place a bet in any betting shop in the land or even be back on betfair through 3rd party accounts, even if they're spotted on a racecourse the only power racing has is to eject them from the racecourse premises, there is no prison sentence hanging over their head so why wouldn't they take the risk if the reward is greater?.
It's fraud artie. Country set fox killers taking the p1ss out of the masses. munter is correct imo and I hope the ponces in the financial sector enjoy the spectacle because they'll be the next to go.
Professional Footballers and Gambling don't go together ...... just look at the exploits of Didi Hamann, Michael Owen, Paul Merson, Stan Bowles and many others ...... untold £millions lost, now add Michael Chopra et al ...... all for the benefit of "Baldy" & Co.
Dieter "Didi" Hamann now lists himself as a "Pro Gambler" and pundit for the RP, he now lives in style in Alderley Edge, the smart Pro Footballer enclave of Cheshire ...... take his tips and follow him "Over The Edge" (hopefully with Thommo) ......
http://www.soccerbase.com/blog/pro-punter/didi-hamann/
It is the blind, leading the blind and unwashed .......... Ooooooover the Edge Uuuuuuuuugh !! ......
Dieter "Didi" Hamann now lists himself as a "Pro Gambler" and pundit for the RP, he now lives in style in Alderley Edge, the smart Pro Footballer enclave of Cheshire ...... take his tips and follow him "Over The Edge" (hopefully with Thommo) ......
http://www.soccerbase.com/blog/pro-punter/didi-hamann/
It is the blind, leading the blind and unwashed .......... Ooooooover the Edge Uuuuuuuuugh !! ......
In the style of Catherine Tates' "Nan" character from the TV series .....
Grandson: "Did you back the effer Nan ? "
Nan: "No son ........ I effing laid it ....Ha, ha, ha, cackle cackle!" ...... expletive !, expletive ! .....
Grandson: "Did you back the effer Nan ? "
Nan: "No son ........ I effing laid it ....Ha, ha, ha, cackle cackle!" ...... expletive !, expletive ! .....
he hasnt retired, been riding in the bush in oz.
Heffernan has been riding in Australia for the last 12 months but he has been charged by the British Horseracing Authority for "communicating directly or indirectly to one or more betting exchange holders information relating to the prospects of horses in races, as well as intentionally failing to ensure that horses ridden by him were run on their merits.''
The race-fixed scandal has rocked British sport as soccer players Michael Chopra from Ipswich Town, ex-Doncaster Rovers player Mark Wilson and Nottingham Forest's James Coppinger among nine people charged with serious breaches of the rules of racing.
Heffernan was due to ride Wouldn't It Be Nice in the Breeders Plate at Royal Randwick tomorrow but was stood down by Racing NSW stewards late yesterday.
Racing NSW chief executive Peter V'landys said this morning the decision to replace Heffernan from all riding engagements after receiving advice from the BHA.
"Mr Heffernan was advised that he was stood down by Racing NSW pending him providing full disclosure of matters pertinent to his licensing in this jurisdiction,'' V'landys said.
The BHA issued a statement overnight whic explained the non-criminal charges follow an investigation into suspicious betting activity on races that took place between Nov. 1, 2010, and March 31, 2011, and focus on wagers on betting exchanges that horses would lose, the BHA said.
Chopra, Wilson and three others have been charged with offering bribes to Heffernan.
The police "will be informed, but whether they pursue it or not is completely a matter for them," BHA spokesman Robin Mounsey said in an interview.
Heffernan has been riding in Australia for the last 12 months but he has been charged by the British Horseracing Authority for "communicating directly or indirectly to one or more betting exchange holders information relating to the prospects of horses in races, as well as intentionally failing to ensure that horses ridden by him were run on their merits.''
The race-fixed scandal has rocked British sport as soccer players Michael Chopra from Ipswich Town, ex-Doncaster Rovers player Mark Wilson and Nottingham Forest's James Coppinger among nine people charged with serious breaches of the rules of racing.
Heffernan was due to ride Wouldn't It Be Nice in the Breeders Plate at Royal Randwick tomorrow but was stood down by Racing NSW stewards late yesterday.
Racing NSW chief executive Peter V'landys said this morning the decision to replace Heffernan from all riding engagements after receiving advice from the BHA.
"Mr Heffernan was advised that he was stood down by Racing NSW pending him providing full disclosure of matters pertinent to his licensing in this jurisdiction,'' V'landys said.
The BHA issued a statement overnight whic explained the non-criminal charges follow an investigation into suspicious betting activity on races that took place between Nov. 1, 2010, and March 31, 2011, and focus on wagers on betting exchanges that horses would lose, the BHA said.
Chopra, Wilson and three others have been charged with offering bribes to Heffernan.
The police "will be informed, but whether they pursue it or not is completely a matter for them," BHA spokesman Robin Mounsey said in an interview.
I very much doubt it has rocked British sport and will barely get a mention with most media.
They just showed two races under investigation,and too be honest i could see nothing wrong,the stewards need a good kick in the b o l o x! What a waist of time.
The only way you can dramatically reduce the number of bent races is to stop all channels whereby someone can gain from a horse losing.
That means laying on an exchange or being a regular bookmaker.
If all there was in racing was a tote monopoly with punters having only the facility to bet on a horse to do something 'positive' in a race then racing would be much straighter.
A tote monopoly with a takeout similar to the commision rate on betfair (5% or less) would be better all round.
This would be good for funding the sport as is shown in other tote monopoly racing nations.
Also, pro punters could get big bets on without the knock back they get now from fixed odds layers because a huge tote would have massive liquidity if it took all bets on British racing.
That means laying on an exchange or being a regular bookmaker.
If all there was in racing was a tote monopoly with punters having only the facility to bet on a horse to do something 'positive' in a race then racing would be much straighter.
A tote monopoly with a takeout similar to the commision rate on betfair (5% or less) would be better all round.
This would be good for funding the sport as is shown in other tote monopoly racing nations.
Also, pro punters could get big bets on without the knock back they get now from fixed odds layers because a huge tote would have massive liquidity if it took all bets on British racing.
Rule (A)36.1
Inside Information is information about the likely participation or likely performance of a horse in a race, which
36.1.1 is known by an Owner, Trainer, Rider, stable employee or any of their service providers as a result of acting as such, and
36.1.2 is not information in the public domain.
A Person must not communicate Inside Information directly or indirectly to any other Person for any material reward, gift, favour or benefit in kind.
Entry Point: Disqualify 3 years
Range: 18 months - 5 years
What a stupid meaningless rule? owner goes to jockey and asks any chance,he replies no hope? (no crime there)
Inside Information is information about the likely participation or likely performance of a horse in a race, which
36.1.1 is known by an Owner, Trainer, Rider, stable employee or any of their service providers as a result of acting as such, and
36.1.2 is not information in the public domain.
A Person must not communicate Inside Information directly or indirectly to any other Person for any material reward, gift, favour or benefit in kind.
Entry Point: Disqualify 3 years
Range: 18 months - 5 years
What a stupid meaningless rule? owner goes to jockey and asks any chance,he replies no hope? (no crime there)
Those who get the real money can rest comfortably, as they, as most of us know
unmentionable by name and untouchable by the mealy mouthed momsers who
are the arbitrators of horseracing's authority.
unmentionable by name and untouchable by the mealy mouthed momsers who
are the arbitrators of horseracing's authority.
metro I suppose you can have two types of inside information, the simple exchange between say a trainer and his owner or maybe a punter he's friendly with but not in any collusion.
In Heffernans case he was been rewarded, ok there was a good chance that the horse wouldn't win or even place on form anyway, but if it looked like the horse was in danger of making the places or even winning these punters knew they had the jockey onside to prevent that happening so in effect they coud lay away to their hearts content knowing their money was all but in the bank.
In Heffernans case he was been rewarded, ok there was a good chance that the horse wouldn't win or even place on form anyway, but if it looked like the horse was in danger of making the places or even winning these punters knew they had the jockey onside to prevent that happening so in effect they coud lay away to their hearts content knowing their money was all but in the bank.
levelstakes...your case for a tote monopoly would not be any good for any punter. What pro-punter would be having a few thousand on the favourite without knowing what price he was getting? (and also knowing his cash would be dramatically shortening the price he would get returned). With regard to prize money...you are right but its not going to happen!
honest jock houded out of te game by this rubbish makes me sick
levelstakes1 a typical thick comment, not like you can back the rest of the field to lay one. With exchanges we now STOP and SEE corruption
This Chopra must be one of lifes regular mugs, gets a huge
payment and his greed leads him to gamble most of it away,
the mental hospital awaits.
payment and his greed leads him to gamble most of it away,
the mental hospital awaits.
Whingeing moaners on here alwas cying about corruption ...........
i understand what you are saying lightbulbs but i am a pro punter for want of another name.
ive talked to pro punters in horserace betting in other countries with tote monopolies and they operate in a different way. they bet very late comparing their tissue to the totes odds. because they bet later they tend to take in more facors as well such as paddock inspection and how the horse behaves going down to post.
they know from experience how much the odds will move with there bets and whether they will likely or not still get value when the dividend is returned.
people in this country are obsessed with being able to take a price.
whats the point in trying to take a price and something you deem value and getting knocked back to a fraction of your stake?
a lot of effort to mark a bookies card for little reward.
and worst of all the time the bookie takes all of your bet is because he knows more than you and it isnt off!
that state of affairs is the main reason why punters are up against in this country.
when you are on, you dont want to be on!
ive talked to pro punters in horserace betting in other countries with tote monopolies and they operate in a different way. they bet very late comparing their tissue to the totes odds. because they bet later they tend to take in more facors as well such as paddock inspection and how the horse behaves going down to post.
they know from experience how much the odds will move with there bets and whether they will likely or not still get value when the dividend is returned.
people in this country are obsessed with being able to take a price.
whats the point in trying to take a price and something you deem value and getting knocked back to a fraction of your stake?
a lot of effort to mark a bookies card for little reward.
and worst of all the time the bookie takes all of your bet is because he knows more than you and it isnt off!
that state of affairs is the main reason why punters are up against in this country.
when you are on, you dont want to be on!
I don't deny the model we have here has its problems...specifically relying on punters losses to fund the entire sport is clearly not going to last much longer i.e the levy will be replaced with something else sooner rather than later. However, a tote monopoly, in fact any monopoly is never good for the customer and to remove price competition from the market would mean the game was killed stone dead imo...
Why not have a tote operating with a 5pc margin on all of its pools...that way it is in direct competition with the more traditional layers. The customer benefits and there is more choice/more turnover etc
lightbulbs probably because the tote is not efficient enough to cover all its costs off just a 5pc margin
levelstakes when i was uk based and bet quite a bit and made it pay, i did so by working in with a bookie who knew i made a profit and whom "lost" my bets in the trade, ie followed them in but made it look as if they were just hedging
would that type of scenario be of any help to you, usually if you are good enough i think you can find an honourable bookmaker
would that type of scenario be of any help to you, usually if you are good enough i think you can find an honourable bookmaker
i know exactly what you are talking about Happy Valley. I used to say it to independent bookies all the time. 'if you dont think you can beat me, just take it and lay it off double and win for yourself too'!
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539