if he left his horse unattended and this shouldn't happen wouldnt some other stable staff have seen somebody if most of the other horses are attended to

thats what i mean,it looks worse for the trainer because if it had happened at the course its very likely somebody would have seen somebody or something

could someone please explain a limited liability company to me and a white label customer.tia

Wonder if it was a Ltd liability company in the Voler La Vedette case??

The horse ran 5 more times for Byrnes after the Galway run and three more times after the Tramore doping incident drifting every time  where were the stewards then

To pick up a point that GAZO made, Where the hell were Betfair in this whole thing ? If the horse hadn't been tested,
would the layer be free to continue his nefarious activities. I believe so. I have had an account for 19 years and DO
NOT believe a fraction of the accusations on here to be true, but I find it hard to believe Betfair haven't noticed
some dodgy laying connected either to certain horses or stables. The problem is, if they continually pointed out illegal
activities ,then the whole Betfair model could be called into question .Every so often an independent body should be able to go
in and look at all activity in Horse Racing to ensure that all is well.

Dr Lynn Hill, said at the enquiry that the administration of ACP would have took place close to the time of the race. Have none of these so called experts never read Jamie Reid's book "Doped" about the doping gang in the 1960s that  broke into racing stables over night and doped horses. They wrapped the drugs in tin foil so that the juices in the horses stomach would break down the tin foil so that the drug went in to the horses system just before the race.

if it has been posted here already , apologies, but in yesterdays racing post it said .

buckley also identified an unnamed "individual known to be associated" with the account who was described as being "based in a distant part of the world and was said to be associated with match fixing in other sports"

at sedgefield , another byrnes runner on the card thosedaysaregone was also laid for substantial amounts and was pulled up after the saddle slipped

before sedgefield , viking hoard ran at galway in july 2018 and was also laid £55,000 to £12,000 , a sample was taken on that occasion and the committee presumed that "nothing adverse arose from subsequent analysis of those samples "

Before anyone asks.......the latest from the RP on 'white labels':

Charles Byrnes case leaves a lasting smudge on so-called 'white labels'

Like the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board, those looking for answers from the Viking Hoard case have reached something of a dead end, at least until trainer Charles Byrnes' appeal is heard.

Naturally, formal comment from the interested parties will not be forthcoming while the case is still active. The facts that have emerged, from the IHRB referrals committee's 4,300-word report and subsequent investigations by the Racing Post among others, are more than enough to ensure harsh light will again be shed on the affair as soon as that appeal has run its course.

The welfare element might be the single most shocking aspect. The opinion of those much more informed in these matters would almost suggest Viking Hoard was lucky to still be conscious as he stepped out on to the track, such were the levels of acepromazine (ACP) administered pre-race. Jockey Kevin Brouder had a lucky escape.

Purely where betting is concerned, there is much more to pick out from the Byzantine chain of transactions that led backwards from a bet that took up 50 per cent of the exchange market to an account traced to an individual "based in a distant part of the world and said to be associated with match fixing".

Crucially, there was no challenge to Dr Lynn Hillyer's assertion that the betting patterns and substance administered "were not coincidental". Or, put another way, the panel accepted that this €35,000 lay bet from some far-flung corner of the globe came from a source that knew Viking Hoard, standing in a stable in Tramore, would be got at.

At the time, it was possible to place lay bets through Betfair's 'white label' partners. These companies, which allow access to Betfair's markets from jurisdictions across the world, place bets on the exchange on the clients' behalf.

This is perhaps not quite as clandestine as it might first appear. Betfair have previously claimed that these companies are required to conduct the requisite 'know your customer' checks, and that the exchange can request access for the details of any account as it sees fit. It presumably did just that in the Viking Hoard case, which is how the IHRB panel ultimately ended up with the name of our would-be criminal mastermind.

Officially, the story ends there. Only it almost certainly does not. It has been established that the use of brokers, essentially shell accounts, can be employed and that going through more laissez-faire territories can reduce the chances of tracing back the source of funds. Basically, no longer would those with nefarious intentions be naive enough to lay using accounts in their own name, as Miles Rodgers did in Betfair's early days.

As in the IHRB report, it should be stressed there is no evidence to link any other individual, Byrnes included, with these betting patterns. It is simply to emphasise that if you accept Hillyer's assertion that the lay and the administration of ACP were linked events, then it is beyond the realms of plausibility the trail stops at the point at which investigators reached a brick wall. The list of suspects could run into the millions but probably would not include the person whose name is attached to the offending account.

The Viking Hoard affair will no doubt blacken racing's name. It does seem that some lessons have been learned, though. In the intervening two and a half years, it has been reported Tramore has installed some form of CCTV, albeit not at the level that satisfies the strictest security protocols. Meanwhile, Betfair have banned laying through their white-label partners. Whoever nobbled Viking Hoard will have to find a fresh method the next time they attempt to defraud punters.

Still, questions remain and a couple of the bigger ones lie at Betfair's door. The decision to restrict only lay bets through B2B partners stands as a monument in treating symptoms rather than cause. If doubts over transparency permeate these affiliate platforms, the problem does not go away by restricting just one of their two main operations.

Betfair have previously insisted that such partners are held to stringent standards of verification, both in their respective territories and as part of their contracts with Betfair. It is also understood that the platform that was used in the Viking Hoard case is no longer in partnership with Betfair.

It is evident checks need to be tighter still. In lighter-touch jurisdictions, Betfair may well be the main police of their own partners. Being subjected to deep suspicion right from inception has meant Betfair have a reputation as a diligent operator when it comes to integrity, but this is still not an ideal set of circumstances.

At last report, it was estimated that white label sites are responsible for less than one per cent of revenue at Flutter, the group of which Betfair now form a large part. That is not an insubstantial amount considering Flutter's overall revenues amounted to more than £2 billion in 2019, yet it may be small enough it is decided it is a liability the group could do without.

Here's hoping. Anything that makes what was inflicted on poor Viking Hoard, his jockey and his backers at Tramore less appealing to would-be fraudsters must be regarded as an unalloyed positive for racing.

This has clearly been a long time coming. Far too long.

Look at the way he "runs" his horse year after year. Disgusting. It's not wanted in the game.

cloone river

You posed a similar question earlier.

VIKING HOARD's last run was, again, at Sedgefield

However - It was (officially, at least) it's First run for New Trainer Micky Hammond - despite some thinking that it may still being trained by BYRNES - as it was backed from 20/1 to 7/4 in the Morning Markets.

Viking Hoard had run 4  times for a new Trainer, prior to the Sedgefield Debut for Hammond - But had NOT run for 10 months.

The New Trainer (after Byrnes) was R CURRAN - from Downpatrick  ...

- although - there is NO record of any SALE of the horse - either from BYRNES to CURRAN - or CURRAN to HAMMOND

In fact - VIKING HOARD is still listed as Owned by a Mrs Mary CURRAN.
--------------

After VIKING HOARD's WIN at Killarney in July 2018 - Charles BYRNES said ...

"He rode him closer to the pace today and he stays, and for a four-year-old it is unreal the way he stays.
He'll keep going and might go for a hurdle race at Galway. He's a very slow horse to work and I don't think he's fast enough to win on the flat as all he does is stay and he loves top of the ground. I bought him at Newmarket last year and couldn't get a buyer for him and he's for sale again now."  C Byrnes


VIKING HOARD was - rather remarkably, considering the usually more stringent and reactive Handicapping in Ireland - was only raised 11 pounds for that comfortable 15 lengths success at Killarney - something that I am still struggling to comprehend, having handicapped all UK and Irish Flat and Hurdle races for decades... especially as the Runner-Up remained on it's same rating...whilst the 3rd went up a further 4 lbs (on top of it's 6lb  penalty carried) for a previous over 8 lengths Win.

All that made VIKING HOARD something of 'a GIMMEE' at GALWAY ...

- Yet it DRIFTED - and we now know was confidently LAID -  and was PULLED UP...

Whilst I never had Viking Hoard down as morhing into a really useful Handicap Hurdler - and he looked as if he had to have Dry ground - I had kept a close eye on him - as I was of the opinion that there was some potential there, and he would eventually 'have his day' - as he was previously trained by an unproductive Trainer in the UK, that being Harry Dunlop.

More a case of what the Irish Handicapper did not give Viking Hoard for his Killarney win, as outlined - and especially as we are now aware that the 13 lengths runner-up subsequently Won off 4 lbs higher, and the 3rd has been beaten just a neck off 8 lbs higher... So the simplistic 15lbs for his 15 lengths success would not have been an over-reaction.

The Sedgefield race simply did not 'work out' whatsoever from a future Hurdling point of view - and  is a 'Red Herring' as the 117 is it's English Rating, which run at a level higher than Irish Jump Ratings.
In fact, I only have the horse running to an Irish equivalent of 98 (without Brouder's 7lb claim)

The Sedgefield run was its best run off 117 thats the mark he ran off.When you look at two of the horses that was in front of it.Mixboy and Bench break.

cloone - As I outlined - the 117 mark at Sedgefield is an English Handicap mark - it equates to around a 109 Irish Handicap rating ... Believe Me.

I beg to differ on your appraisal of the Sedgefield race

Beach Boy eventually won a small 6-runner race - 9 outings, and almost a year, later - off 9 lbs LESS than at Sedgefield.

Mix Boy subsequently Won another Jumps race 5 outings later - But it was a CHASE ... and Mixboy is currently rated 11 lbs better over FENCES than Hurdles.

The runner-up was beaten 41 lengths and 31 lengths on it's next 2 Hurdle outings - followed by defeats of 21, 16, 28 and 18 lengths in it's next 4 Jumps races

How can - "The Sedgefield" - be, "its best run" ? - when ...

Viking Hoard, therefore,  ran to nowhere near the  117 rating, anyway .... more like an English  107, at best - That would equate to an IRISH Rating of around 99.

As I have already explained ...

The Sedgefield race  is a 'Red Herring' as the 117 is it's English Rating, which run at a level higher than Irish Jump Ratings.

And what did the horses in the killarney race do after that onlooker?So when Viking Hoard ran in Sedgefield did he have to run off 117 or not?Beach Break was after winning 3 races in a row before he ran at Sedgefield and won two more races after that.Mixboy won 3 races after that is on 133 over hurdles and 144 over fences.

I thought after the first lockdown there would be many gambles landed, once racing started again..(they've got bills to pay)..seems money hasn't just talked, its shouted!  Where there's money, there's corruption!  The whole game is rife, as too is the stock market.  It's in the media's interests to admit that the game is clean but anyone with a half a brain knows differently.  If you're not inside, you're outside!

From today's (Friday's) RP, it seems the BHA notified the IHRB of the Tramore lay.

From which we can infer that the BHA and Betfair arrangement of a few years ago whereby Betfair notifies the BHA, and that there is no equivalent arrangement between Betfair and the IHRB. Does that sound right?

We might also infer that the BHA and IHRB were by this time already suspicious about this horse.

basically an insult to peoples intelligence to think theres laying on a industrial scale going on in byrnes yard without his knowledge,
if you ask everyone in racing to name a yard where industrial laying was going on without the trainers knowledge byrnes would be last on everyone list
its like chosing an old dog to show your newest trick

@1st time poster -- that is the question, isn't it?

Was it only Viking Hoard or were there also lays of other horses in CB's barn?

Were the same accounts (or the same white label "exchanges") making similar sized lays on other yards in Ireland (or in Britain come to that)?

Follow the money.