Good article on politics linked to ACs

Chris Cook!!

He completely misunderstands how politics has been turned upside down. The Conservatives are no longer conservatives. Obviously. The handful that are left have been put out to pasture on the backbenches. But the politicians in general no longer lead, they don't set the strategic direction. They are simply middle managers. We are now essentially led by the unelected unaccountable mandarins and bureaucratic quangos.

What a sad world view!!

They are still Tories in many other fundamental ways and choices - healthcare, welfare, education etc...

They still hold the power too, at least far more than the Labour party do.

It's so disingenuous tomo. The duopoly will now produce manifestos that they feel will keep their 'base' happy, but not frighten off swing voters. It has no bearing on what they will actually do. The risk for the country is that Starmers lot are much more aligned with what the blob wants.

..and on the issue of background power groups and Quangos etc - where are those for the racing powers and linked businesses in all this...?

Absolutely not stu. Stonewall for example have a grip on education like Japanese knot weed. Many months ago, it was leaked out the horrendous stuff that the kids are being indoctrinated with related to sex ed, 'white privilege', gender ideology and all the rest of it. And they have done the square root of fukk all about it.

Healthcare? They shut down hospitals to anyone who didn't have covid. Their policy is giving the NHS more money and removing cancer targets. Buying up vast private medical resources and leaving them empty.

Welfare? How about 5+ million people on out of work benefits, PIP assessments online, index linked benefits with regular bonuses.

horrendous stuff that the kids are being indoctrinated with related to sex ed

You sound like a far right member of the GOP in America!!!

Oh yes and of course awarding record exam results with no exams. Very conservative

1.2 million immigrants in a single year (the ones we know about)

Prime Ministers' Questions | March 2023

"Graphic lessons on oral sex, how to choke your partner safely and 72 genders—this is what passes for relationships and sex education in British schools. Across the country, children are being subjected to lessons that are age-inappropriate, extreme, sexualising and inaccurate, often using resources from unregulated organisations that are actively campaigning to undermine parents. This is not a victory for equality; it is a catastrophe for childhood. Will my right hon. Friend honour his commitment to end inappropriate sex education by commissioning an independent inquiry into the nature and extent of this safeguarding scandal?" Miriam Cates MP

Don't want to go into a wider general politics debate, but taking a key example like healthcare, then talk to any doctor working in the NHS and they have the fairly clear view of what Conservatives are and do to the NHS, vs what a Labour government would compare as.

Not saying they haven't moved to some policies that might have been less hardcore right wing, but I still see they are fairly heavily different on social aspects and know their own agenda that's vastly different to Labour.

It's not far right to highlight it, tomo. Of course, the people doing this to kids would love to smear those who call it out.

Basic point is they are a Conservative government in power (regardless of debates about what it means in entirety).

Are you in the QAnon cult by any chance?

Even if one takes a view that Tories are (partly) puppets for behind scenes powers, then we still have to ask where are the behind the scenes business powers for groups like racing, to avoid these ACs damage...??

The NHS is inherently Labour, stu. It is of course part of the problem that they will strongly resist any change, if it comes from the Tories. The model is broken and completely implausible, unsustainable and will break the country eventually. The Tories don't have a plan anyway, they just manage what the dpt of health tells them they want to do. The fat pill announcement this week is a good example. 

But I don't see any prospect of change as people still have a religious like view of the organisation.

The model is broken and completely implausible

Well I agree with you about that anyway.

Even if one takes a view that Tories are (partly) puppets for behind scenes powers, then we still have to ask where are the behind the scenes business powers for groups like racing, to avoid these ACs damage...??


This is how all of the pernicious changes are introduced/sold. AC's are sold under the banner of safety. It is clever, what they do. So anyone seen arguing against it is framed as defending bookies or people getting into serious trouble through gambling, suicide etc. It's how everything is done now. Through the prism of the lowest common denominator. Nut zero is unbelievably absurd, but anyone rationally arguing against it is framed as not caring about the planet/ kids' future. Essentially we are in a post reality/fact world, a sentiment driven one.

To defeat these tactics, you need a smart strategy and smart people. We don't have many of them in public life.

I find it overall rather amazing, that the large business powers that could be affected, are not exerting any influence on this process. I don't personally believe the more abstract and emotive aspects of influence really ride so easily over real business interests.

That is also partly the point of the above article I guess.

It is absolutely the case. I really don't think people grasp the fundamental changes that are happening to the west, and western values.

I work for a successful SaaS business. But making a profit is now way way down the agenda. It's all about values, impact on the community. Meritocracy has gone. They remove a print button from the UI to stop people using paper as part of the commitment to nut zero.

I have heard that it will be on the agenda if we get labour in gvnt, they will try to bring in PPP. Which is ESG on speed, and embed it in fiduciary responsibility.

PPP stands for Profit, People, Planet.

You could of course, do pretty much anything under that cover/umbrella. Deliberately so.

Why is Net Zero absurd by the way?

I feel this has slightly gone wider into some OT areas, so bringing it directly back to the main focus, gambling and ACs...

Well whichever way we look at it, Labour getting into power can't be any worse for gamblers than this Conservative government have proven themselves to be, over recent years of influence on gamblers and gambling as an institution.

That is quite mad when you think of the supposed values of 'personal freedom' vs 'nanny state' that these two are often represented to be - gambling has always been a part of the former ideal, as an acceptable pursuit in political views.

I also think back and remember that brief period while Labour were in power, and they actually made a key point of supporting the ideals of gambling as a pursuit (think earlier days of BF when that was...) - though that seems like a distant memory in our current days of politics.

Meritocracy has gone,when was it ever here?

We are now essentially led by the unelected unaccountable mandarins and bureaucratic quangos

And which party put those quangos in place? Cider has been swallowing too much cider - id wager he hasn't been  inside a school in about 50 years. Much better to blame som secret  cabal for one's chosen plotocs being sheet and ruining then country for 15 years - its always someone else fault ain it boomers?
The state of racing (and the directionless way it is led) is a rather elegant way of looking at the rest of the country.

Why is Net Zero absurd by the way?

Lol. Okay I'll fall for it:

Because if we get there it will make difference to world emissions. Bearing in mind that we've exported most of our emissions elsewhere.

That's a massive 1%, by the way.

Good stuff from Cider as usual.

Thanks DC

And which party put those quangos in place?

Blair predominately. But you have to understand, it's apolitical. They were happy to defer legislating to the EU and now it's the blob. Do you think Steve Barclay has some grand plan for the health service, or Gillian Keegan has one for education? 'New' Labour were much more strategic when they won a landslide and made changes that were virtually impossible to reverse. It remains to be seen how they cope with the quangos and the blob, if they achieve a majority.

As I referenced at the top though, politics is unrecognisable from 1997, but the RP journo is still writing as if nothing has changed. Whatever it is, technology, social media, the digital age, lowering of standards, something else or a combination of all of them, this fantasy that the politicians are in charge, that Hunt walks into the treasury and decides the budget is, is an utter fantasy, a relic. They simply manage, are presented with theoretical choices which are hobsons choices. And if they go against the preferred option, that are undermined at every point by incessant leaking and powerful friends in the media, and collusion within the blob (such as the BoE dumping gilts onto the market when GBP was under pressure).

stu, it ties in because the incredulity apparently is why something that would be seen as Tory is seemingly being attacked, using policies that a 15 year old could tell wouldn't work. It's not coming from the Tories, and it's part of the much much wider picture of people who want to change our fundamental culture.

I keep repeating myself, but it doesn't register with many. They are still trying to apply logical/rational thinking, to this narrow subject. It's only when it is judged in the much wider context of what is happening, what is being done to us that it makes any sense.

This short clip demonstrates the high level of our politics, in a nutshell.

.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0-CdZj9Jd8

But you do recall Labour being fairly active in promoting of gambling in the UK, while in power?

Some were rather worried by the fact they supported gambling so much...

What's 'the blob'?

stu, I recall the excitement about supposed 24 hr licences and super casinos, bringing vegas to the UK. Labour liberalised a fair bit in the gambling space (and banking!).

"The Gambling Commission are quite a big concern. Are they under control? Are they working in the parameters being set by the government? That’s something I’ll raise to the minister. I don’t want them to hide behind any possible levy review as that’s a separate thing all together. If they say there’s a review of the levy our response will be so what? We don’t know which way a review will take us. It could be better, it could be worse."

Prominent jumps owner Carl Hinchy announced this week he would be exiting the sport as checks left him unable to bet on his horses and he was also critical of restrictions over his own spending. This comes despite former gambling minister Paul Scully having stressed it was neither the government nor the Gambling Commission's job to determine how much a person can bet. Robertson will advise Scully's successor to take such an approach.

He said: "There’s a philosophical issue here. The only time you get checks on your income is when you’re looking to borrow money and not spend it so this is a new concept. I don’t think we should tell people how to spend their money, that would be a significant change of approach that any government would have to justify. We’ve got to be a Conservative government but, in a number of ways, we’re not being that at the moment.

"There are some individuals who have suffered terribly and my heart really does go out to them. I think there’s a need to target these people and there’s all sorts of other ways, such as the betting trends, to try and help them. There will be pressure on betting companies to do that but not to say how much can you afford as it’s up to the person. There’s a line to be drawn there and I think the group would take that view.

"The government will feel the need to do something otherwise they’ll get backlash, although I hope – very strongly – they don’t do anything detrimental."

These are comments from a Tory MP in the RP. To be fair, very much on the pro racing side. I keep repeating it, but this is an ideological fight. The people driving this, are not elected. I'm certain that this will be pushed whomever has a majority in the HoC. I do feel like people are stuck psychologically in those times when elected politicians determined the direction of travel. Those times have gone, and I don't have any answers. Even if something radical happened at the ballot box, the new people would also be hamstrung as the true power no longer lays with the HoC.

I personally still have hope that the powers will, at least to some extent, see some of the potential fiscal damage they could cause via the more extreme end of these proposals.

I know some may downplay it, but I don't believe business powers that might be affected have no 'behind the scenes' power either.

Time will tell either way however, so we will have to see.

“lessons will be learned” I can just see it happening ffs….like some major enquiry…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wd3IaJRQBXg

Godfrey explains it all for you here in one short 10 minute video for those of you still in denial

I get there are wider influences in the world, but bottom line is this will still come down to old fashioned bills and laws around them, that will have to be voted in by our MPs.

That is the central mechanism that will see our fates as gamblers decided.

No old-fashioned bills or laws or MP's votes required for this at all. None.

The Gambling Commission will enact whatever it fancies.

Ring any bells?

That was published Oct 31, 2014. Got to hand it to them, they play the long game....

Interesting document, yes cider...

The power that these people have can be seen in the way the UK government is handling the immigrant crisis.
The Tories are facing a heavy defeat at the next election, while local communities are up in arms. And still the boats arrive.

So who is running the UK? If it were the Tories they'd have stopped the boats long ago.

I spent 5 minutes this morning, carry out a bit of googling.

The author of that WEF article is someone called REBECCA CASSIDY.

REBECCA CASSIDY was a Specialist Advisor to the Select Committee on the Social and Economic Impact of the Gambling Industry in the House of Lords.

.https://www.gold.ac.uk/research/case-studies/reforming-gambling-policy-/

She was apparently heavily involved in producing this massive document:

HOUSE OF LORDS
Select Committee on the Social and Economic
Impact of the Gambling Industry
Report of Session 2019–21
HL Paper 79
Gambling Harm—
Time for Action

.https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/1700/documents/16622/default/


At our first meeting on 18 June 2019 we appointed Professor Rebecca
Cassidy, Professor of Anthropology at Goldsmiths, University of London,
as our specialist adviser for the inquiry. She was reappointed when the
Committee was appointed for the second time on 28 October 2019.

I would need to get paid to go through it lol, there is a section dedicated to affordability checks, and some very interesting comments from Hneysuckle's owner. eg, If we can address it and
get it right, I think that the number of problem gamblers in existence
today—a magnitude of about 400,000—will come down significantly
once that plays through over the next three to five years


Here's some other bits:

How to measure affordability

318. These are examples where it is clear that the gamblers could not afford the
bets they were placing, but usually things will not be quite so clear cut.

319. Gambling operators already have available a large amount of information
about their customers, especially those gambling online. In February 2019
the Gambling Commission published responses to a consultation showing
that licensees could access information relating to a customer’s financial
circumstances, such as bank statements, proof of income, and credit checks.
Others suggested that licensees could analyse income and expenditure, with a
number suggesting using socio-demographic data to form an understanding
of affordability. One respondent said that a customer’s lifestyle could inform
a licensee about how much they could afford to gamble.350

320. beBettor is a gambling compliance data processing company assisting
gambling companies with the issue of affordability. They told us that they
help gambling companies understand how much their customers can afford
to gamble before experiencing financial harm, and measure gambling activity
data within their network of operators against these affordability estimates.

They said:
“The affordability estimates we provide are calculated through
processing individual customer data, and mapping this against sociodemographic and economic data sources available in the public domain
(“Open Data”). Part of the difficulty in assessing the social and
economic impact of gambling to date is that the industry response has
been fragmented, with operators reluctant to work together. However,
operators working collaboratively will achieve greater results in the area
of problem gambling than more isolated efforts.”351



This 'beBettor' appears to be quite a large operation.

Our Affordability Checks
Privacy centric customer affordability checks powered by Open Government Data Science

Interestingly, a couple of minutes digging shows some recognisable expressions used on their site.

Frictionless affordability assessments
Frictionless customer affordability and financial vulnerability checks conducted seamlessly in the background


A definition.

What is Open Government Data?

Open Government Data (OGD) is a philosophy- and increasingly a set of policies - that promotes transparency, accountability and value creation by making government data available to all. Public bodies produce and commission huge quantities of data and information. By making their datasets available, public institutions become more transparent and accountable to citizens. By encouraging the use, reuse and free distribution of datasets, governments promote business creation and innovative, citizen-centric services.


.https://www.oecd.org/gov/digital-government/open-government-data.htm

340. What would be more valuable still would be if the gambling operators
could approach the banks for data on the accounts of customers who are
problem gamblers, or at risk of being so, or who are opening new gambling
accounts. The gambling operators, if they were serious about the importance
of affordability checks, might have been expected to discuss with the banks
how they could cooperate, but Ms Frean told us that Starling Bank “have
367 Written evidence from Lloyds Banking Group (GAM0120)
368 Q 223 (Alexandra Frean)
369 Ibid.
370 Supplementary written evidence from Starling Bank (GAM0122)
90 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE GAMBLING INDUSTRY COMMITTEE
not been approached by any gambling companies to do affordability checks.
We would certainly be open to speaking to them about it ….”371 Similarly,
Lloyds Bank were “not aware of any direct contact from gambling operators
in relation to undertaking affordability checks, but we are open to having
such discussions.”372

341. As we have said, for gambling operators to share among themselves the data
required for affordability checks raises data protection issues that can be
resolved. For banks to be able to share such data with the industry will raise
separate data protection issues, and we have not sought the opinion of the
ICO on this.

342. The Gambling Commission, the Betting and Gaming Council, and
UK Finance should work with the Information Commissioner’s
Office to create a consistent industry-wide approach on the sharing
of customers’ financial data for the purpose of affordability checks.

oo-er.

I'm afraid this is only going one way.

Well there are a lot more cleverer people on here than me that can get to the nuts and bolts of it all and can articulate it as well but to me this is done and dusted, the  powers  that have influence in and on the GC are abolitionists of either gambling or any form of animal sports and this is there way of killing both in this country.
Next will be alcohol, they have already started taxing higher strength booze more and those limits will only head one way and that is down.They know it is easier to slowly strangle these things till it becomes the 'norm' that is why a cashless society is more easier to control.

Rebecca Cassidy is the author of a book called Vicious Games: Capitalism and Gambling

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ITDKJ9YXpw

It's the classic route: unhappy, frumpy lefty gets anthropology degree at yooney -> sponsorship by Davos -> House of Lords -> quango (Gambling Commission) -> ban gambling because it's capitalist.

At no point is there any need to worry about voters or MPs or democracy in general. This bitter woman has learned how to bypass all of that.

(Alway s remember what 'capitalism' is: a posh word for what normal people call freedom.)

There seems a lot of this view above, but the step that's still illdefined is that last one, 'ban gambling'.

I can see they can do a fair bit without bills or papers being passed, but ultimately laws, papers and rulings will have to be put in place that will define this more clearly.

and that part is still fundamentally controlled by government.

You can achieve a de facto ban on legal gambling by making it an experience so difficult and unpleasant that no one would want to do it anyway. That's what Cassidy is arguing for, and what she's on the cusp of achieving. Hell, she already has achieved it when you go by the number of people who have already given up because of the effects of her proposals/demands.

That is true, but partly because they still have actually finalised anything in all this stupid process. It needs that to happen.

*still have not actually

I don't believe the intention is to ban 'gambling' completely, but as I wrote before, the ideal model for them is a national lottery style format where the game can only be beaten by chance, and they can cream off half the revenue for tax and other socialist projects. Everything is identifiable and can be controlled. I referenced that Omaze before, and for it's a shameful product imv, targeting the gullible (and low IQ). But it's not even regulated, as they don't call it gambling, and nobody seems to care that old ladies and hard up families are getting rinsed by those types of products.

CROPSTICK, part of the problem is that there are clever people around, very clever at times. But they resist seeing what is staring them in the face, as they don't want to be labelled conspiracy theorists or tin hatters online. I don't know why it's like this, but we can take the BBC as the bellwether of 'acceptable' opinion within public discourse currently. One could imagine the BBC getting right behind the concept of treating gambling (and potentially people who can't control their gambling) as a public health issue. They now hate horse racing, and anything to do with caucasian older men, or traditional British/English. So killing off HR is right in their arc. People on the freedom side of this fight can expect to get zero support from the mainstream, the blob or much of the HoC (a few backbenchers at best).

Framing (they aren't meant to make it public doh, heads will roll presumably, not for the racism but dropping the ball)



Sadiq Khan was forced to distance himself from a claim on his website that a picture of a young white family “does not represent real Londoners”.

The Labour London mayor was criticised over the message, which appeared as part of a guide to his and the Greater London Authority’s (GLA) brand.

The guide opened with the words: “A City For All Londoners”, and promised to appeal to all ages, genders, sexual orientations and family make-ups.

But a picture of a couple and their two children walking along the Thames, with parliament in the background, was highlighted as an example of pictures not to use. A label on the picture read: “Doesn’t represent real Londoners”.

It's about time we had some honesty from Khan, I guess....


[   This image is no longer available.   ]

I keep repeating myself... Your message may be getting lost in your high output, listing is never a good look, can't say I have detected yor message.

Hth.

Cider's message in brief.The tories are not tories but vote for them anyway.Ian Duncan smith and the Daily Mail are part of a left wing conspiracy to cancel gabling.Only Cider and GB news know the truth.Everything else is misinformation.

Do you reckon if that was published when Boris Johnson was London mayor, and the picture was of a black family, he would last to the end of the day ?

The tories are not tories (they are Tories, they aren't conservatives)


but vote for them anyway. (no)


Ian Duncan smith and the Daily Mail are part of a left wing conspiracy to cancel gabling(sic). I don't believe IDS, or the publication referenced have anything to do with it.

Only Cider and GB news know the truth. Everything else is misinformation. Plenty of people know, but they are frightened of being smeared. I personally couldn't give a sh1t. GB News is significantly imperfect, but it's the best we have right now, in the terms of a national broadcaster (very low bar). Ofcom will try and shut it down, I predict.

Well he got away with picaninnies Letterboxes tank topped b#m boys ect for years and didn't resign so I would think he would have got away with it.

It was satire, as I assume you are aware of, but if he had wrote the article when mayor, he would still have been forced to quit.

I don't believe the Khan inspired racism has even found its way to the bbc news desk as yet.

I am only having a laugh with you Cider,I don't like any of them be lucky.

All good. A couple of my posts on this thread have been a bit of a splurge, but this forum is not very good for links, and detailed content. It struck me this morning before I went out that I did not check on the WEF post, who was the author and if there was any links to what is going on in the UK. So I posted what I found.

My overarching point, what I keep repeating is that many people are fighting the wrong 'man'. It has very little to do with helping problem gamblers. It's just something that can be leveraged to attack us. This is a fight for our entire culture, and the way of life we had enjoyed, and been accustomed to.

The Khan connection is the framing, what I have touched on previously. This is the stuff that goes on way way outside of the public gaze, why do you think we now get a constant diet of non white people on tv ads, for example. 'we' are being conditioned. I will dip out of the 'AF' conversation for a while, which I intended to anyway, before this thread was started.

I do agree with some of your points, about wider control and influences cider.

But I think we have to tackle this as a more narrow issue, even if there are those wider issues as factors. We have to tackle the government process of limitations on gambling. They created things like the GC, in the first place.

Whether we can tackle the government process is still a difficult question though, I agree.

when it goes completely cashless you'll get a phone call from the bank at the end of the month informing you they've identified excess spending on alcohol and tobacco on your account and you're being referred to a counselor.

and they've updated your credit file.  addicted to smoking and alcoholic.

GC won’t buckle to anyone they’re looking for brownie points,the punters are fkd imo…

Fodder !

cider and co miss the obvious point that maj of people under say 45 , in his advert scenario dont see black people in adverts they just see PEOPLE,so who are the adverts aimed at exactly ?

I yearn for the times that we just saw people as exactly that, and not judged by their identity. Why do almost all the people who create ads seem to believe that they have to recruit/include actors who aren't white. It's a deliberate misrepresentation of the UK. It exactly follows the ideology of that Khan mistake, that an all white family is now manufactured as a misrepresentation of the country amongst the chattering classes, ie a bad thing. A quarter brain can see that it's not about having not white people included in ads, it's the deliberate cultivation of something that is not true. Although, we are heading there tbf.

adverts not true LOL
you mean they dont drive cars down mountain passes ar 180 mph
and halland and co dont really do those tricks with a ball
really ,well thats my fun stopped i thought everything in an advert was real ,
your obcessed with khan but people didnt mind bendy buses,water cannons that didnt/couldmnt fire water,,,garden bridges etc etc imagine khan presiding over all that

Being obtuse does not suit you at all.


according to the 2021 Census, the total population of England and Wales was 59.6 million, and 81.7% of the population was white



Whenever you see a human being represented in an ad on the English telly, you would expect the distribution to settle into those percentages over a sample. It doesn't matter whether they are playing the part of a normal person/family, or a fantasy one.

Unless, it is being deliberately subverted and not a random sample.

It's probably closer to the inverse of the natural distribution.

Here's another stat for you to digest

What percentage of UK families are mixed race?

1.7 million people (2.9%) had mixed ethnicity – 0.5 million of those identified with the mixed white and black Caribbean ethnic group (0.9%), and 0.5 million with the mixed white and Asian ethnic group (0.8%)

22 Dec 2022

nice to see cider after yrs/months of 24/7 tweets teling us we,re been taking over etc that over 80% of people in uk are white, anything to think he,s winning a debate at any given moment in time

The proportion of the UK population aged 16 years and over identifying as heterosexual or straight was 93.6% in 2020; there has been a decreasing trend since the series began in 2014.

An estimated 3.1% of the UK population aged 16 years and over identified as lesbian, gay or bisexual (LGB) in 2020, an increase from 2.7% in 2019 and almost double the percentage from 2014 (1.6%).

The proportion of men in the UK identifying as LGB increased from 1.9% to 3.4% between 2014 and 2020; the proportion of women identifying as LGB has risen from 1.4% to 2.8% over the same period.

People aged 16 to 24 years continue to be the most likely to identify as LGB in 2020 (8.0%) reflecting an increasing trend for this age group since 2014; this breaks down to 2.7% identifying as gay or lesbian, and 5.3% identifying as bisexual.

The engineering is working.

nice to see cider after yrs/months of 24/7 tweets teling us we,re been taking over etc that over 80% of people in uk are white, anything to think he,s winning a debate at any given moment in time


I don't use twatter, but yes you are right for once, and correct in conceding that you are being whipped in this particular back and forth. Fair play.

" The worlds gone Mad "  ....    Welll said Mick.

   https://www.racingpost.com/news/gambling-review/the-worlds-gone-mad-mick-cha...

Mick Channon, that's a big one.

You would have to concur reading this thread GC!!

if you used channons mindset you wouldnt be checking/investigating those people buying/bidding for horses at sales when the funds they have on paper dont exist,
dont people find it rather alarming that the list of people who said 24/7 for years
our yard doesnt gamble,i dont gamble, wasnt our/my money,the owner doesnt bet,no idea where the money came from blah,blah,sudden ly up in arms because they,d rather not have THE BETS , THEY APPARENTLY HAVE NEVER HAD ,rather than be subject to AC
i assume if theres been 1000,s of these checks  99.9% of people have agreed to them rather than walk away

Why are you obsessed with 99.9%? Btw trainers have more than one owner with horses, are you saying they are all the same?

well this is a dedicated racing forum and up till last week we were struggling to find anyone who had givepunting up,refused checks etc ,so i,d imagine you,d have to tour a fair few betting shops  or talk to alot of casual punters before you found a raft of punters giving game up,
what % of punters gambling in uk do you think if so inclined and decided to could place their bets in a betting shop,bearing in mind 40 yrs ago 100% of them did ?

You should give up on guessing percentages 1st tp, 100 % = ALL, which was not the case 40 years ago!! hth

well i,m sure the small % of punters who found other ways to bet 40 yrs ago can dance their way  around any  checks to continue their betting in 2023