Soccer

Bet monitoring in a fast-changing wagering landscape: a New Zealand case study By Dr Eliot Forbes, Chief Executive, Racing Integrity Board, New Zealand; Member, IFHA Council on Anti-Illegal Betting and Related Crime The global wagering environment is undergoing a profound shift. The current landscape requires us to extend our integrity focus beyond domestic borders to an environment that is international, multi-jurisdictional and increasingly crypto-denominated. Legal, domestic operators now compete with a rising tide of illegal online operators, including crypto racebooks, illegal exchanges and prediction markets. Such operators free-ride on racing’s product and present a corrosive threat to the sport’s integrity and its commercial foundations. For regulators and sporting bodies this is not an abstract concern. Bet monitoring has long been a core integrity tool, but we have had to strengthen this capability and broaden its lens to match a market that is evolving faster than legacy systems were designed for. This article uses New Zealand as a case study in how a small jurisdiction is challenging itself to respond to these challenges, while recognising that no single organisation has all of the answers. A changing domestic landscape New Zealand’s racing and sports betting market is structured around a single licensed wagering operator. TAB NZ holds the exclusive right to offer betting to New Zealand residents. The Racing Integrity Board (RIB) was established to deliver integrity services, providing independent oversight of all three racing codes (thoroughbred, harness and greyhound), including responsibility for bet monitoring. An important feature of our position is geography. While domestic wagering is TAB NZ’s primary focus, we sit on the doorstep of Australia, one of the most vibrant, competitive and innovative wagering markets in the world. New Zealand-based wagering accounts for only around one-third of the combined Australasian betting on New Zealand races. We have therefore always needed to keep one eye on the Australian market to understand how cross-border activity affects the integrity of our own racing. Over the last three years the domestic framework has evolved. Through a 25-year strategic partnership, TAB NZ appointed Entain to deliver wagering to the New Zealand market. Entain has modernised the product offerings and upgraded the technology systems. For the RIB this has been an opportunity to work with a partner that operates across different global markets and to deepen our understanding of how New Zealand-facing activity sits within a wider regional picture. In July 2025 the New Zealand Government introduced legislation to establish a domestic online wagering monopoly, consolidating all licensed online wagering within a single onshore operator and creating a clearer environment for monitoring domestic 12 activity. The scale of Australia-based wagering on New Zealand racing, however, means it remains essential to maintain visibility of activity with Australian operators. Our philosophy: Five core elements of wagering integrity Our philosophy begins with five core elements: 1. Intent and the regulatory framework Bet monitoring is a specific statutory responsibility and we approach it with deliberate intent. This includes developing a deep understanding of the operating environment, recognising the tight correlation between wagering and racing integrity and ensuring that regulatory frameworks and associated arrangements are effective. 2. Capability and expertise Effective integrity oversight relies on skilled people. Betting analysts, stewards and investigators bring complementary expertise enabling us to interpret market signals in the context of how races are run, how participants behave and how wagering markets respond. 3. Data as a strategic asset We treat data and the systems that support it as strategic assets. How information is accessed, structured and managed directly affects the quality of insight we can draw. Modern analytical tools, including emerging AI-enabled technologies, are also broadening and automating the ways in which data can be examined for anomalies and unusual patterns. 4. Systems-thinking Integrity risk can emerge across ownership structures, training environments, stable and jockey behaviour, betting markets and information channels. Understanding how these elements interact, including how behaviour in one part of the ecosystem can influence another, is essential to assessing risk coherently and proportionately. 5. Feedback and learning Our approach is anchored in continuous improvement. Each alert, review and investigation provides insight that sharpens our focus, strengthens our monitoring capability and enhances overall organisational performance. We adopt an intentional learning philosophy so that, as far as practicable, our integrity effectiveness evolves in step with the dynamic nature of the wagering environment. 13 Integrated Wagering Integrity Operations Our bet monitoring activities are built around coordinated internal workflows involving betting analysts, stewards and investigators. Working in partnership with Entain and guided by clear operational protocols, our approach is proactive and combines early preparation, real-time surveillance and routine post-race review across all three codes. Before each meeting, the betting analyst distributes an initial assessment to relevant stewarding teams highlighting key market movements, high-risk races, notable bets placed in early markets and emerging patterns. The responsible steward reviews this information, adds relevant racing context such as stable knowledge and participant connections and ensures all integrity teams begin the day with a shared understanding of the key risks. During the race meeting, analysts monitor the markets continuously and issue alerts when certain bets (a $50 bet from one person may be highly significant, whereas as a $10,000 bet on the same runner from another person may be no cause for concern), wagering liabilities, timing or market behaviour warrant closer attention. Alerts are acknowledged by the stewards immediately and they assess the race with specific reference to the information provided. Their observations focus on racing patterns, opportunities afforded to runners and whether any further inquiry is necessary. Where a matter requires deeper scrutiny, it is escalated to the betting analyst and principal investigator. This ensures that concerns arising from either the race or the market can progress seamlessly into formal casework as needed. Post-race findings also feed back into our risk indicators, sharpening both stewarding practice and analytical settings. Illegal offshore betting on New Zealand racing Alongside our domestic work, we are extending our attention to offshore activity involving New Zealand racing. Recent analysis from Responsible Wagering Australia (RWA)1 estimates that despite legislation and regulatory controls that aim to prohibit offshore gaming and wagering, illegal or ‘grey market’ offshore operators now account for about 36 per cent of Australia’s total online gambling market, a share that has doubled since 2019. It would be optimistic to assume that New Zealand is insulated from similar forces. Our analysis of crypto deposits into major sportsbooks provides some sobering insights. Blockchain transparency allows aggregated crypto-deposit data to be extracted from the largest offshore crypto casinos and sportsbooks. Over the past twelve months, the top operators globally recorded more than US$187 billion in identifiable crypto deposits and seven of the ten largest platforms now offer racebook functionality (Figure 1 - Crypto Deposits). 14 As this dataset excludes all fiat-currency deposits, these totals represent only a portion of total deposits. Even if only one per cent of wagering on these platforms relates to horse racing, this would imply at least USD 1.87 billion in crypto betting activity takes place on racing across this cohort of operators alone. Figure 1:Crypto Deposits2 The RIB has analysed the crypto racebook market over the past year. More than fifty leading crypto-enabled brands, licensed in pseudo-regulatory environments, now accept bets on New Zealand racing, alongside offerings of racing content from other major international jurisdictions (Figure 2). They do not pay product fees, do not share integrity data, offer limited or no consumer protections and are unlikely to adhere to anti-money-laundering obligations. Many jurisdictions may be unaware their product is being wagered on through these channels, receiving neither product fees nor integrity data. These operators rely on ‘grey market’ licensing regimes such as Curaçao, Anjouan and Costa Rica, where licensing confers the appearance of legitimacy while imposing minimal integrity or reporting obligations. Offshore operators offer fixed-odds and derivative products on New Zealand races that do not exist domestically. These operators also advertise sign-up inducements such as deposit matches and bonuses with rollover requirements no longer legal in regulated domestic markets. 3 Alongside the large crypto-enabled sportsbooks, New Zealand races are also offered on illegal betting exchanges, crypto casinos and sport prediction markets, alongside political events and esports. 15 It is a fundamentally parasitic model: they extract value from New Zealand and other jurisdictions’ racing product while contributing nothing to the integrity systems or financial framework that sustain the sport. Figure 2: Racing markets offered by offshore operators, as at November 2025 16 Integrity risks in an evolving global environment Offshore environments often amplify harm-related risks, as highlighted in the IFHA Council’s August 2025 Responsible Gambling-themed bulletin4, and these conditions shape the broader context in which the offshore wagering market operates. We are mindful that the lack of safeguards, along with the incentives used in these markets, can influence online consumer behaviour. New Zealanders wagering offshore, even when it is not linked to criminal activity, still undermine the integrity of the system and the industry’s funding mechanisms and they also expose themselves to greater consumer risks. When a significant share of wagering occurs offshore, the RIB sees far less of the market signal, weakening the situational awareness needed for effective oversight. Offshore operators target younger customers through social media, streaming platforms and influencer channels. When initial engagement with racing occurs in unregulated environments that operate without integrity expectations, it becomes more difficult for legitimate channels—or the sport itself—to build long-term, trusted relationships. Concerningly, consumers report difficulty in determining whether an online operator is legitimate or not. For bad actors, the opportunities are considerable. Crypto-based racebooks and exchanges, with anonymous wallets, rapid settlement and opaque ownership structures, are attractive to individuals seeking to move or disguise illicit activity. When betting takes place in environments with no reporting obligations, the risk of corrupted outcomes being used for money laundering increases significantly. The road ahead In response to these challenges, our ongoing work includes: 1. Mapping offshore coverage We are building a clearer view of where New Zealand racing appears offshore, monitoring key markets and mapping the crypto-deposit activity of major operators to ensure we are properly informed about the scale and profile of this activity. 2. Seeking greater transparency We are pursuing opportunities to secure greater transparency with operators that are lawful in their home jurisdictions. Where integrity agreements are possible, our position is clear: operators who profit from New Zealand racing should contribute to the sport by protecting the product they use. Where broadcast or wagering rights are granted to third-party agencies, we expect full visibility of downstream distribution chains, including clarity around the beneficial entity and the jurisdiction which the operator is licensed. 17 3. Supporting policy development We provide informed support to broader domestic policy work including consideration of tools such as payment interdiction and the targeted disruption of illegal marketing. Recognising the close relationship between online gaming and racebook offerings, the New Zealand Government’s intention to grant online gaming licences reinforces the need for officials, regulators and policy- makers to be well informed about the crossover between these products and the integrity risks that can arise across both. 4. Enhancing cooperation Meaningful progress requires coordination across agencies. Domestically, this includes policy bodies, financial intelligence units, law enforcement agencies, racing and sporting codes and licensed wagering operators. For the RIB, this means investing in relationships and systems that enable effective information sharing and ensuring our local partners and stakeholders understand the evolving threat landscape. 5. Strengthening information-sharing We are deepening our pathways with international partners, including the IFHA and its Council on Anti-Illegal Betting and Related Crime, to share knowledge, exchange intelligence and raise specific concerns about suspicious activity or operators. Conclusion We recognise that New Zealand is one small jurisdiction within a vast and rapidly evolving wagering environment. Wagering and technology are advancing quickly and artificial intelligence will accelerate that trend. AI is already helping analysts synthesise data and identify anomalies but it will also be used by sophisticated bettors and inevitably by those who test boundaries. As betting activity moves across borders and platforms including crypto-based channels, traditional monitoring approaches must adapt and evolve. The task ahead requires more sophisticated automated online monitoring, sharper intelligence, deeper cooperation and fresh strategies. From a New Zealand perspective we intend to strengthen our domestic oversight, build a clearer picture of offshore activity, advocate for coherent policy settings and contribute meaningfully to international cooperation. We will continue working with policy-makers, sporting bodies, regulators and government agencies to ensure our collective capability keeps pace with the environment. In a wagering landscape that is more complex and fast-moving than at any point in recent memory, that foundation is essential to protecting the integrity and financial sustainability of New Zealand racing. 1 Responsible Wagering Australia. “Illegal Offshore Gambling: A Growing Threat”. Australia Offshore Market Analysis November 2025 2 Tanzanite Analytics (https://tanzanite.xyz/analytics) 3 For example, under Australia’s National Consumer Protection Framework for Online Wagering (NCPF), wagering service providers are prohibited from offering or advertising inducements intended to encourage individuals to open a betting account. This includes sign-up bonuses, free bets, matched deposits, bonus codes, and similar offers. These restrictions apply across all forms of public advertising and digital marketing. 4 Purbrick, Martin. “From Regulation to Risk: Illegal Markets and the Inadvertent Growth of Gambling Harm by Over Regulation of Legal Markets.” IFHA Council on Anti-illegal Betting and Related Crime Quarterly Bulletin, August 2025.

I just watched a fella called brad reid on the box seat trumpeting how great it was that the number of mares bred was up by 99. mr reid went on to say how great a job HRNZ had done in stopping the decline. Now after watching mr reid i came to the conclusion hes just another well meaning spin artist as well. You see, mr reid said its not rocket science to work out hrnz needed to invest heavily in subsidising breeders through bonuses,cedits earned by fllies and mares who win races,credits per foal for bigger breeders,etc.It sound like its 2-3 million annually. So Reid said its not rocket science the industry had to artificially introduce those subsidies to stabalise numbers. so all mr reids done is positively spin the very negative underlying aspect,which is obvious,he after all said it,that  numbers would have declined without the subsidies .. So all mr reid's done is positively spin the  underlying very negative aspect,whcih to it. to be honest,i personally just don't think they realise just what they say sometimes, because they are so caught up in trying to make out what a good job hrnze doing. as to subsidies. well theres 2 things about that. Its money being diverted from somewhere,hrnz can only spend it once and how long are subsidies sustainable for. maybe mr reid is too young but perhaps he should have a look back in history to past examples of what happens when you remove subsidies. In the mid 80's all hell broke loose when rogernomics removed the lamb subsidies applied during the muldoon era. Now,i'm not comparing an  industy with 70 million sheep at the time to an industry with 1600 horses,but it was still  a case study of the consequences of what happens when you artifically manipulate something and ignore relaities. the point i keep making is,if hrnz was truly doing a good job,there would be no need for any subsidies. Subsidies are just a way of putting off dealing with realities and the longer you put it off,the worse the inpact becomes.

But they’re freeloaders as well. Heard of sports betting?

Why do you say that THEY the freeloaders? Isn't it the NZTAB that freeloads off the taxpayer? And has a monopoly in NZ?

A floor amendment has been added to HB 904–a sweeping piece of legislation seeking to legalize fixed-odds wagering in Kentucky–that is designed to essentially ensure no limit can be imposed on the number of mares bred to a stallion in the state. It requires that the Kentucky Horse Racing and Gaming Corporation select and use an entity to act as “a registrar of Thoroughbreds” in the state, meaning it could choose an organization other than The Jockey Club, which is the current breed registry for the U.S., Canada and Puerto Rico. That “registrar of Thoroughbreds” is then unable to restrict “the number of mares that can be bred to a stallion or otherwise refuse to register any foal based upon the number of mares bred to the stallion.” HB 904 has been posted for passage in the Regular Orders of the Day for Friday. This means that this amendment could be voted on as early as Friday morning in the House. If successful, the amended bill could then theoretically be brought up for final passage on the House floor immediately. The specific language of the amendment reads: “For purposes of this chapter, a registrar of Thoroughbreds shall not restrict the number of mares that can be bred to a stallion or otherwise refuse to register any foal based upon the number of mares bred to the stallion of the foal submitted for registration. “The corporation shall select and utilize an entity to serve as the registrar of Thoroughbreds. The registrar shall submit to the jurisdiction of Kentucky and shall comply with the laws of this chapter,” the language reads. The amendment was authored by Republican David Osborne, speaker of the state House of Representatives. The Republicans hold an 80-20 majority in the state House. The language of this amendment is almost identical to that in a bill Osborne introduced in 2022. That bill was written in response to The Jockey Club's controversial mandate that any stallion born from 2020 onward would only be allowed to cover up to 140 mares. After that bill was introduced, The Jockey Club rescinded the cap. Speaking at last week's National Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association conference (NHBPA), new Jockey Club chair Everett Dobson told the audience the organization would revisit that stallion cap mandate. “Years ago, The Jockey Club attempted to impose a cap on the number of mares a stallion could breed. Under my leadership, we're going to revisit that question. This time, we will involve stallion farms and other breed registries around the world to help us find the solution. Our discussions must be science-based with an understanding of the economic realities of the world we live in,” Dobson said. The fixed-odds bill, introduced into the state legislature by Republican Representatives Matthew Koch and Michael Meredith, is a sweeping piece of legislation designed to essentially expand and modernize the state's gambling infrastructure. Among other aspects of the bill, it requires tracks and tote companies to adopt new modern technologies to streamline and expedite betting cycle times. It also attempts to essentially decouple wagering providers from the prediction market, which is the ability for bettors to make speculative bets on the outcomes of future events. Koch told the TDN this week that as the markets have evolved, “predictive markets, by the way, are absolutely cannibalizing other forms of gambling that are out there.” Earlier this week, it was successfully voted out of the standing committee on licensing and occupations. The post Anti Stallion Cap Amendment Added to KY Fixed-Odds Bill appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions. View the full article