Chief Stipe

Verry Elleegant falls short as she valiantly tries to run down Addeybb in the Queen Elizabeth. Photo: Hanna Lassen/Getty Images HORSES Verry Elleegant owners propose $10m match race with Addeybb Article Author Stephen Brassel 4:40PM19 April 2021 0 Owners of champion mare Verry Elleegant have made a staggering offer to race Queen Elizabeth Stakes conqueror Addeybb in a winner-take-all $10m match race. However, unfortunately for the Australian racing public, the race won’t come to fruition despite best intentions – at least not this year. An early morning call to master trainer William Haggas at Newmarket in England on Sunday offering $5m for a match race against his Queen Elizabeth Stakes hero Addeybb must have come as a shock, but Haggas regathered himself and listened intently. The caller was Brae Sokolski, part owner of champion mare Verry Elleegant and he was lunching at Mr Wong restaurant in Sydney and discussing with fellow owners how his team could exact revenge on their arch-rival. For two years running Addeybb had beaten Verry Elleegant into second place in the showcase event of The Championships – the Queen Elizabeth Stakes but this time around the result didn’t sit well with Sokolski and a few of the owners. The two horses have met four times with the score 3-1 in favour of the English raider but connections of Verry Elleegant are not convinced the better horse won on Saturday. “Nothing went right for us and while I normally cop it on the chin this time I wasn’t convinced,” Sokolski said. “I thought why not have a crack, and see what William had to say about a match race. “He gave me time and listened respectfully, we talked for a good while and he actually said he loved the idea but it was going to be too hard this time around. “His jockey Tom Marquand was already heading home and the horse was in the throes of getting out of the country as well. “William said with a bit more notice he may well have been on board and he would certainly have given it plenty of thought. “We proposed each team putting up five million dollars and the winner took the ten (million). Brae Sokolski watches Verry Elleegant in the Melbourne Cup. Stuart McEvoy/The Australian. “It wasn’t like we were prepared to just throw money away, we honestly believe Verry Elleegant would beat Addeybb if they went head to head. “It also didn’t help with the carnival going back a week as it shortened preparation time for Addeybb going back for Royal Ascot.” As Addeybb jets out of the country to launch an assault on the big races in Europe the future of Verry Elleegant is yet to be decided. “We’ll let the dust settle and then make a decision on whether she stays here and goes to the Cox Plate or we head to France for the Arc,” Sokolski said. “I’ve always been keen on the Arc but the covid situation continues to be an issue so we have some serious thinking to do.” And from there is could be another crack at the Queen Elizabeth and possibly another meeting, or two, with Addeybb next autumn.

MacDonald contributed to that in my opinion. I'm sure she would have settled on the rail and yes she may have got held up at some stage but she is robust enough to push out. Better to do that than fight her.

Kerr was LOSING $50,000 A MONTH! Hell knows what his turnover was!!! Why report him? THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO REPORT HIM - all the RIU needed to do on a regular basis was a data match of our licensees against their client base and check either turnover and/or losses. It is perfectly within the rules. They did this AFTER the fact so it must have been easy to identify him. Hell Gammalite are you that naive? Did you know that these agencies have a STATUTORY obligation to report individual turnover that is over a certain amount per transaction and over an accumulated amount? Sure the authorities don't dig deep unless there is a red flag but it is perfectly within privacy laws to do it. Be afraid they could be looking at your account now!

Gammalite don't you understand that betting agencies have statutory obligations to meet than involves sharing information not only involving AML but also racing integrity. THEY are not required to "snitch" they are just required to provide the information. The agencies tasked with monitoring AML and racing integrity interpret the data. Bookies are licensed to provide betting on racing events - there are agreements reached between the racing jurisdiction and the agencies to share data. How hard is it for those tasked with monitoring the integrity of the industry to check what their licensees are doing? I bet some jurisdictions are doing this. As for putting the transactions in someone else's name - yep that can be done but that then relies on another person being complicit. But that wasn't the case with Kerr was it?

Actually I take back what I said about Daytona Red. I gave up watching him a while ago and didn't look at his recent runs. Change of stable and BLINKERS REMOVED!!!! Still he has looked weak on softer tracks.

Really? They didn't help him at the start! First time he has missed the jump isn't it? Nothing to do with the fact that he improved fitness wise from his first run of course.

LOL plus a tongue tie, nasal strip, lugging bit and ear muffs.

Yep part of my racing soul was cut out when Westland Racing Club was forced to close Hokitika to prop up a shit hole called Kumara that doesn't have a resident committee and a population of about 200 people! I get distressed when I see the shyte tracks that are being produced at our "Premier" locations (Te Rapa despite its recent renovations wasn't that great at the weekend) and prominent trainers say they are "great"! I find myself looking more and more to the racing coming from OZ metrop meeting's on a Saturday. Hell even the racing from the OZ country tracks is better than some of the poor quality fields we see.

The horse I feel has an attitude problem. Puts in some days and not others. Probably could benefit from a gallop over the steeples on the Ellerslie Hill.

So how do they identify those if they are not information sharing but waiting on the 800 Snitch line to alert them?

So what was the point of even asking the RIU Betting Analyst to be involved in the JCA hearing? What the money was spent on is irrelevant to the fact that Kerr committed fraud. In my opinion that part of the "evidence" is an arse covering exercise by the RIU to give the impression that they are on top of things - which they obviously aren't. You obviously haven't read the extracts from the T's and C's for Ladbrokes that I posted. The RIU has EVERY right to question a LICENSEE about their activities related to racing and especially about their gambling. Maybe "lot's of trainers and jockey's have offshore accounts" but wouldn't you expect the RIU to be monitoring them? I'm not expecting them to question EVERYONE with an account but surely there were enough red flags to question Kerr as a licensed trainer? Kerr identified as a problem gambler to TAB-NZ; Kerr is a HRNZ licensed Trainer and Driver; Kerr opens and closes numerous accounts 2009-16; Kerr spending on average $50k per month with Ladbrokes; Kerr as a Trainer won a total of $245k during the 2020 season - 10% of that is $24,500 i.e. half of what he spent with Ladbroke's; Where was all the money coming from?; Information/data is supposedly shared between the betting agencies, HRNZ and the RIU with the intent of proactively ensuring the integrity of NZ racing. Did anyone from HRNZ and the RIU ever look into or ask Kerr about his gambling PRIOR to a third party complaint in 2021? According to the evidence presented to the JCA it appears not! All we see is a retrospective investigation that adds nothing, achieves nothing other than adding another salacious angle to Kerr's demise! Don't you expect better from those running the industry? The RIU are quick to play the cops in flak jackets hiding in hedges and convince their Police mates to do wire taps yet don't seem to be able to do what is within their own jurisdiction and ask some simple questions? Yeah na better to have lots of road kill littered all over the place than act proactively.

You miss the point Gammalite. If the RIU was able to identify Kerr's account to Labrokes once there was an issue why couldn't they do it proactively BEFORE there was an unrelated issue? Doesn't say much for the RIU systems, their Betting Analyst nor the $10m spent per annum by them maintaining the integrity of the sport. Not to mention the millions spent on INCA to find nothing. Bear in mind Kerr's gambling was going on during the whole INCA investigation!!! Keystone Cops spring to mind!

More from Ladbrokes T's and C's.

Gammalite - have you opened an online account with a bookmaker? Do you remember the ID hoops you had to jump through? According to the JCA evidence there didn't seem to be any issues with getting information on Kerr's betting at Ladbrokes. Do you reckon Kerr was betting on credit with Ladbrokes? More hoops to jump through if he was. Here are the terms and requirements for have a Ladbrokes account. Good luck coming up with a false identity!

Correct they don't know where the money comes from but under global agreements on Anti Money Laundering laws they have to monitor large sums of money put through their accounts and report to a central agency. The trigger amounts are not just single deposits but collective amounts over time. It is a very easy step to data match against licensees especially given the RIU has information sharing agreements with bookies AND the code administrations. Geez no wonder INCA is struggling to find anything!

The issue isn't about deflecting blame or even sharing responsibility. It is about what systems are in place to proactively monitor license holders and to limit harm to the industry. Ultimately it doesn't excuse Kerr's behaviour but both TAB-NZ and the RIU have a legislated responsibility to limit harm and maintain the integrity of the industry. In my opinion they either act proactively, re-actively or both. It would appear even though they have sufficient power to act proactively they don't. The fact that they don't is reflective of the culture of both organisations. TAB-NZ encourage losing punters (they discourage winning punters) and the RIU has a Police culture of catch and punish as opposed to prevention. So Kerr was spending large sums of money gambling - at first with TAB-NZ and latterly with an overseas bookmaker. When he had accounts with TAB-NZ they were, according to @nzhorseracing, informed that he had problems with gambling. One would hope that given the rules around licensee's betting the RIU and HRNZ were notified by TAB-NZ of Kerr's problems. That is a proactive approach. It would appear that this didn't occur or if it did no action was taken. Now the RIU has an information sharing agreement with HRNZ and overseas bookies. Supposedly the RIU Betting Analyst is monitoring licensee betting. Again one would hope that this was done on a proactive basis rather than waiting for the 0800 Snitch line to deliver. The serious question that should be asked the RIU is why wasn't a red flag raised through data matching of Kerr's offshore gambling activities in the TWO YEARS that he was spending very large amounts? Given he was a licensee. I fail to understand WHY a red flag wasn't raised. The data matching isn't very hard to do. So it begs the question is the RIU Betting Analyst incompetent or did the RIU know and nothing was proactively done about it? It appears incompetence and inadequate systems rule the day as according to the evidence it took a third party snitch to notify the RIU to seek the information from the overseas bookmaker. All it would require is a regular query run across the bookmaker's client accounts looking for matching NZ licensees. The a further query matching amount spent. What sort of message does the evidence presented in the judgement send to other licensees? "Don't worry about getting around the betting rules as a Driver just punt offshore - the RIU obviously don't have clue!"

That's not correct (2009-16) and regardless there is an information sharing agreement with oversea's bookies. Why wasn't a red flag raised that a NZ Licensee and known problem gambler was betting with Ladbrookes?

You haven't given us any numbers just anecdotal wink wink nudge nudge bullshit. Surely you can post some numbers? Why the secrecy? BOAY readers take note - JJ Flash has a reputation for posting misinformation and fake news. I guess Harness can rest assured that they still have the largest revenue race held domestically across all codes - the NZ Trotting Cup.

Oh right. JJ Flash has access to figures that no other general stakeholder has. JJ you are full of shyte. So this BIG DECLINE that you are talking about has only occurred this season? That is in the last 9 months? Oh I wonder why that has happened nothing to do with a pandemic or the even further skewed import/export situation?

Still waiting for the facts JJ Flash. However just to speed things up. You are aware that between 2018-19 and 2019-20 the % of total revenue earned by Harness actually increased and Thoroughbred racing declined. That is on the back of a very skewed import distribution favouring the other codes particularly Thoroughbreds i.e. that % increase was based on Harness domestic racing entirely. The import distribution in 2018 was 63% Thoroughbred, 24% Greyhound and 13% Harness. So your base premise doesn't match the facts. Of course you may be privy to the current figures as the rest of us have to rely on a paucity of information from this current mob. Neither the TAB nor any of the codes have released detailed half-yearly reports. So much for transparency.

But where are the facts to support the statement that there has been a decline in betting on NZ Harness? We don't need to worry about causation at this stage just need to establish the facts regarding what you and JJ Flash are saying is a decline. The NZ Trotting Cup still only runs second to the Melbourne Cup in terms of race turnover. The nearest galloping race is $400k behind! Then we can look at causes. Don't forget the manipulation of the calendar and televised racing that favours Thoroughbreds either. The Dogs maintain the betting revenue only through the importation of thousands of races from OZ.

What facts did you use to back this statement up? Or is it just a "gut feel"?

Therein lies the reason for the eventual demise of South Island racing. Goodbye Guineas.

Maybe but she has had 3 weeks between all but one of her races and a month since her Oaks win. As for the flight over a damn sight easier than a float trip to Wellington! I think if the track had been firmer she would have run better. Often Te Akau's horses look a little underdone when they start first up in OZ. Then they have a hard run and are flattened. The Sydney trainers seem to have a don't die wondering attitude. Just an opinion based on observation. Now I don't think our best 3 yr olds are inferior to Ozzie's but they don't get tested enough in NZ because we don't have the depth as much now.

Yes I would have thought if anyone would be screaming from the rooftops it would be the South Island's leading trainer. But he just see's it as an irrigation problem.