THE story of how Ladbrokes conspired with a racehorse trainer to deliberately manipulate Rule4 deductions is not a new one, but reached its denouement this week when the Gambling Commission concluded an investigation into the incident and released a statement to guide betting operators on the need to apply Rule4 deductions fairly.

Trade
This is fairly well trodden ground, and the gist is that a Trading Room decision was made to cut the price of a known non-runner in order to maximise the deductions on bets placed on other runners by ordinary punters.
There are two points of genuine interest here: firstly, this deliberate attempt to skew the market in their favour made Ladbrokes the princely sum of £7.70, and more importantly to my eyes, the company provided false information about their reasons for cutting the price of that non-runner to the Gambling Commission, even though it was effectively bang to rights, and the truth was sure to come out under investigation. Ladbrokes, motto Est Sucker Natus Perparvis, do not come out of this smelling of roses.

I have mentioned before that it beggars belief that a company with such history should stoop so low as to rummage in the pockets of the gullible for pennies, and the potential damage done to the firm’s reputation is surely not worth the pecuniary gain. That was before I realised that the gain amounted to less than a tenner. What folly! What is easier to believe, and it almost certainly not unique to the gambling industry, is that the initial reaction from Ladbrokes was to play dumb, and while ostensibly co-operating with the regulator, they were found to have “failed to appropriately review all information available to them prior to initially providing the Gambling Commission with what were proven to be inaccurate explanations.”