Punters face Cheltenham Festival misery unless Gambling Commission acts fast

I was wrong about Easysland but hope, come the middle of March, to be proved right about Stage Star and Noble Yeats.

On Thursday afternoon, not long after bookmakers started betting on Saturday's cross-country chase, it struck me that one of the leading layers had seriously underestimated Easysland's prospects given the one-time 17-length conqueror of Tiger Roll was set to run off a mark of just 134 having shown definite signs of a revival on his previous outing. 

The apparently generous 22-1 was taken about a horse who by the following day was down to single figures. Taking a price that turns out to be considerably larger than SP has led to countless punters having their accounts restricted, but on the basis that Easysland ran a stinker – the odds compilers were proved right and I was proved wrong – one would assume my custom will remain wanted.

That was my only bet on the card, but following their Cheltenham runs I did back Stage Star for the Turners Novices' Chase at 16-1 each-way before then taking a punt that Noble Yeats will step forward considerably with the reapplication of cheekpieces in the Gold Cup. It is hard to know what's going on in the head of Emmet Mullins – he must be a demon at dominoes – but I reckon he was pleased with what he saw on Saturday.

At the moment, Stage Star and Noble Yeats represent only half my festival ante-post book. There is, however, little doubt that by the time we get to the best four days of the year, I'll have expanded my portfolio. I'm also certain to increase it again as we roll through the meeting. In doing that, I shall not be alone – and it's the reason why punters are about to enter a period when affordability checks are destined to cause more misery than ever before.

Stage Star was added to my Cheltenham Festival portfolio following his easy win on Saturday

Edward Whitaker

It was, of course, hugely encouraging that Paul Scully, the UK's minister responsible for gambling, on Thursday stated unequivocally that he does not believe it is the role of government nor the Gambling Commission to tell adults how much of their own money they can afford to gamble. It was similarly pleasing to discover Scully even feels "affordability checks" is the wrong description for what Rishi Sunak's administration plans to unveil in a white paper he described as now "a matter of weeks away".

This will presumably have come as a surprise to the rebuked Gambling Commission, given the unelected body has developed an obsession with affordability checks, one that has led to bookmakers, fearful of being fined by the regulator, insisting punters must share with them deeply personal financial information in order to be allowed to continue betting. Not surprisingly, many punters have rejected that demand, as a consequence robbing British racing of a fortune in lost income.

What we do not yet know is what happens next.

Having had its illiberal interference rubbished by the minister, will the Gambling Commission act quickly and give unequivocal instructions to bookmakers who have hitherto been merely guessing at where the quango feels its affordability bar should be set? Will the Gambling Commission heed Scully's words and accept it has no mandate to tell you or I how much of our own money we should be allowed to allocate to a perfectly legal practice?

The serious concern is that if the Gambling Commission does nothing and simply waits for the white paper and then the proposed legislation's passage through parliament, the mess it has made will become ever more rotten as we move to and through the Cheltenham Festival.

That is because the way I punt is probably how many of you punt. Betting money does not leave my bank account in equal monthly instalments. It is not paid for like a gym membership. There are times when I hardly bet at all, yet just as most of my mince pies are purchased around Christmas, a very significant chunk of my betting takes place around the time of the festival.

Backing Gaelic Warrior (pictured in front) at this year's Cheltenham Festival could be made more difficult by affordability checks

John Grossick (racingpost.com/photos)

That is perfectly normal behaviour, as evidenced by the fact that when Coral publish their annual ranking of the year's most popular betting races based on turnover, the list is dominated by contests that took place at the festival, with even the hunter chase that immediately follows the Gold Cup making the top ten. Put simply, we cannot get enough of jumping's premier fixture.

None of this matters to the Gambling Commission nor its belief that our hobby should be policed. This is crucial because bookmakers believe they cannot take into account the fact customers will suddenly start betting more between now and the end of the festival. Their trigger for suspending accounts is linked to algorithms, not logic. You might have been unaffected by affordability checks until now, but a festival-linked spike in your betting activity will potentially change that.

It's a major flaw in a heavily flawed policy that exposes the extent to which the Gambling Commission fails to understand punters or punting. 

If, for example, you reckon Gaelic Warrior is the best handicapped hurdler in training but are unable to read the mind of Willie Mullins, you might wish to go to the websites of those bookmakers already offering non-runner no bet concessions and back him for the Coral Cup, County Hurdle and Martin Pipe. Depending on the horse's chosen target, you would be refunded for at least two of those bets, but every one of them would be counted as turnover and move you towards or beyond the affordability threshold set for you by the bookmaker. At that point, no matter how much you fancy the favourite in the Ultima, your festival betting with that firm would be halted, pending an investigation of your financial affairs.

I was wrong about Easysland. When it comes to the irrational insanity of affordability checks and how they will frustrate festival punters, I'm certain I'm right.

Stay ahead of the field with the ultimate racing subscription – and your first month FREE. Enjoy the Racing Post digital newspaper and award-winning journalism from the best writers in racing, and make informed betting decisions with our expert tipping and form study tools. Head to the subscription page and select 'Get Ultimate Monthly', then enter the code FREE to get Members' Club free for one month.

First month free, subscription renews at full monthly price thereafter.

Customers wishing to cancel will need to contact us at least seven days before their subscription is due to renew.