Twitxy Saved

Ed Grimshaw

Verified account This account is verified. Learn more

@mindmodeller

Fifty years studying form. Racing analytics, probability models & systems thinking on UK racing governance. Racing should own its own market.
South Scotland CuttingComment.com Joined April 2011
1.1K Following 1.5K Followers 22K Posts

Latest posts 5

Pinned post

Ed Grimshaw Verified account @mindmodeller
Dear @BHAHorseracing,

You rushed to defend the fruit machine. Racing never needed it.
Shops: down a third, 9,000 to 5,825.
Levy: up, £65m to £108m.
Punters get restricted, closed, funds locked and an auto-email is all you get.

We ARE your customers. Who are you working for? #OpenLetter #HorseRacing #Budget2026 @Macbet1972 @AtTheRaces

cuttingcomment.com/dear-bha-were-…
cuttingcomment.com Dear BHA: We're Your Customers, Not the Fruit Machine | Cutting Comment Within hours of the Budget, racing's governing body was grieving for the betting-shop slots. The punters who fund the sport – restricted, checked and answered by automated email – are still waiting...
8 replies 8 reposts 57 likes 8.5K views View on X
Ed Grimshaw Verified account @mindmodeller
Yesterday a trainer who admitted deliberately misleading the BHA with a doctored email was fined £2,000, with her licence ban suspended. Last month a champion trainer was fined £1,100 after his runner at the Cheltenham Festival had an undeclared prohibited substance in its body.

A stable employee who took £1,950 for inside information got two years out of the sport.

Who does the rulebook actually bite?

#BritishRacing #horseracing @PJAOfficial @RacingPost
Ed Grimshaw Verified account @mindmodeller 1d
A stable employee paid £1,950 for inside information: two years out of the sport. A trainer found to have misled the BHA over a £42,033 payment: a £6,000 fine.

Does the BHA penalise everyone equally, or does it depend on who you are? Are jockeys, trainers, and racecourses treated proportionately, or is there a hierarchy and underlying bias from the BHA in its governance of the sport?

#BritishRacing #horseracing @BHAHorseracing @RacehorseOwners @NTFnews @PJAOfficial
View quoted post on X
4 replies 9 reposts 43 likes 2.3K views View on X
Ed Grimshaw Verified account @mindmodeller
A stable employee paid £1,950 for inside information: two years out of the sport. A trainer found to have misled the BHA over a £42,033 payment: a £6,000 fine.

Does the BHA penalise everyone equally, or does it depend on who you are? Are jockeys, trainers, and racecourses treated proportionately, or is there a hierarchy and underlying bias from the BHA in its governance of the sport?

#BritishRacing #horseracing @BHAHorseracing @RacehorseOwners @NTFnews @PJAOfficial
10 replies 14 reposts 109 likes 9.8K views View on X
Ed Grimshaw Verified account @mindmodeller
The statutory levy was sold as money to cut gambling harm. Some groups are now reported to be considering a judicial review of how the prevention pot is being handed out. The prior question is whether anyone can show the spending works.

In April, OHID provisionally allocated £25.4m to 33 organisations. Its updated list last week shows £39.7m to 40, about £14m more, published after a period of legal challenges. No reason for the increase has been given.

One of the later awards is £2.7m to Gamban. It was excluded in April as a limited company and is now funded, reportedly as a social enterprise. OHID has not publicly explained what changed.

No full impact assessment was produced for the Gambling Levy Regulations 2025. OHID says it is still building the evidence base on what works in prevention. NICE found no economic evidence on interventions to improve access to gambling treatment.

Before the next fight over who gets the money, will OHID publish the scores, and the evidence that this spending reduces harm?

@OHID @GamRegGB @GambleWithLives @BetGameCouncil @SMFthinktank @HarryStewartMo1
NEXT.io Verified account @nextdotio 3d
Groups mull judicial review after latest statutory levy funding award:

An upcoming legal challenge will argue the commissioning of gambling harms funds should be taken away from OHID .

Read More ⬇️ 
go.next.io/4k2fOC9
View quoted post on X