John Gosden Warns UKGC Financial Checks Will Drive Bettors to the Black Market
Champion racehorse trainer John Gosden has launched a fierce attack on the UK Gambling Commission’s proposed financial risk checks, describing them as “the most ridiculous policy” he has encountered.
Gosden believes the measures will not stop people from betting. Instead, he argues that they could push customers away from licensed bookmakers and towards unregulated black-market operators, where players have fewer protections and the government collects no tax revenue.
Gosden questioned whether the regulator has enough practical knowledge of either horse racing or the wider gambling industry to introduce such measures.
“Their qualification is to have absolutely no experience of our industry or the gambling industry,” he said.
He also criticised the way the proposals have progressed, arguing that major changes affecting British betting and racing should receive greater political scrutiny.
“They’ve let a quango, the Gambling Commission, set the rules and run it through without a parliamentary debate,” Gosden added.
His main concern is that additional checks and restrictions will create unnecessary barriers for customers using regulated betting platforms. Bettors who feel that the licensed market has become too intrusive may simply look elsewhere.
“They’ve made this bizarre rule which will create criminality, which will cause someone wanting to have a bet to go to the black market,” Gosden warned.
He continued: “And if someone wants to have a bet, you’re not going to stop them — they’ll just go to the black market.”
Such a shift could have consequences beyond the bookmakers themselves. Unlicensed operators do not contribute the same tax revenue as regulated companies, while customers using those platforms may have little recourse if winnings are withheld or accounts are closed.
The Betting and Gaming Council has also raised concerns about the proposed system. The industry body has previously questioned whether the data used for the assessments will be accurate and reliable enough to determine whether an individual may be financially vulnerable.
Critics argue that spending figures alone do not provide a complete picture. A £1,000 betting loss could cause serious financial harm to one customer while representing an affordable expense for another. Credit reference data may not always reflect income, savings or a person’s real ability to fund their betting activity.
The UK Gambling Commission maintains that financial risk assessments are intended to identify vulnerable customers earlier and strengthen player protection. It also says that the checks should cause minimal disruption for the vast majority of bettors.
However, racing and betting industry figures remain sceptical. Their concern is that even low-friction checks could become another reason for customers to leave regulated operators, particularly when illegal betting sites offer faster registration and ask fewer questions.
The issue is especially sensitive for British horse racing, which remains financially connected to the regulated betting market. If a significant number of customers move to offshore or unlicensed platforms, the impact could spread beyond bookmakers and affect the wider racing industry.
For Gosden, the central problem is simple: financial checks may make legal betting more difficult without reducing demand. In that scenario, the black market would gain customers while licensed operators, racing and the government all lose revenue.
Olivia Grant is an iGaming news reporter at CasinosInCanada who covers casino industry updates, regulations, and market developments.
