More frequently these days I am being approached by a growing number of punters to complain that they are developing a lack of confidence in the integrity of the racing product due to certain occurrences.

Recently, I did a series of articles on the race-fixing phenomenon and the response from many of the punters was quite overwhelming. Separate and apart from the issue of the manipulation of results by criminal types, the punters are wholly unhappy with what they regard as poor treatment by those charged with the responsibility to ensure fair play.

As published in last Wed-nesday's Track & Pools form-book, the punters now think it necessary to convene an association to lobby for protection of their interests, such as it is.

On last Saturday's programme the first three races did absolutely nothing for the confidence of the punters. In the opening and third events the winning trainers had two entries in each race and the lesser fancied ones won at 22/1 and 5/1 respectively.

Fancied runners

The problem here, though, is that in both instances the more fancied runners saddled by both trainers were the odds-on favourites and each finished second. Then in the second race, the odds-on favourite, a mare of demonstrably more ability than her opposition, hardly raised a gallop with the champion jockey aboard.

Now, I am not here saying that there is something wrong in terms of a corrupt practice being perpetrated on the betting public. In fact, I have nothing but the highest regard for these trainers, whose horses are always performing well, but it is entirely understandable if the punters begin to clamour once again for the single entry system employed so successfully in many North American operations.

The American, European and Australian regulators decided long ago that for the racing game to be viable, the bettors must have a high degree of confidence in the integrity of the product, and a lot is done to further this objective.

The removal of the tongue-tie as declarable equipment is becoming something of a vexed issue with the punters as time wears on. There are now too many instances where it is abundantly clear that its usage can affect the performance of a horse, positively or negatively, depending on the circumstances in which it is applied.

Discretion

No discretion should be allowed to trainers, and all items and pieces of equipment to be carried in a race should be made declarable. Further, all exercise reports and veterinary reports should be made public.

There are other issues concerning the way information flows from promoters and regulators, which I have dealt with in the past and will again in future columns.

Given all that we know in terms of the racing game being a prime target for corrupt practices, the regulators and the promoters should leave nothing to chance. In fact, everything possible should and must be done to make it difficult for the unscrupulous among us to engage in criminal activity in and around the industry. Greater and more intense vigilance is needed now.

There should also be far less opportunity for the professionals working in the industry to create, unwittingly or otherwise, an impression of entrenched dishonesty, thus undermining the integrity of the sport.