-
Available Subscriptions
Galloping Chat
Thoroughbred Racing forum discussion.
4,133 topics in this forum
-
- 5 replies
- 744 views
-
- 0 replies
- 433 views
-
- 2 replies
- 538 views
-
- 10 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 16 replies
- 1k views
-
- 30 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 19 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 4 replies
- 473 views
-
- 8 replies
- 750 views
-
- 0 replies
- 335 views
-
- 46 replies
- 2.2k views
-
- 54 replies
- 2.5k views
-
- 3 replies
- 571 views
-
- 7 replies
- 614 views
-
- 33 replies
- 2.5k views
-
- 1 reply
- 1.3k views
-
- 34 replies
- 3.5k views
-
- 29 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- Guest
-
- 9 replies
- 611 views
-
- 0 replies
- 371 views
-
- 14 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 1 reply
- 433 views
-
- 11 replies
- 1k views
-
- 46 replies
- 2.9k views
-
- 1 reply
- 612 views
Announcements
-
Posts
-
You've been chopped. I know somebody else that the same thing happened to them. You're not missing much anyway. The site is a disgrace and a gives social media sites a bad name. It is infested and dominated by a SMALL number of conspiracy theorists and racing malcontents that pop up to support each other when they are challenged, including the site admin (found that out pretty quickly). They make a lot of noise, giving people the impression everyone in racing is like that. -
-
No can't access said Facebook page, I just get the it's been deleted or restricted as to who can see it, I only posted one comment, strange indeed. -
-
the latest comment that makes no sense to me again comes from mr peden,who in the short hrnz press release about the cambridge meeting that was cancelled said "we are looking at putting some of the stakes cambridge lost this week back into the region,just how it looks is to be determined" Now what is the logic behind such a comment. Does he not realise there was a race meeting 2 hours up the road that the horses from cambridge could have started in. Or why couldn't they have just said ,hey lets transfer those 4 races they could have held at cambridge,to be run at auckland.even use the same nominations to select the fields,run them for the same stake or whatever. Why is mr peden saying things that encourages people to say,hey if we don't go to auckland then we will get a bigger stake down the track. does mr peden not realise that the shortage of horses was caused by,you guessed iit ,a shortage of horses. Wheres his consistency. hes never said before that when there were programmed races at cambridge that weren't run he thought they should do the same.. i.e. when they only run 6 races,if his thinking is consistent,why hasn't he said the stake from the races programmed and not run on those nights, will go into the region. Why did they just add 4 new meetings to next years calendar in the auckland region.Can't they work out they don't have enough horses in that region to justify that. Also,where is the proof that running races like the southern surge or the golden gait or whatever,with the increased stakes,generates more overall starters throughout the year. If you look at auckland.all i see was people aimed at the bigger stakes,but did they actually race more over the season or will they do so in the future. If hes a so called data man,can he show us the data which says its more beneficial to put the money into high stake races on certain nights than it is to apply the increased stakes in lesser amounts across the board of all racing. these are the people at hrnz who came up with the 2 year old bonuses,which have done nothing to increase th number of starters in 2 year old races. These are the same people who said having a million dollar nz cup was needed. Where is the evidence having big stakes for those races did anything to get the connections of the horses at that level to start more in other open class races throughout the season. Also what strikes me about the auckland trainers is,put simply,they are far more wealthy on average than anywhere else in nz. Yet they are the ones HRNZ think need the support more. How does that make sense. oh well,in my opinion,its all just groundhog day.
-
-
Topics
-
