Chief Stipe

Perhaps they didn't copy your file across?

Or was INCA, the process it followed and the outcomes an indication of a RIU culture/competence that wasn't up to the task? That is it was the RIU that drove INCA.

I did read it. Specifically what did I miss?

That's obvious however we are still waiting for you to tell us how it is lowering the quality. Over to you.

Geez don't show @Brodie those bets!!! He can't get $20 on! Mind you reading the grey print the TAB must find you profitable.

I don't feel sorry for them. They signed up for the job. However the saddest part of INCA was the way the whole thing was handled and the intransigence only served to severely weaken the relationship between the RIU and participants and the latter's respect for them.

Really? Can you honestly imagine Natalie Rasmussen toting a gun or even a hay pitchfork? In any case the RIU, as far as I know, doesn't have an automatic right to dress as Police.

It is more important that they are accurate and consistent than being "hard". It is also .orw important that they have a high level of competency when it comes to charging people. At the end of the day it is often innocent people's livelihoods and reputation at stake. Standing around pretending to be policemen and joking about it isn't being "hard" or more importantly professional.

Seriously @Gammalite the RIU raid the stables of Dunn and Purdon wearing hi-viz flak jackets and walkie talkies with a full police contingent? With office staff grinning from ear to ear with pre-raid photos being taken. How can you take that seriously? I heard one story from a raid later in the day where the trainers wife was the only one home. She said he was down at the Golden Mile and good luck getting him out of there!

That's a different topic entirely. However in your example the charges would be laid first by the Code and RIB and heard in the equivalent of a Racing Tribunal. A defendant could have the option of going to a higher court if they felt the outcome was unjust. The example I referred to was where a defendant was first charged and sentenced in a higher court and then the Code/RIB tries them again and gives a far harsher penalty on top. That in my opinion is manifestly unjust. In the INCA case there was insufficient quality evidence to secure a conviction for the majority of charges laid in a higher court. What you are arguing is they should have been laid in the Racing jurisdiction which has a lower evidence threshold. The defendants may have been found guilty and then likely lost their livelihood. INCA was driven by ego, a predetermined outcome of guilty and a double down attitude when it started to unravel for the prosecutors. Aided of course in the first instance by information from some dubious embittered types. I saw a picture of RIU office staff taken before the police raids commenced. Individuals smiling and proud as they wore Police provided flak jackets, hi-viz and walkie talkies. That picture confirmed all my assumptions.

Well there you go. It is a case of well bred OZZIE young horses improving the quality of our racing and proving that it does raise the return to those you label battlers (I hate that demeaning term BTW). But I guess you don't want those successes to interfere with your race for mediocrity.

I'm surprised @Huey why you haven't started a Topic on how what you would describe as a battler just made a fair chuck of dosh on the sale of one of their horses. But I guess your support for your battlers is confined to cutting tall poppies to make the paddock level.

Thankfully.

Yeah well the main driver of the whole affair had already been let go from his previous job. As far as I know still has a job.

Mind you that was paying $1.10.

Eh? Well at least we have established Paul that there is no Waikato Mafia. Progress at last.

So you prattle on about an imaginery cartel that you know nothing about? Some decent trainers I assure you. Or is your name Paul?

Who was it Catheryne Bruggeman? I guess they are punting on the tracks being soft...being by Belardo. That won't work at Ellerslie. So @Huey does Paul Moroney belong to a different gang in Matamata? Just curious as you are anti most of them.

Should they be? Why should Racing apply a higher standard (a lower conviction threshold) than higher courts? For example a licensee could be convicted of a minor drug offence in Court, be discharged with a probationary period or fined and/or given community service. Racing then has another go at the person and often penalises them by suspending their license and thus removing their livelihood. Why? If the Police couldn't nail a match fixing charge in the criminal court because of a lack of evidence why should the RIU/RIB (who have often acted like Keystone Cops) be able to apply some vague rules and finish the livelihood of a licensee? Or ban an owner? We now have the ridiculous situation of where Stipes with absolutely zero experience in driving or riding a horse in a race determining whether or not a driver made the right split second decision. The driver making the wrong decision has already cost themselves but then the Stipes double down and punish them again! With no evidence of financial gain.

Statistically overall there is no difference therefore as a predictor of performance it is pointless taking into consideration if a mare is in foal. However because of the widely held myth that it does improve performance you are likely to find value elsewhere. Which begs the question if you knew it didn't make any difference why did you insist that the information be provided? To improve YOUR odds?

So you don't agree with @Yankiwi on that point?

Did McInerney tell you first hand? You inferred he didn’t so how do you know? Why didn't he scratch all his dogs after Race 2? Why wait until the end of the meeting?

That's a dog safety feature. Stops them from hurting themselves reducing the barging of the front of the box.

But you don't actually know. Which is about as useful as @Yankiwi 's statistical analysis.

For once I agree with you!! Actually may be the second time! To me it is just another IT Marketing campaign buzzword to put a new spin on IT. These "advances" don't fundamentally change the business drivers for IT nor the underlying infrastructure. What they do though is give IT providers another way of building more infrastructure to build bigger data centres to power the Magic AI. I can see where there may be an advantage for a business that is global where large amounts of data is collected and finding kernels of truth that may facilitate a business advantage or opportunity is harder. But there are only about 5 companies like that in NZ. One disturbing thing though is how some businesses have built it into their customer model e.g. you have an issue with a product or service and your support is not provided by a real person but by AI. Remember the Google Maps directions that sent you down a gravel road that had involved a 1m deep river crossing because it was the shortest route? I'm predicting there will be a range of lawsuits soon. Google Advertising will be one. It is very difficult now for a niche business to manually customise their advertising campaign to local opportunities and nuances. The Google campaigns are now machine learning based and AI determines what you can and can't do. So essentially Google knows best and is designing your ad campaign for you and charging you for the impressons (views) and clicks their ad gets for you. Not to mention the deterioration in the English language which will become amercanised AI speak. Minor languages will be pushed out. Can you see AI delivering results in correct Maori? Anyway I've asked AI Gemini many times to pick the card for a race meeting and all I get is a long dissertation about what racing is and isn't and dangers of gambling!