Chief Stipe

So you are just all talk?

No he said value for him would be at $6 in his price book. You said you liked $4 - pile it on you said. @curious offers you $4.50 i.e. a premium and you turn it down. He didn't wilt at all.

@curious is offering you $4.50 but you won't take it. If In Secret ends up at better odds it is because the most of market will be on Imperatriz.

Who said there was any guarantees? How do YOU assess value? At what price wouldn't you back In Secret? Obviously you won't take $4.50. Punters generally go broke when they don't assess value or punt when there is no value.

Top greyhound trainer faces disqualification from industry after dog tests positive for meth One of the country's highest-earning greyhound trainers is set to be kicked out of the industry after one of his racing dogs tested positive for methamphetamine and another was mistreated. John McInerney, who trains hundreds of dogs in Darfield near Christchurch, will be disqualified for a period of up to 18 months. But animal welfare groups say the penalty is "weak" as he'll continue to make money despite the disqualification. John McInerney is a greyhound track kingpin. He made more than $1.5 million on the track in the past season. But today, at a Racing Integrity Board penalty hearing, he was facing disqualification of between 12 to 18 months. "The thought of a dog testing positive for methamphetamine is abhorrent. The fact he's been disqualified likely for a year, maybe 18 months at most, doesn't go far enough," said SAFE head of investigations Will Appelbe. McInerney's dog Alpha Riley had something else in its veins in April this year - methamphetamine was detected after routine drug testing. And in October last year, another of his dogs, Impressive Isla, was according to investigators in "clear and visible pain and distress" but advice from a vet was not sought immediately. Impressive Isla had an osteosarcoma - a type of bone cancer. McInerney, who's been racing for more than 30 years, told the hearing he didn't know it was so serious and did give the dog pain relief. Tyra Basilicata from the Greyhound Protection League does not buy that. "I don't accept that anybody, especially someone who had been dealing with greyhounds for as long as Mr McInerney, I do not accept that he would not have known that something more sinister was at play," she told Newshub. Greyhound Racing NZ CEO Edward Rennell told Newshub: "There is no place in our industry for those who breach animal welfare standards, or for those who use drugs like methamphetamine in the vicinity of racing dogs." Rennell told Newshub racing greyhounds are regularly drug tested and there has never been a case of deliberate administration of methamphetamine to a racing dog, only meth contamination. It's not clear yet how the dog was contaminated but the hearing heard McInerney's son, who looked after the dogs, had a history of drug issues. With McInerney disqualified, work is already underway to transfer ownership of the dogs to his other son. "The penalties that he's facing are completely weak because he can just transfer those dogs into his son's name, it's going to be the same kennels, probably a lot of the same staff, and he will continue to make money off these dogs," Appelbe said. Basilicata said this makes the penalty inconsequential. "It's a loophole and it needs to be closed." McInerney was charged with negligence in 2018 after five dogs died of suffocation while in a van on the Cook Strait ferry. And last year, Newshub revealed photos of several of his dogs with injuries after being dropped off at a rehoming kennel. He will learn on Friday exactly how long he'll be disqualified from the sport.

Doh! Really! But what do YOU price the field at now......i.e. how do you determine what is value and what isn't? Obviously you say $4 is value and @curious would prefer $6.

What has 2 weeks got to do with rating/pricing the chance of horses at this point in time? You think $4 is good value for In Secret - at what price would you stop backing it?

I'm starting to think you are really quite thick. The ratings Classique Legend was given for that specific race on that specific day i.e. that specific performance. It enables a comparison of races. You seem to pick and choose what race suits your argument or bias. On the one hand you say The Everest is an excellent measure but apparently not this year when Imperatriz's performance is rated higher. You've picked a horse or something else to beat Imperatriz everytime she has been to the races. You might get it right one day.

MEETING NEWS Te Aroha Track Inspection NZTR, Track and RIB representatives will inspect the Te Aroha track late this afternoon, after the Te Rapa trials today. Te Aroha has received 85mm of rain in the last 24 hours. An update will be posted on the website circa 7pm this evening.

He hardly moved on her. If you are making a smart arse reference to my opinion of JMac's ride at Randwick where she got nutted into second then I'd point out to you the situation was different. She was coming back to 1300m on a Soft 5 shitty Randwick track. In my opinion, which hasn't changed is that JMac went too soon on her.

You miss the point - as always. The assessment is on the race win - NOT the horses overall rating. The Manikato win rated 108 which wasn't as high as one of Classique Legends wins. Dan O'Sullivan doesn't rate Romantic Warrior's Cox Plate win very high by comparison to previous winners. The Longine rating for that horse (overall) is 123.

In your opinion why? We all look forward to your erudite analysis.

About WFA Performance Ratings WFA Performance Ratings (WPRs) are a performance measure for each horse run, normalised to weight-for-age so that they can be directly compared regardless of age, sex, distance or the time of year. They take into account a range of key indicators such as race times, sectional times, margin spread, previous ratings and weights carried. Subjective factors such as bad luck in running or advantages / disadvantages due to track pattern, pace of the race etc. are not included. The point scale per length varies slightly with distance, but as a general guide two points is equal to one length.

Dan O'Sullivan rates her Manikato win higher than Think About It's win in The Everest. I guess that puts In Secret's form into perspective.

After jumping well, Opie Bosson took the lead on Imperatriz in the Group 1 Manikato Stakes, and despite the small field, he still ran along at a respectable early speed... this was no sit-and-sprint race. Imperatriz produced an elite show of sustained speed to win easily, running a 108 rating to match her previous peak. Her three best ratings this preparation of 108, 108 and 106, sit above the 105 that Think About It ran to narrowly win The Everest two weeks ago. Her two 108 ratings rank above I Wish I Win's 107.5 Group 1 TJ Smith win in the Autumn and Giga Kick's peak of 106.7 from the Autumn. By all objective rating measures, Imperatriz deserves to be considered Australia's best Sprinter. In the last three years, only Nature Strip (three times 108.5 to 111.6), Eduardo (110.5), Bivouac (111.2) and Classique Legend (111.7) have rated higher than Imperatriz up to 1200m. I Am Me was 3.3 lengths behind Imperatriz, with her 100.4 rating slightly up on the 100 rating she ran to win in Sydney at her last start and a 100.2 win first-up. Uncommon James improved on his 96.5 behind Asfoora at Caulfield to match his 99.7 rating when first-up behind Imperatriz in the Group 1 Moir Stakes over 1000m. He's racing 0.4 to 0.8 lengths off his two peak ratings from last preparation of 101.7 (winning the G1 Oakleigh Plate with 53.5kg) and 100.7 (2nd in the Group 1 Galaxy with 54.5kg.).

It's a standard to measure against.

The rating is based on a number of factors e.g. the competition, time etc. It's just a rating on a race win. I'm surprised you didn't point out the number of The Everest winners on the list. He rates Imperatriz's win at 108 which only 3 horses in the last 3 years have rated higher. Adds weight to the view she is the best WFA sprinter in Australia at the moment.

The first MBIE employees (probably 1,000 of them) to go should be those involved with the Fart Measuring Sattelite. You see the cost isn't just salaries (avg. $120k+ per employee) but the cost of the dumb arse decisions they make. https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/500881/why-nz-invested-29m-in-a-methane-satellite-unlikely-to-improve-our-farm-emission-estimates

Perception is not everything. The facts are what are important. Which Board member influences operational or judicial decisions to their benefit? Invariably the same people who point the finger over a perceived conflict of interest also complain about board members not understanding or having an interest in racing. Name one RIB Judicial decision at any level that has been influenced by a Board member.

How is there a conflict of interest? Are you suggesting a Board member has ANY influence on operational matters?

That link doesn't tell me anything!

Sure Chazza

I'm with some people who actually like it. I'd love a split screen.

Yeah but wait until the TMO gets onto it and starts pinging all the half carters! Note: a half carter is someone who doesn't trail behind the horse in front exactly but has half a cart outward to gain an advantage over something coming from behind.