Chief Stipe

Bookies hit by missing millions In a week where millions of dollars are wagered on the world’s best horses that grace our turf, it takes a fair yarn to grab the attention of the racing world. Sadly, it’s a tale where many stand to lose millions of their hard earned, in what appears to be a scheme worthy of a Netflix drama. Racing identities, bookies and sports stars are all chasing huge sums of money – not to mention the Victorian Bookmakers Association who are chasing around $1.8 million – invested into to what has been reported as a sophisticated and until now, undetected Ponzi scheme. Racing.com has been told there are several Victorian based bookies who ‘invested’ millions – including one who stands to lose $4 million alone. Legendary racing author and journalist, Andrew Rule, wrote in Wednesday’s Herald Sun that one prominent racing family has lost at least $5 million. There are rumours a family trust connected to a former racing identity that has lost more than $10 million. Racing.com has been told there are others, some linked to racing, who have done smaller amounts, but money intrinsically linked to their ability to retire. Rule also writes that footballers, lawyers and likely others who are yet to come forward are also chasing their monies. The loses, if the money is never returned, will likely run into the tens of millions. The saga centers on former lawyer John Bernard Adams, who died recently. Adams, it has been alleged, chased investors promising strong returns on their investments from his Ivanhoe practice. Rule, in the Herald Sun, details other quite incredible actions surrounding key documents post Adam’s death that seemed to indicate to investors that major problems were about to emerge. Adam’s relationship to racing is not completely clear, but he had strong connections to a number of football clubs. What happens next will be fascinating. Incredibly, Victoria Police could not even confirm to racing.com they were investigating the matter. Rule did note the Victorian Legal Services Board is investigating, with the assistance of police. Racing Victoria said the finances of the VBA were regularly checked and despite their missing money, could continue to operate. Racing.com is not accusing the VBA of any wrongdoing and has been told that the investment by the VBA, and likely by many others, seemed legitimate on paper. “As part of our licensing process, we conduct an annual check of each Victorian bookmaker’s assets in accordance with our Bookmaker Licence Rules to ensure their financial suitability to operate,” the RV statement said. "Whilst our advice from the VBA is that they do not expect this incident to affect the operations of individual members, we will undertake an additional review to best understand any potential impacts.” What happens next will be a fascinating, and for some distressing, tale of unpicking what appears to be decades on investments by trusted clients into a scheme that appears to be quickly unravelling.

walk the talk Aristotle’s followers are said to have discussed philosophy while walking about with him—hence their name: “peripatetics.” I suppose they could have been said to “walk the talk.” For the rest of us, the saying is “if you’re going to talk the talk, you’ve got to walk the walk”—a modern version of old sayings like “actions speak louder than words” and “practice what you preach.” Another early form of the expression was “walk it like you talk it.”

So Betfair is offering better than $4.50? You don't appear to have "piled it on"yet.

Ease up. @curious put a caveat on that and the conditions were met. So he stayed. I take it you are not walking the talk?

@curious offered you better odds than you were already willing to "pile it on at" - I would have thought you would have jumped at the better offer!

I didn't realise the RIB had released their decision to you.

So now you are an expert on Judicial Decisions? I've come to the conclusion that for some bitter and twisted reason related to a past perceived injustice you sole motivation is to destroy Greyhound racing.

Are you saying the meth was deliberately administered to the dog? Shouldn't justice be delivered based on the facts not the potential moaning by the uninformed? Also how does the media get informed BEFORE the decision is published? What was the level of meth detected? Environmental contamination?

Who'd know you scurry around the place so much you'd need to be a meerkat to keep up. As for Imperatriz you've been trying to find something to beat her before every race and when offered better odds than the TAB you scurry down the drain pipe.

Nothing to do with the RIB. Why bring your Greyhound shit onto the Thoroughbred forum? What's more it is incorrect that they can't test for the drug in question. https://australianracinggreyhound.com/news/greyhounds-move-to-close-door-on-drug-cheats-20-years-late/15630/ Now if the RIB are not testing for stuff then it's because they are spending too much cash on salaries for ex cops to hide in hedges.

What the glasses or 3D movies? Avatar 3D was miles better than the flat version. Who cares if you look like a geek in the dark I like it has you get a better sense of distance be it from 1st to last or width. In terms of refocusing all it would take is for the studio to cut back to the front of the field after the drone footage. Let's face it generally only see about 3 to 5 horses on the screen at one time when side on. When they turn for home the shot is generally head-on. I like the innovation just needs a bit of fine tuning in my opinion.

Who would know - your posts are an art form of obfuscation. There was four you were talking about at one stage but all with the proviso....."I'll wait until closer to the day...." You were offered $4.50 and you won't take it yet tell everyone to pile it on!

So what? Just a hint - it's obvious you are not serious about anything you write. So if you can't take yourself seriously then don't expect anyone else to.

So you are not piling it on at $4 because....why? Nor $4.50 either. So at what price would you pile it on? $5.5? Which isn't far off @curious pricing it at $6.

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.