Chief Stipe

So will you asking for Going Stick measurements before each official trial or race meeting on behalf of the revenue providing punter's? Or will you be slipping the Track Manager a hundy to roll it pre-meeting?

Not even flick the odd used horseshoe at each other?

Not sure. When was it put in?

Gammalite what increase in punter revenue can we expect from these "novel" races? S

But it wasn't a slap of the hand for Turnwald was it? But it is all speculation isn't it as we don't know what level of P was in the dog and whether or not its performance was enhanced.

But how do you know that the P level that the dog had was sufficient to improve its performance? Was the dog going out second favourite at $4.50 an indication that large bets were made? Given that the favourite was paying half that. You may well be right as you infer that the dog was "got at". But that isn't Turnwald's fault nor is it something easy to prevent. To be fully transparent I believe that the JCA/RIU should release the levels that are present in a positive and determine if it was at a level that was performance enhancing or at least make a comment on it. That would avoid speculation. Recently there was a positive to morphine returned from a horse from a major thoroughbred stable. The RIU was certain it was environmental contamination. I have heard that the level detected was negligible and would not have been anywhere near performance enhancing let alone therapeutic. Releasing the level would make it apparent to all that the dog did or did not gain an advantage. The penalty and disqualification would still be the same.

Why Gammalite are you so adept at missing the point? A race less than 1609m (a mile) has no statistical standing in the harness racing industry. It is a novelty which doesn't even appeal to the harness racing enthusiast or punter. What is it's point? Why not only start 8 horses and race them in lanes from staggered starts? Why dumb down racing to appeal to some market segment that even the marketers don't know about!

Based on what? You are defaming someone but where is the evidence? I don't follow the Greyhounds (other than after a few beers at the pub TAB and taking a 1/8:1/8:F trifecta for a half) but where is Freeman's history of drug positives? Surely our wondrous RIU would have had their full time Betting Analyst look at the betting records?

Sorry I don't agree. Officially it WAS a different trainer.

Correct. Correct - but "believed to be" being the key phrase. My understanding is the source was confirmed. Well they did originally believing that the contamination occurred AFTER the race when some of the dogs owners were involved in the presentation. Some of the owners anonymously admitted to having used P. Further testing was done and given the level of P metabolites present versus the amount of P (there were more metabolites of P than P) the science said that the odds were high that the dog had ingested P prior to the race not after and before the sample was taken. The Trainer then could offer no idea or opinion of the source and it appears at their own expense had themselves tested for P use (note: depending on the tests undertaken P use can be detected over a considerable period of time). The results were negative so the JCA established that the Trainer wasn't a possible source of contamination. In the JCA Judgement all parties agreed that the dog must have ingested P somewhere between Foxton and Christchurch. As far as I know Turnwald dogs haven't returned any prior positives and the JCA accepted that in this case that the Trainer wasn't involved in administering or contaminating the dog with P. Given her prior relatively unblemished history and given the degree of post race testing that is done no Trainer in their right mind would deliberately administer a prohibited drug to their dog in the lead up to a race. So yes the fact that no explanation can be found is very suspicious BUT that suspicion can't and shouldn't be directed at the Trainer. Was the dog "got at" somewhere between Foxton and Christchurch? Was it when the dog was unattended on the Ferry? Was it during the walk around at Kaiapoi by a "friend"? What we also don't know is what level the P and its metabolites was present in the dog. I've posted about this issue for all codes. In my opinion the JCA should always publish the levels of a prohibited substance found in positive swabs. There is zero tolerance but what is the threshold for zero? Environmental contamination will become more and more an issue as testing accuracy improves. Because there was no clear link between the Trainer and how the dog ingested (or absorbed) P. In other cases as you point out employees were involved. A Trainer has a responsibility to ensure that their staff are drug free. For example I know that a stable such as Te Akau does regular workplace drug testing. Another reason for a shorter disqualification was the lack of any prior's. I'm not sure if you have read my posts on the other code forums about this issue but we now have a situation where the punishment for environmental contamination and the zero tolerance levels in racing far outweigh the crime. Just look at Turnwald's case - the dog loses the race, the owners and trainer lose a substantial stake (substantial for dogs!) and the Trainer loses income for 4 months! For something no one can prove she deliberately did and was unlikely to do and an undisclosed drug level which may or may not have been at a level that enhanced performance. I'm just waiting for the day that some of these Trainers across all the codes get together and take a class action against the RIU/JCA because at the moment justice isn't being done. The alternative is to put our horses and dogs in closed environments (like Hong Kong) that will have the welfare nutters going nuts!

I agree it is a nonsense. That distance has no recognition anywhere in terms of statistics. Just imagine it in a filly's record - MR 1:48.2 but only over 1390m!!!! Did they ask Trainers and Drivers before they did this? You'd be wasting your time if you had a horse that was slow out of the gate or even drew behind one that was. Or for that matter if you drew anything other than 1 to 4! May as well open up betting on Kidz Carts!

Geez Yankiwi - a different trainer more than 5 years ago? The defence lawyer also said He denied that Mr Freeman had been corrupt or fraudulent

I hope the tap measure is accurate down South. You wouldn't want that 2147m race to be rounded down or up. If rounded up to 2150m the extra 3 meters might turn it into a proper staying contest!

MEETING NEWS Riverton RC Thursday 6 May – Programme changes Please note there have been changes to the Riverton RC meeting Thursday 6 May. NZTR, in conjunction with the Club and Southern Programming Chairman have made the changes, in an attempt for this meeting to proceed with reasonable field sizes. Both Jumps races scheduled for this day have been deleted. The next jumps races in the South Island will be held at South Canterbury on Thursday 20th May. Note, the Amateur race at Riverton below accommodates a run for Jumps horses. The Amateur Riders race was previously on the R65 1600m, but has been moved to the R74 & Jmps 2147m race. The programme has been confirmed as follows: Open 1600 R74 & Jmps 2147 (Amateur Riders) R74 1400 R65 1600 R65 1200 Mdn 1600 Mdn 1400 Mdn 1200

Perhaps it isn't about horse numbers as the fields for Woodville and Fielding (Awapuni) this week are reasonably strong.

Shouldn't worry you Curious after all according to Bernie you gallop your horses everyday don't you? So what's another week or two of galloping everyday...... Seriously though there were 7 races programmed for Otaki on the 7th. They've only provided alternatives for 3 of them. What about the other 4? Is that a sign that there aren't enough horses in training? The CD had 4 meetings scheduled in a week - now there will be 3. 1 of the programmed races have been added to Hawkes Bay meeting a week earlier and the 1 added to the Woodville meeting 2 days later. The race conditions for a race at Woodville have been altered from being a 1400m just for 2 and 3 yr olds to 2yr olds and UP i.e. any age group. Surely that disadvantages both those who wanted to race at Otaki and those who were aiming for a maiden race with just 2 and 3 yr olds in it. Now they could be up against 4 and 5 yr old robust geldings! Not that we seem to have many of those around anymore. Perhaps they could have shifted the Otaki meeting to Foxton? The internet connection constraint has been proven to be BS.

How hard would it be to walk around with a Going Stick and produce firmness and sheer figures? All we get is the surface was "Synthetic"! I can see it now Pitty and Freda bitching about how the AWT played differently today than it did a week ago. Pitty wanting it rolled with a heavy roller and Freda wanting it fluffed up and groomed properly.

Do they still play cricket on the infield at Trentham during the summer? I have this lasting memory of watching my horse race at Trentham and seeing dozens of young cricketers in whites playing in the centre of the track.

My understanding is that the trainer concerned sought a test themselves and tested negative.

Agreed. If we really do have tiered racing (which we don't) then a Highway or Provincial Championship concept would be a great idea. However sadly we are getting to a situation where you would be lucky to get a full size field of horses trained on provincial/country race tracks.

Still only one of the major centres has talked about addressing their issue of a stuffed Turf track that they run their Premier races on. At the end of the day you can provide all the extra revenue earning facilities you want but then what's the point if you neglect your core business and core competency? I'm not sure many clubs are that competent when it comes to horse racing! Look closely at the Caulfield proposal and you will see that it is about community engagement supporting their core business - horse racing. For example the playing fields for sports teams in the Caulfield proposal aren't focused on revenue they are focused on community engagement. My memories of Reefton include my dad's horses racing there (both gallopers and harness) and my playing rugby in the winter and running on the athlete track for inter-school competitions in the centre of the same race course. Sure look at creating other revenue streams but don't neglect your core reason for being (horse racing) and focus on community engagement.

Surely you are not in favour of Strategic Business Plans now Reefton?

What's the fraud case?

And still engage and reach out to the wider community?

Long range weather forecast perhaps? Why didn't they just give a bit more detail about what is being done?