Chief Stipe

Rumour or fact? Formalin is an aqueous solution of formaldehyde. Gammalite your liver synthesises formaldehyde. If you didn't have formaldehyde in your body you would be dead as some key biochemical processes that sustain life would not happen. Yes formaldehyde can be used to fix cells and to stop decay. It is a key component of many hoof treatments. I haven't seen what the volume or % formaldehyde was in the solution that Alford was going to inject into the horse. But it is wrong to infer that he was "embalming the horse". That wouldn't be conducive to performance would it? The reality is that in any blood test formaldehyde will be present. One must assume that unless the RIU were sitting on positive results the levels detected in swabs were not viewed as abnormal. That would lead one to assume that the levels injected were low. Why use formaldehyde intravenously on a horse? Formaldehyde has been injected into horses by vets in an attempt to stop internal haemorrhaging particularly in severe EIPH cases. Judging on the comments that Alford has made the horse in question was a bleeder so he was attempting to limit the extent of EIPH. That said the science isn't conclusive on it working but it certainly isn't a go fast drug. EIPH is another one of the issues in my mind that unless a solution is found will contribute to the undoing of the industry. The majority of horses suffer some form of EIPH while racing. Lasix has been used both in competition and training in the USA and many top galloping trainers in OZ use it frequently in training. Chris Waller being one.

It won't Freda unless those on the ground such as yourself demand that those things that affect them directly are first acknowledged and then fixed. For example the turf tracks, the course stables and yards, the security and lighting, apprentice training, consistency in judicial decisions. Things that make it easier for you to do your job. Then we might start producing a horse wagering product that we can sell at a competitive price.

Rule Number(s): Rule 870(3) and Breaking Horses RegulationsFollowing the running of Race 2 a protest was instigated by the Stewards against the placing of the 4th horse, AHWEL on the grounds that it had broken for in excess of 50 metres inside the final 200 metres. Mr D Ferguson the Driver of the horse represented the horse's connections and noted on the Information ... (Feed generated with FetchRSS)View the full article

McGrath got most of his sentence NOT for "setting up for the punt"! Come in HTP.

Which THREE?

I notice you didn't do a comparison with a NZ Galloping meeting.

How is it a "different scenario entirely"? In my opinion on the face of it the Sharrock case definitely involved a class A drug that conceivably is performance enhancing. The irony is the RIU established early that the morphine positive was environmental contamination most likely through feed. What is clear in the Sharrock case is that there is no possibility of an environmental feed source of methamphetamine I.e. P or its metabolites do not occur naturally in horse feed. You refer to the New Plymouth case which was never resolved. What actions did the RIU, Racing Clubs and NZTR take post New Plymouth to prevent possible environmental contamination or deliberate nefarious administration by errant persons?

Many possible reasons for that. It would appear the Te Akau situation was handled by a different group at the RIU. Perhaps one not prone to feeding the media. The media only "keep quiet" if not fed. Although in saying that it would appear at this stage that the media coverage has been similar. Except Te Akau weren't as "colorful" as Sharrock in their response. Noticeably the social media response as been muted. I guess Sharrock isn't a tall enough poppy.

An interesting observation. When Te Akau returned a positive to morphine all the knives came out. Finger pointing, wink wink nudge nudge, yeah right. Sharrock's stable returns TWO positives to methamphetamine (P). Comparative silence.

Are you talking about racing or some other industry? No matter how hard you market and promote a crap product you will eventually lose to those who have a higher quality product being sold at a cheaper price. The key fundamental issue in NZ racing is the quality of our race fields, the quality of our tracks and the price at which we try to sell.

But you don't need all those things as Cambridge proved yesterday. Not according to the Jockey's and other Trainers. But them there are these pictures taken recently: received_127373929229248.mp4 1768306332_received_260115425649253(3).mp4

That's evident in the UK as well but that is influenced by the fact that the money races are run on Turf. Who knows perhaps the plan is to run the NZ Guineas on the AWT and we have a NZ Triple Crown.

I already am having seen the Korean and USA dross dished up each day. Up 3 times a week in NZ isn't going to improve my excitement. Add to that the crap premier surfaces...... I actually like betting on soft to heavy grass tracks. Speed maps and data base statistics go out the window which suits me.

If you had a horse that can run good sectionals and likes a good surface why would you race them on a midweek AWT in winter? Is the plan for some Trainers to get some wins and form quickly in the winter and then give the horses a spell for Spring racing? I dont know (maybe Pitty can tell us) but is it possible to give a horse three preps in one season? From my experience 10 to 12 starts a season was the limit.

With a higher cost structure as well I.e. even if they return the same amount of revenue as the meeting at Rotorua all they have done is reduce any profit margin by a considerable amount.

Unless Riccarton does something to fix their turf track they'll have no choice.

Victoria has said no more than two for the State. Meanwhile they continue to invest in and upgrade turf tracks. Strategically I think that is smart thinking especially to counter the end racing mob. What better advertisement for racing than having a horse galloping on a natural sustainable surface as opposed to a synthetic dirt one!

They got an insurance payment and spent it wisely. Regardless as Cambridge proved yesterday you don't need facilities let one flash ones to run a race meeting. A great winter track Foxton. So you belong to the build and hope mob that says "something needed to be done"? No business plan, targets or research just let's spend $48 million of someone else's money, close down profitable racing clubs and things will be all fine and dandy. Do you know how much punting turnover was required to fully fund yesterday's meeting and to cover additional maintenance costs? Let alone achieve a return on capital. Meanwhile a perfectly good racetrack with nice facilities like Foxton sits idle.

Rule Number(s): 870(3) and Breaking Horse RegulationsFollowing the running of Race 2 an Information instigating a protest was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr P Williams, against THE MIGHTY MONDO (G Smith), placed 4th by the judge, on the grounds that it “galloped in excess of 150 metres over the early stages”. Rule 870(3) provides: that any horse which ... (Feed generated with FetchRSS)View the full article

Nothing to do with Brodie at all. But I'm interested to know if you had the final figures to justify your "they were woeful" statement. But you obviously don't. So FAKE NEWS!

Well there is that hypocrisy but arguably Riccarton are worse in that regard as Christchurch wasn't eligible at all under the PGF rules!

Do you have the actual figures or "mere supposition on your part"?

Hi I'm motivated to make a complaint about some of the inaccuracies in MVB and Sherwood's reporting on the Harness industry. The process is to first complain to the editorial management of The Press. CPL-NewsDirectors@fairfaxmedia.co.nz Then if you are not satisfied with the response or lack of action then you can make a complaint to The Media Council, NZ. https://www.mediacouncil.org.nz/complaints#:~:text=Complaints should be lodged via,writing to the Media Council . Cheeers Chief Stipe

I don't disagree. In this particular case the tom tom drums were beating. I question the timing though of the article and the journalists real agenda. In my opinion MVB has been orchestrating a hit job on racing for some time now. Even been rebuked by a High Court Judge for his approach. That said I see no comments from NZTR - were they asked for comment? For all we know Sharrock may have gone on the front foot on this. Good on him if he has. Media management 101 - control the story as soon as you can.