Chief Stipe

We've had this debate elsewhere and you talk fictional shyte. As I said I've had enough of you hijacking Topics so will be moving these posts to others.

Running out of outlets Thomarse?

That's a lie - but you have never allowed the facts to get in the way of your BS. Cost vs outcome. The fact that the rules allow testing at anytime unannounced is a fairly big deterrent. All that aside where is the evidence of wide-spread performance enhancing drug use? Or for that matter any evidence that pre-race testing is going to detect anything that post-race testing wouldn't? Weird - you are anti-whips, happy to blind horses so they get frightened and now want to take 6 vials of blood out a horse everytime it races! Rather than hijacking yet another Topic for your delusional rants why don't you just bump one of the many Topics on the subject you have started over the years. Will save you time and the rest of us boredom.

You do realise Horace that 75% of your posts are attacks on Te Akau? I just thought I'd point that fact out for you. All's fair when it comes to "free speech"! Why the subterfuge in your current post? The 'cloak and dagger'? The horse in question is: Vamos Bebe Trainer: Te Akau Drug 'm' = Morphine Horace do you have news about the B sample? It isn't a positive until the B sample result is known and it is positive. How do you know that all of the Te Akau winners (6) on the day were fed hay? Not a given that all were given hay. As you yourself have declared you are fairly thick upstairs. Hay is an extremely variable product from paddock to paddock, bale to bale and even slab to slab. More than possible that even if all the horses were fed hay that not all were fed with contaminated hay. Morphine is allowed if administered by a Vet for therapeutic reasons and this is recorded as such. In this case it is clear that no such administration had occurred which then begs the question that if it is allowed to be administered under the rules of racing and there was a reason for it to be administered then why wasn't it done legally? That leads one to conclude that any administration was accidental or via cross contamination. Samples of hay were taken and were found to be contaminated with poppy seed. As far as I know there has been no publication of the level of morphine found in the blood sample. It is likely that the level was very very low. Certainly not high enough to have any therapeutic effect and certainly not any performance enhancing effect. New testing technology is so sensitive now that very minute amounts can be detected. False positives will occur especially when there is a zero tolerance level set. In the general public workforce It is a known fact that some employees have failed work place drug tests and the source has been found to be poppy seed from as limited a source as a bagel. I realise you are dumb Horace but perhaps you can enlighten us on how Morphine would be performance enhancing? So to summarise what do we have here? A horse returning an irregularity (not a positive yet) to morphine which is legal to administer to a horse for therapeutic reasons. A trainer-stable returning their first ever irregularity. The drug concerned at the level detected cannot have been performance enhancing. All good fodder (pun intended) to make hay out of nothing and start another conspiracy theory!

How so?

Yes I think all three have the potential to be Grp winners later in the season in OZ. Not Golden Slipper horses but horses that will perform and kick on. Yes I can. The sectionals that she can run on a range of track conditions suggest that to me. I'll draw an analogy.... When I was younger I could run a bit. I cleaned up everything that my local province could provide. I then was promoted to represent my province. So I go and race in a bigger province. Bigger by 10 fold. My first race was an eye opener and a gut buster. Instead of being a winner by 6 lengths I was 4th and sucking air. Learnt heaps. Had to step up the training to be competitive and get tougher. Same with horses. Shit some of those trials at Flemington or Rosehill would have our horses sucking air. So Avantage. Yep easy kills here. So to win over there you'd need to put her under real pressure before you went there. As an aside Aegon won on racecraft learnt behind slower horses.

Only a Dead 4? I suspect they are trying to avoid the issue of drizzle tomorrow on a hard track. All that aside in my opinion pouring water on this week was the only thing to do. However I would have done it earlier and kept the soil moisture well up and fine tuned towards race day.

Have I done my sums correctly. 42mm of irrigation this week? Thursday Morning Weather: Overcast Track: Dead 4 Rail: Out 11m | 10mm Irrigation Last 24 Hours | 12mm Irrigation being applied this morning Weather and Track last updated at 9.02am Thursday 24 February

It would probably be worse. I don't think it is healthy that Te Akau are dominating many facets of the industry. Some facets that they shouldn't have any involvement with e.g. Weigh In, Trackside. But what would we have left if they weren't involved? Yes I like many people get sick of syrupy hyperbole we hear some days on Trackside - that is something that Te Akau needs to manage perhaps. Imagine the day Emily criticises Opie's ride on Trackside? That is what is so entertaining about OZ racing - hell fair suck of the sav if someone deserves a serve they sure get it! All that aside many of these perception issues are a symptom of how small, inbred and insular the NZ Racing industry is becoming. It is a symptom not the cause. Like many things in NZ the cause is the bureaucrats not the workers.

To test that theory you just need to look at who the underbidder's were. Very very few were NZ Trainers or connected owners. Does it really need to drop any lower? Even if it did drop lower the return is so low that the moment a good offer came along the horse would be sold overseas. How many times have you seen a Te Akau horse sold early in its career? Imagine the offers that would have been received for On The Bubbles, Sword of State and Imperatriz? Horses for courses. However there is enough evidence to suggest that if Avantage had started its career in OZ it would have been as successful. I don't think Te Akau have fine tuned their Ozzie raids as well as Murray Baker. I think the main difference there is that Baker has a much harder training regime than Te Akau.

FFS and the proposed changes are going to make them even less transparent and accountable.

Back to a real issue! It may be viewed differently but that doesn't make Worksafe's view the correct one. However the chances of a frightened out of control horse causing death and carnage amongst the public on a race day is very very slim. There is ample evidence to support that. Any investigation would show that all practicable prevention measures had been taken after a risk assessment had been done. This is a real issue and contrary to what one poster says IS a DIFFERENT one. Essentially Trainers and Clubs are knowingly forcing employees into a dangerous situation. We see Trackwork Riders of widely varying skill and experience riding 500kg often immature horses onto a dodgy surface that they can't see. Wearing a tiny LED light on their helmets not to help them see where they are going but to make sure that others can see them coming or going. The questions that arise from that are: Why train at all in the dark? Why the early starts? Is it just custom or are there other reasons? This debate is going on in Australia at the moment forced by the difficulty in getting staff to get up at 3am for a 4am start. One reason given is that the Club track maintenance workers require work to be finished by mid-morning so they can go about THEIR work. Seems arse about face to me. The irony in NZ is we don't seem to get much work done anyway! Why not wait until that big light in the sky rises in the East instead of spending more money that we don't have on artificial lighting? One reason is our industry is such that Trainers have other jobs to get to after working their horses. Why are the training and racing track surface so crap? We all know the reasons for that - lack of investment in the right places. An unlighted AWT isn't going to solve the first two problems. If we can't get a sand training track right or the plough right how the hell are we going to keep a sophisticated surface, that requires constant maintenance and care, up to scratch? Meanwhile doing nothing about the main racing surface. Why are local trainers scared to express their opinions and get improvements? After all without them there are no Racing Clubs. Are the customers of the services that Clubs provide not adequately represented on the governance of those clubs?

Interesting how the two cases you highlight in both instances have things in common. Both wore blinkers. I guess when you restrict a horses vision from 180 degrees to 30 degrees they are going to panic. The Pomare horse (LAURAMIA) escaped by going through the birdcage fence. Do you want THREE fences 10ft high around the birdcage? Hell why not make it a real birdcage.

SHOW US THE EVIDENCE!

You are an IDIOT. The first quake was 7.1 magnitude. The second 6.3. Do you understand the Richter Scale? In your case it is a bit like the Sphincter Scale. The first quake was nearly 33 times the strength of the second which more than makes up for the 30km distance. If you think the first didn't weaken the buildings and infrastructure of Christchurch City then you are a moron. WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME A MEMBER OF PUBLIC ATTENDING A RACE MEETING IN NEW ZEALAND SERIOUSLY INJURED OR KILLED IN NEW ZEALAND? So you will be putting large fences around Polo Fields - I mean you must feel really really scared when you attend those? Or the show jumping arena at the local A & P show?

You really are a sensitive little soul aren't you little Tommy. How does asking "Why the fuck did you do that?" bring racing into disrepute? Might make racing more interesting. BTW Heathcote has more horsemanship skills and results in racing than you'll ever have.

I think you are referring to the Stipe and not Holly. I think part of the problem is the standard of our stipe's in terms of horsemanship and practical knowledge of racing has slipped considerably from years gone by. Add to that the loss of respect arising from some very dubious and inconsistent RIU work and you can expect some reaction from those with real skin in the game. Perhaps the only fault Holly has is her choice of language and a lack of restraint in expressing what a helluva lot of stakeholders are thinking. Of course the RIU management won't be reviewing their staff will they? BTW where is Goober Godber? Is he working on the new super RIU and his next promotion and pay rise?

It may be viewed differently but that doesn't make Worksafe's view the correct one. However the chances of a frightened out of control horse causing death and carnage amongst the public on a race day is very very slim. There is ample evidence to support that. Any investigation would show that all practicable prevention measures had been taken after a risk assessment had been done. This is a real issue and contrary to what one poster says IS a DIFFERENT one. Essentially Trainers and Clubs are knowingly forcing employees into a dangerous situation. We see Trackwork Riders of widely varying skill and experience riding 500kg often immature horses onto a dodgy surface that they can't see. Wearing a tiny LED light on their helmets not to help them see where they are going but to make sure that others can see them coming or going. The questions that arise from that are: Why train at all in the dark? Why the early starts? Is it just custom or are there other reasons? This debate is going on in Australia at the moment forced by the difficulty in getting staff to get up at 3am for a 4am start. One reason given is that the Club track maintenance workers require work to be finished by mid-morning so they can go about THEIR work. Seems arse about face to me. The irony in NZ is we don't seem to get much work done anyway! Why not wait until that big light in the sky rises in the East instead of spending more money that we don't have on artificial lighting? One reason is our industry is such that Trainers have other jobs to get to after working their horses. Why are the training and racing track surface so crap? We all know the reasons for that - lack of investment in the right places. An unlighted AWT isn't going to solve the first two problems. If we can't get a sand training track right or the plough right how the hell are we going to keep a sophisticated surface, that requires constant maintenance and care, up to scratch? Meanwhile doing nothing about the main racing surface. Why are local trainers scared to express their opinions and get improvements? After all without them there are no Racing Clubs. Are the customers of the services that Clubs provide not adequately represented on the governance of those clubs?

The fact that these horses have won Group races says even more about the quality of our Group horses. Two R85 horses in a Grp1 WFA doesn't give one much confidence does it?

Yeah well look at the carnage leading up to and after the Golden Slipper! Then you'd clash with the Grp 1 Sistema Stakes at Ellerslie for 2 yr olds. Then the Grp 1 Sires Produce at Awapuni.

I can see a pattern emerging here however if you rate the Grp 1 at Otaki with only two true Grp1 horses in it running for $200k above the 2yr race at Matamata well one has to ask what your motivation is. Do a close analysis of the Grp 2 Embrace Stakes at Rosehill on Saturday for 2 yr fillies. $200k stake. It isn't exactly a rock star field either. Or the first at Flemington on Saturday. A LR for 2 yr olds. $140k up for grabs. 9 starters. 2 first time to the races. Only one winner and 2 place getters.

Then you would be more critical of the Grp1 at Otaki on the same day. $200k. 7 Starters. If you take out the two class horses with ratings of 105 and 112 then the rest of the field has an average rating of 91!

Happens every day of the week with 2yr old races at Metrop tracks in OZ. The only difference is over there they are racing for twice the money.

"Where it could have been prevented" is the key. Arguably you could "prevent" any ACCIDENT other than an act of God. Ban motor vehicles and that will prevent road deaths. Ban horse racing and save Jockey's lives. Don't worry that they will have limited career choices going forward! Where do you draw the line in terms of "prevention"? Some schools cut down trees in their school yards to stop children climbing them - didn't stop the kids climbing trees on their way home from school. I remember one Principal challenged about a boy falling from a tree and breaking his arm - "will you cut the tree down?" Reply - no. "what about the poor boy who broke his arm?" Reply - I doubt he will do it again. Many schools closed their swimming pools because of the new H & S rules, new Board of Trustee liabilities and the Education Department cutting funding. Outcome - kids not learning to swim at school. Unintended consequence - more children drowning outside of school because they can't swim. How many spectators have been killed attending the races?