Chief Stipe

You miss the point Gammalite. If the RIU was able to identify Kerr's account to Labrokes once there was an issue why couldn't they do it proactively BEFORE there was an unrelated issue? Doesn't say much for the RIU systems, their Betting Analyst nor the $10m spent per annum by them maintaining the integrity of the sport. Not to mention the millions spent on INCA to find nothing. Bear in mind Kerr's gambling was going on during the whole INCA investigation!!! Keystone Cops spring to mind!

More from Ladbrokes T's and C's.

Gammalite - have you opened an online account with a bookmaker? Do you remember the ID hoops you had to jump through? According to the JCA evidence there didn't seem to be any issues with getting information on Kerr's betting at Ladbrokes. Do you reckon Kerr was betting on credit with Ladbrokes? More hoops to jump through if he was. Here are the terms and requirements for have a Ladbrokes account. Good luck coming up with a false identity!

Correct they don't know where the money comes from but under global agreements on Anti Money Laundering laws they have to monitor large sums of money put through their accounts and report to a central agency. The trigger amounts are not just single deposits but collective amounts over time. It is a very easy step to data match against licensees especially given the RIU has information sharing agreements with bookies AND the code administrations. Geez no wonder INCA is struggling to find anything!

The issue isn't about deflecting blame or even sharing responsibility. It is about what systems are in place to proactively monitor license holders and to limit harm to the industry. Ultimately it doesn't excuse Kerr's behaviour but both TAB-NZ and the RIU have a legislated responsibility to limit harm and maintain the integrity of the industry. In my opinion they either act proactively, re-actively or both. It would appear even though they have sufficient power to act proactively they don't. The fact that they don't is reflective of the culture of both organisations. TAB-NZ encourage losing punters (they discourage winning punters) and the RIU has a Police culture of catch and punish as opposed to prevention. So Kerr was spending large sums of money gambling - at first with TAB-NZ and latterly with an overseas bookmaker. When he had accounts with TAB-NZ they were, according to @nzhorseracing, informed that he had problems with gambling. One would hope that given the rules around licensee's betting the RIU and HRNZ were notified by TAB-NZ of Kerr's problems. That is a proactive approach. It would appear that this didn't occur or if it did no action was taken. Now the RIU has an information sharing agreement with HRNZ and overseas bookies. Supposedly the RIU Betting Analyst is monitoring licensee betting. Again one would hope that this was done on a proactive basis rather than waiting for the 0800 Snitch line to deliver. The serious question that should be asked the RIU is why wasn't a red flag raised through data matching of Kerr's offshore gambling activities in the TWO YEARS that he was spending very large amounts? Given he was a licensee. I fail to understand WHY a red flag wasn't raised. The data matching isn't very hard to do. So it begs the question is the RIU Betting Analyst incompetent or did the RIU know and nothing was proactively done about it? It appears incompetence and inadequate systems rule the day as according to the evidence it took a third party snitch to notify the RIU to seek the information from the overseas bookmaker. All it would require is a regular query run across the bookmaker's client accounts looking for matching NZ licensees. The a further query matching amount spent. What sort of message does the evidence presented in the judgement send to other licensees? "Don't worry about getting around the betting rules as a Driver just punt offshore - the RIU obviously don't have clue!"

That's not correct (2009-16) and regardless there is an information sharing agreement with oversea's bookies. Why wasn't a red flag raised that a NZ Licensee and known problem gambler was betting with Ladbrookes?

You haven't given us any numbers just anecdotal wink wink nudge nudge bullshit. Surely you can post some numbers? Why the secrecy? BOAY readers take note - JJ Flash has a reputation for posting misinformation and fake news. I guess Harness can rest assured that they still have the largest revenue race held domestically across all codes - the NZ Trotting Cup.

Oh right. JJ Flash has access to figures that no other general stakeholder has. JJ you are full of shyte. So this BIG DECLINE that you are talking about has only occurred this season? That is in the last 9 months? Oh I wonder why that has happened nothing to do with a pandemic or the even further skewed import/export situation?

Still waiting for the facts JJ Flash. However just to speed things up. You are aware that between 2018-19 and 2019-20 the % of total revenue earned by Harness actually increased and Thoroughbred racing declined. That is on the back of a very skewed import distribution favouring the other codes particularly Thoroughbreds i.e. that % increase was based on Harness domestic racing entirely. The import distribution in 2018 was 63% Thoroughbred, 24% Greyhound and 13% Harness. So your base premise doesn't match the facts. Of course you may be privy to the current figures as the rest of us have to rely on a paucity of information from this current mob. Neither the TAB nor any of the codes have released detailed half-yearly reports. So much for transparency.

But where are the facts to support the statement that there has been a decline in betting on NZ Harness? We don't need to worry about causation at this stage just need to establish the facts regarding what you and JJ Flash are saying is a decline. The NZ Trotting Cup still only runs second to the Melbourne Cup in terms of race turnover. The nearest galloping race is $400k behind! Then we can look at causes. Don't forget the manipulation of the calendar and televised racing that favours Thoroughbreds either. The Dogs maintain the betting revenue only through the importation of thousands of races from OZ.

What facts did you use to back this statement up? Or is it just a "gut feel"?

Therein lies the reason for the eventual demise of South Island racing. Goodbye Guineas.

Maybe but she has had 3 weeks between all but one of her races and a month since her Oaks win. As for the flight over a damn sight easier than a float trip to Wellington! I think if the track had been firmer she would have run better. Often Te Akau's horses look a little underdone when they start first up in OZ. Then they have a hard run and are flattened. The Sydney trainers seem to have a don't die wondering attitude. Just an opinion based on observation. Now I don't think our best 3 yr olds are inferior to Ozzie's but they don't get tested enough in NZ because we don't have the depth as much now.

Yes I would have thought if anyone would be screaming from the rooftops it would be the South Island's leading trainer. But he just see's it as an irrigation problem.

Be that as it may it is a good indication of the condition of the soil and obvious issues when it comes to irrigating evenly. I was being sarcastic Pitty - I should have used the sarcasm font. The point I am making is that the maintenance work done for example at Flemington each year is what many track manager's in NZ would pass off as renovation. The fact is we do SFA of either!

The track wasn't a Good track either - played more like a Soft 6 which makes the effort of Entriviere in the last quite remarkable. I don't think the track helped Probabeel either given Nettoyer is a knows wet tracker. Same for Armarelinha where her turn of foot was nullified by the conditions. I'm surprised Opie's comment was that Armarelinha had come to the end of this preparation.

Sure Pitty. Riccarton is an amazing track that unlike every Metropolitan track in Australia doesn't need significant annual maintenance (what we would call renovation!) nor a minimum 8 year cycle of major renovation. Yep Pitty, the agrarian expert of Canterbury, the South Island's top trainer, has the formula. This is what he calls a great track:

Interesting reading about the Caulfield and Ballarat training facilities. They irrigate their jumps tracks all year round.

Here's what you get at Ballarat: Sportsbet-Ballarat Training & Racing Facilities Sportsbet Ballarat is a world class training and racing facility with the following infrastructure. The Course Proper: Inner track: 1900m Start positions: 1000m, 1100m, 1200m, 1400m, 1500m, 1600m, 2200m, 2300m Outer track: 2400m Start positions flat races: 1000m, 1100m, 1200m, 1400m, 1500m, 1600m, 2000m, 3200m. Start positions jumps races: 3200m, 3400m, 4000m, 4500m Grass gallops available by appointment Manual irrigation The Polytrack: 1,900m Start positions: 1000m, 1100m, 1200m, 1400m, 1500m, 1600m, 2100m, 2200m Max field size of 12 horses Sand Track: 1600m Uphill Synthetic Track: 1400m Practice barriers x 4 Distance markers by light & electronic timing for every 200m Trainers Hut Inside Grass Track: 1550m Width approx. 18m Suited for Official Jumps Trials Regular Club jumpouts & grass gallops available 6 days per week Viscoe Track: 1620m Synthetic surface Available 6 days per week Jog Track: approx. 1400m Located inner field Provides opportunity for clockwise track work 6 days per week without special arrangement Jumps Lane: approx 500m Three lanes consisting of hurdle lane, steeple lane and logs Available to trainers 6 days per week Irrigated surface ensuring availability all year round Communal Walker: 10 bay horse walker (walker bay's leased individually on an annual basis) Undercover with full lighting Bull Ring: 100m circuit Option to install 1-4 moveable jumps within the circuit Sand base irrigated surface Available 7 days per week Horse Pool: Chlorine filtered Available 7 days per week Old Hill Track: 1200m Granite sand surface Timber railed Stripping Shed: Direct access to training tracks Wash bays x 2 Sand roll x 1 Tie up bays approx. 30

This is what you currently get at Caufield - note the number of staff. The cost estimates for the "new" developments at Riccarton might be a bit light on staffing! The Caulfield training centre is one of the premier facilities in Australia and houses some of best trainers in the nation. In addition to the racing at Caulfield, many well-known Victorian trainers and over 500 horses call Caulfield home. Caulfield Racecourse is ideally positioned just 8km southeast of the city, Caulfield is situated close to the city centre of Melbourne and is easily accessible by car, train or tram. Training hours; 4am-9.30am Monday to Saturday, 6am-8am Sunday. Course open to the public sunrise to sunset except race day Training tracks A sand track; 2005m x 5m Steeple grass; 1900m x 18m Polytrack; 1700m x 9m. (combination of wax, crumbed rubber, shredded carpet fibre and sand) Inside grass; 1400m x 14m Lead sand; 1500m x 6m Steeple and hurdle training facilities; 250m laneway containing 3 jumps of each Horse pool; open same time as training tracks plus from 1.30pm-4.00pm. Three full time staff that run training, they work from 3.00am-9.30am, 6 days per week 14 full time track maintenance staff that look after all the training and racing tracks and facilities Three full time gardeners 500 horses housed and train on course. There are no off course stables any longer On site veterinary clinic All water used for irrigation is bore water and rain catchment, use about 120 million litres pa. Public can access the track at; Queens Ave, Guineas Car park, Glen Eira Rd entrance and the top of the hill next to the sports oval.

Really you make a "living from analysing form"? Must be damn easy to do that as what you posted about Manhattan, A Bettor Act and A Delightful Act was crap!!! I'd love to hear what other Harness BOAY'ers think about our respective form analysis of A Bettor Act. Why don't you really say what you think? You won't actually say "I believe Mitchell Kerr was using performance enhancing drugs on his horses!" You can't though because you have zero evidence. All you can do is make inferences, supposition and innuendo. One day you may see a modicum of evidence emerge and then you will jump up and down "I told you so, I was right and it has been going on for years!" But at the moment you have nothing. As I have posted elsewhere on BOAY I'm really interested to see what substance the RIU found in their clandestine raid on Alford. But so far there has been nothing, zip, nada, NOTHING!

I realise you are only THINKING but does the course have an equine swimming pool? A walker? Treadmill? On course facilities for a visiting or permanent vet? Good security and lighting? Plenty of room for all those things?

Freda - correct me if I'm wrong but you are: A local loyal Riccarton Trainer; An industry stakeholder; Have made an investment (time and money) in the industry. Surely those three attributes are sufficient for you to be informed of the plans that your investment relies on. Why do you HAVE to be a committee member to be informed? I just visited the CJC website - there is NOTHING on that site that clearly lays out the plans for the future nor for that matter promotes Riccarton as a future training location. NOTHING! https://racing.riccartonpark.nz/ Compare that to Pakenham - https://country.racing.com/pakenham/training-centre Full transparency, a clear strategic plan, full disclosure of costs and local rules!

It comes from revenue produced by tracks like Reefton and any other track that doesn't get industry subsidies. Ultimately the revenue comes from the punter. I'm not sure if the NZ punter has a choice between backing a horse on an AWT industry day at Riccarton and a nice grass turf track in OZ whether they will choose the AWT. As my mum always use to say "You know what thought (think) did - nothing!" But sold your best. What do you mean "State of the Art"? How is it constructed? Hopefully not along the lines of the past renovation's on your turf race surface. Will it have an irrigation system that works? You still keep avoiding answering the key question - what are the plans to renovate the main turf track for racing?

You are really struggling Galah. You have now switched the debate away from your original assertion to something different. Your original assertion was that "when A Bettor Act left M Kerr's training it lost a leg" - the implication being that its form dropped considerably. Arguably you could say its best form was when it was with the All Stars as a 2 yr old when it won a Group race and was Group placed earning $60k for the season. Its best season in terms of earnings. It went to the Dickie's and then to Kerr. Yes it did win 4 races in the 2019 season for Kerr. However, and this is the point that you choose to ignore, it last won a race in October 2019. That race was an easy R62-R74 race at Addington. The next SEVEN starts were with Mitchell Kerr for ONE second placing. The race after it won was the Kaikoura Cup where it finished 7th. The last run for 2019 was the Junior FFA during Cup Week where it ran 32 lengths LAST. It didn't have another start until TEN months later. In the next 5 starts it had only one placing a 2nd at Invercargill in a R60-R80 race. It finished 5th, 7th, 11th and 11th in its remaining starts for Mitchell Kerr. Everytime it has tried to step up to the next class it has failed abysmally. So to spell it out for you once again - the horse didn't "lose a leg" once leaving Kerr's stable - there is Zero evidence for that.