Chief Stipe

So you are looking for a scapegoat? Someone to blame Just like you've found Bryce Mildon at Hastings to blame based on the advice amd misinformation from who knows. So you find these scapegoats and their heads are rolled. Then what? What are you going to do at Hastings? What are you going to do at Awapuni that hasn't already been done? If you are going to employ someone else who are they?

Wheres the Watu?

Might be too late by then. They don't seem keen to speak out for some reason. I'm not sure their Association has any nerve or desire to rock the boat even behind the scenes.

I stand corrected @SLB2.0 check out R8 at The Valley - a horse lost its footing similar to Awapuni. Will there be an abandonment?

What you are inferring is that the All Stars had some magical advantage. What I'm saying is that factually that doesn't hold up and also the gap between a lot of trainers has closed. Also contrary to your assertion the partnership between Mark and Nathan Purdon is performing at a similar level to the other partnerships that Mark has had with a smaller number of horses. In the 2024 season they still picked up $2.2m in stakes with a UDR of 0.3745. They were 2nd in the 2023 Trainers Premiership with 83 wins, a UDR of 0.4572 which was miles ahead of everyone else and over $3m in stakes. Their stakes winnings was $1m more than the Dunns who won the Premiership. So I need to correct myself - they do seem to be as dominant as always. They just don't have the same number of horses.

Well you've probably had a share or two in a horse at one stage. I bought into the Winnie funded largesse on two occasions prior to the AWT's. Didn't buy into them nor have a bought into this over inflated short term stakes increase. Would love to see some nice turf tracks that played fair in all seasons and weren't shifty sand based. I've never worked out why Trainers just accept what they are given and adapt. So it is great to see them fighting back over Levin.

Where have I said any Trainer or Jockey is "useless"? There hasn't been a complete renovation like the one done this time in the last 25 years. The last big renovation was just on the troublesome bend. Flemington does a complete renovation every 4 to 5 years! We have this expectation in NZ that a track will last forever. They don't. You need to work extensively on them EVERY year to extend their usefulness otherwise you get the problems we are facing now. So if you are going to apportion blame, which you seem intent on doing, then it is those that didn't commit enough capital or resource to renovate on a regular basis. Dairy and dry stock farmers had to adapt why didn't our Racing Clubs? The degradation was a slow gradual decline. Trainers from what I've seen are reluctant to work together and demand better. BTW in 100 years you would expect to do a serious renovation on a track a minimum of every 10 years - so TEN times! He wouldn't have the reasons for the abandonment. Everything was done to ensure that the meeting went ahead and completed successfully. A horse slipped. Why? Where was the system failure? Hell Ellerslie spent 10 time what Awapuni has and look what happened there!!!! NO I'm not running Trainers and Jockeys down I'm just saying as the customer of the tracks they like all stakeholders have been part of the problem. In effect I'm blaming everyone. We all stood by and put up with crap for decades and never addressed the problems or demanded that capital be invested in infrastructure for the benefit of the horse. Not flash stands and parties and over the top stakes but good safe surfaces to race horses on and safe clean secure stabling to house them. Easy now to blame management, track managers and turf science experts who are trying to fix the years of neglect. One of the few things that Messara got right in his report was his assessment of the state of our tracks.

Obviously you are new to the Sport. I've seen horses doing it for 55 years. The difference is with better breeding there are more able to do it. The Bettor's Delight influence has been significant.

Fantastic so some of you are in "I told you so" mode. I guess they have been saying it for the last 20 years that Awapuni has had problems? Those who let this gradual degradation of our tracks to happen over the last 20 plus years. I don't blame the under resourced track managers over that time at all. Where were these experts that you refer to demanding that tracks were maintained adequately? How often do these trainers renovate their day paddocks? That's reactive and only an incompetant CEO would have gone down that path without the full information being available. To do otherwise could have opened a whole raft of litigation. So you want blood - you want heads to roll of the very people that have attempted to fix the mess that took decades of neglect to occur. Those calling for blood seem to have very short memories and conveniently forget the part they played. Remember the Awapuni meetings abandoned in 2010, 2015 (The Kevin Morton vs RIU Case), 2017 and others? Be greatful that finally they are trying to do something to fix the problems and spending nearly $6m to do it.

That's not correct. She was interviewed quite a time after the abandonment. Not only that she repeated what she had said the previous times she has been interviewed. Her answer is to tell the track manager they should have irrigated more. She hasn't said how much! The track had had 17mm of water in the previous 7 days. 5mm in the 24 hours before raceday. Should they have put the 30-40mm that Ellerslie need to put on their track in the days leading up to a meeting? Hell just imagine the screaming from trainers not wanting a track that was too soft! In reality what is he going to say? Just come out and bag Club Management and the Track Manger as well as the Track renovators? The Manager of Awapuni was interviewed on Trackside WELL before Hercock and gave a guarded opinion about what happened and what was happening next. You couldn't expect anything else. As for the anecdotal negatrive reports from nameless trainers and Jockeys about the trials. Well they don't seem to align with the trial videos nor the public comments of Jonathan Riddell, Leah Hemi and Kate Hercock herself. To quote Hercock - " First-time rider on the track, Kate Hercock, was equally impressed. “The track is lovely, it’s very consistent all over.”

@curious I've been thinking about the moisture reading that track managers now seem to be obliged to provide on a regular basis. For some reason some aged neurons formed during my horticultural science days got me to thinking and revisiting some of the science of moisture reading and field capcity. I've come to the conclusion that the moisture reading on its own as the measure of a track condition is a load of nonsense. Even as a measure of the water content it is only relevant at the point in time it was taken - water is constantly draining or being added. However the meter needs to be calibrated to the field capacity of the soil type. Depending on how you measure it the field capacity of sand is 15 to 25% by volume (the % can change relative to the size of the sand grains) with a water holding capacity of 5% to 15%. Applying these benchmarks and correlating the moisture readings then you could assume that Ellerslie is largely pure sand. Awapuni has produced a higher moisture reading and was rated at a Good 4. Why can't they give us penetrometer readings anymore? Or find a more reliable repeatable multi-factor measurement tool for measuring a tracks firmness? Would a Going Stick which measures firmness and shear be a better tool? Would measuring shear have given an indication that the surface was unstable?

She's been interviewed three times now on the same subject but at different tracks. She seems to be Tracksides "Go To" and I'm wondering who is behind that choice. Her repeated assertion that the fix is to irrigate more is way off the mark. Quite ironic really when you consider the other group of stakeholders primarily trainers saying in the past that they irrigate too much!!! Who would want to be a Track Manager? What we have now is a disparate bunch of groups all with different opinions on the issue. The cynic says it is a deliberate divide and rule approach.

Basically a sand loam to which has been added organic matter which helps with drainage, reduces the need to artificially fertilise and has increased the water holding capacity to reduce the affect of droughts BUT not at the expense of natural drainage.

Yes but they are giving an opinion on something they should be knowledgeable about. Although in my experience there is a wide variation between those you would or wouldn't listen to. Some Jockeys make good trainers but not many. They may say put blinkers on. But unless they said why they think that and you would be less inclined to take it on board.

I want to know who has the monopoly on sand? Seriously someone has a real fixation on sand fixing everything. They hastened the demise of Te Rapa with all the sand slitting. They just filled the drains! Now look at the issues with Ellerslie. Does NZ racing really want artificial sand tracks that are expensive to maintain and only provide an artificial Soft 6 or Soft 5 surface that bears no comparison to the sane rating on a non-sand track?

The number of tracks is largely irrelevant. It is about having sustainable tracks that are financially able to maintain their business. In an earlier post reference was made to the amount of money spent at Flemington each year to renovate and maintain the track(s). They can afford to do it. They have 25 race meetings a year, 30 jumpout meetings (3 a month) and 800 horses are trained on the course. Meanwhile in NZ we seem to be contemplating the sale of Levin to fund a course (Trentham) that has 12 meetings a year, no training tracks/facilities, next to zero horses trained on the track, no jumpouts or trials and a stabling/saddling area that was built just after WW2

No Hercock has now done at least 3 interviews on Trackside in recent weeks where she has given more than opinion. She has stated specifically what the Track Managers should have done. That is an area of knowledge beyond her specific realm. It isn't helpful at all nor what she is saying accurate. She repeats largely three things - water more, don't move the rail and the track managers are doing what we tell them to do. Really? Is it that simple? It then becomes a rallying call for all the armchair experts to slay Track Managers and those employed to fix the issues with limited resources. Hastings is stuffed as is Trentham. Adding more water or not shifting the rail ain't going to fix them. @Special Agent would you be happy for a Jockey to tell you how to train your horses? Or would you prefer knowledgeable feedback on how your horse performed in a race? Theres a difference.

Struggle to get race meetings scheduled in the South Island.

I don't disrespect her riding experience nor her right to comment on how the track is performing for the horses she rides in it. However I don't believe she is qualified to proffer strong opinions on what needs to be done to the tracks. She had a go at two track managers now and her solution is to water the track more.

Well they must have an agenda then. Equally your blue blood analogy could apply to them. Bryce Mildon started his track management career at Matamata. He was there for 10 years working for arguably one of the best track managers in NZ. Qualified in Sports Turf Management. 12 months at Stawell in Victoria. 3 years at Sale. Then track manager at Pakenham. Came back to NZ and then 12 months at Pukekohe. Back to Pakenham for nearly 6 years. Managing turf and AWT tracks and was General Manager. So if Pakenham didn't like him why did they employ him for a second stint? He was only at Hastings for about 3 months before the HB Guineas Day abandonment. He wasn't there for the previous abandonments that have occurred quite a few times in recent years. Is there? How can a track like Trentham be financially viable with only 10 or 12 meetings a year and no other revenue source? BTW Mildon managed to successfully run 14 race meetings on the turf track in less than 3 months. I have no problem with Hercock commenting on how her horse feels underneath her when galloping on the track. But shouldn't the line be drawn at her commenting on how to manage the tracks? Especially when her solution is essentially to pour more water on the tracks.

Different problem in my opinion. They were cutting into the ground at Awapuni. Ellerslie initially the horses couldn't get into the ground because of the root matter. They've got round that largely with mechanical means not watering. The moisture meter reading was already very high at Awapuni I don't know how you could get much more water into it!!! Hercock should stick to riding and the track condition NOT how to fix it

I see the normal online mob are ranting and raving maniacally at the "experts" and blaming all and sundry. I don't think it helps. I'm sick and tired of the BS about "it didn't happen in our day when we had farmers on the committee running things". It's pure hogwash. The fact is past generations sucked the life out of the tracks and never put anything back. We are now paying for it. You only have to look at what Flemington spends every year on track renovation to see that we haven't spent that much on more than a dozen tracks let alone ONE. In my opinion there is one mistake that the experts are making and I believe it is driven by the direction they are getting. The objective given to the experts is to provide a track that can handle all weather amd provide a very narrow range of firmness. The only way to achieve that is to use pure sand. It's a mistake in my opinion. The top layer should be a sandy loam soil mix on top of sand. A sandy loam retains moisture and nutrients so needs less irrigation and fertilisation but still provides good drainage. However like Flemington you get a wider range of track ratings e.g. from heavy to firm but the downgrades and upgrades occur faster than a clay loam based soil. Most of our tracks are clay loam and have been hammered. A sandy loam doesn't have as much kick back as pure sand either.

That's not correct. Who is saying he has been pushed from anywhere? My intel from people whose opinion I respect say he has a very good track management pedigree. He was at Pakenham a long time and I believe did two stints there. As for Pukekohe given the hammering it got covering for Ellerslie you wouldn't want to manage it anyway. Hercock put the boot into him after HB Guineas Day again saying it needed to have irrigated it more prior. I saw that track close up and she was wrong. It does need a complete renovation. You only have to look at its track record over the last seven years. At least 5 of those years there have been abandonments. it was "industry knowledge" and lack of investment in maintenance that got the industry into the position it is in. In my opinion you are very much wrong about Hastings. It isn't a quick fix i.e. using a couple of farmers and a mole plough. Tracks have a limited life. The majority of ours are well past their use by date.

I bet you no horse "slips".

I caught up with it in a later replay and it was significant. I expect to be derided for my next comment but... was it a slip or did the horse lose its footing? Hercock says the track needs more water like Ellerslie. Yet go figure Ellerslie was a S5 at 28% moisture and Awapuni was G4 at 38% moisture. Now we have Senior jockeys telling the track managers how to manage the tracks. A circus. There is a 30cm layer of sand on top at Awapuni. We now have another Ellerslie. I was always taught that the best soil profile for drainage AND turf culture WASN'T pure sand.