Chief Stipe

The Riccarton and Awapuni Synthetic Tracks should be put on hold. It would be irresponsible management to invest in them while your revenue is in doubt. There is insufficient extra revenue now and certainly in the next 2-3 years to keep them properly maintained. They could become expensive tomb stones. There is a perfectly good winter racing and training track 30km from Awapuni called Foxton.

Ken Rutherford … the industry’s leaders have made some big mistakes in the past and continue to make more. Captain Ken: We have to protect our industry now and hit the overseas bookies for a six By Barry Lichter • 21 May 2020 One time head sports bookie Ken Rutherford never thought he’d see the day when he’d be advocating banning Kiwi punters from betting overseas. But the former test cricket captain is used to going on a front foot attack and says the industry is in such a precarious state he believes it has no option. Rutherford, who captained New Zealand in 18 tests and 38 one-day internationals, has more than a dozen years experience in wagering, first with the New Zealand TAB, where he became head of sports betting in 2004, and then five years in a similar role in Singapore. So when he says the industry now has to “gang up” on the corporate bookies overseas, it’s with more experience than some of the people who have been running the TAB into the ground in recent years. Ken Rutherford … former New Zealand test cricket captain.“If you’d asked me two years ago whether I would be in favour of stopping people from having overseas accounts I’d have disagreed strongly. I would have said we had to stand on our own two feet and compete. “But things have got so bad we need to make sure we are now supporting the New Zealand industry.” A $2.5 million slice of the Government’s $72.5 million bailout package announced last week has been set aside for the Department Of Internal Affairs to fast-track work on online gambling, including considering measures to mitigate the loss of millions through more and more New Zealanders gambling through offshore platforms. Rutherford says he knows the idea of blocking the IP addresses of overseas operators will go down poorly with many people who will see limiting or denying competition as a retrograde step. He himself closed his New Zealand TAB account some time ago because of poor service. “But I think punters need to take some short term pain for long term gain. And if we can get the industry back on track maybe any restriction could be eased. “I just see our market shrinking so much. The new website didn’t function half as well as the old one and was so poor it drove away truckloads of punters, particularly the bigger ones. “The TAB’s position is totally untenable unless we can stop so many punters betting offshore - the size of the internal market is not sufficient to allow a large portion of that market to wager offshore.” Rutherford believes a lot of people simply don’t understand the way the industry is funded, and that overseas bookies contribute nothing to the local industry. Rutherford spent five years in South Africa working in the equivalent of Trackside and marketing, advancing to CEO in 2012, and says the TAB there is collapsing because of a lack of contribution from bookies and support from Government . “There needs to be a decent PR campaign to educate people that we need to be supporting our industry here – otherwise there won’t be an industry. “Of course the onus will be on the TAB to up their game.” Punters were more knowledgeable than 10 years ago and wouldn’t put up with poor service, worse odds and a lack of information. Rutherford said he could never understand why a succession of TAB chiefs placed such an emphasis on promoting fixed odds betting when the product at best realised half of the 16.5% of tote betting income. John Allen … wanted a Lamborghini betting engine.Allen naive about wagering And he believes former CEO John Allen, under whose watch the disastrous fixed odds betting platform was born, was quite naive about wagering. Rutherford, in his former role as Waikato Racing Club chief executive, attended a number of the road shows Allen put on when he promoted the need to spend lavish amounts on a Lamborghini engine to drive betting. “He told everyone we could afford it, because it would generate all this extra money.” Rutherford says he questioned Allen several times about where the extra growth was going to come from and pointed out that in his experience few punters would bet on the “frilly stuff” he was so desperate to provide. “He was claiming if you gave punters 100 options on one rugby game you’d grow turnover exponentially. “But, from the time I started bookmaking, the core options like head-to-head, points start, winning margin and first try always accounted for 85% to 90% of your turnover on a game. That will never change. The TAB was dreaming. Allen was delusional and just didn’t understand the business.” Anecdotally, says Rutherford, many bookies would actually tell you turnover decreased with too many betting options per match. Too much choice confused punters. Once integrated, the TAB would then have spent truckloads in marketing the new products for little net reward. Rutherford says the growth figures spouted by successive CEOs (Andrew Brown, Chris Bayliss and Allen) were pure spin. “They always talked about how well turnover was going at major sporting events, with no mention of the most important stat - net revenue. A now familiar email from the TAB to thousands of punters.“And someone at the TAB has to tell us about the cost of the bonus bets that are handed out? Do these essentially promotional items get bundled up into total turnover figures (thus fudging the numbers).” When Rutherford first started at the TAB in 2001, setting odds on cricket, racing and football, he said it was a traditional Kiwi outfit, run by passionate people in it more for love of the game than money. But gradually he detected a change and by the time he left in 2006 when Graeme Hansen was CEO it had become a “corporate monolithic bureaucracy.” “All the CEOs seem to have done since is added layer upon layer of bureaucracy and management. “I challenge the current crop to roll up their sleeves, get their hands dirty and prepare to fight.” The synthetic track at Pakenham where remedial work was done last year to reduce kickback.Synthetic tracks a mistake? Rutherford says with $26 million of the Government’s $50 million emergency package gone already on RITA’s outstanding bills, there isn’t a lot left to boost racing so he questions another $20 million being ring fenced to build two more synthetic tracks at Awapuni and Riccarton. “Surely if you’re on a tight budget the money should be spent on strategies to grow the business. I can’t see two more polytracks doing that. “I know by saying that I will get offside with trainers - and I get that they need good surfaces for their horses - but we won’t get all that money back.” The tracks would also be a real burden for the clubs which will have to raise another $6 million each to build them and later more money to maintain them. “If you’re so keen to shore up the infrastructure wouldn’t you be far better off getting your top six to eight tracks in the country spot on - like Ellerslie, Te Rapa, Awapuni, Hastings and Riccarton - so they can cope with the increased activity they’ll face with the closure of all these other tracks?” Rutherford, now the CEO at the Hawkesbury Racing Club in New South Wales, says its synthetic track is used only for training and not racing and only Canberra combines the roles. “They’re not a good wagering product - Pakenham in Victoria doesn’t do a lot of turnover - and many trainers don’t want to run their horses on them. “I hope I’m wrong and in five years people are saying thank goodness we had these all weather tracks.” Preserve media coverage Rutherford says he believes the industry would benefit far more if say even $5 million was put into preserving, and improving, the media coverage of racing. It was a monumental mistake for the industry to shut its window to the public. “It’s mind boggling how quickly they’ve wound back their services. The cost to the industry will be far greater than the savings they’re making. “I can’t fathom how they’ve cut back so much on the TV component and it makes no sense having no more radio.” TV preview shows in Australia like ‘Get On’ were paid for by the TAB which recognised their value in driving betting. And having experts like Grant Nisbett on half an hour before a rugby match, absolutely generated more interest. As a punter who always had a Best Bets hanging out his back pocket and remembers the 8am scratching service on radio, Rutherford says form guides and racing in the newspapers are a complete must if you don’t want betting to drop. “These decisions are being made by people who just don’t get it, all they’re doing is slashing and burning for the bottom line and blaming it all on COVID when we all know they were in trouble long before that. “I don’t want to come across like a know-it-all but it’s absolute rubbish to say it’s a generational thing and only older punters want hard copies of form. It’s part of racing. “I know how many racebooks we sell at Hawkesbury and it’s all to young guys. You don’t see everyone walking around with a phone in their hands, swiping the screen. “It’s a death knell if you don’t do all you can to keep wagering going."

INDUSTRY NZ equine exports to Australia suspended - will this have spring carnival ramifications? Article Author Racenet 9:58AM21 May 2020 3 Comments In an unfolding drama that could have potential ramifications for Australian spring racing carnivals, New Zealand has suspended horse exports to Australia due to a possible case of equine piroplasmosis. Equine piroplasmosis is a blood disease that causes anaemia and is spread from animal to animal by ticks. The New Zealand Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) has now informed all equine exporters that exports to, or via, Australia are suspended with immediate effect. The news comes a fortnight after trans-Tasman equine flights resumed following a Covid-19 enforced shutdown. ANZ Bloodstock reported that a flight on Tuesday night was prevented from leaving New Zealand, while another shipment, scheduled for Friday night, was also expected to be held over as the department negotiates alternative arrangements with their Australian counterparts, the Department of Agriculture. Equine piroplasmosis has never been identified in New Zealand before but MPI director for animal health and welfare Chris Rodwell confirmed that a mare tested positive to equine piroplasmosis in a pre-export blood test. Rodwell told ANZ Bloodstock News: “Further blood tests have been taken from the mare and we expect confirmation of whether the horse is negative or positive for the disease by the end of this week. “Theileria equi is a blood disease that causes anaemia and is spread from animal to animal by ticks. The horse in question was imported to New Zealand from the EU early last year for breeding. No signs of disease in the animal have been reported in its time here.” The disease cannot be passed from horse to horse without the ticks known to transmit the parasite – and those tick species are not found in New Zealand. But many vet agreements with other countries require that equine piroplasmosis has not been present in the exporting country for a certain period of time. For Australia, the requirement is three years - meaning that, under the current certification process, trans-Tasman exports would be banned until 2023. However officials are confident one case of piroplasmosis in an imported broodmare in New Zealand has not and will not be spread. The hope is horse transportation between New Zealand and Australia will not be stopped long term and perhaps not for much more than a fortnight. Recently, Kiwi powerhouse Te Akau Racing announced it was set to expand its presence Down Under and launch a wave of horses at the spring carnival. It was announced Cambridge Stud would join forces with Te Akau Racing in sending six race fillies to Melbourne for the spring carnival to be trained by Jamie Richards.

Rule Number(s): 614(2)Messrs M & M Pitman - Trainers - Presented 'SWISS EIRE' with an incorrect saddlecloth number. Penalty - $50 fine (Feed generated with FetchRSS)View the full article

Rule Number(s): 616(4)Mr J Coutts - Trainer - Failed to gain permission to remove sidewinkers, ear covers and tongue tie from the notified gear for 'PLEADINGGUILTY'. Penalty ... (Feed generated with FetchRSS)View the full article

Can we stick to the Topic please.

Rangiora?

So we need to give you either more difficult questions and/or 25 an hour?

What type of Organisation is RITA? Well I'm no lawyer so if anyone out there can clarify for me - please do! What I do know is what it ISN'T? It ISN'T a Crown Entity that is governed by the Crown Entities Act; It ISN'T a Publicly Listed Company that is governed by the Companies Act reporting to shareholders and the stock exchange; It ISN'T a Private Company again governed by the Companies Act reporting to shareholders; It ISN'T anything else that one might be accustomed to. What does the Racing Act under which RITA was formed say it is (see extract from Act below)? The Racing Act says it is a "body corporate" (Clause 7 (1) (a)). So an entity created by statute i.e. a "statutory entity". But here's the kicker - where are the checks and balances that normally govern other body corporates (corporations and companies) or statutory entities (Lotteries Commission)? Does anyone know of any other organisation in New Zealand that is treated the same? Is this a mistake and has RITA fallen between the cracks due to rushed legislative changes? Another interesting clause in the Racing Act is 7 (2) (b) which states - RITA is a legal entity separate from its members, office holders, and employees, and the Crown. Does that mean that unlike other organisations there is no final accountability? For example if RITA did go into receivership does it mean that the Crown is absolved from any contracts formed by RITA and any debts? Racing Act 2003 (amended 1 July 2019): 7 Continuation and renaming of Board (1) The body called the New Zealand Racing Board— (a) is continued; and (b) is renamed the Racing Industry Transition Agency (the Agency). (2) The Agency— (a) is a body corporate; and (b) is a legal entity separate from its members, office holders, and employees, and the Crown. (3) The Agency has, both within and outside New Zealand,— (a) full capacity to carry on or undertake any business or activity, do any act, or enter into any transaction; and (b) for the purposes of paragraph (a), full rights, powers, and privileges. (4) Subsection (3) applies subject to this Act, any other enactment, and the general law of New Zealand.

Another question for Freda - during the construction of the new Synthetic Track have the local administrators indicated where you will be able to train?

I bet you my last dollar (which is getting close under this current regime) that the recruitment of a new CEO is in a bit of trouble. Another task that RITA haven't delivered on.

How do you know? There isn't any transparency anymore. Weekly turnover figures have disappeared. The half yearly report for the period 1 August 2019 to 31 January 2020 is now 38 days overdue from its previous latest release. It took a virus to get some action after 11 months of hand sitting.

Freda can you ask one of the delegation where the fine silica sand comes from? Probably Newcastle.

Is RITA or Cambridge Jockey Club paying? Airfares will be close to $600 return - each person.

You wouldn't want to go too deep with your tractor grubber.... Woops you need specially designed equipment to maintain the tracks.

Well he is on track. Wyong had their first loss last season in five years.

Brodie would tell you that 189 of them were from the All Stars stables.

What seems universally agreed is they take a lot of day to day care which equals cost.

Dated 2010.

A good opinion piece on the promises versus the actual outcomes in the USA of installing Synthetic Tracks. It seems punters hate them. GroundControl.pdf

Some information for trainers and owners. Mainly the science of Synthetics. Note that it is recommended that you shoe your horses differently for turf and synthetic track racing. Synthetics-Aug2014.pdf

Some information on synthetic track maintenance. It appears that the Riccarton track will have higher maintenance costs that the Cambridge one due to the extremes in temperatures experienced in Canterbury. The track has to be prepared daily relative to the ambient temperature. Will be interesting when you have a Norwester with a Southerly change! tdn191209.pdf

The History and Future of Synthetic Tracks April 6, 2019 0 View Comments Share Tweet Pin Email Share After a 23rd horse died at Santa Anita Park on March 31, the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals urged horse racing officials to replace all racetracks in California to “the known-safest racing surface—a synthetic track.” Horse racing enthusiasts scratched their heads in confusion. Hadn’t Del Mar, Keeneland and Santa Anita tried synthetic surfaces and then switched back? Which is better, dirt or man-made tracks? That’s a debate that has been going on for more than 50 years. The history of synthetic tracks has been one of hope and unfulfilled promises – with a bit of politics thrown in. What Are Synthetic Tracks? A synthetic track is any track that is made of man-made materials. It holds better in wet conditions and is an all-weather surface. Most synthetic tracks are made of a blend of polypropylene, synthetic fibers, recycled rubber and sand, all coated in wax. It’s in place in about 35 racetracks worldwide. The first synthetic track, Tartan, was installed at various harness racing venues in the 1960s, but the surface failed to catch on with trainers, and they were replaced. The same thing happened in the 1970s when Calder Race Track tried Saf-T-Turf; track management covered it with sand only four months later after trainers complained that it made their horses sore. Synthetic tracks started to become serious alternatives in the 2000s when Polytrack became available. It featured a better cushioned and weather-resistant surface, and tracks began adopting it. Keeneland installed it on its training track in 2004, and then Turfway Park used it on its main track a year later. This shift was occurring while several high-profile fatalities were being investigated. Del Mar saw 15 fatalities at its track in 2006; Arlington Park in Chicago had 22 horses die that same year. In 2006, the surface got a major endorsement when the California Horse Racing Board ordered all major Thoroughbred tracks in the state to install synthetic surfaces by Jan. 1, 2008. Keeneland followed suit in late 2006 with its own Polytrack surface. At its peak in popularity, synthetic surfaces were on nine tracks in North America. The tracks proved to be safer than dirt or turf tracks; a study by the Jockey Club in 2014 showed that on all-weather tracks, the death rate from injuries per 1,000 starts was only 1.18, compared to 1.22 for turf and 1.78 on dirt tracks. After Turfway installed a synthetic surface in 2005, their fatality rate dropped 85%. And once the California tracks installed the new surfaces, they saw a 37% drop in fatalities. Studies showed further proof of synthetic surfaces’ superiority. Dr. Sue Stover of the University of California-Davis found that the force of the hoof on synthetic surfaces was more than half of what it was on dirt. When talking about a 1,000 pound animal, that’s a big difference. The Tide Turns But there were problems with the synthetic surfaces. Temperature changes affected the surfaces greatly – hot weather made the surface sticky and difficult to run in, and the tracks had to be watered to keep the temperatures down. Many tracks had problems with maintenance; Santa Anita replaced its Cushion surface with Pro-Ride after heavy rains caused drainage problems. The track had to close for a week while repairs were made. And the tracks had a short life span; The waxes and polymer tended to break down over time, causing costly replacement of the materials. Del Mar had to replace its foundation after only seven seasons. Then it became a money issue. Handicappers, the life blood of a race track, complained that the synthetic surfaces didn’t provide a uniform surface on which to judge a horse’s past performances. Trainers were also reporting odd, soft-tissue injuries with the horses. However, Dr. Stover said there was no way to prove this, since trainers were not mandated to report such injuries. “There is weak evidence and considerable anecdotal evidence that soft-tissue and hind end injuries are more common on synthetic surfaces than dirt surfaces,” she said. Jess Jackson, owner of the famed filly Rachel Alexandra, refused to run her in the 2009 Breeders’ Cup, calling Santa Anita’s surface “plastic.” In the two years the Breeders’ Cup was held at Santa Anita’s synthetic track, not one horse whose last race had been on dirt won a race. The CHRB reversed their mandate in 2008, giving tracks permission to switch back to dirt if that was their wish. Santa Anita announced its return to dirt in 2010 after the new Pro-Ride surface had drainage problems as well. The next year, the fatality rate jumped to 2.94 per 1,000 starts, compared with .59 per 1,000 in 2010. In 2014, Keeneland and Del Mar announced they were replacing their Polytrack surfaces with dirt. Interestingly, both tracks were announced as Breeders’ Cup host sites after the announcement. So is the dirt the cause of Santa Anita’s epidemic of fatalities? Not so fast, Dr. Stover warns. “Injuries are the result of multiple factors. Track surface is an important factor, but there are other key factors that play a role, including training history (exercise intensity) and pre-existing bone abnormalities,” she said. “The fatalities at Santa Anita need a full investigation before jumping to the conclusion that the racetrack was a contributor to the fatalities.”