Chief Stipe

The cockups aren't confined to the North Island.

Said like a true socialist. How is Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves doing? Apart from taxing the shyte out of anything productive that moves? Hell Truss wasn't Chancellor of the Exchequer and was only PM for 49 days! Hell it took Ardern longer to stuff how economy and arguably she wasn't as bright as Truss!

Read the Stipes report in the first post. The gate malfunctioned, horse got upset, attendents climbed up, while the starter was resetting the start button the gates released and three horses weren't ready. All horses started but 3 were disadvantaged.

Is the guy on the left with the red star @Brodie? Or @Gammalite on a comeback?

Race 9 DR JOHN SOUTHWORTH MEMORIAL VASE 1200 I’M ALL IN (W Kennedy) - Began awkwardly losing ground. Declared a non-runner by the Adjudicative Committee after it was prevented from taking an effective part in the race owing to the mechanical failure of the starting stalls. SLIPPER ISLAND (R Hutchings) - Began awkwardly losing ground. Declared a non-runner by the Adjudicative Committee after it was prevented from taking an effective part in the race owing to the mechanical failure of the starting stalls. Underwent a post-race veterinary examination which did not reveal any abnormality. DECEMBER (G Rooke) - Reared as the start was effected losing ground. G Rooke reported to Stewards that the barriers malfunctioning had affected his mount in the early stages, however under [Rule 632(1)], the runner could not be considered to be declared a non-starter as it finished in fourth position. IMPENDABELLE (M McNab) - Restrained in the early stages to obtain cover from the outside barrier. WHISKEY ‘N’ ROSES (S Spratt) - Raced three wide without cover through the early and middle stages. Went off stride passing the 600 metres and was then pulled up by its rider. When questioned, the rider reported that she felt that after going off stride rounding the bend, something had been amiss with the gelding. Underwent a post-race veterinary examination which did not reveal any abnormality. Following this race Stewards interviewed the Starter and all riders in relation to the start. The Starter reported that the gates had opened as he was in the process of resetting the starting button and without him giving his verbal call. After considering submissions, Stewards lodged a request for a ruling with the Adjudicative Committee as to whether I’M ALL IN (W Kennedy) and SLIPPER ISLAND (R Hutchings) were denied a fair start due to a malfunction with the starting gates. After considering submissions from Stewards, the Starter and riders the Adjudicative Committee ordered I’M ALL IN and SLIPPER ISLAND to be declared non-starters.

With a geo-blocked limited market of 5 million people. The only way they will gain monopoly profits is if they dump racing at the end of the first 5 years when their funding committment ends. Even then they are competing with established gaming businesses in NZ. Perhaps they are waiting for Sky Casino to go broke.

How can it be anything but loose change? A Geo-blocked wagering market of 5 million people! As for why - I can only think there is a strategic reason but that escapes me. Perhaps a small educated demanding market to test new products and systems? I worked once for an international corporation who were doing that. IT diversity - a stable political and business environment to house backups to global systems. Who knows but I don't imagine it is just for the revenue which at the moment must be running at a loss.

To be fair the NZ wagering market is loose change to ENTAIN. The biggest headwind they face is the gambling tax proposal in the UK. With the UK Labour Government tanking the UK economy they're desperate to find "society friendly" sources of tax revenue.

Come on @the galah Harts foot is firmly wedged into the cart. Moran's foot was dangling below the cart and he hit his horses leg with it. It isn't one rule for one and another for anyone else - Hart is adhering to the intent of the law Moran wasn't. BTW how is your remedial work on the NZ road code going?

Because @Archie Butterflydefames and slanders decent people behind a paywall. Not the Yoles of this world which the mainstream media have done a better job in than @Archie Butterfly. Obviously you are a subscriber @the galah - may I suggest you instead put your subscription into your TAB account where you have a chance of making a profit or at worst we all win from it!

@Archie Butterfly aka Peter Profit is a bottom feeder sifting through the detritus looking for tasty titbits of dirt to turn into stories that the negative gullibles get off on. Very few of his "stories" are accurate. He is about due to start posting some obscurely labelled ampoules or tiny jars of some substance as the latest Go-Fast. A subject he has written many hit pieces on but has failed to hit a target. On that subject @the galah I have some interesting information from the USA that supports my contention that the USA equine drug testing regime is not fit for purpose and is archaic. A recent article I read supports what I have said for a long time that the technology is available to test for anything even when you don't know what you are looking for. Industries in New Zealand have been doing that for years. @Archie Butterfly isn't that bright and sells snakeoil in the form of gossip.

Agreed. @Archie Butterfly used the same photo for his BS story. Hart's foot is clearly wedged into the sulky stay.

Next they'll be saying who instigated the aftermath. Instigate being another misused word in the English language.

Trainers Sheila Laxon and John Symons deny they owe $500,000 to company at the centre of Melbourne Cup prizemoney fight www.theage.com.au Trainers deny they owe $500,000 to company at the centre of Cup prizemoney fight By Danny Russell and Sarah Danckert February 7, 2025 — 3.19pm Trainers John Symons and Sheila Laxon have denied owing more than half a million dollars to a collapsed company at the centre of their Melbourne Cup prizemoney dispute. The trainers say they are, in fact, owed $26,000 in outstanding fees by Esprit Racing, the company they worked for as trainers from 2014 until 2023. Esprit Racing was sent into liquidation this week, almost two months after the trainers’ $464,000 cut of last year’s Melbourne Cup prizemoney was paid into the company’s account by Racing Victoria. Symons and Laxon have launched legal action against Racing Victoria in a bid to recover the money. Racing Victoria maintains it paid the prizemoney into an account registered with them for Laxon and Symons. Documents filed with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission on Thursday by Esprit Racing’s sole director, Judith Sutcliffe, shows the company had only a few assets including a horse float, a Holden Camaro and equine therapy equipment at the time of its collapse. One of the assets on the report is crossed out as though it were improperly entered. It appears to state: “Laxon & Symons horse” or “Laxon & Symons loan”. That now disclaimed asset was initially listed as being worth $569,875. The report also shows in the section titled, “Money owed to the company”, that it is owed $569,875 for “advances”, though the names of who the advances were made to are redacted from the report. The company also states it owes its creditors more than $1 million, with those creditors all redacted from the report by the liquidator. Symons said they only trained for Esprit Racing and that the company bought horses - “specked them at the sales” - and then sold shares in them. “They never advanced [us] anything,” Symons told this masthead on Friday. “It’s bullshit. And the people that are in those horses are going to come forward and say that. Because they have paid [Esprit Racing] for those horses. It’s just rubbish. “We could not have any interest in the company whatsoever, and we didn’t.” Esprit Racing’s had one director, Judith Sutcliffe, from Tarneit at the time of its collapse, according to the company’s records filed with the corporate regulator. According to the records, Sutcliffe is 82 and lives in a retirement home and has previously used the surname Kirby as well as Sutcliffe, according to Esprit’s company records filed with the corporate watchdog. This masthead was unable to contact her directly. Before its liquidation, Esprit’s accountant was Michael Kirby, according to company records. Symons said Judith Sutcliffe was Kirby’s mother. Kirby declined to comment on Thursday, directing this masthead to Esprit’s liquidator. “It’s got nothing to do with me, talk to the company,” he said. This masthead asked Kirby specifically whether Judith Sutcliffe was his mother or another relative, and whether he knew how she had decided to appoint Jirsch Sutherland as a liquidator. He did not respond to those questions. Kirby first became involved with Symons and Laxon as an associate in 2014. The trainers were bankrupted after losing a Victorian Supreme Court civil case brought against them by former friends - Frank and Karen Butler and Glenn Fielding - over the ownership of horses in 2014. After the trial, their company JSL Racing Pty Ltd - John and Sheila Laxon Racing - was taken over by JSL Racing (Australasia) which then became Esprit Racing, at the time owned 100 per cent by then director Michael Kirby. Kirby also operated accountancy firm, XO Accounting Pty Ltd, with offices in Melbourne, Sydney and Auckland. At the time, Kirby provided a personal “financial guarantee” for the trainers to be licensed in Victoria and later in Queensland on the condition they worked as employees of Esprit Racing “for training purposes only and will not be involved in the finance aspect of the business”. Kirby and Symons bought last year’s Melbourne Cup winner Knight’s Choice for $85,000 at the 2021 Magic Millions Gold Coast Yearling Sale before selling the horse to current owners Cameron Bain and Richard and Kaye Waldron. Symons said they parted ways with Esprit Racing two years ago because they alleged that the company was not paying staff and the trainers “were getting a bad name because of it”. “He put his mother in there [the company], that’s why we ran away,” Symons said. “[He] put that the company was registered at 1 Dicky Beach, Sunshine Coast -we rented that house some six years ago. “We did a deal to walk away from the company because he had a heap of horses, so we said we would do 12 months training for him for nothing … and then we are walking. “There’s not one bit of correspondence that he could show that we owe him any money. It’s the opposite. He owes us.” Soon after the split, Symons and Laxon registered their new business name, Symons-Laxon Racing, with Racing Queensland. They expected that account to be automatically updated with Racing Victoria through the Racing Australia database. When asked why they were not taking legal action against Esprit Racing, Symons said: “Because we didn’t put the money in his bank.” Esprit Racing appointed liquidators from advisory firm Jirsch Sutherland on February 4. A spokesperson for the liquidator Malcolm Howell said: “Malcolm’s investigations are just commencing, given it’s still early in the appointment (he was appointed on Tuesday 4th), and letters are being sent out to gather more information. “At this stage Malcolm has only spoken to the director, Judith,” the spokesperson said.

The vision quality is abysmal. They prattle on about the aftermath. 3 Studio presenters. One who hasn't got a clue about racing except how to read from the form book. Then they show an ad instead of the race from Wingatui which is broadcast on Trackside 1! WHO IS THE PRODUCER OF TRACKSIDE?!

My other bugbear is why can't all the presenters where a standard Jacket? Some of the fashion tastes are despicable. Heveldt seems to dress out of the cast off bin from the local op shop drama society.

Yeah posted about it before on BOAY. I cringe everytime I hear it. Good point about Twentyman... noun. something that results or follows from an event, especially one of a disastrous or unfortunate nature; consequence: the aftermath of war; the aftermath of the flood.

That is full of holes especially if the primary metric the rating can't be measured or isn't measured with a quantitative metric using a tool that produces consistent results. A Betcha Hunch just doesn't cut it.

No. But if you decide to pass a logging truck and trailer and it is going 95km/hr in a 100km/hr zone and you are driving a Mercedes AMG model I suggest you click the turbo switch and floor it. Then when well clear and in front (suggest you don't try and knock the logging trucks wheels out) decelerate using those ABS brakes. If there is a speed camera its software will be confused that you can go from 95 to 180 and back to 100 in 3 seconds. PS: If you do get caught dont get @the galah to defend you.

Just done you a favour @the galah and checked the road code. Before you pull in, you must check that you’re well clear of the vehicle you’ve just passed so you don’t cut them off. From the Legislation (check 2.6(3): Passing 2.6General requirements about passing other vehicles (1) A driver must not pass or attempt to pass another vehicle moving in the same direction unless— (a) the movement can be made with safety; and (b) the movement is made with due consideration for other users of the road; and (c) sufficient clear road is visible to the driver for the passing movement to be completed without impeding or being likely to impede any possible opposing traffic; and (d) until the passing movement is completed, the driver has a clear view of the road and any traffic on the road for at least 100 m in the direction in which the driver is travelling. (2) Subclause (1)(c) and (d) does not apply if the passing vehicle and the vehicle being passed are in different lanes and are, throughout the passing movement, either on a one-way road or on the same side of the centre line. (3) A driver must not, when passing another vehicle moving in the same direction, move into the line of passage of that vehicle until the manoeuvre can be made safely and without impeding the movement of that other vehicle. Compare: SR 1976/227 r 8(3), (4)

Are you serious? There is no such road rule! You can't post the Harness rule can you even post the Road Rule? Good luck with your defence in court if the motorist on the inside is killed. A more accurate analogy would be the Starboard Rule in yacht racing. A yacht on starboard has right of way however if the yacht on port does not give way then the boat on starboard must make every endeavour to stay clear. Of course the starboard boat can loadge a protest BUT if there was a collision and they could have avoided it then they in the wrong. The harness driver might have been entitled to be 2 out instead of 3 out because there was room on the rail but that doesn't mean they can blow the legs out from the horse inside them. I could see @Gammalite placing his wheel along side the other horse and leaning in pushing the other horse in but even Gamma's wouldn't peg another horse by knocking its legs out from under it. Sorry what rule is that? Wrong wrong wrong. You weren't clear of the car when you decided to cross. Again show us the road rule that says you can do what you suggest. Good luck on the Auckland Motorway trying that trick! Make sure the car beside you is smaller than yours when you do it. I think @Rangatira is right perhaps BOAY should do mandatory drug and alcohol testing.

What any Good rating? A G4 or a G3 or a G2? OK you're probably right there isn't a mandate but I thought there was some policy. Feel free to add to the list or correct it. You won't get moderated for disagreeing.

There have been a number of threads and posts on this Topic over the last few months. It is clearly evident that: On many (All?) tracks that the pre-raceday gallops as per the NZTR protocol is not done; That a penetrometer or any other device other than a moisture meter is used on the tracks leading up to and including raceday. Ellerslie have openly said they only test for moisture and DON'T use a penetrometer. Other StrathAyr tracks use a Going Stick. Ellerslie seem to have special dispensation to treat their track as an AWT; The moisture meters used are probably not calibrated regularly hence readings that don't correlate with the official track ratings; The track rating an hour before race 1 is often not the actual rating for the track - how can it be when no horses have galloped nor has any testing occurred. A morning of sunshine can quickly turn a doubtful S5 into a G3!; It would appear that the S5 readings are often G4. This is probably to get around the NZTR mandate that on race morning the track should be no better than a G4; Some trainers have been misled by the official ratings leading to scratchings that may not have occurred if the rating had been accurate e.g. Crocetti being scratched at Trentham when the track was reported as Soft yet raced as a Good 4 and better; Jockeys have openly said after race that the official rating is wrong. In at least one instance the Jockeys told the Stewards who refused to upgrade; There are rumours that one track alters the readings taken by track staff before presenting to NZTR; It is apparent that there is no QUALITY CONTROL checking by the RIB Stewards that all the protocols and measurements have been undertaken as prescribed; The worst offenders are Ellerslie, Trentham and Riccarton. This list could go on.... With regard to there being a conspiracy - well the choice is either between a conspiracy and a cockup. I would go with the latter i.e. a cockup laced with some collusion.

Where is the rule that says she is allowed to knock the legs out from under another horse?

You miss the point of why they needed to be upgraded. They hadn't had work done on them for decades. The turf and soil have a limited life if not regularly rejuvenated. When they did do work as you say they just fiddled.