Yankiwi

When that Aussie track expert (Brian Barrington) in 2014 came over he had mentioned that he couldn't believe how little water was being applied to NZ tracks. As a newbie at the time (only had been an owner for a couple of months) it didn't make a lot of sense to me. Now I've learned just how important track moisture is. This is the one bit of advice he gave that GRNZ did trial, which in the end wasn't adopted long term after the trial, until PNGRC wanted to reinstate their 375m starting position many years later. https://www.grnz.co.nz/News/1110/Lure-Driving-Trial Isn't it funny how a failed trail in 2014 became a good idea in 2022 when GRNZ needed an excuse for changing a long term rule for the sole purpose of justification for reinstating a once dangerous starting position? That failed trial vanished, when it was convenient for them to forget it. Here's how they spun it in the 2022 annual report. However, this was ruled out due to construction and logistical issues, so attention then turned to the previously scrapped 375m start. A report surfaced from around 2015 written by an Australian expert that recommended that the 375m boxes be realigned, as they were angled wrongly in relation to the running rail, and that the lure should be allowed to lead the greyhounds at box-rise by 10m. Whilst there was no documentation to explain why these recommendations were not carried out, it provided reasoning that a safe 375m start could be created. Construction work commenced, the Rules were amended to allow a 10m lure and trials were successfully run from the new start, allowing racing to commence from April 2022. https://www.grnz.co.nz/Files/Annual report 2021/GRNZ Annual Report 2022.pdf Well, the 10m may have helped things at Palmerston North 375m start. But that same 10m had a devastating effect at Manukau, tempting dogs to ignore the running rail when it was in between them and the lure anytime they were running off the pace midfield or further back in the pack. The 2014 safety rail didn't help to protect them, nor did the November 2023 safety rail. I wonder why?

Hey John, thoughts about this? During say November to May, what if the sandy surfaces of NZ tracks such as Auckland were to be groomed after a day's race meet, then water it at a slow steady pace overnight which would allow for the water to be absorbed deep into the track. Then the next morning, cover the track surface with a tarp, to help seal the moisture in by protecting in from direct sunlight & air movement. Maybe that tarp could have an insulation layer as well to help the heat of the tarp which would be absorbing the sunlight and heating the track surface. Then the evening before the next race meet, uncover the track, take your moisture/hardness readings and water it again overnight at a predetermined pace to compensate for the reading taken, to have it perfect in the morning. I know next to nothing about Cricket, but don't they cover the grass when it rains so they can control the amount of moisture in the ground? If so, why couldn't a dirt track be treated the in a similar fashion to help keep the moisture in?

New results. I have now searched every Stewards report for "euth". That identified the number of dogs that were noted as being euthanized. If the Steward reported a death & didn't use "euth" in the description (example - "was humanely put down") that would not have been captured in my data gathering. One year further back in time added. 2017/2018 season Q2 was completed under GRNZ's current season KPI target, so it can be done. 2016/2017 season may have achieved the same milestone. It's likely overall & minor/medium injuries would have achieved it, while one or two unreported major injuries which ended with euthanasia would have brought the season over the 0.6% threshold. GRNZ will have the data of the first four seasons studied here. They kept data such as this hidden behind smoke and mirrors for as long as they could, until their deception tactics were no longer effective for them. Regardless, since that 2017/2018 season, overall thing keep getting worse & worse. They still keep putting them around the track, even though they fully know how dangerous it is & how dangerous it is going to become. "Welfare underpins everything we do" is only a slogan. There is not meat on that bone. It's a talking point so they can feel good about themselves for the wonderful job they think they are doing. If they don't want to invest in the Auckland track and fix it properly, like they had in Wanganui, then fair enough as its future is in doubt anyways. But if welfare really played any part in their thinking, they wouldn't be letting the dogs that they govern go anywhere near it. Good things will not be happening on the track Sunday. GRNZ could have been planning for a shift to Cambridge yesterday, after two dogs broke a hock the day before, but instead they decided to wait for more potential victims to sign up for going around Manukau next Sunday.

This isn't a rail study. This is an injury study. Whether a dog breaking a hock during a race and being euthanized after normalizing the data and allowing for variances actually had an injury in the first place is open for debate.

https://www.grnz.co.nz/catch-the-action/12930/stewards-report.aspx This is where In the Stewards reports I pick up the injury data from. 56.1 is the rule that used for an injury requiring a stand-down during the race. It is a summary of all dogs from the race meet that were issued with a stand-down period. I can ignore any of the other rules that are listed here for the dogs that were early scratched or for dogs that were late scratched prior to starting their race. Therefore, for race #3 at this meet, only one injury of 10 days was recorded. The vital information which had not been recorded here is a dog that ran in the race, was injured during the race & the injury was so severe it was euthanized at the track, as a dead dog doesn't require an injury stand-down. In the stand-down report above, there is no mention of "Elaborate" breaking a hock & being euthanized in race #3. Bellow, in the race description, it tucks the bad news away out of plain sight.. Back in April of 2014, the public was not even informed of a euthanasian. So at some point between 2014 & 2018 the GRNZ/RIU had changed that protocol, and information about death/euth prior to that change, when every that was, will be underrepresenting of the actual data, as it's simply not available. Maybe if it had been made available, I would have made a more informed decision about buying racing greyhounds in the first place. Like I had said before, never again.

Unnormalized Stewards reports lead to worthless presentations. I don't need to worry about GRNZ challenging this study, as of yet. The first rendition underrepresents the reality. I've got to go back thru the 10 years' worth of data & reanalyze it. So for now, throw out what look like the good Auckland seasons & probably consider the bad ones even worse. Here's why. 29/1/19 Since the dog was put down due to injury, no stand-down was imposed. Same here. 31/12/18 I'll come back once the other racing seasons have been completed with a 2nd edition presentation.

I've never been one to go to a doctor by choice. If something happens to me I can't fix or have an illness I can't shake by myself, only then will I consider going to get something sorted, which isn't very often! For me, the quality of life is far more important than the quantity of it. I have not set up my life to live forever, because I know you can't. Whether the one jab I had changes what happens in my future, who knows? Whatever does ultimately happen, it will be attributed to tobacco regardless, because that's the easy answer for any doctor to hand out & fits the narrative. My last visit to the doctor's office was for immigration purposes 18 years ago. During it, the doctor recommended that I quit smoking. I then asked him what will happen if I do quit, put on 10 or 15kgs & come back a year later, what will he be telling me then? Oddly enough, he only gave me a blank stare & didn't answer the question. So far in life, I've been very lucky health wise. I'm now 60 years old. I've never broken a bone that required a plaster cast. I've never been admitted to the hospital for any reason. The couple of trips to the hospital I have had, were for ER visit to patch up a deepish cut and strap up a broken finger. I've never been in an ambulance (luckily, I dodged that on jab day). We all live our lives in the way we chose too. That's a little look into the path I've taken.

Possibly you could respond in the link below John. https://bitofayarn.com/topic/110947-discussion-brought-over-from-the-dog-forum-as-it-seemingly-was-the-incorrect-subject-there/

I'll honestly & happily answer your question John, with bonus coverage. I held back against the vax tide & was very hesitant. My wife worked in the Hospital, so she went & got the first two shots without questioning anything. I was still a hold out. Then late in the day on the vaxathon Saturday (or whatever they called it), I gave in and decided to get my first shot. Had my wife drive me to a drive-thru clinic & got the jab. Then she pulled the car forward to the waiting area, where you were supposed to wait for 15 or 20 minutes (can't remember the exact holding period). About 5 minutes into the hold period, I began feeling hot & feverish. Told my wife I was feeling hot, she said recline the seat and relax. I said na, I'll be alright. Next thing I remember there was an ambulance dude in my face, using "Charles", asking me if I was ok & how I was feeling. He met immediate resistance from me. Who the hell are you? How do you know my name? Why are you in my face trying to take me out of my car. Needless to say, I went out cold. Wife has since told me it was for about 5 minutes & filled me in on what happened during my memory lapse. As I came further back to the real world & stopped them from removing me from the car, I found I had an O2 meter thing on my finger and a blood pressure device on my arm. I calmed down a bit & asked what my O2 reading was, he said 98%. Good! I then asked what my blood pressure was, he said he hadn't taken it yet. I said go on then, but I want to know the result. He took my BP and it retuned slightly high. He had some concerns. I told him that is normal for me, as the first time during an exam it's always a bit high, then when retaken at the end of the exam when I'm more relaxed it's completely normal. They still tried to get me to go into their ambulance, I refused. I told them to take their instruments off me because we'll be leaving now. Said I'll be going home, get a cold glass of water, go out on to my deck and pet my dog while I have a cigarette. That was the end of the days event & that was also the last time I will be injected with anything I'm not informed about enough for my liking. Had a couple of 2-day head colds since then. Never had a swab up my nose for testing anything. Don't know if I've had Covid. Don't care if I've had it. Don't know if it even exists. As for my wife, I finally convinced her (my episode would have been a big help) not to be boosted and take the axing they were threatening from the hospital she had worked many years in. In the last year or so, some of her old bosses have approached her about returning. Saying that they are not in good shape & really need long experienced clued-up staff like herself. Her ex-bosses don't seem to like the answer she gives them.

Yet another bad day at the office. It hasn't been a very happy new year for the dogs that raced at Manukau.

According to the Stewards reports, if a dog started in a race and was reported as injured after a post-race vet check, it was recorded an injury. If a race had started and events during the race forced that race to be abandoned, the injuries were recorded (as today's race 11 will be). 3/11/13 (the beginning point of data retrieval) to 30/1/17, the stand-down rule imposed was 81.1 5/11/17 to 29/1/23, the stand-down rule imposed was 56.1 5/11/23 to 28/1/24, the stand-down rule imposed was 41(1) Injuries that required a stand-down that were reported coming from pre/post-race trials, were not recorded. Anything other was not recorded as an injury (trainer reporting to a steward their dog had been injured during a race in the days following & so on).

Brief study #5 What was the injury rate for Auckland's 2nd quarter (1 Nov to 31 Jan) in each the last 10 years? How does the most recent 2nd quarter injury rate stack up with previous years rates? Is there a trend, year on year, with Manukau's injury rate? 1) 10 years of 2nd quarter injury data summarized totals. 2) How does the most recent 2nd quarter injury rate stack up with previous years rates? With 5.5% of all starters receiving an injury requiring a stand-down in the most recent quarter, it is the highest rate of overall injury over the 10-year period. 4.7% of the overall injuries were minor or medium. The increased rate of injury doesn't necessarily mean more dogs were getting hurt. It's most likely that the percentages are more in line with previous seasons (except the 22/23 season) due to the increased rate of post-race checks that were previously going unrecorded. 0.8% of overall injuries were major 1, major 2 or death/euthanasia. At 0.8%, it was exactly on the 10-year track average, but 33% over GRNZ's KPI target figure. 3) Is there a trend, year on year, with Manukau's injury rate? The 2017/18 season was the safest. Well under GRNZ's current KPI season targets, realizing only half of the major injuries GRNZ is targeting for the current season. As for trends, the first two season of the study returned rates higher than GRNZ current KPI. The following three seasons returned lower than or close to equal with the KPI target. Then from the 2019/20 season forward there was a very apparent steady uptick with injury rates rising well about the KPI. The 2022/23 season saw the track at it's worse (in the study). Injuries were rife, races & meeting were abandoned, and the track was closed down for remedial work for about 3 weeks with racing operations moved to Cambridge during the interim. This explains the low number of starters during the 2022/23 season. When racing had returned to the track for the final 4 weeks of that 2022/23 season second quarter, injury rates remained high with 1 entire race meet being canceled due to "weather & track conditions". My summary: The Auckland track can be run in a safe manner. I had done so in the 2017/18 season 2nd quarter. After a bit of a patch-up during the 2022/23 season Q2, it hasn't return to anything near safe with injury rates still ranking the highest in the country. GRNZ has hired an Animal Welfare Manager and a Racing Safety & Infrastructure Manager for situations such as this. Why hasn't the injury rate seen a meaningful decline, back down towards where it's previously proven that it can be? If my figures are unrealistic, like Chief insinuates that they could be, I welcome GRNZ to post their alternate data, which shows a differing result. If welfare underpins everything GRNZ does, why wouldn't they? Why would they leave my study unchallenged if it were off target in a meaningful way?

Now, either the cleaner in underperforming in Auckland or they've initiated obstacle racing. If the goal of obstacle racing is the first to make contact, the #10 takes the prize with a well-placed right rear paw in a photo finish.

Well that is excellent news. I must have been seriously misunderstanding. My sincere apologies. Thayne, get ahold of GRNZ. Odds are they owe you a few dollars.

AGRC - I'm trying to collect some data. Can you please inform which dog finished in 7th place?

I decided to look a little deeper into the dog that finished in 7th place, in a 6-dog race, as I believe that GRNZ had paid a small dividend back to 6th place in a race then, which likely never happened in this instance. With that research, I believe it was Thane Green, who unfortunately is no longer with us, that was the owner & trainer at the time. My goal was to give a heads up to the owner and/or trainer of Call Me Leo and suggest they contact GRNZ about the situation & claim any money owed to them. Obviously, that can't happen now. So, if whoever was/is in charge of his estate is made aware, a phone call would likely net the estate $40 (if memory serves). 6th place now pays $50, but I believe the increase was made after the error in GRNZ's data.

Interesting results from race #2 on 21/11/2021 in Auckland.

How about a simple sentence? I've utilized the BOAY forum to reach out to GRNZ's now Racing Operations Manager Mr. Michale Dore, asking him to answer a couple of questions I had asked him nearly 4 1/2 years ago, which have seemingly been ignored and have gone unanswered.

Still going strong and manually collecting much more data in a far further reaching dig into the Manukau track and its performance over the years. When complete I'll post another, in your words, "pointless presentation", if I can find a thread that hasn't been locked. If unsuccessful, can I have your pre-approval to begin a new thread entitled "Pointless Presentations", if all the other threads in dog forum have been put into lock-down by the websites governing body?

Side note: I still have the entire email chain & would be happy to provide a copy of it to any member of the current GRNZ board for investigation purposes if they'd like to pursue. They'll have my contact details their 2014 & 2015 files. They are the same now as they were then. Sharing the chain with anyone else other than the board member or an RIB investigator, I feel I would be in breach of the disclaimer at the bottom of Mr. Dore replies, so therefore I am extremely hesitant to do so.

Dear Michael Dore, As a key stakeholder of GRNZ, back in October 2019 (when you were listed as the GRNZ "contact me" person over integrity issues) we had a brief email chain over the outcome of the decision revolving around a GRNZ registered trainer (Mr. Peter Ferguson) nominating and then scratching a greyhound that had already been sent to a rehoming agency quite some time before the dog was nominated to race. The RIU "deemed the perpetrator to have breached Rule 62.1 (i)" (62.1 Any person (including an Official) commits an offence if he/she: i) being the Owner, Trainer or Nominator of a Greyhound, or a Person having an interest in a Greyhound, Nominates or runs that Greyhound in a Race under a fraudulent, misleading or deceptive description;) yet then they somehow opted not to charge using 62.2 (i) for nominating the dog in a fraudulent manner by means of a JCA hearing, instead opting to ignore the fraud offence and charge with 62.1 (cc) (cc) acts in contravention of or fails to comply with any provision of these Rules or any Rules made thereunder, or any policy, notice, direction, instruction, guideline, restriction, requirement or condition given, made or imposed under these Rules; With that the penalty could then be imposed under the minor infringement table, and the eventual punishment would be a $300 fine for fraud. Here's a link to the steward's report which reported the finding so you can refresh your memory if need be. https://www.grnz.co.nz/catch-the-action/13738/stewards-report.aspx Anyways, where our email chain seemingly paused, I had asked these two simple questions, which you have failed thus far to respond to. In that email chain your tone seemed as though you were very put-off, defensive, dismissive and disrespectful. I'd hate to think that as a key stakeholder, my concerns were not taken seriously or even worse, my email address was added to your blocked senders list. Because of those possibilities, I'm reaching out to you here, after giving you several years to respond by email, on this forum. I'd still like to know what the answer were to those two questions from back then. Anything more current than the date I had I had asked the questions is not at all what I'm after. I'd like to know the answers as at 25/10/2019. Can you please either respond to my email, or instead simply respond in this space if you're a member. I have noticed that fairly recently you had started a membership account on the Channel X forum, so I believe it's likely you have a BOAY membership as well. If you're not a member here that's fine, a reply email with the answers to my questions will be fine. Thank you in advance. Charles Bidwell. GRNZ key stakeholder since 2014.

One way or the other boys & girls. Friday night in Wanganui. THANKS MAUDE (4) - referred to the Veterinarian after falling at the lure and cleared of injury. BOOM BOOM BOOM (6) - referred to the Veterinarian after falling at the lure, where it was reported to have minor lacerations right lateral leg with a 3 day incapacitation issued. ICY HOPE (5) - referred to the Veterinarian after falling at the lure and cleared of injury. BIG TIME LOCH (7) - referred to the Veterinarian after falling at the lure and cleared of injury. COMMISSAR (8) - referred to the Veterinarian after falling at the lure and cleared of injury Why was the Mandatory 5 day standdown imposed on Goldstar Tookie, yet not imposed on 2 runners in Cambridge on the same day or 5 runners in Wanganui the next day?

Same day! What gives? Cambridge 08/02/24 SMASH ZONE (1) - referred to the Veterinarian after getting tightened onto the rail first turn then falling at the lure and cleared of injury. THRILLING VESPA (5) - referred to the Veterinarian after interference at the lure becoming unbalanced and falling and cleared of injury. Christchurch 08/02/24 GOLDSTAR TOOKIE (7) - fell at lure. Referred to the Veterinarian and cleared of injury. Stood down for the mandatory 5 days as per GRNZ Rule LR41A(1). LR41A Greyhounds suffering a fall (1) Where a greyhound falls during a race or trial and the officiating veterinarian or authorised person upon examination of the greyhound finds no injury they shall impose a precautionary stand-down period of five days commencing on the day on which the greyhound falls in any race or trial conducted by a Club. Also under LR41A (4) For the avoidance of doubt, any greyhound that falls during a race or trial whether injured or not shall have a stand-down period of at least five days commencing on the day on which the greyhound falls in any race or trial conducted by a Club. (5) For the purposes of this rule, a greyhound falls during a race when all four legs lose contact with the racing surface and the greyhound’s shoulder, side or flank makes contact with the racing surface. Cambridge incident. The steward decided that two dogs needed to be vet checked after falling in the Cambridge incident. Sort it out RIB. Enforce the rules consistently in the way they are written.