Yankiwi

Brief study #3 Basically the same questions as the hock study. How many torn gracilis muscles since the beginning of this racing season? Which track did they occur on? What was their racing record prior to the injury? 35 torn Gracilis muscles since the beginning of the racing season (33 individual events, 2 of which both sides were torn). Individual track totals Auckland (7) 20.0% of all torn gracilis muscles with 12.17% of all starters (one incident of both sides) Cambridge (4) 11.4% of all torn gracilis muscles with 11.54% of all starters Wanganui (3) 8.6% of all torn gracilis muscles with 12.21% of all starters Palmerston North (3) 8.6% of all torn gracilis muscles with 12.24% of all starters Christchurch (15) 42.8% of all torn gracilis muscles with 39.79% of all starters (one incident of both sides) Southland (3) 8.6% of all torn gracilis muscles with 12.05% of all starters. Summary: Auckland is by far the most likely, 65% above the overall average. Christchurch is 8% above the overall average. Cambridge is near spot on the overall average. Wanganui, Palmerston North and Southland are each about 30% under the overall average. On average this season, you could have started your dog in Wanganui, Palmerston North and/or Southland in roughly 2 1/2 races with the same probability of having your charge pull a gracilis muscle as a single start in Auckland. Let that sink in. Racing record of the dog before & including the day of injury. Colour coding for the "Starts" column. Red = Retired after the injury Yellow = Has not returned to racing or been officially retired Green = Had recovered & returned to racing (number of starts after the injury in the "Races after" column. Summary. Fast well performing dogs are more likely to pull a gracilis. 26 of the 33 won over 10% of their races. 21 of the 33 won over 15% of their races. 13 of the 33 won over 20% of their races. 8 of the 33 won over 30% of their races. 31 of the 33 finished in the top 3 in more than 30% of their races. 15 of the 33 finished in the top 3 in more than 50% of their races. 7 of the 33 finished in the top 3 in more than 60% of their races. The likelihood of a dog to have torn a gracilis returning to competitive racing is slim.

Some trainers have more dogs than others. Some tracks are more prone than others. Results about the tracks soon.

While currently working on brief study #3, looking deeper into Gracilis injuries, I was surprised to uncover this. It doesn't only happen to dogs that I had owned. As in the other studies (or my dog which something very similar happened to), I'll leave the dogs name out of it. 25 Aug Stewards report. referred to the Veterinarian after beginning awkwardly, then contacted entering the first bend, losing ground where it was reported to have torn left gracilis muscle with a 42 day incapacitation issued. Required to trial prior to racing again. Then in its required returning trial (solo) was in very fast time (17.36). 03 Nov Stewards report referred to the Veterinarian after faltering in the back straight and dropping away and reported to have a torn left gracilis with a 42 day incapacitation issued. Must complete a Satisfactory Trial prior to resuming

Today Oh my... First 5 races, 4 gracilis muscles torn. The safety rail that isn't there won't help prevent that problem. GRNZ's slogan "welfare underpins everything we do" hasn't help prevent the problem. When will someone do something about it? Tough day at the office on the most dangerous track in the country.

I'm lucky I decided to do this new research. During it I stumbled across this from Palmy's report 30 Jan 2024. I had recorded the injury as a 14-day standdown either after it was posted on the race day, or the next morning. When the RIB or GRNZ comes along and changes/edits/adds to it, I have no flag saying I need to go reassess the information. So, when you start hating on me when GRNZ's 2nd quarter report (and full season eventually) comes out and my numbers don't match theirs, this will be one of the reasons why.

Brief study #2 How many dogs have broken a hock in the first 6 months of this racing season? Which track did they happened on? What was their racing record? Total of 28 dogs broken a hock in the first half of the season. Individual track totals Auckland - 5 - 17.8% of the broken hocks with 12.17% of all starters Cambridge - 1 - 3.6% of the broken hocks with 11.54% of all starters Wanganui - 2 - 7.1% of the broken hocks with 12.21% of all starters Palmerston North - 5 - 17.8% of the broken hocks %with 12.24% of all starters Christchurch - 13 - 46.4% of the broken hocks with 39.79% of all starters Southland - 2 - 7.1% of the broken hocks with 12.05% of all starters. If the first percentage # is larger than the second percentage # - the track is more likely than average to have a dog break its hock. Auckland, Palmerston North and Christchurch are the most likely. Cambridge, Wanganui and Southland are the least likely. Racing record of the dog. Summary. Fast well performing dogs are more like to break a hock. 22 of the 28 won over 10% of their races. 12 of the 28 won over 15% of their races. 6 of the 28 won over 20% of their races. 24 of the 28 finished in the top 3 in more than 30% of their races. 8 of the 28 finished in the top 3 in more than 50% of their races. 5 of the 28 finished in the top 3 in more than 60% of their races. Ok Chief, you're turn to pile on me.

Brief study #1. Winsome Opawa - Fastback Queen litter My boy (Caesar Legend) was 1 of 4 that made it to the track. Here's how the entire litter went. 3 of the 4 broke their hock, two of them early in their career. Naturally, Dogs have been bred to become faster & faster. In car racing, they can build them to be faster & faster, so to keep the sport safe the governing bodies impose restrictions on what they can & can't do. So to me, it has to be up to the track to keep the race times within a reasonable threshold by altering their racing surface to allow for faster or slower times. What other tools are there to use if dogs are running dangerously fast on the track?

I've previously thought about this for quite some time. I haven't dared bring it forward on a forum. Statements such as this can quickly get people to focus on what your underlying motives might be, right Chief? I'll do a bit the digging I've been thinking about doing (which dogs break their hock) for quite some time & post the results when I'm done, whether they support my suspicions or not. I'd hate to be accused of having a bias.

Here's a very recent example from 1 Feb at Addington. Help me make sense of this. Here's the way I read it. 5 dogs started from the 8 that were drawn to fill the field plus 2 reserves. 1 dog (Goldstar Whisty) was late scratched as ineligible to compete (for some unknown, unexplained reason). That leave 2 dogs that were not late scratched and should have had the reserves fill their positions. I've checked each of the remaining 4 scratched dog & none of them raced on 1 Feb, so they weren't a reserve in another field filling in for a scratched dog from it. Why didn't the 2 reserves fill in for the 2 early scratched dogs? To address the "fewer dogs in a race makes for safer racing". At the last PN meeting - 30 Jan. Only 5 dogs drawn to the field. All 5 of them started. 1 will never be drawn for another field. To GRNZ's credit, they do now fund patching the legs back together so they can continue on with their life in almost all cases. My question is, after they have been operated on & completely recovered from their "leg injury", where are they going to live out the remainder of their life?

Thanks, all fair points.

I guess no-one knew Overit. My question~ Does anyone know what GRNZ spent $1.25mil more on in the 2023 than they did in 2022? Is this the effect of adding un-needed suit after suit to headquarters? I sure hope the GRNZ board does. Under the current model, they can't keep the overall expenses climbing $4.5mil a year with income dropping $3.5mil a year at the same time for very long. And a note for participants, did you notice that stakes were the only GRNZ expense not to rise substantially? Must be a very flash new lure at Cambridge.

Yeah John, some big differences. There probably weren't as many "cuddly" handlers here in NZ in the early 90's either. Must be a global warming thing. Dog were equipped with two muzzles on a race day. A wire muzzle (similar to those here) were worn in the race kennels up until a few minutes before race time, then we changed them to their "racing muzzle". You can notice in the pre-race parade that each of the 8 handlers was carrying a wire muzzle in their hand & the 4 handlers running the track just before they start the race carrying 2 wire muzzles each, which belonged to the two dogs they were in charge of catching. Unfortunately, a majority of Americans (I'll include myself in lot until I learned differently) thought that dogs shouldn't be caged up in a small crate. However, they never had the chance to see a dog wagging its tail and looking over its shoulder, trying to tell you to hurry up & open the door so they could get in. The pre-race kennels at Hinsdale where not much bigger than the dogs themselves. They were also stacked two high. It was amazing that if the dog's assigned kennel was on the top tier, most of them wanted to just jump up themselves & get in, which was heavily frowned upon and would get the handler in some deep $hit if they got caught letting them do it. I guess Americans as a whole thought it was better for you to let your dog run freely in an unfenced section, learn the road rules by having enough passing cars honk their horn at them & if they were going for a ride with you, it should be untethered in the back of your pickup truck. Here's a little look inside Hinsdale's holding kennels. It was posted on YouTube 15 years ago, I don't have any idea how long the footage existed before it was posted. The small crates (cages?) look the same in the video as I remember them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZ7TPW_RW0o

Back to trying to save what's left of greyhound racing in NZ. Here's some thought & tips for GRNZ (even though they probably hate me by now). Consider this. Having 9 dogs racing around a two-turn track, with a safe slow, and forgiving racing surface. I've read your suggestion of having a 6 dog fields. This will not resolve the underlying problem of your racing surface. I've noted that many of the races held here, which used to be full 8 dog fields are now being run with far fewer on the track because of you letting less than full fields to be carded (could be an uninjured numbers available thing?), and the overall injury reduction outcome has been pitiful. Also, your drawing 8 dog field with 2 reserves, which do not fill the early scratch boxes, so 6 or 7 are going around. Still injury numbers are all but stagnant. Other fields are being accepted with only 5, 6 or 7 entrants, only to find that several are being scratched and 3,4 & 5 dog fields going around the track are commonplace. I used to have a bee in my bonnet about this, as it was and still is race fixing by trainers, but injuries need to be minimalized first. Face it, this tactic hasn't led to meaningful Injury reduction. It's time you gave up on your theory that this will help reduce anything meaningful, other than to be used as evidence in some report that you're trying to do better. Next item - PBD I'll agree that the PBD has made some minor marginal improvement. Of course, dogs not bumping into each other as much early on can only benefit. But they are still racing around on a hard unforgiving track no matter where they might be running on the track. Next item - Track surfaces. Tracks currently do not provide dogs with enough energy absorption. Human long jumpers run up a hardish surface to gain speed & jump, but land in soft sand because is disperses the energy so their bones, cartilage & joints and a whole buck of internal things I know little about don't have to absorb all of the pressure created by stopping. Every time a dog foot hits the racing surface it stops momentarily, right? Unlike a long jumper, I realize that greyhounds need to continue on to their next stride, but the impact they are creating with each stride is applying to much force to their internal structure. You need to soften the racing surface so it absorbs more of the energy. I'm sure we can agree that gravity is an incredibly strong unrelenting beast. Once you soften the racing surfaces it will slow the time it takes for the dogs to complete whatever racing distance they are. Why do the fastest dogs at Addington need to run 295m in less than 17 seconds? What if a best of day top grade sprint was run in 17.50 with perfectly favorable wind & weather? Surely that would be safer, right? Would turnover go down? If so, couldn't a 15-race meeting be stretched out to 16 races, because 8 of the dogs that would have been in the 15-race card didn't sustain a reported injury (or unreported "niggles") to compensate? Here's what I'd consider doing. Unfortunately, you can't shut down Addington for an upgrade. It's the most important one to fix because of the numbers you're putting around it, but a lengthy closure would destroy racing in the South Island. So, how about this for starters. Shut down Auckland and move all north racing activities to Cambridge in the interim. Redo Auckland's surface. They are running at the highest percentages in all 3 injury categories. Use less a sand and more of a loam surface (one that give a puff of dust into the air after dogs have run over it). It will slow them down as each push they make into the surface for acceleration will create less forward momentum as they will be compacting the loam surface absorbing some of that energy. Following is a somewhat of an educated guess. I do not have any data on the composition of any US track. I'm sure if GRNZ is interested, they could somehow gain access to it. Make the subsurface a sand/builders mix for drainage. Above that use loam, with heavily compacted loam near the bottom of that layer, deeper than you'll ever till it, and make it increasingly looser the further from the subsurface you get. Get your stinking lure further from the rail & even more importantly lower to the ground, so the entire lure is even with or lower than eye level of the dogs that are chasing it. That way they won't be looking over an invisible rail (to them as they are fixated on the lure) that is in-between them and where the lure is or will be soon. Then trial the crap out of it. Hit it hard. Hinsdale basically ran two 15 race meeting per day on their track year-round! It wouldn't surprise me if NZ tracks could even become far safer, as the transition from straight to corner is far more gradual than Hinsdale was. Fix the problem of where the dogs are putting their feet! The rest of their bodies (also the trainers, owners, even this former owner and even maybe the odd do-gooder or two) will thank you for it. Ok Chief, here's your cue to replay telling me to get off my high horse & remove myself from my podium of holiness and to get back into my box & accept NZ greyhound racing for what it is and what it provides, while it lasts. When in Rome, race greyhounds like the romans do! Even though it too has become a rapidly sinking ship. I'm to ignore that I might have some knowledge & ideas to patch some of the leaks. Just sit quiet & let Rome lose the final battle in the roman way.

Thank you for the kind words. A very rare event for me on this forum. For me, dogs do it. They can be fiercely loyal, cheeky & ooze unconditional love if treated anywhere close to decently. Even the premise of a horse sitting on a couch with me would wake me from a sound sleep with a fright. I have many personal accounts of a retired racing greyhound (Exalted Lady) I brought home from Hinsdale in the early 80's one day to add to the family which already had a beagle as a longtime resident. Interesting things can happen when one dog like to chase rabbits with its nose & another with its eyes. They made a great team. I won't bore anyone with those long-winded stories here and besides some might not be politically correct anymore. Didn't he/she do well! Must have had some inside knowledge & been previously warned about the potential dangers of racing up north, since those very real dangers were being obscured with censorship & by using soft words such as "was referred to the Vet for assessment and found to have suffered a leg injury.". I went downhill skiing once and my knee hurt a bit after falling, I know what a leg injury can feel like! <sarcastic grin>

Found another video (shot like a home video) from Hinsdale roughly 10 years after I had moved on. Angels you never see from race replay footage. Also many other things you can see if you stick with watching it. A dude on the track in a green shirt could have been me, if it was taped 10 years earlier. How loose (soft) the racing surface is. How far the lure is off the rail. Most interesting to me, how far the lure was ahead of the boxes before the lid opened. A sizable crowd (apparent later in the video) for a Saturday afternoon in small town New Hampshire. At the 15 minute mark - a 9 dogs racing field. How much abrupt (sharper) the turn into the corner is. Below is a link to the full video if you have 20 minutes to waste sometime. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSLHniP6arQ Disclaimer - No dogs appeared to receive a minor, medium or major injury during the filming of the event.

If this ends up holding true for this year, things will get very ugly. Auckland is currently the worst performing track before March to May even gets here.

I'll agree with you on this one, if your only viewpoint of the injury is on the NZ tracks. A greyhound is a greyhound, no matter what country's flag they are racing under. Like I said previously, just in the time while working at the track handling greyhounds in the states, I only ever saw one dog running like it had only 3 legs. That was the one that had to be carried off the track. That particular race I was not one of the 4 handlers on the track but was in the paddock (what they called the kennel their) preparing the next 8 dogs for the next race. I saw it transpire out the window & when they girl that caught it before it finished the race carried it back inside, emotionally she had lost it. It wasn't long until just about everyone in there was seriously shaken. As a bunch of pimple faced late teen-agers, we had never seen anything like that before. I've only got my memory with, but I'll try to work out an overly cautious estimate of how many starters I would have been there for while working there. (yes I used to attend regularly for many years afterwords as a punter and never saw it happen during that time.) .75 years x 52 weeks/year = 39 weeks. 39 weeks x 11 race meeting a week (I had 1 day off per week so I've removed a 2 race meeting day) = 429 race meets. 429 race meets x 15 races = 6435 races. 6435 races x 8 dogs (hardly any races had less than 8 starters, while 2 races per meeting had 9 starters in a race, which were usually the 11th & 13th as they were both part of a "twin trifecta" which had a carryover pool between race meetings until it was struck) = 51480 starters. 1 (major injury) / 51480 starters = 0.0019% GRNZ KPI = 0.6% GRNZ's KPI is 315 times higher than the time my personal experience working at the track alone. To appease the haters, let's pretend my memory has faded so I forgot 9 incidents & only remember the 1, which is not the case. 10 major injuries / 51480 starters = 0.019 or over 30 times less than GRNZ KPI, which they are not on pace to achieve this season. My personal experience as an owner in NZ of starters. 5 major injuries in 90 starts (I've omitted the gracilis from the trial) = 5.55% Just a bit higher that GRNZ current KPI of 0.60% Any wonder why I tossed in the towel, had GRNZ cancel my license (for protection from the rule book) and began speaking out?

Seems slowing them down may have a large positive effect. Without naming a kennel (I know Chief is itching for me to go there), most know whose dogs make up the largest number of starters down south, yet it has had equally the lowest injury rate percentage this season, all of which are well below the GRNZ KPI target. You'd think GRNZ would be thinking the same way. If they were fit for purpose, you'd know they were thinking that way. Come on GRNZ. Release injury data on a per track basis. Some speculate my data is all over the place, so why not back them and provide your data to set things straight? Hell, you could even get the long-awaited chance to one up me & put me in my place.

I am interested in other variables. However, I'm not interested in pursuing your gaslighting. I've been there and done that many more times than you deserve. Besides, you discredit everything I post, so what I do post might as well be what I'm interested in, otherwise there's no point other than being told I'm wrong & don't know what I'm talking about.

Here's the moment that changed everything for my first boy (#7). No leg interference from any of the other dogs. Only the pressure that he was applying to the racing surface with some added lateral forces pushing him away from the rail because 3 dogs couldn't fit into a racing lane that's only 1 dog wide with the lure being so close to the running rail. This is the first time I've spoken out about this personal experience on any public forum. That said, you've heard me go on & on about something that happened in the same race just a fraction of a second later. There was no mention of the #2 striking the running rail in the Stewards report. My boy did get a sound bite "was referred to the Vet for assessment and found to have suffered a leg injury." That day was not simply my bad luck day. The odds were heavily skewed towards AGRC & GRNZ's failures. That Sunday a greyhound broke a hock in a pre-race solo trial in the same area. My boy was the second of the day. Then later in the program a third dog broke its hock during a C5 527m race at the opposite end of the track, totally free of interference. The 3rd dog was from the kennel Jacob was working for. I know he has seen many races & injuries during them, but if he was at the track that day (I can't recall) I'm willing to bet this day sticks well in his memory well because it was the day the Welfare manager of the time was at the track in Auckland with some Australian "Track Expert" in tow, which GRNZ had flown over to help assess the problems there were having IN 2014. On the day, I was unable to find where the Welfare manager was hiding, but I was able to locate the Aussie "Expert" and gave him a piece of my mind, after he was dismissive after three fractured hocks and relied on the old saying, it just one of those racing things. Even after all of my "bad luck" with ownership, still to this day on my lounge wall, you'll find a picture from his maiden win (and my first as an owner), the first-place ribbon from that win, some lure fluff he tried to gobble up from the lure in Cambridge after a trial which I had to dig it out of his muzzle to clear it & his GRNZ registration card. (Out of respect, I've deliberately obscured the co-trainers face as I have not asked for permission to post their photo on the internet).

That data hasn't been retrieved. Even if it had been, you'd simply discredit it & move the goal post somewhere else. Besides, GRNZ's KPI's are a combination of all starters, not those from what might be from a safe trainer & what might be a dangerous trainer. Where's GRNZ's 100% correct & reliable data for injuries on an individual track basis?

Yes John, times were slower (I see this as a good thing). At Hinsdale the 5/16 mile (503m) races were normally in the 31 second range. Sub 31 was rare. 3/8 mile (603m) races were normally in the 38 to 39 second range. About track surfaces, how about this little beauty from 2007 during a late spring snowstorm, some 25 years or so after I had worked there. When is was built, Hinsdale installed the states first heated track, making it a truly "all weather" racing surface. Their design went on to be copied by several tracks in cold weather climates with great success. With cold weather like that, it's amazing any greyhounds made it around the track without tearing a gracilis, right Chief?

I did not admit that. My data is fine, the initial reporting of the data had an error, which has now been fixed.

Well, I owned a few racing greyhounds in NZ. #1 - 11 starts - 3 wins, 3 placings - Severally broke his hock while charging to the lead during his 11th start in Auckland. - Put down. #2 - 23 starts - 0 wins, 4 placings - Tore a gracilis in first race for me in Auckland - Retired #3 - 31 starts - 2 wins, 10 placings - Tore a gracilis in 30th start Auckland. 3-month holiday. Tore the other gracilis during a trial Auckland. Retired. #4 - 13 starts - 0 wins, 2 placings - Tore a gracilis in 13th start Auckland. Retired. #5 - 9 starts - 1 win, 0 placings - Broke a toe in 9th start Cambridge. Retired. #6 - Bought & named a pup. Barely qualified in Auckland - 3 starts (in the CD)- 0 wins, 0 placings. Wasn't very interesting in chasing the lure. More fun to run in the back of the pack. Retired. Coming from the land of very few careers ending injuries, it was quite a rude awakening becoming an owner here. I learned my lesson. Never again.

Feeding its demise by telling the truth? I don't decide which dog was injured & which one wasn't. I only trawled 6 months' worth data (so far) in Stewards reports to determine how many starters there were, how many injuries were incurred & how long the stand-down was for each dog in each instance. My bad. On one point, you may be right. GRNZ does not want its participants to know that they have the ultimate power. Maybe I could put a positive spin on the injury problem? In the first 6 months of the 2023/2024 racing season there were 30 race meetings held with no injuries reported requiring a stand-down. We'll ignore the 486 race meetings that can't make that claim.