Yankiwi

Ok here's a different approach Chief. I've trawled through all of the March 2023 Stewards Reports. Christchurch deserves a big shout out for being the safest track hands down, considering only contact with the running rail. Well done all of you at Addington!

I resign. You guys can have it your way & the industry can have it theirs.

I'm addressing only the rail contact issues in this post. https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/Racing-Greyhound-Review/$file/Greyhound-Review-Final-Report-12-December-2022.pdf AGRC has dropped the ball. GRNZ has dropped the ball. Warning flag began to wave over two months prior, then a cattle prod over the head after they got through the Silver Collar race day was unrelenting? RIB has dropped the ball. Maybe instead of suggesting I change my course of action, which is not an action I'm tasked with but have chosen to undertake, it's time for those whom are concerned with what happening in Auckland to change their direction/actions and demand better from ARGC, GRNZ & RIB. They are the three entities that can make the needed changes with the track & how it's being run. Maybe ask Mr. Death why he hasn't got out from behind his desk & measure between the uprights and found out why GRNZ rules were not being adhered too. Maybe ask GRNZ what their new infrastructure manager has put in place to correct their now well-documented running rail issue. Maybe ask Mr. Door how far back in time his tracking data goes on rail strikes in Auckland. Maybe ask RIB why they have allowed the lure to be continually run, for at least the last two months, 50% more than the maximum length allowed under GRNZ rules. I'll put as much effort into this as I chose too. Not more, not less, and in the direction, I chose to take.

They don't have a time convivence. They are on a formal warning from Govt which is looking more & more likely to be shut down. I first brought this public to attention on 13/04/23 here https://bitofayarn.com/topic/92681-whats-going-on-auckland/. They all would have read it. They all had two long months to take action towards it before I got stuck in. How many suits are there between the AGRC? GRNZ? RIB? Not one of them worked out it was 4 or 5 times more likely to occur in Auckland than on any other NZ track? Not one of them could work out the lure had been running 50% further ahead of the lead then the rule stipulates? Really? No, I mean REALLY? I say fock the lot of them. They're the ones charged with making, adhering too & policing the rules. They're the ones charged with assuring greyhound welfare. Yet not one of them was able to analyze things and said oh $hit, the lure is way too far ahead of the leading dog? Dog's limbs & lives are in danger. The industry is in danger, and you Chief have the nerve to tell me to get off my high horse. Well, if you don't want to hear from me that's fine, go ahead and put me on your ignore list. If that not a firm enough action in your eyes to reel me in, then delete my account.

Not sure what you're trying to balance. I had expressed no opinion whatsoever. So, in turn I'll submit this, for the balance you're looking for. 12. The making of a false document and submitting it to be acted upon when presented to the Registration Authority (GRNZ) as genuine is unquestionably misconduct, as Mr Fredrickson accepts with his guilty plea. It might be an aggravating factor that he had done this before without problem, although that highlights a cavalier attitude and culture to the duties of a GRNZ Licensee. That, as he said, it was “common place” in the Greyhound Racing Industry is not only no excuse, but, if correct, reflects very poorly on the culture and understanding of some involved. If what he says is true, it must stop.

Seems Gary had a little to answer for just before walking out the door. https://racingintegrityboard.org.nz/decisions/non-raceday-inquiry-written-reserved-penalty-decision-dated-12-june-2023-gary-fredrickson/

I just don't get it. Today's report for Addington says this about the 6th race. Yet a bit after "into turn", this occurs and goes unmentioned? I won't even get into the rule breach that initiated this "dance", but the dance was the reason the #6 was able to hold on and win the race. So going forward, everyone will have the information as to why the #4 finished last, yet it's not deemed important as to why the #3, #5, or #7 didn't get past the #6 and win the race. C'mon Stewards, don't be lazy & do better. Link to full replay so you can form your own opinion - https://youtu.be/HjWut4wDeks

Debrief of today's race meet. The lure was brought back noticeably closer to the field, which was somewhat beneficial. There were two rail strikes per the Stewards report. The first one was in race 3 dog #2. The lead dog was right roughly 10m or 11m behind the lure shortly after the contact occurred. The second was in the final race 13 #4 dog (seems they missed the #2 in the same race I had pointed out earlier). I can't detect where the #4 hit the rail entering the corner, but it possibly did halfway around the corner. Again, the lure was out 9 or 10m ahead of the lead dog. Oddly, this #4 dog also hit the rail in its previous race on the track. Coincidence? Overall assessment on the day. Bringing the lure back helped. Racing was rather clean. While there was a couple of rail strikes, they were brushes of the rail at very slight angles to it. It might have put a bit of paint on a racing rug or removed a bit of hair. No lacerations & sutures, no injury stand-downs required. My advice, keep the momentum going & bring the lure back even closer to the middle of the boundaries. How about between two and three uprights (6m to 9m), especially as the lure is entering the corner. The rule states it can go down to 4m, so what's the harm in trying it at 6m or 7m?

Rail was struck in the 13th race, will the Steward catch & report it? Notice the #2 with both eyes closed in the second image. That'll be during the contact or very quickly after it. Just prior to contact. During/after contact with eyes closed. Lead dog was about 9m off the lure a couple of seconds later.

Probably should have added, I understand you can't operate the lure for dogs back in the field, but I am expressing how important it is to keep the lure in front of the leading dog within the mandated distances.

From today's race #5. As you can see the #1 on the rail is further back in the pack in the image, or about 4 uprights back (12m) from where the lure is & still it has a direct line of vision to the lure. If you freeze these dogs in the same position yet were to move the lure 2 more uprights (6m) ahead of the pack like where it was being run at, the #1 only has a direct line of vision over the running rail. Consider that my hint to what I believe is the second problem. The fix is again very cheap & easy. Can the boys & girls in power work it out or will they break the bank to do it?

Yay! - They did something. Race #1 - Suddenly back within the GRNZ distance guidelines. How hard was that? Poor footage to judge from, however I estimate 9 to 10m in the back stretch prior to entering the corner. Regardless, the lure is much closer to the dogs in the first race today than it has been in any race in the prior two months. Looking forward to reading a far cleaner stewards report later.

I very rarely visit Stuff, but this has been brought to my attention, which would otherwise been unnoticed by me. What affect will this article have on GRNZ's social license? https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/racing/132314134/banned-greyhound-handler-faces-new-charges

Fair point. If the doors are not closed after all this and a master plan isn't being generated, that will make it abundantly clear what the future of greyhounds racing holds. If they won't listen to someone fighting for the good of the industry, they won't listen to anyone. As a side note, I originally had stated that there were three things I believed were contributing to the problem. On BOAY, thus far, I've addressed only one of them. I had also put out an offer for the powers to contact me directly, if they wanted my evidence/input/suggestions about those three. No-one as of yet has made direct contact which I'm not at all surprised by. I suppose they prefer me shaming them publicly on here for their inaction or are relying on BOAY to hear my opinion or receive my in-depth evidence. I'm now removing that offer from the table. Figure it out yourselves boys & girls. You've done such a great job so far, I'm sure you'll have them all sorted out for this afternoon anyways.

Addington - Five time less likely for a greyhound to hit the rail than it is in Auckland. They sure seem to be able to keep the lead dog on the bunny. How close is that? I don't know exactly but would guess somewhere between 6m and 9m (both within the rule standards), but obviously far less that the 12m to 15m I continually see at Auckland. I wonder what CGRC knows that ARGC doesn't. Maybe the ability to read the rule book and follow the governing standards? Maybe having Stewards with more experience or a closer attention to detail and better control of the race meeting? I know I'm being hard on AGRC, GRNZ & RIB, but I believe it is warranted. Something up there is very wrong. I believe I've addressed the biggest problem here on BOAY. Whether I'm right or wrong doesn't really matter. Just sort it out. Dog's lives and the industry as a whole are at stake. These two were in the "slow" catagory.

Isn't your answer obvious the image? I used the magnetic lasso to cut AGRC container out of the same image & then moved it on to the track just behind the lure. The unedited screen shot. The same image after the cut & paste. Now where's my flaws?

Suppose I should come clean. My name is Yankiwi & I am an advisor to the RIB, GRNZ, AGRC (and probably GPL & SAFE as well), completely via BOAY. About these recent allegations revolving around the Manukau track safety with its running rail, my advice is ~ For the RIB - The alleged problems happening at the track are out of our control. If pressed on the issue, hide behind the escape clause, which was intended for the rare instance that the lure was outside the rules maximum distance in the GRNZ rule book by using your "discretion". Never declare a no race as it will zero the revenue captured from gambling on the race. Under no circumstances make reference in the Stewards Report of the lure being too far away. Only ever acknowledge in the report when the distance has become too short, as both the lure and dogs will both be visible in the same screen shot when televised. For GRNZ - Individual track matters are not the primary concern of yours. They are an operational issue which must be dealt with on the club level. Your focus is completely on governing, not operating. You've made the rules & it's up to the RIB & clubs to see that they are adhered. For AGRC - You have a track manager from the top of the class. He has many years of experience in the day-to-day operations of a greyhound track & club and knows completely what it takes to keep the animals safe and what makes a track safe, without listening to or considering any outside influences. For GPL & SAFE (if they make it on here) - Do nothing. The industry is imploding from within so any noise you make will only distract from the public watching the industry committing suicide. I'm so glad I finally got that off my chest.

I get that these are GRNZ's words, not yours. My main gripe/goal has little to do with the rule book. My real goal is to have far fewer dogs risk their life by making contact with the steel running rail in Auckland. Welfare has been said to be paramount for many years now. I've addressed a serious issue where welfare is apparently not being treated as paramount. The industry is lucky that this problem didn't cause an injury or claim a dog's life on the greyhound's biggest day of the year, while the protestors were at the track pushing their agenda. Image what would have happened if Sunday was the unluck day that what will eventually happen if this is ignored. Why is it so difficult to come together & get them to live up to their words. There's a problem there, I've brought what I believe is the biggest issue to the forefront. GRNZ - fix this pleze! Note, I intentionally misspelled the final word in the last sentence so those that feel the need to challenge me have something I'd much rather debate than the welfare of the dogs.

No assumption. The 40' container (12.192m) is roughly the distance of 4 uprights. I understand that being slightly further away from the camera lens than the rail would make it appear slightly smaller than it actually is in comparison, but I'm sure you'd already know that as well. You're a smart cookie too. I worked the magic in the edited image to reassure the on the ground information I had was correct & provide everyone with some proof, something it seems I have to provide for every claim I make on here. Maybe one day Chief you'll believe what I have to say and not feel need to challenge me on every sentence. Would a position within GRNZ headquarters suit you? You got what that aspect of a position dealing with me would take. As for your question, I have not. If a dog near the rail gets pinched down by one to its outside, then it's roughly the same distance from the lure, which sucks both of them in closer to the rail when the lure is in the corner. The further from the lure, the more of a vacuum affect. If you want to know, you go spend the hours & check for yourself. I'm not going to waste the time just to have you flog it off & try to send me down another rabbit hole. Besides, you aren't going to fix the problem I've brought forward, are you?

Thanks for that TW. So, the Stewards are satisfied that the consequence of greyhound hitting the rail 3 to 4 times more often in Auckland than any other track isn't substantially inconveniencing the outcome of the race, whether one hits the rail or not in any given race. I believe the RIB hold the most blame for this. It's their meeting to run, and the way Auckland is being allowed to run, they've been doing a terrible job at it. The RIB believes it's ok for every race in Auckland to be run outside the clear limitations of the GRNZ rules? Then why is there a rule at all? Why not just make things up on the fly?

Apparently not, as the Stewards reports make no mention of it, nor the RIB website. The lure driver/drivers? have been very consistent keeping the lure 10m to 15m ahead of the dogs. That's where the phone calls I've been asking for should come in. Instruct them to keep the lure 2 uprights ahead of the leading dog and do not allow it to get further ahead than 3 uprights. Get this accomplished & watch the stats crash back down, more in line with the other tracks.

No shadows, only shady decisions, behavior, and work ethics.

The rule used to be between 4m & 8m in front of the leading dog. When PNGRC & GRNZ decided to reinstate the PN 375m distance on the sneak, they change the rule to between 4m & 10m, so they could allegedly make what was a dangerous starting position safe. Their lack of foresight in making that change for PN has made the two turn tracks a more dangerous place to be running around. The 12m to 15m distance in front of the leading dog that has been going on in Auckland for at least the last couple of months (I haven't gone back any further as of yet) is nearly TWICE the distance of what the maximum distance of 8m used to be. As Elon has recently said, let that sink in. Once everyone at the AGRC, GRNZ, RIB are done overloading the GRNZ server this morning, trawling all the AGRC replays, can one or more of you make the phone calls, please? Oh, and can you please take the 40' container off the track and put it back where it belongs, which I had put there to make my point blatantly clear.

Since we now know that the uprights holding the rail up are 3m apart, how far is the lure ahead of the leading dog in race 7 on Sunday? What about race 12 on 8 June, the race where Big Time Faye at the back of the pack & free of interference, was introduced to your lure rail?

This is from the silver collar race two days ago & the tell-all image of what 95% of Auckland's rail contact problem is. What's wrong with this picture AGRC, GRNZ, RIB? Any of you? You're the professionals, you should and are paid to know. If you don't, consider resigning from you position for the benefit of the greyhound industry. A couple of phone calls can fix it. Will someone please make those phone calls before a dog gets killed on this track? Ok ok, I know it's tricky. I edited this next one to make it a bit clearer. Maybe the RIB can show this to their Steward so they will start declaring a no race when it happens, which should have happened in most if not all of the last 194 races on the track. Thank me later.