Yankiwi

Spot on Milo... One that tells the truth.

You don't need labs to be open on a Saturday... It was probably all set up Friday night.. The things that you can seem to do when you win $2m a year in purses...

Top dog isn't know for his spelling... https://fasttrack.grv.org.au/Dog/Details/124886891 https://www.grnz.co.nz/greyhounds/profiles.aspx?AnimalID=29733 Condolences to leeroy's owner... I'm sure he's heartbroken...

Friday vet probably found something wrong.... Saturday vet is the corrupt one here.....

Seems a lot of jealousy being exposed tonight. https://www.grnz.co.nz/catch-the-action/13408/stewards-report.aspx Judicial report: ASK KING JEFF which was a late scratching at Wanganui on 08.02.19 when found to be suffering from kennel cough, was represented on 09.02.19. On that occasion, ASK KING JEFF was again examined by the Vet who found no evidence of kennel cough and under Rules 56.5 & 56.6 the original stand down was rescinded and the dog was subsequently cleared to continue with his racing program. Kennal cough on Friday - Clean bill of health on Saturday... Somebody knew something which we're now uncovering. It does seem about as likely as my West African online girlfriend (who says she's from France & that's why she has an accent) has a sister that is dying from Cancer & needs more of my money to finally cure her once & for all!

So why is it, that on Friday night Jeff was scratch because of kennel cough with a stand-down of 21 days, that it wasn't scratched from todays event immediately at that time? Ask King Jeff Rule 44.20 from 08 Feb 2019 to 28 Feb 2019 What is the betting analyst busy doing? I'd be trawling the fixed odds movements VERY closely.... BC... LC... CR... BC (owner)… GW... VET... VET... Someone made a ton off this one at the expense of the honest others that fund the industry...

https://www.grnz.co.nz/catch-the-action/13406/stewards-report.aspx Race 10 PALAMOUNTAINS SCIENTIFIC NUTRITION C3/4 - C3/4 - 520 ASK KING JEFF was a late scratching when found to be suffering from kennel cough when examined by the Vet at kenneling time. Unbelievably, it ends in the ultimate good result. From a dog that had kennel cough only 3 days ago. Those Vets must have some kind of miracle cure...

When you do contact Godber, he waits a day or two to respond to you then closes ranks (covers for those under him) and tells you don't know what you are talking about... I'm sure that I am not the only one that has email replies from him ending in "We'll have to agree to disagree". For some strange reason, I don't think I'll ever agree with ole Mike about anything. I believe in truth & integrity.

And where did Yi Feng get its racing career underway? at the kennel of a current GRNZ board member... Mike, I told you this was happening years ago & you buried your head in the sand, remember? "I would say that across all three codes we find the Vets to be very professional in carrying out their duties. The fact that a steward is also present during an inspection is a further level of check to overcome any allegations of collusion. It is insurance for the Vet as well as the RIU and the code.." Well Mike, you are wrong and this dog simply highlights this ever continuing problem. Do your job Mike. Investigate those under your direct charge. It's your duty & responsibility....

This is an image of the #1 dogs shadow marring the #8 dogs shadow. A corrupt steward charged the dog with FPT instead of marring to conveniently set it up for a fake injury reprieve from a corrupt Vet.

Sickening & completely predictable... So yet again, either the vet found a fake injury or the greyhound was forced to run hard out for a kilometre or two on Saturday & wound up lame from overworking.... I'm not the most fit person in NZ & if I choose (or was forced) to do the Tongariro Crossing on a Saturday, I'd be quite sore & walking funny on Sunday too....

Sham is right... Possibly another lead for the SPCA investigation??? https://www.dogsnz.org.nz/clubs/dominion-poodle-club/306 I must say, I was very surprised with I read on that webpage.

I've been thinking about the way things have gone for the last couple years & there is one thing I just can't seem to rationalize. Are there two RIU's? In the Greyhound code getting on two years ago now, photographic evidence of live baiting was put forward to GRNZ & the RIU, who both choose to just sit on the evidence, so it was they put forward to the SPCA. To this day, the people in the photographs are still at work in the industry while the SPCA is still hanging over their heads... Yes, closing in on two years later... Fast forward a year & a half or so. The RIU uncovers some evidence of match fixing in the Harness code. Again, the RIU does little about it but takes the evidence they had to a higher ground & hands it over to the police. The police do their investigation (INCA) and as soon as news breaks, those caught up in the "investigation" are warned off immediately. Greyhound code... We have to wait for the SPCA investigation to be complete. Harness code... Investigation completed - actions taken. The top investigators in NZ for animal welfare are the SPCA. The top investigators in NZ for match fixing are the Police. We've told the SPCA investigation is complete & it's with the lawyers, so why are at least those in the photographs & the kennel not warned off? Seems to be two sets of rules & two sets of standards from one entity.

Do you punt on the tote? Do you focus on fixed odds and lose money long term? Both help them.

I don't have a dog kennel. I don't own any greyhounds. I don't have the SPCA investigating me, nor do I have the RIU chomping at the bit to get a hold of me once an SPCA investigation is completed. I don't have my name on the JCA website. I don't kill animals because of neglect when I travel. I don't kill perfectly healthy animals when I can no longer profit from them. I don't make my household pets gain or lose 10% of their body weight in the course of a week. I do have enough money to cover my bills. I do live a debt free life. I'm very far from a millionaire but have the live skills & knowhow to live with-in my means, without the backing of anyone else's money. I am in no way jealous of anyone involved in the greyhound industry.

I've noticed another BOAY member is the neighbour of a trainer & I feel that's a brilliant way for that trainer to get his/her point across. Surely the neighbour isn't an LP so they wouldn't have to worry about the wraith of what the GRNZ rule might hold. The powers (GRNZ/RIU) read the forums & trawl for their next victim that speaks the truth. It sometimes seems that if someone starts getting to close to the truth, the powers bend over backwards to shut them up. They probably feel threated because if the truth does make it to the surface, they know they'll be in the chit for their part in covering the truth up.

100% correct. It's one of the powers LP's still have & the easiest to utilize. ie: Race #7 is a 520m race and we have 6 of the dogs in the field. We've only got 4 staff members from our kennel so we need to find 10 handlers.... ...Ok big kennel, with the numbers you've bred you'll always have some with better form then the dogs in my kennel & because of that, my dogs didn't gain an entry. So yes, I'll handle for you but in return I want 10% of the stakes money any of your dogs win in each race I'm required to box/catch. I know it's a steep price to pay, but because of your tactics, it's the only way I stand a chance of covering my costs, never mind making a dollar or two from the endless hours I put in both here at the track & looking after my dogs at home. If you can't find your 10 handlers, then some of your charges will have to be late scratched & receive their 28 day stand-down. In those 4 weeks, I'll stand a better chance of gaining entry into the races & maybe I can cover my costs in that manner... The choice is yours, yet again, Mr. Big Kennel.

As soon as an LP openly speaks up against authority, everyone know what will quickly happen to them. An LP is bound by GRNZ rules and under their iron rulership, they are only allowed to say what GRNZ thinks they should say. I'm sure they wouldn't look kindly on any LP being involved in lobbying the government. When the photo's from the Cole property turned up at GRNZ, they were in no way concerned about what the images were showing, their only concern is who took them & how they got there. That speaks volumes of what their reaction would be if headquarters or even higher up the ranks were challenged by an LP. I'm no longer an LP & I have spoken up against GRNZ in few instances, but most of my energies have focused on the corrupt RIU. I've tried dealing with Godber over many issues directly, usually ending with being told I don't know what I'm talking about. I've given up going to him over issues because all he does is closes rank within the RIU, because he just can't fathom that they're not always right & there is corruption in the ranks. I do have an avenue which I use to get points across to headquarters. No, I don't always get my way there, but at least when I do approach them they listen. I believe everyone will see a shake up with the RIU & with what I've heard rumoured, that the shake up may already be underway.

Unfortunately, there is no "satisfactory trial" requirements for the removal of gear... A satisfactory trial is required for the initial application of blinkers, but not the removal. 44.15 Without limiting the provisions of this Rule, where either the gear proposed to be applied to the Greyhound is not in accordance with the Gear List, or the Trainer has not provided notice in accordance with clause 44.14, the Trainer of a Greyhound may apply to the Stewards at any time prior to the Race for approval to apply to the Greyhound gear (including gear not on the Gear List) or remove from the Greyhound gear recorded on the Gear Register. The Steward may grant approval to apply to or remove from the Greyhound the gear requested. In respect of any approval given by a Steward, the Steward will ensure that the approved gear to be applied to or removed from the Greyhound is recorded on the Gear Register and the Greyhound shall from the relevant Race have applied to or removed from it, the gear so approved.

Will probably be brought back to Addington this afternoon & represented to the Vet, wearing a neck brace because of whip lash & two eye patches because the blinkers are failing to work, for a 21 day injury stand-down, like has already happened twice previously in its short career.

GRNZ wants safer tracks yet GRNZ rules & poor enforcement of the rules let this happen... Yi Feng 09/08/18 - YI FENG (6) - heavily contacted from the inside entering the first bend. Bumped from outside exiting final bend before turning its head outwards marring outside greyhound. Stood down for 28 days and pending a satisfactory trial. 25/09/18 - YI FENG (6) - turned his head free of interference in the home straight. A post race veterinary examination revealed no injury. Stood down for 3 months and completion of a satisfactory trial. Re- examined Addington 27/9/18 and 21 day injury found. 27/11/18 - YI FENG (7) - moved outwards entering the home straight and turned its head towards a runner to its outside without making muzzle contact. Pursuant with Rule 55.1(b) this greyhound is stood down for 3 months (second offence) and required to complete a satisfactory trial. A post race veterinary examination revealed no injuries. Re-examined 29/11/18 at Addington and 28 day injury found. 07/02/19 - YI FENG (1) - shifted up the track rounding the bend. Clipped from behind exiting the bend. Turned its head outwards towards the runner to its outside whilst free of interference entering the final straight before making slight contact. Vetted following the event and no injury detected. Stood down for 28 days and pending a satisfactory trial for Failing to Pursue the lure. Someone at GRNZ should be reviewing why this dog was charged with another first offence. It has not had 10 consecutive races in its career without the need for at least a satisfactory trial being required from it.

Super Six racing tonight... So much for a safer track when they let proven Mongrels compete. First race.... The shadows on the track tells the story of what the head-on footage in the home straight would show, which mortals are not allowed to see.

Hmmm... seems the official record of the race has morphed into something new.... FUNZALO (1) - In contact into first turn and unbalanced. Turned his head out to another runner soon after and was referred to the Vet and cleared. Was stood down for 3 months for a 2nd offence under Rule 55.1 b and is required to complete a satisfactory trial before next racing.BIGTIME COOPER (2) - in contact and unbalanced into first turn. Checked soon after and lost ground and was crowded into final bend and went back to the rear and stayed back. Covering your tracks top dog? Could be considered tampering with evidence, which has nicely been captured here.

Have you ever wondered why B Cole doesn't have & cannot get a trainers license?

Or my post could be viewed in its true perspective. According to the Steward (not Yankiwi)... The #1 dog FTP, thus was charged under 55.1b ~ "Was stood down for 3 months for a 2nd offence under Rule 55.1 b" The #2 dog Marred ~ "Marred soon after and lost ground" According to Yankiwi.... The Steward charged the #1 dog under the wrong rule (should have been 55.1a) because it marred the #2. If the #2 marred as the Steward claimed (which I do not believe is the case) then why wasn't it charged for it under rule 55.1a? The Steward is the professional. The Steward should know the difference between marring and FTP. The Steward should charge a dog under the correct rule. The Stewards report should make it clear as to what actually happened in the race. The Steward that wrote the report for this race is the top dog & presumed to be the best the RIU has to offer to the code (which is an indication on how well the top dogs boss is performing).