Yankiwi

By my count, Connor was less than 15 months old when he qualified & 15 months + 1 week when he had his first start.

Your turn now.

No, I can not show something that isn't available in the video replay. Your turn now.

Had a very funny feeling you'd go quiet. Maybe Honestly or Jason could point these out for me?

As you seem to understand the rule book more proficiently than I do, please quote me the GRNZ rule number which states where a "race" Begins? Ends? Must be competed on a track? Requires gambling? Exempts a trial from a Marring or FTP charge? Exempts training techniques from being a race? Go ahead & prove me wrong.

https://www.grnz.co.nz/Files/Rules of Racing/J001839 MASTER GRNZ Rules of Racing effective 1 August 2018 (clean) - 30... (1).pdf Page 5 (not the 5th page of the rule book, the page marked as #5). I always thought James Bond was a detective & would do a bit of research.

Don't get confused with what you, me or anyone else "thinks" is a race. According to the rule book, a "Race means the competitive pursuit of a Lure by two (2) or more Greyhounds in a Greyhound race and includes a Heat, Consolation Race, Semi-Final or Final." Therefore a "race", in GRNZ terms, ~ Does not have a starting or finishing point. Does not require a track. Does not require gambling. A two or more dog trial meets the criteria to be a race. Therefore a dog could be charged for marring or FTP in such trial. More than one dog training on a drag line in the same pull at home = race. Two pups chasing the stuffed animal you just threw across the back section = race.

From the ultra close up of the #8 and prior to the initial panned out shot I first posted. The image in the panned out shot doesn't show up in the ultra close up, as the camera is too zoomed in on the #8 to see the actions of the #4. I'm sure the head on, which us mortals are not entitled to see usually, would tell the same story the Steward told on the day.

Is there a lure on the #8's butt?

Easy answer right in the same rule book, page #5. What is a race? "Race means the competitive pursuit of a Lure by two (2) or more Greyhounds in a Greyhound race and includes a Heat, Consolation Race, Semi-Final or Final." The greyhounds are still competing beyond the winning post. The winning post is an imaginary line that determines finishing positions for gambling & purse purposes only. Nowhere in GRNZ's definition of "race" or within the rules, does it state that the race ends at the winning post. I believe the "race" begins when the lids pop open and ends when the first greyhound makes contact with the lure. At that point the "race" is over, even thought the "winning post" was crossed long before that point on the track.

Remember Timmy Trumpet? The dog that did not marr Ayra Stark on 25 May 2015, according to Gavin.

G string this & g string that. I don't understand what the fuss is all about. Maybe a bit of protection from the zipper maybe? ?

The Steward needs his eyes checked and his companion on the day needs his integrity investigated. This dog did come close to the rail, about a close as the #2 & #1 just before it & far closer than it will ever get to a rehoming program.

Stewards tend to go into hiding or disappear, when their previous indiscretions begin to catch up with them. The inconsistencies that some individual Stewards show can be blatantly obvious. These I believe are these are playing in to the downfall in this instance. I've been contributing to the food chain, which is now on his coat tails, for several years now & the stars seem to be finally starting to line up. I believe the pressure began to really heat up after this race... 07/09/18 Stewards report ~ Judicial report: BLAZIN' AUDREY stood down for marring in race 10 ( refer judical ) Wanganui greyhound report 14-9-2018 14/09/18 Stewards Report ~ Judicial report: Under the auspices of rule ( 11.1b ) the Stewards reviewed the racing manners of ( BLAZIN' AUDREY ) during the running of race 10 at the Wanganui Greyhound Racing Club meeting on the 7-9-2018. BLAZIN' AUDREY marred the running of another runner on the home turn and has now been stood down rule ( 55.1a ) marring with a 28 day stand down and to the completion of a satisfactory trial. BLAZIN' AUDREY has had a previous stand down for marring in Australia on the 22-6-2017 and since completing a Satisfactory trial had raced 23 times in Australia and New Zealand without transgressing the rules. The representative for the Cole kennels made submissions to the Stewards regarding the endorsement in Australia - in that the Kennels were not aware of the stand down when the dog was imported as no information was forwarded to them or the Stewards. The Stewards have accepted the submission that had the kennels been made aware of the stand down they would have applied under rule ( 55 .7 ) to have the endorsement cancelled on the completion of 10 clear runs- which would have cleared the first endorsement off the dogs record. The Stewards after making enquires are satisfied that the kennels have applied in recent times for cancellation of endorsements and the stand down now imposed is treated as a ( 1st offence ).

Serial offender here... https://www.grnz.co.nz/catch-the-action/13358/stewards-report.aspx "Judicial report: TIDDY CASH in Race 10 was up in weight by 3.3 kilograms from the weight recorded when presented to race on 28.11.18. However, the Trainer scratched the dog in breach of the Rules on that occasion and that matter has subsequently been dealt with before the Judicial Control Authority." So to me, this was no surprise, but one thing I'm not understanding is, how on earth was this dog a $2.60 favourite in todays event?

It's my belief that GRNZ & the RIU are chomping at the bit & ready to move, once the SPCA proceeding are complete, be that after a trial or a dropped investigation. If the RIU or GRNZ ultimately screw up their case, as they have a history of doing, I'm picking that Aaron & his cronies will fill Winston's so full of partially true statements, Winston will be forced to do something, and not the something anyone on here wants. I'd like nothing better to see the alleged rat bags get locked up. In my mind they are guilty. It's also my belief they have been guilty of the same violation for many years. The sport needs to be cleaned up or it will be wound up....

With only a couple of hours before 2018 is behind us, a brilliant idea has just come to mind (and you'll soon figure out why). Obviously the RIU needs a complete revamp for integrity to gain a foot hold within the Greyhound code. With that I have a name I'd like to put forward, to take over the running of the RIU. Many here will already know her, some more intimately than others, but most will have had at least some kind of dealing with her in the past. Her name is Stella Artois. I suppose a few haven't had a chance yet to meet her in person, so I've trawled the internet and come up with her photo. Happy new year everyone.

Another in the CD... Same old excuse... http://www.jca.org.nz/non-race-day-hearings/non-raceday-inquiry-riu-v-pb-briggs-decision-dated-24-december-2018-chair-mr-t-utikere

Another potential example from today's races. Hypothetically, If someone had put the brakes on the #8 so it wouldn't get out of the boxes & you were sure the brakes had been applied. $1000 win #7 = $41000 $4000 win #6 = $40000 $4000 win #5 = $40000 $5000 win #3 = $40000 $6000 win #2 = $42000 $5000 win #1 = $45000 Total investment = $25000 Minimum return = $40000 Move the decmal point one place & total investment could be $2500 with a minimum return of $4000. $1500 from other means far out weighs a $793 winning purse, and you don't get put up a grade! With a red hot favourite in a race with the brakes on, it's nothing to do with the other dogs form or ability, it's about the math. When was the last time anyone has seen a dog swabbed for severely under performing or doing something crazy & way out of character, like the Addington incident? I can't remember one instance.

Been a few years now since I've been an LP. It's been roughly two years since I've given up on the punt. I have nothing to gain personally other than possibly a "thank you for your help in saving the sport" one day. Hopefully I get it at the time I believe that the sport is indeed safe. That is not now & it's a long way off at the current rate of improvment The three biggest areas of concern, at least in my mind, are as follows (in order of priority) Welfare (fully support but not the area my energies are best spent). Integrity (where 99% of my attention is). Conflicts of interest (others are much more versed with their longer interest in the sport). There's always going to be some rat bags at ownership & training levels. But where we are now & have been for some time is the police of the code (RIU) turn their blind eye to most if not all the problems with them. That said, the sport flutters along in anocracy. The GRNZ Board have the ultimate power over the running of the code & are so full of conflicts that there can never be any integrity at that level under the current rulership. How did one of the countries top trainers end up with a position on the board? Who ultimately hired Mr Rendle in the first place? Then Mr Holden took charge, but who put him it the position & where did that get us? If someone's got the balls to take on those three areas & get them sorted, then the sport has a chance. If any one of the three are not acted on with urgency, then the long term destiny of the sport is already etched in stone. More rules & policies are not the answer. Enforce the ones that are already there and they'd quickly find they can probably delete 1/3 of the current rulebook as it became redundant.

In your defence, it was Jason (and it was his post I had replied to) that claimed the race couldn't be fixed because there was 7 other potential winners. A bit of math proves that his statement couldn't be further from the truth. Knowingly stop a red hot favourite from jumping, thus throwing the stakes money away & make a killing by other means.... Each of the bets (of the 7) placed with a different overseas bookie. When it's done, 6 of the bookies will have you near the top of their Christmas card list & the 7th will have his eye a bit closer on you. Would Jason like to laugh at my post too, as he did with your post, thus laughing at himself?

A narrow minded person would read what they wanted from my post & ignore the fact that I stated fixed odds information was no longer available so I used tote odds as an example. But never mind, obviously your faculties are far superior to the ones I possess, so instead I'll try explaining my case to the rubber band sitting on my bench.

Is the other race in question? There's a big difference between a dog wanting out from an inside draw & a dog missing the jump & running into the rail! An even bigger difference, is this dog is noted as: "HI HO TONTO (2) - Slow to begin.Shifted outwards after the start jostling with outside runner .Racing manners warning." As for racing manners warning, what ever that is, the only thing in a Stewards hands to do according to the rule book, is declare it an unsatisfactory performance & require the dog to undergo a satisfactory trail. The potential revenue producing missed jump didn't even receive a second look from the Steward. Why's that? Apparently neither of these races reached the warped criteria for an unsatisfactory performance to be invoked. The Steward on both days was happy with runs. Everyone should jot down these two examples for future reference, in case one of their charges has a similar incident. As they say, presidents have now been set.

Do the above example once a month.. $11,600 x 12 (months per year) = $139,200 per annum. What a nice way into early retirement, if you knew one red hot favourite per month that wasn't going to jump. Race fixing doesn't get any easier than that!

If you knew for sure the red hot favourite is not going to win, then making money is very easy. I don't know what the fixed odds were on the race, so I'll use the closing tote odds for this example... $10K on 4 to win grosses $52,000 $5K on 1 to win grosses $47,500 $4K on 5 to win grosses $47,600 $3K on 6 to win grosses $47,700 $2.5K on 3 to win grosses $45,750 $2K on 8 to win grosses $44,000 $1.5K on 2 to win grosses $39,600 Bet them all Total investment = $28,000 Minimum return = $ 39,600 A nice minimum $11,600 profit because you knew the red hotter wasn't going to win.