pete cook

I'm becoming a bit bored with this, but just got back from walking the dog and would like to point out two things. First, the Industry was told, when Slot races were introduced, that the main advantage was that they would "cost the Industry nothing". Who, or what changed that? (and to be fair to Mr. Steele, it was before his time). Second, in his speech at a "future is Now" presentation just after he started, Mr. Steele suggested that slots could be bought by groups of say, 30 young people, who could put in $10k each. At the time, I remember laughing out loud at the naivety of that idea. Sadly I have been proven right. Oh, and just a last thought regarding having good horses. Using Mr. Boots as an example, how many horses has he bought that have been developed by excellent NZ trainers and gone on to be his stars? The problem is that your average owner has little alternative than to sell to rich owners like him.

Fine, let the big spending owners have their fun with slot races. Just don't understand or support why the other industry participants who haven't the same resources, or horses, should be disadvantaged financially to subsidize them.

Gama, I suspect we are talking at cross purposes. There are the odd horse trainers who have served at HRNZ and the ATC, however I am talking about their skills as trainers, not administrators. How many winners have Brad Steele or Matt Peden trained? There are now no license holders on the HRNZ Board.

I am at a loss to understand where you are coming from. As far as I can see, neither Brodie or myself have been critical of our horse people, yet you keep suggesting we are. I have always believed they are some of the best in the World, and have been privileged to know many of them personally. Obviously, your idea of 'tiny' and mine are different, and my issue is that the 'tiny' amount would be much better spent elsewhere, instead of subsidising races for people who have horses that are capable of winning far more than that.

It would be interesting to see a breakdown of the number of mares being bred by the big studs, compared to the so-called hobby breeders

Gamma, it's obvious a discussion (I was going to say argument but refrained) with you about this is futile. Only the future will tell who was right or wrong. My understanding is that when the Entain deal was signed, it was conditional on NZ introducing Geo-blocking (which Australia have had for years).The idea/thinking was that that would create a large boost in wagering (I seem to recall a figure of $40m being talked about) to replace for the money that Entain is putting in now. Given that HRNZ have just announced that turnovers are actually down on a reduced turnover of last year, and the year before that etc., that seems to have been proven to be pie in the sky. As I've said before, we don't have generous State Governments of billionaires to help...ALL, I repeat, ALL our money comes from wagering, hence my comments on Slot Racing, which, as does Cup Week almost every year, run at a substantial loss.

Gamma, I really do admire you rose-tinted glasses. Yes, the 7 slot holders put in $30k each, but although I was never much good at maths, that only comes to $210K.So to say HRNZ only puts in a small amount to a $500k stake is simply wrong. Nobody likes watching super horses race more than me, as I've been doing for around 60 years, but I'm a realist and, as it stands, the race will be boring and very expensive for a game that can't afford either. I could send the rest of the day outlining the better ways that the Entain money could be spent, but others on here have already done it on here.

HRNZ putting large amounts of Industry money into a seven horse Trot Slot race, that will undoubtedly be a wagering disaster, is a disgrace. Just another example of recklessness with Entain money.

All the programmer/handicapper has to do, for example, is put in a condition that, for example, in a rating race, any horse that has won more than 10 races, or a certain amount of money cannot start. Seems it's too hard.

There is no perfect handicapping system, never has been, never will be. If you set it up to advantage one group of horses, you disadvantage another group. The answer is in innovative programming, which can be done under any system, including the current one.

There is no perfect handicapping system, never has been, never will be. If you set it up to advantage one group of horses, you disadvantage another group. The answer is in innovative programming, which can be done under any system, including the current one.

When you are a small stable, it can be challenging to get the best drivers, who naturally want to drive the horse they think are the best chance of earning them money, that's their job. There is also a loyalty factor. I know one leading trainer who has a list of preferred drivers. When a driver turns him down, that driver goes to the bottom of the list. As for Paul and Tu Tangata, he owns it so he can do what he wishes, don't forget he gets $100 for doing so.

Galah, I don't know if you are aware, but John Mooney was appointed, prior to Mr. Steele's appearance, to chair a kind of think tank to sort out the problems. From what I hear he has pursued is own agendas and Steele has followed. Mr. Peden is simply a PR specialist.

Thanks for the compliment (I think), but I've been involved in too many controversies and shit fights in the past to want to get into it again. Sadly that is probably the case with most of the 'tragics' like me

Strong suspicion that most questions were actually answered by Mooney and Peden. That is likely to be true. In Mr. Steele's defence, he inherited a mess and, like the Board, has been poorly advised since.

Gamma, I have no doubt that you are a passionate supporter of our wonderful sport/industry, as am I, otherwise, why would you spend time writing on here. Just for your information, seeing you sort of questioned my participation, I have been involved in every aspect except breeding, only because I couldn't afford it, I have had numerous racehorses, most of which have been leased or come from other trainers. For 11 years my partner and I trained them ourselves and also drove in Amateur races. It cost us a lot of money because we didn't have good ones, although we did manage 14 wins, which we are very proud of, and we don't regret a moment of it. I have attended more than 50 NZ Cups and have been involved in administration for decades.....that's how I have some knowledge of the mistakes that have been made prior to Mr. Steele's appearance. I must dispute your comments about the financing of slot races. I was present at a meeting when the then HRNZ CEO first announced them. Twice that day, he stressed that the great thing about them was they would cost the Industry nothing to stage, because all the money would come from the slot holders. That was the case the first year, now HRNZ is subsidising them to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars, when some horses are winning races and earning a couple of months training fees. There is no question in my mind that that money should have been pumped into maiden races for 3 year old and older, because they are the contests that most horses are capable of winning. That may have encouraged people to stay in the game. As for the Auckland TC, if there is ever a case of mis-management they are a shining example. Two Club Presidents have told me in the past that the club want 'only the elite horses racing at Alex Park'. That's exactly what they have achieved- how's that working?

I have tried to resist responding to Gamma's ramblings, based, unlike Ceemenow's facts, on emotion and ignorance. However, when he accuses NZ trainers of being lazy, I can't hold back. I'll start by pointing out that the two trainers he praises for lining horses up (the Green/Delany and Telfers) are both backed by obviously passionate men who appear to have bottomless pockets. Sadly, the majority of local trainers have, for decades, had to rely on selling horses overseas to stay afloat. Where does he think the majority of his hero Mr. Grimson's horses come from? As a result, many trainers and indeed, owners are reluctant to over race their horses, in case they run poorly and devalue themselves, something the Australian trainers don't have to worry about, they just race them until they drop. Comparing Australia and New Zealand in the racing industry is nonsensical. Apart from the massive difference in population and wealthy people, Mr. Steele comes from an industry where, if it wasn't for a couple of passionate individuals and supportive State governments, it would be a cottage industry, if that. Yet still some places are on their knees financially! In addition, where would harness racing across the ditch be without New Zealand bred horses. At one recent meeting at Menangle, every winner was bred in NZ. I'm not saying that, for numerous reasons, harness racing in this Country hadn't been mismanaged, what I am saying is that Mr. Steele was thrown a lifeline by the Entain deal, and has frittered much of it away on subsidising ridiculous slot races and two year old promotions. As far as the HRNZ Board is concerned, I suspect that they are being given the same misleading spin that is being fed to the public, but seem to be reluctant to question it.

I'll make a prediction. Mr. Steele will stick around, talking things up until just before the Entain deal runs out, then he will say what a wonderful job he has done and go back to Australia, to leave some other poor sods to handle the fallout from the house of cards he has help create.

All Trackside staff have been instructed not to discuss the greyhound ban

Graig has had his contract terminated

Amount of information out of HRNZ is okay, it's the accuracy of it, and the omissions that are the concern.

Considering we are allowed to bet on Australian races on Good Friday and Easter Sunday, when it is not allowed here, I can't see the Aussie dogs being any different.

You can bet on fixed on-course. You have to ask for it and sometimes the operator will ask if you want it.

Gus