the galah

the 40 minute gaps will be because they have the 4 nz meetings on a sunday. I started a thread about it a while ago when they started the 40 minute gaps. The gallops have been running 2 sunday meetings a lot over the last few months. if you were trying to discourage people from attending race meetings,the 40 minute gaps would be the way to go. I guess they don't want anyone being on course these days apart from those with horses engaged. Oamaru and addingtion at least appear to be going to have a fine day. The temperature predicted to get to as high as 10. you have to laugh,well i find it funny anyway. at least the harness people recognise more the need for their nz product be a priority for them. Turnovers for the gallops on the sundays don't seem much more than the trots,from my observations.S I guess the gallops people must value the money generated from the aussie product above promoting participation in their sunday and midweek meetings.

Actually imperial command was back racing tonight. I thought i had better watch it. To my great surprise it was a $2 favorite . its started favorite in all 5 starts over there. But punters got burnt again,as it started the score up in a mad angry gallop and was still like that when they said go. oh well,at least its many followers have hope, as its made it back to the races and some think theres a reason for keeping the faith.

yes 6 in that 3 year old race. 2, 2 year old races at auckland at addington,both being run with 5 horse fields,as per normal. your right about the obsession with 2 year old racing. you know,hrnz are chosing to pay the $12,000 bonus out to the connections and breeders of just one of the 120 horses who race on friday night at addington,or just one of the 72 horses connections that race at auckland on friday.. they could have instead used that $12,000 to pay $100 to the connections of every starter at addington. Thats $67 extra to every owner and $33 to every breeder of a starter on friday. and at auckland they could haveused the $12000 to pay an extra $110 to every owner and $55 to every breeder of a starter at auckland,instead of paying just 1 lot of connections. those 2 year old races already have good stakes,but hrnz continue to prioritise the people who race and breed 2 year olds,as they obviously view them of far,far greater importance than any other group.

you do realise that what you've posted appears rather contradictory. the first half of your post describes the realities of,well to quote you,"all around the world horse racing is struggling and in particular harness racing". You then accurately described some of the reasons for that,which are applicable to nz harness racing. but then,the second half of your post is a story ,which you infer,could be used to reflect the average people in nz harness racing. To quote you "his business went from strength to strength and he had to take on more staff to handle the growing volume,business was very good". Then you ended your post with the the inference that people who express opinions ,similar to what you did in the first half of your post, somehow contribute to the sports decline,if those people go one step further and criticise administrators who ignore the realities. i think your post recent post just is a reflection of whats worked for you in your life.fair enough. but theres a difference between someone making decisions and those who are impoacted by decisions. Its like your ,yes ,make the hard decisions when you have to,but lets not bring the mood down just yet ,lets put off the day of reckoning as long as we can,because that will delay the negative impact on the people concerned. The problem with that type of thinking is,the impact will happen,now or later,people adjust now or later,but if its not life threatening,your left with the people impacted no longer trusting those that weren't up front.

i thought it was pretty hard to have,even with the driver change. It had finished a beaten off last,just stopping,being 40 lengths,6 lengths and 40 lengths behind the second last horses in its last 3 starts. i think opening it at $30 most probably had priced the driver change in. well done if you backed it,your a punting genius today.

i like your thinking gamma. whats that old quote"we cannot solve our problems with the same thinking(or people) as when we created them".

I had to laugh when they interviewed pre race,the trainer of the winner ,bettor reaction. Now i'm sure he was being honest when he said he expected his son would go back at the start with his horse. I think that would have given punters who backed debrief real confidence as its drive rindicted he expected to go forward. well turned out the opposite happened to what the people interviewed said. . actually thats the second time i've heard the trainer of bettor reaction interviewed and the second time he said it would be going back at the start,only to see it in front early in the race. yes $12,000 seems a lot to lose to me. Maybe they have plenty to lose.Someone put $1000 on the telfer winner,secrets abound ,the night before in the junior driver race paying $8. maybe that was the same person.

it will be interesting,once the new law comes into effect, how much more will be bet through the tab on racing and sports and how that will flow through into increased returns for racing here. hopefully the positive impacts will far outweigh the negative for example a hegative impact could be there are nz people who also have tabcorp accounts and bet into their tote pools.Given they are not big at the moment,any decrease would mean their pools would get to a point where they are very unattactive for aussies to bet on. I used to spend on a tabcorp account just so to spread the impact of even a $20 or more bet on the price. so its not as if you start transferring that spend onto a small nz pool.. Hopefully it all turns out as they are predicting.

you mention db,last year db had a drop in operating profit of25%. they laid off staff including 60 at one of their main breweries.lion lost $46 million. i like that your trying to be positive,but its not the reality on the ground amongst the silent majority. its interesting that earlier you were advocating for more slot races,which remember,hrnz is now pumping funds into and then you were also saying $15,000 maidens at addington is too much. personally I struggle to see how prioritising the small % who operate at the elite level over the 90% who operate at the lower levels,will lead to anything other than people getting out of the sport and not breeding. And thats what is happening. People just look at the hrnz website news and evaluate who they think the industry is prioritising and then they are saying,well thats not me ,i'm already struggling,its not going to get any better for m,e so reluctantly those people start getting rid of their broodmares and many others,already in the background in different parts of the sport,are fading out of sight.

So what we are discussing falls under the amendment to section 98 of the act. so,reading between the lines, it appears that it may have been to do with the tab originally having to place greater restrictions to prevent problem or harm gambling,whcih they may have felt were unrealistic or difficult to enforce. in other words it would have been too easy for the regulatory bodies who oversee compliance,to pick up things which the tab may have viewed as being over the top oversight. it appears section 98a, relating to consumer protection,where the issue of taking larger bets from winning punters,would appear to fall under,may have got a small amendment,but not specifically the amount people can get on for? actually reading that act where it says"the intensity of betting by a person using an online betting system provided by the tab,including the frequency at which successive bets may be placed." well that rings a bell with me as to the most likely reason betfair closed my account about 3 years ago. I opened a betfair account,put about $100 with the theory that if i backed favoured dogs to lose, who consistently jumped poor and got back early and drew poor as well on tracks with 2 turns.i did that for about 2 months, i backed on every dog race in australia,which was about every 3 minutes most nights. i did that for about 4 hours each night. i only did a couple of minutes study for each race.Well it was all going well and after about 2 months i had turned my $100 into about $5,000,then i got got a bit too clever and one night bet on a couple of tracks with only 1 turn and ones that were paying more,and would you believe it,i backed 6 dogs in a row to lose paying double figures, within half an hour and they all won. Bugga me,could you believe it. So that left me only a few hundred again. Well,the next day betfair closed down my account.They refused to say why,i had made some money overall and it annoyed me. So i waited and then my wife opened an account. I was doing ok,i just decided to bet on nz harness as the aussie dogs thing just seemed a bit too intense for my brain to switch off when i went to sleep. Well my wife decided to withdraw some money ,they wouldn't let her,it said phone them. Then,as soon as she spoke to them they just closed her account and sent out the funds that were in there.they gave no reason and just said ,we don't have to tell you why. so thats a long story,but i can see now,even though i wasn't a losing punter on betfair,i fell within the scope of who they had to restict or close the account. you can see why horse racing is struggling with some of the strict oversight rules. Some seem over the top, when its obvious people aren't losing much and are just having a bit of fun.Compare how they want to control peoples gambling ,but your free to do many other more harmful things. the british horse racing industry is an obvious exampleIt seem to be struggling with the main blame being laid on over the top harm regulations..its been reported recently that average turnover per race was down 8% compared with 2023/2024 and dowjn 15% compared with the year prior.. in 2007 they estimated 17% of the uk public regularly bet on the horses,but they reckon that only about 10% do these days.soccer is the most popular sport to bet on there,with racing close behind,then a big drop to the likes of golf,cricket and rugby.but soccer and racing gamblers average spend a month is about half of what gamblers spend on the other sports mentioned.Apparently betting on fantasy sports is getting rather popular.

i thought the racing amendment bill is to change several things,the most prominent being making it illegal for off shore gambling companies to take bets from new zealanders. the refusing bets thing ,well is seems the select committeee in parliament had made recommendations limiting the tab refusing to take bets,the tab wasn't happy with that,so lobbied peters to keep their ability to restrict punters. mow i don't know whether that would have meant under the original draft,punters like brodie would have got on for more if they wanted,i haven't been able to find the original draft. But it sounded like mr peters was being asked by the tab to stop punters getting on for bigger amounts. thats why i was wondering how does that effect punters. were some winning punters done a disservice by mr peters?

whats with the ffs?. so you think entain losing hundreds of millions in penalties,as predicted, because of the austrac prosecution is a small change issue. tell entain shareholders that. I'm sure they would be pleased to know. One of your strangest and biggest over reaction replies you've made.. Are you having a bad hair day?

Yes,not much was reported about anything he said as entain ceo,about nz harness racing,in nz.At least that was my impression as well. maybe that was just the way it worked. one of the few things we did get media coverage about what he had said,was how he pushed the 2 year old bonuses and guaranteeing running races,despite small field sizes . Wel,that was a self serving policy,that could be argued created a perception that contributed to less people breeding their mares. But entain has done many good things,better trackside coverage,more racing which means more income . its hrnz who are spending the money like theres no tommorow.

Its interesting just how much some people spend at these betting agencies isn't it. in one article it says the australian agency in charge of oversight of betting found enatin allowed 17 high risk customers to spend $152 million. it didn't say over what timeframe,but seems to have been in the last 5 years. And some criminals where funnelling "dirty" money through accounts.what a surprise. Seems some drug dealers like to have a bet as well as to money launder..Maybe they could use my account,i don't mind.

there was an article on "the post" from a few days ago,which was headlined racing amendment bill,what it means for sport ,racing and betting offshore. i don't know how the put that type of thing on here,but it was interesting enough. Whats the post,never heard of that myself. how much of the $100 million goes to racing .they say 20 million of that will go to a sports group to distribute to sports organisations. looks like basketball will be a big winner. i read a headline of another article a month ago about winston peters seeking to remove restrictions on the tab refusing bets,from the new racing bill. its sounds like it had been looking like they were going to make the tab accept more bets that are currently refused,but the tab lobbied peters to allow them not to. anyone know what they were going to do but now aren't, since peters may have caved to the tabs request. anyone know much about that. for some reason things that effect racing seems to be given coverage in mainstream media more than racing media sometimes.