the galah

Its not sinking in what i have said. The horses that ran last night are not the same ones that ran2,3,4,5 years ago. Rasmussen has not been driving until recently. How about you go ask her why?? One thing that i know,punters can rate the horses on ablilty,but drivers are a factor.N rasmussen is much better than m purdon and heaps better than say o thornley.Another example is b hope seems to have great success with trotters,but several pacers he gets off improve when the likes of john dunn drives them. Another example was a race just run at winton. Some of those horses had won 3-8 races,yet they only ran the mile in 1.59.8. I could have run faster until the 400m.Only s tomlinson moved up where as the likes of s ottley(who is driving very negatively in recent weeks) and t nally(who seems to lack any judgment of pace, sat at the back. Had n rasmussen driven them they run 2nd,instead of 2nd last. So drivers are a factor,but i've been comparing how the horses run now,to how they ran forever 2-5 years ago. I think we are going in circles. Same thing,different day.

Like i've said ,if you cant see the drop off in how they run in comparison from a couple of years ago then in my opinion that makes you are poor judge. Last night changed nothing in my opinion.They still will be using and paying top dollars for their vets. Don't underestimate how much that can help a horse "peak",but thats available to everyone else if they have the money. I personally didn't see them grow a leg last night on recent performances.There was improvement,but i put that down to the driving ability of rasmussen.Her ability to rate her horses at a consistent speed and make the moves at the right time is exceptional,and if anything i think the other drivers seem to almost concede their tactical positions almost as if its inevitable,which sometimes is rather meek. I've said,and still believe that Cullen has shown he is not far behind purdon/rasmussen,just doesn't use all the tools in the tool box that were being used a couple of years ago.

Starter briefly called a false start,but then changed his mind with apparently 5 drivers easing their horses up,so we are told,but who really knows. In an earlier race a start was declared but only briefly,then it was changed to a false start,this time the blame going on the mobile driver who did not initially hear the starter apparently. Where's peter lamb when you need him?

That race just run had some strange drives. Mark jones interview went on about how this was the race majestic lavros had been set for,yet it looked like he forgot to tell sam ottley.Ben hope really does drive those trotters well though,and natalie rasmussen again gave her horse every chance.

Your right. Just looked it up. Somehow he had his 7 day suspension given to him last week deferred until after tonight. Not sure why he gets that preferential treatment and has a suspension start a week later. To be honest,rasmussen is outdriving the others tonight. She always makes her move at the right time and has ended up in the right position compared to her main opposition.

Mangos got suspended again for whip use,so thats why he didn't drive it. Does that aussie owner who was mangos's big owner still race many in aussie? He had 2 or 3 mangos trained horses in the jewels 2 or 3 years ago,but said they would be the last because it was not worth having them in nz racing against the all stars? I think he was from western australia.

It was the deliberately running wide about 100 metres before the passing lane to let his stablemate through that was the dishonest bit.

Thats the way he always drives those inexperienced trotters.The horse actually showed a bit of improvement tonight.Balle is one of those handful of drivers that deserves closer scrutiny going on past drives,but i don't think tonight was one of those occasions. I thought the stipes took action against the right driver when they opened an inquiry into d ferguson team driving. I can't understand why ferguson thinks he can get away with his drive tonight. When you see team driving like that it puts doubt into punters minds as to whether ferguson will drive his horses on their merits,or will he drive to advantage a stablemate in the same race.I used to think he was pretty honest,but thats the second time in a couple of months that he has done a dodgy drive.

Maybe in hindsight he should have moved up a bit earlier,but thats the way its always driven and those tactics have got good results in the past. I thought its problem was it was not handicapped to run anywhere myself,and thats pretty much how it turned out.

If you think the all star horses have the same stamina they did a couple of years ago then your dreaming.True fantasy went the run of the race,and looks the top 2yo filly.I thought she drove it well from the wide draw,but they are beatable.

Obviously the way the labour/nz first government had handled covid was the major part. But National was a weak opposition and had 3 different leaders leading into the election. I have always been a winston fan myself. I've always thought his values and take on things reflected the way i think nz should be run,and he had a couple of very capable mp's with him. Just a shame he lost his way with some of his comments in the run up to the last election. He was never into the political correctness that we have in todays society.

I think you have to acknowledge that many supported Labour because they were tired of National having no social conscience , prioritising money over the environment and sucking up to china, amongst other things. But i just change channels whenever i have to listen to the media focus on calling everything by its maori name. Some of these government department names are just ridiculous. Its like they want to fix something thats not broken. But thats where the worlds headed and the youth of today is being indoctrinated with this thinking. And all these sports seem to follow suit.So it won't get any better.

So you post like on the chiefs original post suggesting the RIU has someone feeding the press about the story of anderson assisting another trainer,then in this post on the same subject you say "an RIU steward may have given Mr Anderson approval to do so". To be honest its hard to take anything you say seriously.

Every once in a while i have a look at the other channel.They mostly just talk about the same as on here,but one topic which was raised was a story currently on Stuff about the work being done by those who try and re home ex racehorses. In particular it had comments from those who operate the "racehorse rehoming charity". In this case they had talked to carl markham and rebecca nairn. These people,and others who do similar things in other parts of nz,are people the industry should be proud to have represent them. They showcase the love of the horse that so many have within the industry. And they go further by giving back with their time and efforts put into retraining and finding homes,and always treating the horse with respect. As they say,the demand for their services far exceeds what they alone can do,but its about time they received some industry funding in some way, as its unfair to expect them to shoulder the burden of something which portrays the industry in a very favorable light.

Pretty much what i expect from you.

.

Never said anything like that. I said purdons stats improved when rasmussen started training with him,and when he no longer trained with payne or by himself. I also have said i think cullen trains as good as purdon/rasmussen,probably because purdon has taught him well and still has input. and i have said cullen hasn't had any races where his runners draw 5 lengths or more ahead of the rest when they run very fast times like the purdon /rasmussen partnership used to be able to regularly do with 4 or more runners in the same race.And i've asked why?

I haven't suggested driving on ecstacy,so not sure what your point is. So youv'e included the lowest(this years)to get that figure. How about you wake up. Compare the udr of the previous 4 years when purdon trained on his own and with payne. .3353,.3013.4285,.3761. So the conclusion is purdon udr improved by about 35% when rasmussen became co trainer.

Thats the point i made ,which you argued vehemently against. Cullen has proven he is little inferior to purdon/rasmussen as trainers. The drop off in udr,wins came after inca and the pandemic. Not this year.Why was that?Its something you ignore and will never acknowledge,so little point debating it with you. They will always be the benchmark trainers,but their figures are not as good as what they were in the previous 4 or 5 years. I quoted the udr's and wins in another posting on another topic to confirm that.

You know,i've always thought from some of your posts, that you were the bitter one when it came to the riu. I don't know what experiences youv'e had that have lead you to give that impression,and i'm not saying you don't have good reason for that,and i think it likely youv'e dealt with something where you have been unjustly treated, but people who have been accused of being bitter are quick to point out the same traits shown by others on the opposite side of the argument. I think we need to recognise that being bitter is not a bad thing,its just a word to describe feelings you have because of a perceived injustice.We need to judge the merit of the perceived injustice,and we all come to our own conclusions. One of the biggest problems in the past has been those who's job it was to enforce the rules focused on the small players,while turning a blind eye to the big players. There was no consistency in enforcement,and administrators had no systems in place to address it,nor did they really care.It was part of the reason for the reduction in participation levels,then we had those who's actions had lead many to no longer supporting the industry, lamenting that fact,when they themselves were largely to blame.Many owners in the past have also read where... whoever have returned a positive,for example the blue magic scandle,and what did we see. we saw increased support of those who transgressed, because many owners are all about winning,and expect their trainers to take risks and to push the boundaries. So now we have the riu seemingly targeting people by what they do,instead of ignoring some because of who they are.Thats the way it should have always been. Had it been so then everyone would have been happier and feelings of bitterness would not exist to the extent they currently do.

Did you put your money on the former kerr trained horse A Better act today? Well back in class today,thought you would have been on given what you said about its recent form a couple of weeks ago? Showed today its still looking for that extra leg that i said it had when running for m kerr.Another poor effort i see. And hows the barclay or ellis horses going. Didn't you rubbish me when i said that stable had lost a leg in the last 12 months. Its you who can't see what some of us can.

So the judge thought excluding some members of the press was the most effective way to get balanced reporting? Like that worked(or was ever going to help). The proof is in the pudding so to speak. Makes you wonder. You keep telling yourself that,but i don't think so. Doesn't everyone thinks they are on the right side of the debate,so what does that mean anyway.

So what long owner is saying is a judge excluded a certain member of the press from some of the inca court proceedings,and now we have this saturation coverage from that member of the press on related to topics to what the judge didn't want any reporting on. Whether thats accurate or not i don't know. If it is, whats the bet at the time some not too clever people actually thought excluding that reporter was a victory of sorts,and wouldn't have consequences..

Woodham saying he would need more information before he could comment, is not the same as saying he was unaware of what the journalist was asking about,as appears to be your take on it.

So you have had someone like ken spicer on the board of hrnz openly supporting and advocating for nigel mcgrath,matt anderson and who knows who else. Are you seriously suggesting he,or those that work with him should be kept informed on all details of ongoing investigations? Isn't the reason for the constant referral in the press coverage to ken spicers ongoing support of those being investigated, there to highlight that hrnz position on integrity would be compromised if full disclosure was given to them. Seems an obvious conclusion to draw. Surely you remember the blue magic scandal where a racing official warned all the licence holders involved of the investigation.