the galah

This horse seems very genuine and is well trained,but I've noticed its like groundhog day nearly every time it runs. I don't think I've seen a horse driven the same way and get the same run so often. Drop back,go last the fence,sit there and pull off so as to follow anything going backwards at the 400m,then finish fast the last 150m. I reckon ive seen that same run about 20 times from that horse.

Sioux princess yesterday at Invercargill was just the same,if not worse. Having said that Neverneverland has been running like somethings not right for its last few starts.

Looking at their trials you would think cloud break should be paying about $20 and el dorado $8. Yet as you say they are only paying $3 each. Not for me at those prices. I like senor margarita at $71 and don't tell ange for a place at $5.75 That's more my type of price. I also like shezabromac and jive to be a quinella. Having said that I have a very poor strike rate when tipping on here.

Now days those doing the final field odds seem to have a major influence on the final tote prices. Punters seem to follow their lead. As to vintage beach. I understand that stable does like to punt them, however that's hardly likely given its early dividend. Its not a strong field but $2.60 seems a bit ridiculous for its form. The bookies obviously must think it can win.

How did that horse pay $66 today. It went a big race last week ,probably going better than the horse that was favorite in todays race. Unfortunately I only had it in combos with paduka who rattled home after getting lost yet again. There was some amazing dividends today. I had a wee nibble at Kramer at $151 to win,but it only ran 2nd. Bugger.

He was risky because of his manners,but probably should still have won easily given the ease in which he hit the line just on the back of the placegetters. Theodosia did pay a good dividend. Chris butt seems a good trainer.

What did you make of that?Looked like he had an educational run. The difference between a punters perspective and a drivers perspective as to what's best well illustrated there.

Not much to tell. Went to front on a horse known to go best in front. Stayed there but faded a bit in the straight. Did move into passing lane late in the run home but there appeared an inside gap early in run home for the horse in trail if it had elected to go there.Goes best over sprints. Not sure what the original poster could be unhappy about. I guess his name sums it up.

Stevie lynn.good tip happy. I hope you and your followers got some.

I agree with you brodie. What other business would increase expenditure like the ATC did recently ,with small stakes increases,while their business takes a huge financial hit. It appears just a face saving exercise to attempt limit the criticism by those currently running things. There are so many areas that are contributing to participation within the harness racing industry contracting. Its not just the north island. For example if you live in Canterbury and have 5 horses.The first thing you need is training facilities to rent.. Well I can tell you from personal experience that there are none. I recently came to an arrangement with someone experienced I know and trust, to train our horses, for a wage as it was cheaper that way, All we had to do was find somewhere to train from. Well after 3 months of looking we recently gave up. There is no where. Those with vacant facilities simply don't want anyone using them and I can understand that. The only alternative is to buy 10 hectares,but its hard convincing the wife that we put $400,000 into a bit of land with no facilities just to train a few horses so you can keep your hobby going . The price of farm land or land near population bases has become unaffordable to most.

Last week I came across a lady who knew I followed the horses. She told me that her son was very keen on Harness racing so recently she had rung up Mark purdon and asked if he had anything from Lazarus that he could send her for her sons birthday.. I thought she was pulling my leg ,but no, she did get to speak to mark purdon who went out of his way to sort something out and to her delight he organized,at his expense, for a lovely framed picture of Lazarus in action to be sent to her son..Her son is very proud to have received it she tells me. No surprise that she told me she was a big fan of the all stars and that purdon was a top bloke.

Dalgety had not been going anywhere near as good as he used too for some time and Nathan purdon driving his team did not appear to help either. But combining their training skills and utilizing the best drivers they can get has seen them return to their best form.

I have awesome impee rated 2nd behind one of your old favorites flying mandy. Of course we both know flying mandy is very risky,and I think better coming from behind. Stevie lynn. Ive got it rated about 7th.Quite a few chances in that race. Ive got calypso rock(draw bad though),jive,carita fraud and For today as my top 5. So i'm picking 1/3 of the field which makes it confusing.

I believe both were team driving and both were bads drives. Both drives snuffed out both horses chances Heres the title of the last 7 threads currently on racecafe. U may ccollect, Auckland update, What a joke, Addington acceptance fees, Hannon driver tactics,Hardly worth it,and betterstartdreaming(about poor driving). Hardly positivity .Your better off sticking to bit of a yarn.

I thought anyone with any judgment watching that race could work out McKendry drove a shocker in keeping the lead when he could have got the perfect sit behind the horse that won impressively last week. And the reason for his dumb tactics were intended to give his stablemate the trail. As to andee poutama. Do you really think it was an intelligent move to go 4 or 5 back the fence when the obvious 1/1 sit was there for the taking? Come on ,it was also dumb. And yes you are right, i do think I know the ins and outs of every driver/horse. I think every horse should be driven on its own merits,not to assist stablemates. And we all know team driving happens a lot. Its one of my pet hates. Team driving is the cause of negativity, so blame them. I never stated the winner was not the best horse,so don't know why you infer I did.

Some team driving in that race. Not just the all stars that team drive. Maurrice McKendry clearly sacrificed any chance Bare knuckle had to give its stablemate a good run,and andre poutama gave up the perfect 1/1 sit on Check in to go 5 back the fence, I guess the stable got the win with the one they expected,although the way the race was run could just have easily been its stablemate . Star galleria went very well.

Its been mentioned on the other website that the ATC is looking at an $80 million loss,up from $40 million,and is involved in costly legal battles. I wonder how accurate that is? The ATC hierarchy have already indicated that it will be selling valuable assets so it can't come as a surprise that they will looking at all options like Franklin. Looking from the outside,without full knowledge of the true extent of the financial disaster unfolding for the ATC,it appears they are doomed. It just seems to what extent. How a club can increase some stakes,and maintain others,,while under such financial pressure defies belief,and only further makes one wonder about the abilities of those making such decisions. My prediction would be for the current leadership and the majority of the current directors to be all replaced. The new leadership will them start undertaking the sell of assets to reduce debt,and with that you would think hey would have to look at the viability of maintain existing stakes. Is it not just another Fonterra, but on a smaller scale? The article refers to younger trainers not being able o afford properties to train from,well that is happening everywhere,not just Auckland. What do some of them end up doing to survive or exist within the industry?You don't have to look too far in recent history to see that.

Channelling the spirit of Jack Nicholson ??? Or have you been watching the movie "a few good men" It was a good movie. . Are you suggesting the RIU have a code name for how to silence an insubordinate like myself who asks too many questions? Did you order the "Code Red" Happy,or was it Mike gobder from the RIU??

Some of us don't have facebook, or follow the dickie stable facebook page. The Dickies are obviously aware its better to be up front about it. So why did the RIU not just state the truth. The definition of "cross contamination" is the unintentional transfer of a substance. Its spin. Its not the first time the RIU have played with words when it comes to positives.. It's a deliberate policy and one which will continue to be criticized every time the truth is hidden or twisted.

The hrnz website had a write up about CK spur winning on Friday. In it they said CK spur would get another promoted win because of a positive from another runner. The only time Ck spur has run 2nd recently was to Sertorius. That horse just happens to be trained by a trainer who late scratched 7 horses ,yes the whole team, with the RIU deliberately spinning it to say it resulted from cross contamination. Coincidence ,i think not. And if its not coincidence the RIU would have us believe that the supposed cross contamination happened a month after the original positive, yet somehow the dickie stable only cottons on to it being a possibility 4 weeks later after i'm guessiing just being informed of a positive. I think the result of my posting this thread will be for HRNZ to reprimand the writer of the article for letting the truth slip.

The privacy act? Its because they don't want the bad publicity. Its just a cover up. There is no link. I'm guessing it is the Dickie runner Sertorius. We will never know because its all a secret at the moment.. The best way is to check the horses form on the website in 3 months time when they may update the race record of the horse.

Why does the RIU want to keep everyone in the dark when it comes to a horse returning a positive. They never declare it has happened,and even go further in spinning the story so the public remains ignorant. 1 week ago the Dickies late scratched 7 runners,and the RIU told us it was due to Cross contamination. They must think we are all dunb. Was that really the case or was it related to one of their runners returning a positive from a month earlier. I don't have an issue with them being scratched,it makes sense if they had concerns about future positives. However the way the RIU and the industry deals with these matters clearly shows they don't want anyone to know. It also leads to inferences about the stables concerned being drawn ,sometimes undeserved. To me its simple,if you hide the truth,then that means you have something to hide. The RIU are enablers and are directly responsible for the innuendo that goes on about certain stables. This thread is proof of that.

Yes,did enough to win. I backed the 2nd horse (skreemr) to win bcause I thought the fav would pull up and run 2nd. I hope my punting gets better in the remaining races.

Bettor getta lover a $1.35 favourite in the next. Every start so far this horse pulls up when it looks like it may win. Will it do the same today,will o'reilly time his run,or will it change today and win.?

There's not enough information in those 4 paragraphs to make any informed judgment other than to realise that within the tab,there is not always a united front as to whether the decisions being made are in the best interests of the industry as a whole. I don't know whether this is the case here,but human nature often sees people look after their own interests at the expense of the greater good.Its just the way it works and that can only be overcome by good leadership. The quote states a tab source says turnover is down a million a month on last years figures but makes no comparison to how many meetings,what type of turnover the figures relate to,whether the source is reliable,etc ,etc. It also states last years turnover was down on the previous year. To what degree. it may be that the decline is at a similar rate to the current year. Who knows. There is no mention of the effect that the new website had in turning off so many punters which one suspects is an obvious factor. The whole thing seems just a self interested comment which because of its lack of substance tells us nothing. I have always found that information is withheld so as to create the illusion that things are not as bad as it would become apparent if full disclosure occurred. In other words due to ignorance everyone is mislead to believe those in charge are making the correct decisions. Because how can you criticize something which you have no knowledge off.