the galah

yes.That seems to be the thinking of HRNZ decision makers as well. he spends a lot of money in the sport,so lets reward him and other big spenders like him,by setting up a scheme that he will benefit from. But that industry money is not for giving away for limited return,its supposed to be used to improve the sport,specifically breeding numbers. Thats the point i'm making. To get the best returns,it seems logical that every $ spent, should be spent in a way that everyone can gets the opportunity to benefit from and gives everyone a reason to be encouraged and in a way that gets real value for money for the industry. When you mention the small folk who are likely to breed their broodmare,well they are the mares you are seeing being sold or sadly,disposed of and they are the ones that you are seeing less of at the studs. oh well,theres only so many times i can say i think some dumb decisions are being made. The only thing that working in nz's favour to a small degree, is some states of australia are doing poorly,so thats helping horse numbers here a little.

If we dig deeper into how effective the two reasons HRNZ gave,for justifying spending $750,000 on the 2 year old bonuses. If you have bred any horse, good enough to win a 2 year old race this season,then there is a very high probability that you would breed the dam again this year. It just makes sense that you would try and capitalise on the added value you may get from the dam having left a recent 2 year old winner. So i'm pointing out,if HRNZ had any sense,they should have realised the first of the two reasons,to encourage the breeders of the 2 year old winners,was not targeting anyone who may be in two minds as to whether they were going to bred. HRNZ,in effect,targeted those who would be breeding anyway.So the first of the 2 reasons hrnz gave,was in reality insignificant to those they target. Now to HRNZ's second stated reason. To reward breeders. Look at who they have rewarded. as i've pointed out,HRNZ have rewarded the likes of dean shannon and breckon farms the most,because they have bred so many 2 year old winners. They've rewarded the richest people,who are having sucess,the ones who would have the finances to breed there horses anyway. And if the richest people are saying they feel they need more financial help,,then what about those,who are not wealthy and have been telling HRNZ the same thing,then why don't they count. i'm in no way inferring anything that should diminsh the contribution of the likes of dean shannon or breckon farms or whoever the larger breeders may be.t I'm simply saying,i think HRNZ has spent $750,000 to achieve something,that was never going to get the results they said they would. I think people should just read, who and what, is coming out of HRNZ.I feel theres a pattern there.

Well,the bonus payments take many forms. You would think ,this would be a period in time,when every $ spent by HRNZ should be being evaluated for how effective,productive and the value of the returns on each dollar. So entain/HRNZ have had the $12,000 bonus payments for each 2 year old race. the purpose of those payments was "to encourage more people to start their 2 year olds and to reward owners and breeders". That was according tom mauro barsi from hrnz. Well,to me,i think its been a resounding failure. Why,well obviously anyone who follows harness racing has seen all the endless 5 and 6 horse races run throughout the season. Even now,when there should be plenty of 2 year olds running around,only canterbury can get a full field. This week we have 6 2 year old races with numbers of 5,6(2),7,8,10,11 and other with races with 2(2),3 2 year old starters. So an f for fail on the encourage more people to start their 2 year olds . so what about rewarding the owners so as to breed more horses. Well ,silence is the answer there. So i'm guessing the anecdotol evidence will prove correct.Numbers being bred are down. Hey,but the big man from entain,hes got a pocketfull with the bonuses hes won,so at least he doesn't have to dip into his big piggy bank if he wants to breed a few this year. Now,i'm not einstein,but the bonus 2 year old payments were never going to work because they were treating a symptom,never the cause. people who said they thought they would work,well ,as i say often,did they really believe that or were they just in reality looking after a small % of breeders,mostly those in the same circles. Now we have bonuses in other forms. that is bonuses to encourage people to start their horses in races worth big stakes. Well duh,aren't the very same people telling us how clever this is,the very same people who said we need to up the purses of the group races ,because by doing so we will get better,bigger fields. Well fellas,i'm confused,which one is it. Look,if paying $20,000 to the first non group one placed horse,in a race already worth $200,000,gets you another couple of starters,well is that really getting value for money. Then they may also pay the connections another $10,000 to get them to start in the invercargill cup,if they can run a place. Like i say,is that getting value for money spent. Will it even attract any new starters? Why not just make it a preferrential barrier draw or say you will deduct 5 points off their rating if unplaced or whatever.something which allows you to invest that $20,000 or $30,000 in a way that encourages many more starters and gives oppportunities to many,not just 1,to earn more. i'll give points for trying on the $20,000 chrsitain cullen bonus,but not many. people can agree with me,or not.I just think their has to be wiser fiscal management than what we are seeing.

Like i have said 100 times on this forum,what you have just said is the way a significant part of the people in the harness racing bubble think. for perspective,i say many don't think like that. I for one think, that people in harness racing for decades,at different points,have pushed the boundaries of what they can get away with as far as whats acceptable. the difference about inca,was that someone finally drew a line in the sand. what or who pre empted that,is incidental. It was always going to happen at some point. I knew it,i talked about it on the odd occasion. Not much as people just roll their eyes as if your anti harness racing. Well far from it actually.Others must have known it had to happen one day,surely. It just so happened,unfortunately for those involved,the stars aligned for them to carry not only their current,but past burdens of others pushing the boundaries.And unfortunately for those involved,this time,far more resources were used to establish wrong doing. So,for me,if you want to apportion blame,which everyone seems to want to do,then don't forget to start with the people whose actions(those charged) created enough evidence for the police to believe spending large amouts of $ on pursuing the investigation,was warranted. Thats my final comment about operation inca.

actually i find it interesting that they have finally named the race involved at palmerston north. I don't know how to,but someone should just put up the video and people can make up their own minds. the article says the police intercepted conversations between the pair. Well unless we know the exact wording of the conversations the police had recorded,its hard to make a judgment call either way,in my opinion.So,sitting here without that specific knowledge,the benefit of the doubt should apply. even the article the chief has posted seems to infer that money was made from a race being fixed,but how accurate is that article as race fixing would involve betting and it has always been reported betting was involved.But the $ amount quoted in the article, is the winning stake. i have to admit,having just watched the race replay and knowing one defendant was wall,its easy enough to guess who the unnamed party is.Its almost certain it would not be the winning driver. the thing i would say,having watched that race again,was something questionable which warranted the question on the night being asked by the stipes. to me,if i was a stipe,yes i would have asked questions around a certain drive,but moreso to remind a driver that your watching ,knowing that particular race video was insufficient to prove anything on its own. but therein,lies what i have always said,was why there was ever an operation inca. That is,the stipes weren't doing their jobs properly. Over the years,i've probably started half a dozen topics on examples of manawatu officiating stipes,seemingly watching races with the caps still on their binoculars. was the race in the article one of them,no. I get where you are coming from and agree in that the scale of the reaction by anyone who gets caught up in these things,whether of their own doing or not,seems overblown. But there can be no denying,people in harness racing live in an insular world that results in seemingly irrational magnification of some issues. Like,its not just a small % that seem to react like the world is caving in and thier future has forever changed,its a large %. How many times has the chief said hes closing a topic around matters mentioned in this thread because of that very reason. Its like people can't discuss reality without some sort of irrational response. But there is definetly a mental health phenomenon related specifically to racing around these matters..

It took a bit of extracting,but youv'e given me the answer that i was sure was there. that is,methven went out of their way to assist the kaikoura club run a successful meeting, by attracting greater numbers. In other words,methven always want to support those that support them,by paying good stakes, but after discussions with hrnz they did what they did. so,to me,thats yet another example of HRNZ pushing an agenda,in this case favoring kaikoura,to the detriment of the connections of horses that raced at the methven meeting. I mean,can't people tell who says they are on the their side,when in reality their actions say otherwise.

i agree. the way i see it,theres only one way to interpret HRNZ's focus. that is,lets invest industry funds in rewarding the high achievers as they are the showcase of the industry and greater participation will follow. and lets divert funds from the areas that generate a profit and use them to subsidise the areas that run at a loss to ensure they keep going. To me thats HRNZ's strategy going forward under current and recent past leadership. I've previously discussed all the flaws in their strategy. No point going over them again as it would take too long. But like i said recently,in my opinion i think the industry have leadership who simply, while well meaning,are just not very clever. And i know,a lot of people agree with me. You know,you can tell people that you are there to promote grass roots participation and that decisions will be made to benefit the vast majority.But if your actions don't match your words,then its inevitable you will no longer be believed.Trust,respect,confidence in the words spoken evaporates. People just start thinking,do they really believe what they are saying,do they really think i'm that stupid,or,like me say, maybe they are just not very clever. as forrest gumps mother used to say,stupid is as stupid does.

no its not. Every element of the definition ofthe word propoganda exists if you read or listen to what we are being fed.I can be more specific if you like. You know you talk about personalities and people you respect in the north island,as if we have criticised them or undermined them. Yet nothing brodie or i have written on this topic has ever been negative or detrimantal towards industry participants as relates to the number of starters or the auckland clubs financal woes. when brodie talks about strength in his posting on this topic,its very obviously talking about horse and industry participant numbers. all you are doing is deflecting from facts presented relating to horse numbers,public following and financial matters. I guess you don't talk about the subject matter we talk about because the numbers don't lie,so deflecting is what your left with. when you say its not irrational to help out. i agree. We disagree on the rationality of the help being offered. I believe you are basing your point of view around emotional thoughts,obviously influenced by your lifes experiences involving north island harness racing and the personalities involved. i do love the fact that you are still so passionate about north island harness racing and we need to hear from people like yourself. All i'm saying,is decisions have to be made on data and facts and balance sheets. I believe its wrong for you to infer that the very people you talk about,will be worse off if decisions made are based on the things i've just mentioned,when logic says they will be better off. Short term thinking will undermine long term survival.

Many,like myself consider bit of a yarn a tool to balance what i would call the 'propoganda",that comes out of hrnz and often the media.A means of facilitating our voices,of sorts. Propoganda is defined as"communication used to influence or persuade, to further an agenda which may not be objective, and is selectively promoting facts to encourage a perception,often by using reptition and language which produces an emotional rather than rational response". in this case the subject matter is the auckland trotting club. We have been told repeatedly by hrnz and the harness racing media of the importnace and significance of auckland and the necessity to subsidize auckland harness racing ,for the betterment of harness racing in nz as a whole. In other words we are constanly being subjected to propoganda to further the auckland agenda, which we view as irrational. so the likes of brodie,or me,and others chip away at providing what we believe is balance. So,for me, that is what i consider to be the answer to the question you pose.

This weeks stakes at methven for non win horses i think you could view in 2 different ways. It highlights Methven can often reward those that support them, if they put their minds to it. So well done to them this week. but also,isn't methvens varying stakes an example of double standards of how they treat the akaroa club and the kaikoura clubs? Then again,maybe no one,apart from those who won the non winners races in november actually care.I don't think punters care,hrnz obviously doesn't. Maybe its all just another symptom of an industry with double standards,which i often point out.

There was a story on the hrnz website discussing this years turnovers. it noted turnover was down from 2.53 million in 2023 to 2.265 this year. it quoted brad steele,head man at hrnz,who said they had modelling which said it can be a 3 million dollar turnover 2 day meeting. then he went on to say the numbers were ok,but they needed to attract more and that putting a camber on the bend was one way of doing so. So where did the modelled 3 million figure come from. Sounds like a john allen type prediction. In my opinion this is just more,pick a figure from the air,talk that you get from current leadership. And where is the evidence that putting a camber on the bend would help attract any more starters or generate any more turnover. Thats like saying,the nz cup being worth a million,instead of $631,000,will generate more turnover. Like,you can have the same field,but the stake is higher so punters will bet more.There are people at hrnz that think like that. Just for the record the 2022 nz trotting cup was worth $631,000 and turned over 2.1 million whereas the 2024 was worth 1,000,000 and turned over 1.8 million.Both had 2 starters from australia.Actually no horse that started in the cup 2 years ago,started this year. i mean,do people actually believe some of the things they read coming out of hrnz and do those at hrnz actually believe it? Kaikoura may be HRNZ's focus,but what about what they allowed the methven club to do ,when methven shafted those that support them at their just a couple of days before kaikoura. That was very poor form by the methven club,yet methven do it every year. Just look at the stakes this week at methven when they have to compete against motukarara for horses. Methven non win stakes 25% more than their meeting in november. reality is thats yet another example of HRNZ talking the talk,thinking people are stupid enough not to realise that to gain something often comes with a price to others. Maybe hrnz is right and they can fool a lot of people with all their positive talk. HRNZ went full crow on the turnover figures for this years nz cup meeting. Fair enough,it was great to see the increase that was good if you compared them to 2023. But for perspective, then the 2023 figures had been down on the 2022 figures. The 2022 cup meeting turnover was actually greater than 2024.

Greg o'connor in great tipping form as well today.8 from 9 winners so far..Making it look easy....

a couple of hot favorites but most paid around $4-5 which means they would probably have been paying around $6-7 had he not tipped them.

whale will be smiling this week as his 12 whale watch horses, have resulted in 8 wins and 3 placings.Hes certainly in hot tipping form currently. Hes selected Milou in the next at motukarara,to get the full house.

Well you had to laugh. Or perhaps if you backed robyns playboy maybe swear a little. But the hrnz website highlighted M Hurrells drives and trackside interviewed him early on in the day. Then greg o'connor again repeated the tactics Mr hurrell said he would be using early in the race. That was go forward and look for the lead. I'm guessing it was a result of all that publicity and confidence that punters heavily supported the horse late. in the first attempted start ,which was a false start,iit looked like mr hurrelll intended to go back,no can't be i thought. Then blow me down and knock me over with a feather, at the second attempt he indeed very heavily restrains robyns playboy ,all the way back to last.There he sat,under a strong hold and there he was at the finish,still under a hold as the horse who had raced behind him at the back improved around him and stuck ion well for 3rd. i don't think anyone was expecting to see those tactics. The moral of the story,well i'm not sure. Maybe don['t read any drivers thoughts in the media and keep trackside on mute. i do see the funny side of it all,even though i had a wee investment on the horse based on the driver using the tactics he said he would pre race. oh well,on to the next race i suppose.

actually the whole china export thing i find rather perplexing. There was a 3 part story written for the paulick report,published just 2 months ago,about the expanding connection between the american thoroughbred industry and the chinese. it was very interesting,but if you think about what was said in that series of articles,while harness racing wasn't discussed ,it left me with more questions than possible answers. Like questions about understanding the thinking of the chinese. Comparethere approach to growing the thoriughbred industry there and how that doesn't mirror the same thing with harness horses being purchased from here. Like obviously nz and australia have the advantage of the free trade agreement and australia in particular, apparently spend a lot of time and money promoting the purchase of yearlings ,by the chinese at their australian sales. But like i say,from the articles written in that paulick report,you have to ask if the chinese are genuinely interested in establishing the harness industry over there,doesn't it make you question,if they are genuine,look at who they are purchasing here and the prices they are paying, given how much they will be spending on getting the horses back to china. like its a whole different approach from what they are doing with their thoroughbreds. like,the most obvious is,why have they mostly been buying older broodmares when they are supposed to be buying racing stock. I know the most recent batch on the export list,as they include a lot of 3 and 4 year old mares,but that hasn't been the case previously. why haven't they,like their thoroughbred counterparts ,been buying yearlings and why haven't the sales companies here or in australia thought it worthwhile to promote chinese interest to any degree in the yealing sales held over here. seemingly the americans should have an advantage with the thoroughbreds as most tracks in china aren't turf,but are dirt type tracks. so doesn't that make you wonder,what about the harness tracks and exactly where are they and what surfaces are they. theres heaps of other questions you could ask with no apparent readily known answers. Thats why i personally think the whole china export thing has a lot of mystery around it,with not only possible good,but also bad scenarios that may play out. Maybe the saying,ignorance is bliss,is the approach some sellers are taking as they can't possibly know tyhe exact use or the fate of those they are selling.

From what i've heard from a couple of sellers,its up to about $10,000 for a mare and around $20-25,000 for the right stallion.I guess it varies a bit and i wouldn't guarantee those amounts,but thats what i've heard. personally i still think its very questionable the future use in china of horses sold there.Just remember the other uses for broodmares for in that part of the world and remember what they did with all the donkeys they bought from africa. But i can understand nz people selling, as many of the horses going there are unlikely to be bred from and some of their owners saw no future in breeding from them here given how they perceived the future of the industry here as relates to how perceived they were considered of little relevance.

i see on the other channel they have someone giving a breakdown of stakes paid/turnover/funding. thats always been interesting to read and of course is relevant and that person is saying tonights manawatu races will most likely run at a loss. well thats all true and good. But Manawatu seems to be an easy target and is cherry picked while giving other areas of the industry a free pass. to me there is a double standards being applied by many. (not referring to brodie there,even though he did start this topic, as hes pretty consistent). but to give an example of what i mean by double standards. where's the analysis of the data,for what must surely be the most uneconomic,special interest/ preferential treatment driven sector of the industry, stakes /returns for 2 year old racing. come on,for the first 8 months of the year we had 2 year old races with mostly 5 or 6 starters running for stakes in excess of other graded races with another $12,000 industry funded bonuses on top of that, paid out.Whats the data for the first 8 months time frame? Like i said earlier,manawatu needs to be compared with other areas returns whether it be geographical or whether it be to 2 year old racing. i agree with those that highlight the importance of financially underperforming areas of the industry.On the face of it,those on social media sites like this, seem far more willing to discuss the significance and the consequences thereof. personally i believe there are workable,province specific business models which could ensure each areas continued participation.I ,along with others have discussed that before. But the way i see it is this. Industry leaders are just dumb. simple as that.Just not very clever. The best example of that was the way they treated the horse utilisation report that many people from different areas of the industry poured time and energy into providing possible solutions/improvements to industry problems. I thought it was full of common sense and from people in touch with reality. But,seemingly because of that,HRNZ have not enacted most of the report. You know i was talking to someone nopt that long ago. He was telling me he was talking to someone in power and the topic of the handicapping rating system came up. He was told by this person that if he wasn't happy with it,to sell his horse to australia. Basically give the game away. I was also told about another part of this persons conversation,which i laughed at because i thought he wasn't being serious,as it seemed such a dumb thing to say. But when i laughed the bloke i was talking to me said,i'm telling you,this is what was said.

it really has to be assessed on turnovers you would think. and in comparison with other clubs their turnovers aren't too bad. i didn't really look much at the entain pools yesterday although i did notice they had a jackpot first 4 of $1300 from the first race which resulted in an $11,000 first 4 pool in the following race. I've previously referred to those as a magnet for generating turnover and have suggested how that could be maximised,although i doubt they ever will be. also the tabcorp pools are ok as well when compared with other nz race meetings. For example they had a $9370 win pool in one of the races last night and another win pool greater then entain/nz tab had.Obviously those had the time slot/sky coverage thing working for them i often refer to. so the point i make brodie is,you refer to financially viable race meetings. Well palmerstomn north dioesn't underperform in comparison to other meetings as you suggest. Meanwhile i was reading The breeders email they send out. it had an interview with andrew grant who owns a handful of mares ,but doesn't think he will breed any this year. he laments the empty paddocks he currently sees at nevele r stud where he does some work. he said"i understand that things change and some things will never be the sameagain,but with all this top end funding recently announced,where is the support for the middle and lower end market,he lamented". well,90% of the industry are asking the same question as mr grant.

There needs to be a strategic plan which sets out the pathway for the continuation of harness racing in all areas of nz which currently have harness racing.Manawatu included. if HRNZ have such a realistic future workable plan,then why aren't they promoting it. so one assumes they don't and that indicates a failure of leadership. things can't stay being managed as they currently are. The kicking the can down the road approach until industry leadership have moved on to new jobs or roles in 3-5 years time is not a strategy. every month is a month closer to the time of reckoning that is approaching on the horizon as time moves closer to that point. the way i see it,harness racing is extremely susceptible to the domino effect. for example,manawatu participants have an impact on cambridges viability,if cambridge is impacted that impacts auckland or vice versa. In a lot of ways,the variable of which domino is the first to trigger the flow on effect, underlies the importance of each domino. to me it just comes down to industry leadership,or lack thereof depending on your view of things.

southland harness racing now provides a betting product along the lines of auckland racing. And we all know punter paticipation in auckland harness is declining. The smaller fields are the reason for that. and the reasons for the smaller fields seem multiple,and its very likely things will only get worse. Reasons like the unfair handicapping system. For example the horse TED,a 2 win horse from 3 starts,would be amongst the top 10 or so rated horses in southland.Imagine owning that horse,after 2 starts, having to line up against the highest rated horses in southland just to get a start.They should sell that horse before they break its will by running in races like that 2400m 2.54race that it ran in last start. At least they didn't line it up in that nz record race last week which was its only option to start in that day. Then look at the non win horses who are rated r40. Mostly they don't have enough non win horses in that grade and the lower rating non win horses have to run against the higherr 50 non win horses each week.Same with the 1 win r 35 horses. The type of horses who once had a chance to earn money in the lowest of the r35 races,now have to run against better horses than they did a year ago due to the handicapping system.You just don't see them anymore. then look at the age of the current participants in southland. It appears 3/4 are over 50,possibly more.Probably half over 60.Also take note that whereas once families had sons and daughters carry on from where their parents left off,now next to none seem to be participating. look at the smaller number of horses qualifying. look at the lack of females involved in the sport down there when compared with some other areas. The increase in participation by women has masked to a degree the decline in male participation elsewhere. look at the cost of getting there for canterbury horses. Whereas once canterbury horses owners received a travel subsidy to attend,now they don't. and of course southland don't appear to be considered of much importance when compared to Auckland. The big hole that exists in auckland is being filled by hrnz funded stake increases,but southland gets next to nothing. Hrnz would rather increase stakes to auckland and try and get owners to pay the cost of travel to there,than provide the same incentive to go to southland. Then of course theres the other reasons that apply elsewhere in nz,but especially southland like land values being pushed so high by things like dairy conversions in the last 20 years which has made it next to impossible for young people to see a future,but even moreso has led to the rapid decline in small time trainers that were once the backbone of southland harness racing. Many decisions being made by HRNZ leadership seem to be hurting southland harness racing. HRNZ need to address the many issues southland have,but is HRNZ capable of that.Thats very debateable. My thoughts are they need to look at shortening the racing season in southland.Not only do the numbers point to this being inevitable,but its also so cold in southland at certain times of the year which effects participation.Thats what used to happen when they had far greater numbers participating in southland. Had HRNZ done something like i suggested and invested the forbury money in setting up some type of trainingfacilty in canterbury then southland trainers could have come up with small teams and supported canterbury harness racing or aucklnad harness racing in their off season .Satelite stables sort of thing for 3 or 4 months of the year. However the way things are with training facilities disappearing and racecourses mostly full then ,they may not find it easy to find a place to stay.

borrisokane. Interesting how some owners come up with names. I suppose its named after the small town in ireland.i think i heard or read that somewhere one time. I wonder if the breeders or owners who named him took a liking to the place when visiting it.Who knows. its in the province of munster and munster of course is famous in rugby for being the first irish team to ever beat the all blacks. I remember that,even though i was just a kid.From memory thats when they used to have the mid week games and we saw them on tv the next night.The all blacks back then were the first side to win the grand slam. They seemed to have much tougher and more touring games scheduled back then,but lost just the one game on the tour. Graham mourie even played in that game.The Munsters captain famously found out after the game his father had died suddenly during the game. I see they made the all blacks work hard in the recent match. charlie sheens grandmother was from borrisokane. Maybe that explains some things,maybe not. anyway,back to the horse,i remember it starting off very well for bruce negus and sheree tomlinson used to drive it then. Then it started breaking and they put big spreaders on. Bruce negus has been able to get a lot of horses going well through how he does the spreaders. I'm not sure whether he sets them up any different,but he has had good success with horses who have gone to his stable. but negus was obviously having trouble with borrisokanes breaking in its races and then regan todd got him and he also put spreaders on,but obviously came to think that borrsokane went better without them and thats how hes raced recently and hes certainly going very well. The head on replays do show he moves one front leg in a bit and it gets closer than normal to the other front leg,but Todds obviously worked it all out.

i started a thread about mr todd about 8 months ago. to be fair i think i should say that i agree with others on here who recently have been saying very positive things about his training abilities in recent times. obviously he has a couple of star horses in his team,but 18 months ago i used to think across the board ,his horses were inconsistent and tended not to maintain form for long.That was my assessment anyway. But in the last year or so,in my opinion, i think all his horses have been perfoming far more consistently and punters now have every confidence in him having them ready to reproduce consistent form. That applies not only to his good horses but each horse he trains.Thats what helps punters and the public gain confidence and he deserves much credit for that.

As i've mentioned before,given the well known, ongoing current plight of the auckland club,doesn't it raise questions about the quality of decisions being made by those calling the shots at HRNZ. i mean,why would HRNZ be investing so much of industry funds,of which there is only a finite supply,into ensuring the auckland trotting club continues at alexandra park. HRNZ continue to say that because such a large % of the population live in auckland,that racing must remain in auckland and that aleaxandra park need funding stakes wise to ensure that happens. doesn't that all seem rather foolhardy and a strategy that is fraught with risks to the industry as a whole.

to me there is good drone coverage after the race is over,especially replays of the home straight drone shots,but the drone coverage of the start of races, in real time,just shows a lack of understanding of what a significant proportion of the viewers want. i thought it would go without saying that if you have a bet on a horse you want two things 1)to be able to follow your horses progress at the start of a race,which is such an important part of any race.You can do that with a drone shot, but you really have to concentrate hard and focus solely on the horse based on the barrier position its drawn. 2)a significant % of punters also want to be able to assess in the first 200m ,not only the position of the horse they back,but also the position of others they may take in multiples or the main rivals to the horse they have backed. with the drone coverage you are unable to do that for the first 200m,which in effect is 10% of most races at addington. if anyone put the race coverage on pause having seen only the first 200m in drone coverage,they would not accurately be able to tell you what positions each horse is in. They could if there was no drone coverage.If you don't believe me just try it next time. why can't those in control of the coverage understand the above point.Why frustrate a significant % of your audience, with in my view inappropraitely timed drone coverage Obviously some people quite like the drone coverage,but i personally know of no one myself that prefers it at the start of races..