the galah

Just out of interest ,here are the win pools on tabcorp compared to our tab for todays trots. they are the tote pools and don't include ff . Nz then (tabcorp) in brackets.6836 (6793),5290 (3516),6352 (2750),8820 (5265),6647 (7336),6255 (6320),,8429 (10740). Exotic pools seemed well supported overall as well. So the point i could make is racing midweek in canterbury does get good overall punter participation if they are run in the right time slots. It seems HRNZ wasted the opportunity to generate more industry income by not programming the bulk of the extra meetings announced recently, in canterbury.

Yes but it did go away but just looked like it resented being taken a hold of at that trial. It did settle at least 100m behind the 2nd last horse in the trial,yet finished under a nice hold 3 lengths off the winner at the finish.i thought it looked a next up winner myself as long as it got plenty of room early. $1.90 wasn't the right price for me ,but well done to those who backed it.

The hrnz website not working again but pretty sure i saw him put in an impressive trial a week or so ago. Looked a next up winner. However i was like you and thought its odds were too short given its not foolproof and was off ur over a sprint.

what i find confusing is how the handicapper gives some horses more rating points for wins than others . Mounga is an example of a horse receiving winning rating penalties at the lower end. consistency builds trust in the system. Handicappers discretion applied inconsistently doesn't.

Dave di somma once did an interview with the canadian owner ,mike tanev and discussed the name aardie. i just watched it again to answer your question. He must have played a bit of baseball and his mates nicknamed him aardie because of his big nose. So aardie is the owners nickname. Anyway,there used to be a cartoon series which featured a character called aardie the aardvark. The aardvark is an actual animal with a tongue thats a foot long and obviously a big nose that eats termites and other insects and comes out at night and is from africa.They occasionally are shown on those widelife in africa shows.

Are you letting HRNZ leadership off the hook? No doubt just trying to be diplomatic i suppose as youv'e mentioned that before. But we shouldn't stop reminding ourselves,Phil holden,head of HRNZ, clearly stated in his press release that the new dates were a result of HRNZ "working in close partnership"..."Joint strategic plan"...this calendar and the upcoming strategic initiatives.. designed to breath fresh life and confidence into harness racing". Clearly HRNZ is promoting the extra dates in the north island at the expense of the south island, as being a joint decision. joint meaning they shared in the decision making for the extra meetings. so my point is the first thing that should be addressed is the expectation of common sense decision making by HRNZ. Entain you can understand where they are coming from. so when you say "they(HRNZ) have only 2 real weapons in their armoury",i think you need to include basic common sense decison making in there as well,really its the number 1 weapon. Obviously your 2 points are very important and from what you write,perhaps hrnz needs someone with your common sense involved in decision making..

This is another subject where clearly theres inconsistenies regularly being applied. Anyone who follows the scatching penalties must realise there is 1 rule somedays and another the next. The use of exceptional circumstances is applied when they want to, but not always. Just depends whcih way the wind is blowing from my observations. Its a topic i've observed for a long time now. The lastest example is millwood godess. Its been scratched from tomorrows races yet has been accepted for the races on friday,drawn 1. i suppose the connections think it is more of a chance now its drawn 1. So how is scratching because you have a better draw an exceptional circumstance. Getting a good draw one day and not another is not an exceptional occurence. Its a farce to say it is. And why can't it work in reverse. a trainer scatches on the friday to run on the wednesday because they have a better draw on wednesday. i've seen it before,same reason, but a different application of the rules normally applied.

yes the ratings sysyem is a complete joke in how harshly non win horses are rated. But how can the handicappers possibly justify the inconsistent treatment they give horses that win. A 2 win trotter getting penalised 8 points,other 1 win horses sometimes 7 or 8,then well perfformed horses like mounga only 6. It would be a fairer system if they just picked the numbers out of a hat.

So what do horses that win get in rating penalties these days. The conditions of the country cup hasn't changed,so what did mounga get rehandicapped after its last start win. Mounga has had 15 start for 7 wins,2 3rds,2 4ths and 4 unplaced. of the 7 wins,mounga will have been rehandicapped for 6 wins as 1 was penalty free. then it would have dropped 1 point for each of its unplaced runs. No ratings change for the 3rds and 4ths. so in effect it started off on r 50,then assuming its been re rated even a discounted 6 points for its wins(most get 7 or 8 points) then that means 50 plus 36 =86 -4 (umplaced) +82. so how does it end up rated only 79 ,thus allowing it to start off only 10m in the country cups final. Its hard to find a similar horse to compare it to, as the ratings system is so utterly messed up that horses who win early in their careers don't seem to stay around much anymore and who can blame them. But the closest example i could find was the south island trotter Moment of what. Its had 8 starts for 2 wins,2 2nds,2 4ths and 2 unplaced. Going by its current rating,it must have been given 8 penalty points for its latest win. as its r56. 8 points,clearly more than what mounga gets given for his wins.. To me moungas rating seems to have a bad odour to it. The whole ratings system is driving people out of the sport,and this appears to an example of an inconsistent application of the ratings penalties. If anyone can explain how mounga hasn't been treated as others are,then please inform me.Has this horse not been given preferantial treatment? Harness racing has a lot of issues of its own making and the inconsistent policies of the handicappers appear one of them. Is it who you know that the handicappers factor in?

heres the main 6 ways they do affordability checks. geo affordability-where you live. wrong post code more likely to be looked at. application data-whos applied for a loan type thing vulnerability data-do you have the wrong characteristics. In nz the profile of problem gamblers could be called racist and sexist,but i suppose britain isn't nz mortality data-to identify gamblers using dead peoples identity. property data-seems to be linked to geo- average house prices and assets of residents of where you live derogatory financial scores-seems to relate to the credit ratings you have. Imagine all the above crap as being possible factors in how they decide whether you can have a bet or not.bureaucracy gone mad.What a strange way the world is heading. All about controlling the sheep. Like brodie said,nz had its first taste of it with the previous government,luckily we are not on the same level as the likes of britain,yet.

entain said a couple of months ago that regulatory changes as relates to this issue in britain and around the world would have a 40 million pound impact on earnings for 2024. entains net gaming revenue in the uk was down 6% last year,reflecting the regulatory changes. entain had apparently put their own systems in place in anticipation of the proposed changes,with many confused punters as a result.. Entains chief financial officer admiited"its even hard for us to articulate our approach and for our customer service people who are picking up the phone to confused customers. Its hard for them to explain why they have been sent an alert or why they are being asked for bank statements and so on". as mentioned earlier,a survey found half of those customers who had been asked for affordability check information had said they would no longer bet with them or would stop betting. Racing industry people are saying all these changes will have a major impact on the viabilty of the british racing industry. But don't worry,the british can spend whatever they like on other frivilous things. just looked up what they spend on the national lotteries. it only pays out 57c in the pound,which meant in 2022 the average household lost 121 pounds,3.44 billion all up.Government won't touch that. last year the uk govt got 982 million pounds in lottery duties. Just an example of big brother and what hypocrites and fake those that run britain are these days.

It seems the gambling commission in england has decided the affordabilty checks will be introduced in 2 stages. Starting off with credit checks to be undertaken if anyone deposits more than 500 pounds into an account a month from august,that reducing to 150 pounds a month in february next year.The credit checks to be done on publicly available data.Then the next step will be for the credit information to be gathered from the likes of credit reference agencies. apparently it is a about giving those customers a credit risk rating. The gambling commission is claiming the punters won't notice it as much and betting agencies will end up with less information due to the changes they have just made.They are saying now customers don't have to give all their documents to prove they can afford to lose 150 a month,instead that assessment will be done by the credit reference agencies. But then again,many are pointing out,that even if you are well off,but are one of those people who don't have many references for credit scores because you have never booked up on credit when making purchases,well you will come into the category that will be looked at closer. Then,you currently have in ireland some legislation which some are saying will badly impact racing there.Again to do with so called gambling protection. Seems the irish government is intent on introducing a ban on gambling being advertised between 5.30 am and 9pm.Going by the articles witten,it seems the racing channels racing tv and sky racing are saying it will no longer be vialble for them to broadcast racing in ireland. Racing ireland leadership are currently saying it won't come to that,but it seems people over there are very worried as if racing channels do disappear,they are worried it will impact betting and ownership. A recent a survey/report found it could cost irish racing 30m pounds in 5 years and the irish government 150 million in 5 years.

her owner bought her off a gavel house on line auction for $30,500 when she was a yearling. i think i read he had sent her to australia because he felt they may be able to train her a bit different to help her soreness. if you looked at her race here,especially when she warmed up,you could tell she was sore somewhere.I was always surprised she wasn't vet checked here but she sure raced well and really only got beaten when she hung bad, you would assume because of the soreness.Still looks that way in australia,just not as bad.Maybe shes still able to race there due to a combination of a better medication to numb the pain,different training and bigger track.

Hard to believe mach shard paid so much after being so dominant last week. just believe a great horse. Muscle mountain very courageous in defeat.. just believe best trotter from aussie to race here for some time. high quality nights racing all night.

i wonder how installing the facial recognition technology in the 100 tab outlets they talked about is going. Have you noticed any bells and whistles going off when you've been to a tab lately brodie.

In my opinion,theres a major problem with HRNZ leaderships understanding of what will lead harness racing onto the path of future financial stability. I have always understood that history has shown that the most successful businesses are those who exploit existing assets and financial capabilities over trying to explore new income sources. sort of like saying,if your going to look for growth,stick with whats proven to work and don't go looking in investing in areas that aren't proven. It should be a basic principle that HRNZ should have when making any decisions. Its just common sense and logical. TAB,this idea you and entain and HRNZ have about nz harness racing growth being linked to aucklands population base, is like trying to invent the wheel. But to be fair. How about this. Lets see entain produce data in a way that everyone can understand. How about graphs. Graphs which differentiate between the north and south island,but that can be transposed to show the comparisons. Graphs showing things like proposed number of races to be run,actual races that end up being run. average field sizes,average start per horse,etc. Priofitability of the new meetings,gross betting revenues and margins. In reality,if they really have put any thought into these extra north island meetings,all the predicted estimates and returns should already have been assessed. Then once ita been going for 6 months,put those up on the hrnz website for all to see and judge. Transparency is the key to gaining trust of those whose income relies on the viabilty of decisions being made. Then ,if the decision makers have got it right,then everyone can see well done,but when ,in all likelihood the data will show they got it totally wrong by putting their focus on extra meetings in the north island over the south island,well then everyone can look at the data and say,we demand answers and accountability for poor decisions made.

Great stats and to me is a true reflection of where things are at. decisions should be made based on information like that.There may have been only 450 people surveyed,but the only thing i would question was the accuracy of the ownership. I'm guessing maybe ownership in that survey included numbers with small % in syndicate shares. They are still owners but large syndicates can distort ownership figures if you include them. Like 100 people owning 1 horse,is still only 1 horse. The only thing that made no sense was when you said at the end that you can understand why entains focus should be on the north island. Its like you were standing on your head when you said that given the stats you just quoted. Entain is about a betting product is it not. Using those stats, there are 3 times more horses racing in the south island than the north island. the south island makes 10% on gross betting margin,the north island losses 8%. What your saying is that entain and hrnz are well aware they have chosen to give us much more of the harness racing product that sustains a significant loss and has far less numbers to provide that product.. The only way that their decision makes any sense would be for someone to say hrnz and entain are working to destroy harness racing. Then there would be logic in what they have done.

I agree with what you have said. I never said big money 2 year old races are likely to decrease. I agree connections of 2 year olds should have been beneficiaries in scale similar to all the other sectors as regards the boost in stakes as a result of the entain deal. But,if you want specific examples of a pointless waste of increased funding on 2 year old racing,i refer you to the diamond creek farm 2 year old race at invercargill. Its stake was increased form $60,000 2 years ago to $110,000 this year. So they gave an extra $50,000 to a race to promote the 2 year olds. But what did the extra $50,000 achieve. More starters,higher turnover,more media exposure,increased breeding numbers? No,it got them nothing extra. Did they get even 1 more starter because of the extra $50,000. 2022,2023 and 2024 all had 8 starters. Now if HRNZ had plenty of money to give away then sure,but they don't so they need to be making common sense calls. Then you have the emphasis on the large 2 year old bonuses. It was not a common sense call because where are the benefits to warrant the 1.5 million $ spend over 2 years? At most you were going to get maybe 40 recipients of the bonuses each year. Mostly wealthy people who could afford to breed in the future if they wanted.Those type of people already know they are not in it for the money. i'm not saying they shouldn't be rewarded,but isn't it obvious you should be prioritisng retaining breeders across the board. You can overspend today,but you can guarantee you will pay for it in the not too distant future. Thats going to happen. wheres the realistic future thinking?

the obvious question then is why aren't there more 2 year olds being raced currently. And i think the obvious answer to that is,its far more complex than people will race their horses as 2 year olds as they are wanting quick returns because of high costs.Thats a very simplistic way of viewing the issue,but it does demonstrate how HRNZ and entain view things. Again,i would point out the obvious,whats the point in anyone racing a 2 year old when you know its no chance of winning or earning.What does anyone gain from getting well beaten when racing against the best 2 year olds. Despite the current bonuses and focus stakes wise on 2 year old racing,its looking like its made not one scrap of difference. I don't have the stats,but all you have to do is look at the very smalll numbers running to work out the obvious. Like i have said and predicted,the only time you will get more horses running because of the bonuses will be later in the year.I didn't think that i was being over clever when i predicted that as i thought it obvious,but obviously the decision makers couldn't see it before it happened. Its just like the thing about them currently considering rehandicapping winners of 2 year old races back to be rated as non winners when they turn 3. Again,i think thats another obvious decision that will do more harm that good if you want to keep people participating. But hey,theres hardly anyone left now. If that does happen,all that will do is see smaller non win fields at tracks like addington as no one except thehandful of big stables will run against them. Then you will have officials and hrnz going on about ...why don't people run at addington with their lower grade horses.

hopefully thats just a teething issue. I suppose they are not differentiating between the gallops and harness tracks yet. Probably someone has just not got the inputting right or needs to create another category or something. Hopefully doesn't take them long to sort out.

I've never had sportsbet,but now i'm getting used to this new website and i'm really growing to like it.Not that i have an account. I've done the ..turn off the markets i don't want to see...which is a good thing as i'm not interested in 99% of the sports betting. They now have the start times coming up on the phone,so my wife is happy and she can even set an alarm to be notified however many minutes before start time that she may want. she tells me the new app responds quicker as well. The other thing she would like to see is,in the results,she would like what time each race was run in,like they used to. I think once people get used to all the new things and adapt to using whatever it is that interests them,then i think its going to be viewed as a real positive move.

That alumni harness racing show gives an interesting insight in harness racing in some parts of the usa. Last weeks show again had the indianna official on. Turns out he belives it was no coincidence that he was terminated after making a complaint against his boss. She had sent him a text with photos of her underwear and asked would he like them at the end of his bed.He thought thatjust a tad inapproriate. Also,he went on to list examples of how the indianna racing commission boss gets rid of other employees(sacks), who bring information about wrongdoing involving people she prefers not to penalise or do anything to. Then he went on and listed how the lady in charge swept things under the carpet if it involved high profile persons including possible drug violations,plus jobs for her friends,conflicts of interst in those adjudicating,drunk steward (twice) that they just ignored and said carry on .

Interesting article on harnesslink this week. One of the things it highlights ,is something i've highlighted before on other related topics regarding 2 year old racing. Entain appear to be pushing the 2 year old racing for 2 reasons. 1)they believe that is where people will invest next. I suppose it makes sense as everyone wants a quick return on their investment,and these days aren't looking for the horses that will be around a bit longer and which in reality keep the sport going. 2) self interest of those who are pushing and making the decisions to pay the bonuses and subsidised stakes. Whether people want to ignore it or not.Its true. The decision makers are looking after themselves. Classic example.Montana park,run by the boss of entain focuses on horses who run early. So they want to earn as much money as they can early and if they aren't considered good enough,are moved on. How do they earn the most money. Give them lots of bonuses and disproportinately high stakes. The phelan/purdon training partnership in 2022 trained 42 winners,16 2yo of whcih 9 were montana park in 2023 again 42 winner,15 2 year old,8 montana park. This year 27 so far,5 2.yo. and 4 montana park. No wonder entain want to focus on promoting 2 year old racing. Who own the other 2 year old winners and bonuses winners. are they part of the group who pushed for the bonuses. Like i said. Just telling it as it is.

been to the tab and the option numbers are shown on the printouts they have of the fields on their wall.Hopefully they get them put on the website.

Still no ff option numbers on website. So does anyone know what the ff option numbers are today for addington? say for race 1 as an example?