the galah

They may not want you betting blind,but thats what you have to do. Or not bet. Its hard to believe a power outage could be at fault as its gone on most of the day. Open an account with the nsw tab. If you do,they have most of the recent videos of each horse in each race.They seem to be taking betting on all the races from nz harness on a saturday at the moment. They can be a pain to contact if you have a query though as they never answer their phones or emails. Some of their pools aren't that much but their win pools always get to at least $2,000 and a couple today were just under $6000.If a trifecta or first 4 jackpots they can get over $3000 in those pools.

Yes peter profit has been saying for 2 or 3 months now that seaton grima has the same magic as jason grimson.He writes articles on him ,just as he does on jason grimson.To give him credit,peter profit recognised early on in seaton grimas recent success that he too was now a magic man. Grima used to be a regular driver for many of grimsons horses. I see it was he who kept the speed frantic when parked in the race that golden bay won tonight in 1.49. His stopped late in the race but i guess when you have the magic you try and run the rest into the ground tactics wise. Looking at how horses race at menagle,it seems there is a handful of friends who all can improve any horse of any other trainer.Its been that way for a wee while. Anyway,i guess it just speeds up the demise of harness racing over there. Rival,honest trainers,surely must be getting out of the game when they see how poor they are results wise in comparison with the magic trainers.Either that or join the magic train.

just turned the tv on,saw race 1 at menagle golden bay running . 1.49 this week.Mr grimson working his magic.

Maybe,but i used to bet on a couple of the dog tracks over there and got to the point where i started to write the prices down that were shown when it said tote closed on the website and i used to then write down the prices of those placed that paid a dividend.And there was a distinct regular pattern that 90% of placegetters dividends were reduced when it came to the final dividend from tote close. It was amazing that there was a pattern that every roughie at tote close that ran in the money always paid a reduced price.I remember showing my records to someone as i believed it was dodgy.I only used to bet at a couple of tracks,but gave up totally because of my suspicions. I always thought it would be easy enough to rort with the dog races often lasting under 20 seconds. Just need an inside man.My theory anyway

Its funny you say that as i had a similar theory about the australian dogs early on in the commingling of the pools. I used to look at the tote dividends when they closed then look at the final dividends when they were confirmed. For a period of a few months it was like every dog that ran somewhere dropped in price after tote close. Favorites ,outsiders ,if they paid a dividend,theywere the 3 dogs that dropped in price after tote close.I was convinced it was dishonest in some way and guessed it had to be an inside job somewhere with the aussie tab somehow. I guessed someone was getting bets on after the finish of the dogs.

I thought thats what most people did and was a personal choice of punters to do that instead of a multi.Thats why there is % betting.But i get what gammalite is saying as well. What doesn't make any sense is when the tab is telling punters in one breath to take multis instead and in the next breath saying the justification for canning the pick 6 is having the money tied up for too long. I mean if you take a multi,your money is tied up until the final result of each leg of the multi.In fact in reality if someone was taking a 6 race multi,in all probability they are going to pick the best 6 bets for the night over the whole meeting. It may start in race 1 and end in race 11. Tying up punters money for 11 races,instead of the 6 with a pick 6. The tab treat us like we are dumb sometimes. When it is them who are the dumb ones with what they say.

I have had the same experience with people who voluntarily took the jabs as well. Just not interested in all the data or truth,which personally i can't understand that appproach. Interesting the Doctor in the interview who is known globally for his previous work,so knowledgable and highly respected,has dedicated his recent work to patients with what officially is called ,long covid. The interesting thing being, he says,60% of his 1200 paitients with long covid,in fact have what he calls long vaccine,as he was seeing long covid early in the pandemic,before so many of his patients had ever got covid,but had taken the vaccine. Thats why he and other high profile doctors and specialists he works with have put their reputations on the line and have tried to get the truth out there. Also interesting what he says about the life insurance companies data. I guess thatr may mean you may want to sell your shares in such compannies and that premiums must increase,because of how the numbers are stacking up for younger people who have had life insurance..

You should watch- tucker carlson on x, epidode 81. dr pierre kory. Well worth a look brodie. Also have a look at the oecd figures on excess mortality in nz in the first 9 months of 2023 that came out a month or so ago. I've been waiting for media coverage of that,but they ignore it. Truly amazing ,but the media has always been complicit in the cover up of facts and figures. Brodie on the money again(as was i).

can someone answer this question. Can you take a multi ff on one of those machines they have in a pub. I haven't had an account for a while,closed it as not happy with the tab, and hardly bet much these days as i find those pub machines too frustrating to navigate,but decided tonight i may take a small multi. But after 5 minutes trying today,pushing buttons on the machine i don't think you can do ff multis on the machines.Is that correct?

Was that horse called besse scott? funny the things you remember but i think i remember that.

The cancellation of pick 6 reminds me of the times i used to take them. I gave up on them many years ago ,but never got one except a small one that paid $300. I almost scooped the pool one night. almost. it was one of those $50,000 guaranteed pools. I had a couple running in the last and there was only a handful of live tickets and only mine on a horse called Coloured Fella. trained by K Bowen and driven by robert mitchell. I can still the race like it was yesterday. Coloured fella went forward from his front line draw but was caught out 3rd and 3 wide rounding the first bend.No worries i thought as the horse racing parked was looking for cover and there was a horse following coloured fella that would have given him the 1/1. But then,unbelievably,robert mitchell pulled back and tried to push the driver in the 1/1 onto the rail,only problem was there was a horse there,so anyone watching had to have been thinking,whats that idiot doing. I know i was. So he tried for 100m to do that while the horse 3 back got squeezed up but persisited in trying to maintain its position as it was allowed to. Then,oh no,coloured fella took a knock all of his own doing,broke and ended up 10 lengths last. But wait,in what was a 14 horse field(i looked it up),turning for home ,coloured fella has tacked on to the field and has manouvered to the outside and appears to be going well. But ,oh no,he now is trying to save a bit of ground and has run into a wall. Why didn't he just come to the outside where there was a clear run.But wait,with 100m to go hes switched to the very inside,virtually last but and is coming home on the fence at 100mph. Will he get up? well no,you guessed it. In a nose,nose,nose finish he ran fourth. I see he was accredited with the same time as the winner.Biggest certainty beat you could see. Me,well i got $1200 for the concession pick 6 for 5 winners,but what could have been a life changing collect came to nothing,zilch,zero,nada. Robert mitchell got suspended for a couple of weeks for the drive when they concluded the inquiry the following week. Me, i felt at the time he should have got life.

He certainly is a wonderful horse and one of the best examples of how clever michael house is. In his last 15 starts hes had 5 wins,5 2nds,2 3rds and 2 4ths. Hes only missed a place once. Hes earned roughly $53,000 plus that $10,000 bonus in just the last 4 1/2 months. Hes still a rated 53 horse. When you compare that to say a horse like grettymac who is running at addington on friday. Its rated 2 points higher than boyz invasion from its 2 wins from 7 starts.

A group of people from different areas within the industry,who called themselves a reference group with john mooney their spokesman,have asked for change to the handicapping system,and suggested non win horses should be given a r40 after their first win. Personally i think their is a lot more common sense from that group,although don't agree myself with the preferential treatment they suggest 2 year winners should get. They want 2 year old winners to return to be rated as a non win horse when they turn 3. All that will mean is you will get races where people will withdraw after nominating again and some non win races dominated by hot favorites. But at least the reference group has better ideas than the people they left it to last year. The unfortunate thing is if they do change,it will only be from 1 august. something to do with IT. Of course they could get around that and start making the badly needed immediate changes by doing so with setting programmes and making up fields with race condition that are fairer. Whether the current handicappers and race programmers are capable of doing that,well i doubt it. Another thing that i think is clear is they give too many concessions to junior drivers. If we take the example of superstar legend that i have been using,he has had the equivalent of 3 1/2 penalty free wins within the last 10 months. So she had been getting a penalty free rating win at a rate of 1 every 3 months or so when you include the full and half penalty free wins for the juniors. As tab for ever has said,michael house is a master at getting the maximum benefits out of the current system.Hes just too clever for the system and gets rewarded accordingly. So you have to somewhat reluctantly admire him for that.

I just looked up the fields for thurday at the manawatu. Would you believe it. Superstar legend actually drops in grade,and gets to run against 8 rivals,3 of which are 1 win horses and 2, 2 win horses. meanwhile the 2 win avenger is running against 5 rivals who have won 54 races between them. We can't blame the connections of superstar legend for taking advantage of such a farcically designed system.

Mid way through last year Hrnz had an independant working group come up with recommendations to "achieve the fairest and most equitable method of handicapping" The independent working group comprised rob lawson,tony thomas,jay abernethy,darrin williams,regan todd,nathan williamson,andrew morris,kevin smith and cameron kirkwood. So these people don't seem stupid,but it doesn't take einstein to work out that no,they didn't " achieve the fairest and most equitable method of handicapping". What they gave us is a system that rates a 2 win horse like Avenger,3 rating points higher than a 16 win horse like superstar legend who has won $145,000 more and who in its last 16 starts has had 4 wins,3 2nds,2 3rds,3 4ths($33500).

correct cyril. obviously your not slow,the reason you can't make any sense of it it because it makes no sense.

Remember ,before answering the above quiz,just remind yourself how clever the people are who came up with our current rating system.

Heres one for you. Which of these michael house trained runners has the higher rating a)superstar legend-16 race winner,stakes $161,000. winner of 2 of its last 5 starts including the highest rating race today. b)warloch- 15 race winner,stakes $226,000 c)avenger- 2 race winner, stakes $16,000

If you look at the trainers still going in the north island i would think they fall into 2 main categories. 1)The big trainers who train form properties they own themselves. 2)trainers who train from rented facilities like racecourses. I'm guessing there may be a handful of other trainers who train from their own property who mostly have small numbers,but you could count them on your fingers. The cost of setting up private training facilities is unaffordable ,except if you are a very big trainer like say stonewall. So realistically you won't be getting any more of them. And the rented facilities like racecourses or training centres,are limited in the numbers they can cater for and people have to live close by to make it practical to use them. So therein i have identified why harness racing in the north island is doomed. Its as simple as that. If you had another 500 people with 1000 horses wanting to train,where would you put them. Nowhere,thats the reality. Mark my words,the same issue will gradually become more obvious in places like canterbury in years to come.Its already a reality,just not on the same scale. And an observation i have made in the likes of canterbury, there are unused facilities on private properites that could cater for more trainers,but nearly all of them the owners would rather not have someone other than themselves use them. Which is up to them,its theirs, if they don't want to. i'm just stating what i think is a blatantly obvious fact ,yet it gets very little attention. Why that is,i've never been sure. Maybe its because there aren't the funds to fix that.Maybe its because some of those people who complain about dwindling numbers,know it exists,but know that stakeholders and licenceholders have no inclination on a personal level to allow a trainer to rent unused facilities they may have. Probably a bit of both.

obviously we see things different. personalities don't come into it for me. I view each race based on what i see. My philosophy is simple. Drivers should be trying to get the best result they can and should drive their horses on their merits to the best of their ability. When they are not it annoys me that they would treat with contempt the very people who all within the industry rely on for their long term viability of the industry.The punter. I also think there is a lack of understanding by some industry participants of the damage they can do to the perceived honesty of everyone within the industry when obvious cases of lack of intent occur. I can guarantee around nz in pubs and in homes more people than normal would have watched the mounga race. That race was a high turnover race,run just before tea on a friday,so it would have had many more eyes on it. To the casual observer and to punters who made mouaga favorite or took him in their multis,i can guarantee their would comments questioning r close intent. So you can think there was nothing wrong with the r close drive and the lack of stipes action.however i would say i am far more in touch with what the average punter or observer with no personal interest in whether r close or r todds feelings may be hurt because of a negative social media comment.

I have to admit,i can see no reason whatsoever for you to say i should compare the sarah o'reilly drive on dashing major today,to the robbie close drive on mounga at westport. On one hand you noted riley harrison overdrove dashing major at westport by moving around the field on an average speed after breaking and losing 50m,then tacking on to the back of the field with about 1800m to go. Yet today,it broke again at the start losing about 10m but because of a good speed set by the leader,only tacked on to the back of the field with about 1300m to go. For you to suggest any punter would expect her to send a $31 shot around the field after finding that it wasn't capable of doing that at westport,well that just leaves me scratching my head as to how you could think that. And for you to say it finished as fast today as mounga did at westport,well thats not accurate.. You may well think they were the same but in my opinion i think saying the 2 are similar is not accurate.

Turns out no. To be honest that didn't surprise me as you had to ask yourswelf ,what the trainer/driver would be thinking pre race. Do they come out and drive it in a way that is the opposite of what it was driven at westport,then people would have said,there i told you so. And if they were happy to just run on at westport,why would it be any different today for thw same stake. The money i thought came because everyone saw how he came home so fast at Westport,so he had to be favorite on that,despite there being obvious ? over todays tactics. He went another very good race. Not as obvious today that he may not have wanted to win. But certainly driven again today in a manner which gave himself no chance whatsoever in winning.The horse did very well to run 3rd after leaving its run so late. If you look at its record. Its 4 wins have all been when taken to the front,so clearly its a good frontrunner. I've always thought its the type of horse they would be aiming at the country cup series with the $100,000 final. They would want to get in off the front so wouldn't want to get too many points beofre hand,but still have to earn enough to get a start. So the way to do that would be the run a couple of places then get a win in the qualifying races.maybe win the cheviot cup or something like that with a bigger stake than today. Now i have no idea whether thats how they think and i'm clearly guessing. However psychoanalysing a trainers thoughts before placing a bet complicates things a bit..

I never said you were ridiculous. I said the scenario's you put forward were ridiculous . In my mind theres a difference,so thats what i meant. Personally i don't think R harrison would have given a 2nd thought to jimmy arma when driving dashing major. She can't really have known it would end up parked. Shes not a driver that i have seen team drive before,but maybe you are right. Harrison was most likely always going to have driven the number 1 horse tomorrow as she normally drives it. As to mounga. I read on the other forum that someone by the name" pure steel" commented this week about an aussie race. He said.."my reasoning is they will win from any draw if driven with a will to win and put in the race". I have always thought that man knows what hes talking about..lol.

Thats exactly how i see it as well walt. mounga had 3 trials and workouts prior to yesterday and there was no doubt that the win was there for the taking had they wanted it yesterday. Personally the todd stable is not one i ever invest on much.Thats just my choice. I've previously commented in my opinion theres an inconsistency to their form. My thoughts are they run their best races early in each preparation and don't hold their form for that long if given consistent racing. They tend to be lightly raced and my guess would be they are always well prepared and have had plenty of work to race well when lining up fresh. Todd is a very successful trainer. I have always thought R Close is an extremely talented driver and like todd,a likeable bloke. But when it comes to betting on him,i never quite know what to expect from him..

My comments on your observations. 1)look at who owns mounga. Some of the most high profile owners and administrators in nz. I would suggest they would be most unhappy to see their horse/trainer/driver drawing such negative attention. However did that provide some type of .. lets not go there...in the aftermath of that race?Also the horse was a significant drifter on the ff. 2)fully agree. Once people have formed a perception about something,it sticks in their mind and rightly or wrongly they view everything through that lens of perception. 3)when it comes to these type of things,its often who the head stipe on the day that equates to action taken. There only appears to be one stipe who will consistently place importance on maintaing punters confidence, by questioning perceived dodgy driving. Just look at who gets charged with these type of offences and who officiates on the day.Theres a definite pattern. 4)thats why we had operation inca.Ironically our leading driver somehow got tied up with that,yet he is the one that has always done the most for maintaining punters confidence in the integrity of the sport. Life isn't always fair i suppose. But the point being when you have one dodgy driver it creates a wider perception that draws others in who may not deserve it. 5)punters are irrelavnt. Thats the message the punters received yesterday. 6)no,but many within harness focus on whats best for them. As to yesterday,punters aren't asking for much from trainers/drivers. Just go out there and try to do the best you can.Why is that unreasonable?