the galah

whats pdf stand for?

i actually meant so i can plan to get to the tab with the teller in time, as i don't have an account.Now i can't use the tab app to work that out.

can't find them either. Does that mean you can no longer have a fixed odds bet on course either. do they have a plan is to close all the tab outlets that serve people and replace them with those awful machines, and get rid of the punters who go to them because they like a person serving them ,like i do. Say you were at addington and wanted to have a fixed odds bet at auckland,how would you know what the jetbet is?If you wanted to have a bet at the meeting you were attending do you rely on the person serving you or do they intend to no longer have tellers at the races and just want people using those machines that the inexperienced punter takes 5 minutes to put one bet on.Is that one of their plans. they also seem to have lots of meetings with no trackside coverage and no jetbet numbers on,in their system. For today they are always coming up in the nest 3 races to go. Whats the point of having them from all over the world,and why if no one can bet on them at a tab outlet.. some of the changes are good,but some seem stupid. Can people see the times for the races on their phones? My phone screen not showing when races start unless within 2 hours. If i was working out my bets for the day and wanted to plan so as to get them on in time,i can't seem to tell if im using my phone. Maybe its because phone screens are too small? I don't know,but thats how i often plan my day. Work out the time a race starts and plan to be home in time to put a bet on. Thats strange.

Actually when you think about it,if the todd stable had any consideration for the punters,all they had to do was notify the stewards of the tactics they would be using,that way punters could have been notified. The likes of mark jones has done that before and i don't know why others don't. Its like these drivers that carry a whip then complain when the stewards pick on them for showing no vigour at all in a finish. If they have no intention of using the whip,why do they carry it.And why don't they notify stewards pre race that the horse is very risky when pressured in a finish. That way they cover their own arses and punters are informed .

Yes, the being unproven on a grass track thing that tab mentioned ,wasn't really relevant . Mounga won its first race start easily on the grass.It also won a workout on the grass a month prior to westport. Also it would have been fit enough as it had trialed well at the workouts and trials 3 times in the previous month to westport.

I'm sure his owners love wining. Just as i'm sure his trainer/driver love winning. Punters accpet that not every horse goes into a race with a realistic winning chance and accept that horses have races that often ,with some good horses,they are being aimed at bigger races down the track. Punters aren't mugs. Obviously there can be many logical reasons why a horse is driven a certain way in any race,and punters understand that and accept that. Sure,some may get a little frustrated when they don't get the ideal run,but no doubt the horse and driver feel the same way and thats just part of racing and gambling. But,theres a difference in that and in going out there with a pre conceived plan not to win. thats where you lose the punters confidence in the product and once you sow the seed of doubt,its there for some time.This was one of those rare occasions. This topic has just been pointing that out. surely people don't expect punters to sit there and see something they think is dodgy and just say nothing.This discussion around this topic just reflects what would ahve happened with people who saw that race,where ever they were.

Without wishing to go over it again. But your memory not that good as he was a significant drifter on the ff at westport. The reason he opened up so short would have been because of his prior form. Just as the reason he was well punted again on the 2nd day,where he was again driven to have little winning chance,was because he finished so fast at westport. Also some have suggested on here that they were told pre race,that the horse was not there to win. So you can brush over it as much as you like,but the horses connections are not seen in the same light as you imply by many as releates to the horses west coast runs. Nothing that has happened since westport will undo what happened there in many peoples eyes. Those type of things will be remembered by many much longer than any wins he has had since.

Hindsight a great thing but can't say i'm over clever in this case,as he had won his 4th race from only 7 starts on 1/9/2023 at addington,winning easily with Bach,The falcon,Deceptive lee and Alta Meteor the next 4 home. From a betting perspective, i haven't invested on him since westport .Just a personal choice not to support him due to previous loss of confidence in intent. But good luck to the punters that have stuck with him.

Good old mounga. You would have to say hes been well trained and well driven lately.Certainly wanting to win the more prestigious country cup races hes run in lately. As walt and i said when this original thread was started,hes really just living up to what we knew he could do if they wanted,which was why we felt aggrieved with westpeot. But thats all in the past now. Well done to mounga. on to the final. will the cunningplan come off. It may well do going on today. Only thing about winning today was he goes back another 10m by the looks of it.

But then you would get the likes of mounga winning an early race and just being driven like at westport so not to get rehandicapped for the big final.

I think they become elegible when they have started in three of those races. Today will be his third. I had thought those qualifying races had ended a couple of weeks ago. I'd looked at the hrnz website and it never had this weeks on,but maybe that was a list of all the completed qualifying races.I found it confusing.

Turns out there is one more race in that series,so by starting tomorrow he can qualify. Cunning plan back on it seems. They may drive it a bit quieter tomorrow as they may not want to get another handicap penalty if it won. Who knows.

i didn't realise the police fund those things.

Do you really think the incentivising south island owners to shift from racing their horses in the south island,to the north island, really is part of the plan? That makes as little sense as giving the north island more races. Actually when you think about it ,given that,maybe that is part of their thinking. But surely it doesn't make much sense. They already get regular racing in the south island and they already have races with small numbers in the north island,so if they were going for small numbers then they would have already done it.Also,its a safe bet that due to insufficient numbers, they will not be running the number of north island they said they plan to and programmed races will be abandoned.. Also wouldn't it cost more to have them trained in the north island. Certainly the transport costs to get there wouldn't be cheap either. Only the likes of michael house may do that. But didn't he try that and only lasted for a short time and wasn't even that a result of him not being able to get back to the south island due to the ferry not running. One of the disturbing things about the press release from the chair of HRNZ,phil holden,is he goes on about how great the extra north island races are for the industry,yet fails to give on tangible reason of why. Just saying "the time is right","fantastic partner in entain",'provide significant benefits for the sport nationally",etc. Its just more blah,blah,blah with no substance of how? Maybe theres a simple reason they haven't given one reason why extra meetings will mean extra horses will be trained there. Its because they,like everyone else ,they can't think of one. Will there be any accountability for poor decisions? personally i actually think having extra meetings is a good thing,but obviously the majority of those should have been in canterbury.

i think those trainers will be stressed out thinking about their appeals,but their horses will be feeling chilled out about it all.

What about the story on harnesslink this week. The newest drug to hit harness racing in the usa is synthetic marijuana. 19 positives just recently. Doesn't say what it does,but i did read once that it was banned for its performance enhancing effects,namely it could reduce anxiety. Before someone gets too carrired away and says thats ok,just realise when its comes to that type of thing in harness racing,the stakes have never been "higher" ,so get down off your "high horse."

We can't really disect the merits of who was charged and what evidence was presented to support that.We don't have access to that. There was sure to be many threads to the rope which provided the strength of evidence to charge. With time and reflection,we can now say the police had insufficient evidence to prove what they alleged and that those charged have proven that ,through their defence offered,often in court. Thats the reality. But no one,can tar everyone involved with the same brush or judge the merits,or lack thereof, of everyone based on someone elses case.People can't use one example and say thats a reflection of every case. There is sure to have been higher levels of innocence and sometimes wrongdoing,but it did not meet the burden of proof required for criminal wrongdoing in the courts. Personally i have always said i did not question the integrity of some involved as i've seen them go out and try 100% week after week for years. Blair orange the most obvious example of that. But i also said,im my opinion,sometimes you just know beyond doubt,when a horse is being pulled and to me, johnny white at nelson was a perfect example of that.So no one was convicted of that. Finally ,i've always said there were 4 groups of people who should shoulder the most responsibilty for inca. 1)the stipes for their inaction and for the lack of guts to properly investigate questionable activity.Their weakness in standing up to the backlash they always get from industry participants and some officials,when they even dare question or hold to account more high profile people,well that sets the standards for what people see as being tolerated,when it shouldn't have been. 2)past licence holders and stipes who set standards of integrity which lead current participants to believe the same standards were still acceptable. Its just natural for someone to think something is ok or tolerated if they have seen it going on for donkey's years. Why would they think they are doing much wrong. 3)those involved. absolutely they have paid a price that was unjust,but they still must look at themselves in the mirror and reflect as to whether ,had they done something differently or not done something,would they have had to pay that unfair cost. 4)finally industry participants and supporters who see obvious questionable activity and just go along with it,often because they benefit from it.The type of person who judges something on the personalities involved,and not the actions .Both are relevant,not just one. If you knew someone well and they respected that you were saying something in a way that wasn't judgmental of the person,just you didn't agree with the actions,then just maybe the person would think twice and reconsider doing it again. Who knows.we don't live in a a perfect world.Never will. There are so many shades of grey in life and sometimes you get caught up with something where you are left feeling aggrieved,frustrated and angry. And i'm sure ,in some instances there were some involved in operation inca that would be totally justified feeling that way,even after honest self reflection. Thats not fair and would be very hard to deal with. But it happened and you have to. Thats my final thoughts.

Its certainly a "unique" approach to the problem. You have an area struggling to survive ,its major issue being a lack of numbers meaning its not generating enough wagering to break even let alone run at a profit. So the answer,give them more racing so stakeholders can earn more money and punters will have more choice of races to bet on.. Like i said,a unique approach. i thought most businesses look at where they are profitable and say lets do more of that. Not the other way around. Doesn't it appear to epitomise the saying"throwing good money after bad". Also,phil holden,in his press release said "the changes are designed to breathe fresh life into harness racing after years of zero growth and decline". Its interesting he would say that,as somehow he must believe there are people out there who believe "the changes",will do that.. Maybe there are. maybe they are geniuses and we just don't know it. I will go with no,theren't cleary not myself. But if it turns out they are the stupid ones and the rest of us were just pointing out the obvious,then shouldn't that mean they really aren't the right people to be involved in decision making in any form.

i see mitchell kerrs back in the news. this time sentenced to 5 months home detention for misleading the official assignee,not telling them about 6 bank accounts he had used to gamble over 2 million on with ladbrooks. Also a covid wage subsidy he wasn't supposed to get as he wasn't supposed to be in business. But the one i find interesting. it says between april 2021 and june 2022 he continued to be involved in the management of his business,mitchell kerr racing. Yet he was supposedly banned for life in april 2021.And being a bankrupt. How does that happen. Surely others must have been aware of this.esn't HRNZ have some serious questions to answer. like did they investigate and have they charged anyone who assisted or was complicit in his deceit of carrying on operating after being banned and declared bankrupt. Am i missing something or does this all seem very,very dodgy. And i'm not talking just mitchell kerr.

Under the proposed law changes before parliament ,currently supported by the ruling party,if brodie had even 1 losing bet he would have to supply credit references,credit checks,bank statements and anything else they may view as relevant. Maybe the nz rules not that bad after all.

it may not be a nz harness racing topic yet,but its interesting to see whats going on in britain.Who knows whether something like that will come here and when.Most probably i suppose depending on who is in government. in the 2022/2023 season,betting turnover on british racing was 9.12 billion pounds,a dramatic fall of around 900 million,or inflation adjusted 1.75 billion they say. It seems the most significant reason is affordablilty checks. In other words punters are being told that they are betting too much. And what they say is even more concerning is stricter rules are currently before parliament and are viewed as being a major issue if british racing is to survive. Currently a survey found 1/4 of punters were already being forced to undertgo affordability checks. The newest proposed implementation of the checks would be triggered if a punter lost an average 1.37 pounds a day(500) a year,or if they lost 125 pounds in a months.Once you hit those levels they do a credit check and you would not be able to gamble if your credit check was no good. Also the harsher checks which most likely would lead to limitations would be if you lost say 1000 in a day. Wouldn't matter what else you were spending your money on or how rich you are,but gambling would be looked at. Obviously if betting agencies were proven to have allowed say someone to lose even the propsed 1.37 pounds a day and they had poor credit,then the penalties would be harsh. i havent read what the exact current rules are but it seems even wealthy people are getting notifications from their banks if they lose. One example i read was a wealthy owner who was contacted after he lost 1000 in a month. they are even currently saying postcodes and job descriptions are factors in current affordability checks. The gambling commision is saying it will only effect 3% of punters,but a survey found 26% have said they have been subject to the current checks and half of those told them where to go and stopped betting. racing authorities have pointed out you can spend as much as you like on the national lottery,alcohol,ciggarettes,fast food,etc. They are also pointing to the major impact it will have on betting agencies who will find horse racing less attractive and instead will focus more on other betting products.

Just to point out whats happening this week. Cambridge and auckland are both racing this week. They would have the biggest fields they've had for a while when both racing in the same week. They have 175 horses in total,but 16 of those are south island trained and 2 aussie trained...meaning 157 north island trained horses. Then they have 14 horses running at the trials this week trying to qualify. Compare that to the 2 canterbury meetings. They have 267 horses running. Plus another 52 qualified running at the trails,26 trying to qualify and 12 in learners workouts.90 in total. So all up,including the trials,you have 171 north island trained horses running this week. In canterbury alone you have 357 running in canterbury. plus the 16 south island trained that are racing at auckland. So you have well over double the number of horses in canterbury than auckland and waikato combined running this week. So the decision makers who have come out with the new racing calendar have looked at those figures and said,lets give auckland and waikato 3 times more new extra races than canterbury.

What do people think of the new racing calendar? Auckland and cambridge will have more meetings run in the same week. In total that region gets an extra 216 races. Manawatu gets an extra 50 races. Canterbury,where i thought most of the horses in training are,get only an extra 64 races if you include the extra timaru meeting and southland an extra 26 races. So the north isalnd get 3 times the extra number of races than the whole of the south island. So they have looked at things,said where are the least number of horses,then given them the most number of extra races by far.And vice versa. More meetings where auckland and cambridge run the same week. if someone was to tell you that was going to happen,no one would have believed it because it seems so stupid. But there you go. Who are the people making these decisions?

a I've said it before and will say it again. it seems general knowledge that early on in operation inca the police were gathering evidence through various means,including having people act as undercover type operatives.They were looking to establish whether there was anything to the allegations that had been made.And at that stage,they were being treated as just allegations. So part of that early evidence gathering took place at the nelson meeting. so what evidence did they gather that weekend. Well i thought it was common knowledge tthat they spoke to a driver who boasted how results could be manipulated through team driving. Then,what happens.We got what many consider one of the most obvious cases of a horse not being driven on its merits. The johnny white race.It was all over social media and even the trackside presenter said as much,although anyone watching could have worked it out anyway. So what did you expect the police or whoever to do. The evidence they gathered on that day cleary kept the wheels turning for their investigation. Yet, here you are,still going on that its the fault of jealous ,poor trainers. No one else. just them.What a plonker. I'll give you points for loyalty,whoever you are and whoever it is you are trying to be loyal to.But without self reflection,people won't learn anything going forward. So lets hope others aren't as blinkered as you.

I've wondered whether the fixed odds bookies get some sort of performance bonus for reaching certain targets of profit. I say that because i can't think of any other reason why they wouldn't see the big picture as relates to including income the tab receives, from customers combined spend on tote and ff. Bookies sort of placing self interest first is my guess..