the galah

I read recently of the passing of maurice jones(reese jones). He was a successful trainer who from memory had brothers barry,peter,cliff . All top horsemen. i think he had a son who was a handy jockey at one stage as well and was the uncle of a jockey or two. Those brothers trained a lot of winners between them including some really good ones. From memory the jones brothers used to be regulars on the west coast circuit. A different era,but not so long ago.

You say theysometimes run the top 6 in the heats then top 6 in the semi's. Well that seems to mean you do accept they have more than 2-3 runners in each race. Take this year. In those vicbred heats they had 1/4 of all starters,but when you break it down to their numbers in the pacing heats,its much higher because they don't have many trotters. Your not coming up with a good argument if you are referring to the all stars. I know everyone thought their dominance in those age goup races not that long ago was a bad thing.Everyone except those that support the all stars that is. I will tell you a story. I once was in the north island about 25 years ago.On my travels i came across the former part owner of a very,very good horse who in the latter part of its career had been trained by the purdons.I spoke to the owner about what it was like to own such a horse.He told me the story of how it was wonderful but their experience was soured by seeing their horse being used as the horse to undo the favorites from other stables on more than one occasion in the big races. e.g. like an interdomion final. In fact their horse could well have won had it not been driven in such a way. I remember the race in question and the discussion the drive received.You could probably guess the horse i mean if you remember the race and remember who won it and who owned it. So the point is,every horse that is team driven and chances diminshed simply to enable a better finishing position of a stablemate,has owners,breeders, punters who are left feeling unfairly treated and conned to a degree.

i would have thought you knew what i meant by that. i was referring to how they look after their horses when i said that.

So its a bad look because someone has 7 of 10 runners in tasmania,but its a good look when someone in victoria has the same thing. Its the vic bred races i'm referring to. They are the ones emma stewart dominates numbers wise. my view is,what or wherever the races are is irrelevant. Run any race anywhere ,where you have one stable with over half the runners and punters,rival trainers and owners,will look at that and say they will be team driving.. I'm just saying that was one part of the murrihy report that is worth thinking about. I'm not comparing how the stewart stable operate to the yole stable in any way.

i agree they would have to create specific rules. And yes i do think in the future that will come to pass,thats if there are enough other trainers still going to have a viable industry. just look to tasmania as to how the overall number of participants has played out with the yole dominance. You realise that in tasmania ben yole had 6 or 7 in a field at one stage and just continued to grow. in those age group races in victoria emma stewart very often had 1/3 of the starters and sometimes over half.Hows the turnover and stakemoney on victorian harness going. the media celebrate that part of the stewart dominance,yet have a double standard when they refer to ben yole. To me what i have said is so obviously a major problem.

Its a tricky one isn't it gammalite. It would seem unfair to the honest, caring harness racing participants in tasmania to lose harness racing through the inaction of officials who turned a blind eye and ignored what the yole stable was doing.Many did everything they could to bring attention to it all,so for them to be penalised would seem rather unjust. Hopefully the harness industry keeps going and in the future they emply people in their integrity unit who actually have integrity. The yole stable are clearly dishonest and those they employed almost as bad apart from those brave enough to give evidence against their former employer. I can't imagine anyone with any integrity working too long for a stable knowing all that was going on. I view the tounge tie horse case as rather sinister to me. While theres no doubt it would have been accidental to leave it on for 4 days,the employee who came forward said the horse looked like it was going to die,wouldn't eat,looked really skinny and had a really sore tounge. One would assume it must have swollen up rather badly.. Yet despite that and despite the protests of the stable employee they took that horse to the races 2 days later,knowing it would have already been in a distressed state. It had run 2nd the week before,but ran 211m last. Thats a deliberate act of animal cruelty in my eyes. Also something which i think the harness racing media will likely completely ignore,is the findings that having one stable with so mnay runners in a race invites dishonesty. Just look at the dominance of the emma stewart stable in so many of those age group races in victoria. Its a bad look and people just turn off the sport when they see so many from one stable in a race. People have to be consistent on that. If its a bad thing in tasmania,its a bad thing where ever it happens.

Well the Ray murrihy report into tasmanian harness racing truly makes shocking reading. It would be quicker to list the things ben yole hasn't done detrimental to harness racing and his horses,as the list of what he has done is so long. But heres a brief look at some of the things they found did occur Perhaps to start,lets set the scene.Heres an example. They left the tounge tie on a horse(blings on fire) after a race in which it was placed..A stable employee reported to tim yole that the horse still had the tounge tie on 4 days later and looked like it was going to die.They took the tounge tie off. They had it entered for a race in 2 days time. The yoles decided they would still take it to the races. The stable employeee complained that the horse looked disgusting and that they couldn't go to the races..... but they did. It ran a long last,beaten 211metres. It ran so poor a vet exam was ordered,but unbelievably the vet found nothing wrong with it. Then the report said it was regular practice to terrorise(the reports words) horses in their wash bay prior to the races,by putting blinds,ear plugs on,then actiavting them while whipping them on the rump and legs. Anyway you get the picture of how disturbing the actions of Australias leading harness trainer were. But to list some of the other findings 1)race fixing 2)Team driving 3)raceday treatments 4)intravenous injections within 1 day(although apparently it was normal to inject all horses with 2 substances 2 days prior. 5)horses kept in poor conditions-too many in small paddocks,poor ground conditions,no protection from weather,horses being bullied by dominant horses and not getting enough feed. 6)poor vet treatment record keeping Anyway enough of mr yole. What about the findings as regards the office of racing integrity. Seems no one ahd any confidence or trust in them. IThe report found that some of their behavior had no integrity at all and it found some of the things they told the inquiry were on the balance of probabilities not true,. In other words they were liars and covered up stuff. They even abused people who complained ,ignored complaints,ignored a complaint from one of their own steards that a driver had approached her with evidence of race fixing. Seems they never even followed that up and when they did after the media got hold of it,they didn't keep the records and then lied about all that as well.The findings around the chief stewart painted him in a very poor light. It also said they should have been doing more unanounced stable visits and investigatory work,but didn't. It also highlighted that if anyone had a problem with a n official,no point complaining because they just investigated themselves,which they didn't do anyway. The report found a "disturbing number of participants either had left or downsized their interests in tasmanian harness racing".... i wonder why? the report also found that part of the problem that the yole stable had got away with the animal welfare side of things for so long was because the rspca was hamstrung by the poor legislature and rules and regulations currently on the books,and that they didn't seem to have practices in place to consider the racehorses welfare after racing like they should. Thats as close as they seemed top get to addressing why yoles known as chainsaw. 7 yole former stable employees gave evidence. Finally it refered to their handicapping system. And funnily enough even made mention of how it was unfair it was for low start,low grade horses to be graded above horses who have had so many wins,. Observing the handicapping system was designed to see more and more horses drop in grade,in what it called a race to the bottom. Sounded very similar to nz actually.

i remember being there that day. In fact i think i can spot myself watching the race against the outside fence. great days.

There's a really good story on neil brady that Duane Ranger wrote,written 2 weeks ago. Its well worth the read . I don't know how to post such things on here but if you google duane ranger harness racing,he has a website. His latest story is about riley butt . Perhaps someone smarter than me on how to post stuff may put it up for everyone to read?

i can understand why you say that,but personally find the whole thing a bit surreal and hard to get a handle on. so much history,so complicated,each side placing self interest above everything else. I suppose thats how things work though and its the innocent who have no control over these things who pay the heaviest price,as always. i have followed it and it seems the timing of the hamas attacks was related to israel making recent peace deals with other arab countries without having to make concessions in its conflict with the palestinians in those deals. Seems they have been negotiating along those lines recently with saudi arabia,irans arch enemy. So it seems the hamas attacks were a way of derailing those agreements. Lets face it,its not Israels fault for trying to want more stability defence wise in the region. I read a poll recently,and i have just looked at it again and took a few notes which i think are interesting in helping understand it all. The poll was of people who live in gaza and the west bank and was taken just a couple of months ago. heres some things the poll said which you may find interesting. Support for hamas,the ruling party in gaza,spikes during armed conflict,but even now most palestinians do not back hamas. Gaza residents are more critical of hamas than those in the west bank.44% in the west bank support hamas and 42% in gaza. But depsite all that,57% in gaza and 82% in the west bank believe hamas was justified in lauching the october attacks on israel. A large majority believed hamas claims that the attack was to defend a major islamic shrine in jerusalem against jewish extremists and to win the release of palestinian prisoners. Only 10 % believed hamas had commited war crimes in israel,although the majority had not seen the videos. Seems the palestinian media have fixated on the war in gaza and the suffering of civilians while giving little coverage of the results of the hamas attack. The poll found the level of anti america/anti west was huge,driven by what they viewed america and the west were allowing to be done in gaza. They haven't had elections since 2007 in gaza or the west bank and the palestinian authority don't have the same goals as hamas.It was 2007 that hamas gained control of gaza. The Palestinian authority used to run both the west bank and gaza until 2007.The PA have been heavily criticised for working with israel in coordinating security in the region. So it all appears Israel will be stuck with running gaza when this latest conflict ends.

I like it.The three wise men who have traveled from afar. Brought together ,not by christ,but by bit of a yarn. Who would have thought that...... Then again,maybe that might be overtstating it.

I think you should watch anything professor John mearsheimer,from the university of chicago has said. Hes an expert on the history of ukarine and is someone i followed when they first started talking about the possiblity of war. Hes the fellow who for years has been saying that the wests policy,primarily driven by the USA, of pushing ukraine to join NATO was inevitably going to end up in destroying Ukraine. Hes the fella who consistently has been able to predict what later has unfolded in ukraine. He said the war stems from a huge mistake in 2008 the west made,which was to openly say and pursue policies that would enable ukraine to join NATO. He said putin has been saying since then that unless ukraine remains neutral,that russia had no choice but to wreck and weaken ukraine. He has consistently said the idea russia wanted to conqueror ukraine was a nonsense. He said russia have worked into their strategy of having a neutral ukraine,to include conquering the more natural resource rich part of ukraine,but that putin and russia never wanted a war to start with. He said it was the bidens administration policies which pushed the matter of ukraine joining nato with more active rhetoric and policies,which pushed the russians even more into a corner so they saw a western backed,nato joining ukraine as an existensial threat. the professor insists the west is directly to blame for the war. like i have said ,he has consistently been right on predicting what will and has happened.His views on ukraine and where it was heading have been accurate for years if you look at when and what he has said. He has recently said that the usa and the british did intially think ukraine may win the war but through 2023 they now realise the russians clearly have a good chance of winning the war if they want to commit the necessary resources. The professor was heavily critical of the USA,saying even when it became obvious ukraine was going to be destroyed,the biden administration doubled down . Of course so many establishment republicans have supported the policies that have destroyed ukraine. So when chief you say Putin is a nut case,you are just ignoring history.

golden bays an interesting one. I would imagine whoever first bought it from nz would have paid a reasonable sum. I remember it went ok at the trials here,then showed what i thought was big improvement when it had its first and only nz start on nz cup day,running under a 1.55mr itself when running about 7th after a wide run. They said on trackside it had tossed its driver out beforehand and run around the track but they still started it.Maybe getting all spooked up had helped it,who knows. So i've occasionally watched it when its run in australia and its gone like its trials form. Handy but not the horse that ran on nz cup day. It did win first up in queensland though. So will be interesting how it goes for grimson.

Currently there have been 24 Junior drivers have a drive in 2024. Of the 24, 14 are young women. The 3 leading juniors are all men. It has become an industry where women have a possibilty of being quite sucessful career wise, as well as having a job that is enjoyable and i think thats an area which is not promoted enough myself. Although i'm with you forbury in thinking men will always havea slight advantage just because they have that bit more natural aggression in them. Sometimes that may not be the best thing,but it is a thing. As far as the junior driver premiership goes it will end up being between wilson house,carter dalgety and sam thornley.That should be a good battle.

I think you haven't been as fair minded as you normally are brodie with that comment and he should always continue to say whatever he thinks.

I don't think people are knocking her natural ability,just the one drive. And for that type of thing,thats all it was,a one off. I'm just saying some drivers go through the odd slump in form,just like they do in other sports.And just like in other sports,those that follow whatever particular sport it may be,notice it and often comment it on. I'm sure being a top driver requires the same as being good at any sport,a large part is natural abilty and a significant part is the mindset. Confidence is a big thing. I'm also sure horses perform best when their mindset is good. Also horses can also sense the mindset of a driver and perform accordingly.

Your right about the drive she got suspended for. But its not her that imposed the light penalty,so can't blame her for that. in my opinion she was not driving at her best prior to that suspension,but since that expired and she resumed driving, she has been driving very well.So she obviously has already come back a wiser person. Going overseas sounds like a real adventure. Mind you with technology today you can still stay in close contact with all her friends and family.

Unhinged did an interview with gemma thornley where she said she was going to work with the three day event type horses,i think. Its on his unhinged harness facebook site. She has been driving with confidence again in the last month and is a talented horse person.

Heres another one. On the 10th of january tom nally was suspended for 7 days. Tom nally is the southland junior driver who drives drives in southland/otago. I'm guessing you could count on one hand the number of times he drives in canterbury. each year. He had not driven in canterbury in the month prior to his suspension. So what did the adjudicaator do. well it appears they spun the chocolate wheel and it landed on the 2 of february. So there are 4 meetings in southland or otago in the time frame he was suspended.. Then there were 3 days meetings in canterbury on days where there was no southland meeting. So therefore it seems the adjudicators now will include any meeting from southland to canterbury as days included in someones suspension,irrespective of whether you drive in those areas. In nallys case you can't even argue that he may have driven in junior driver races programmed,because one of the meetings included had no such race. Besides he hadn't driven in the canterbury junior races the month prior to his suspension. I don't really follow this stuff,but when i do look at them,its obvious how farcical the penalties are and how totally inconsistent those that hand them out are. Its just like the scratching penalties. Anyone who follows those must realise they are so inconsistently applied. Harness racing seems to be riverting back to the days of inconsistency in judical penalties. Surely its time canterbury drivers start insisting they have southland meetings included in their days suspended.

Do you think people are going to breed more horses because of an initiative that in 3 years may pay dividends for them. An initiative that i would confidently predict will not exist in such generous terms in 3 years time.You do realise there is no guarantee the bonus will be around in the same form next year,let alone 3 years time.There may be no bonus whatsoever in 3 years. That would be like a car importer buying up electric cars in japan just before the last election,due for delivery next month,thinking at the time he bought them he can get a top price onselling them because of the clean car rebate. There may be people who breed horses who think the same as the car dealer,but no i would not be one of them. I'm not that stupid.

personally i think the level of the subsidies is so high that it makes it the most hair brained/discriminatory scheme to ever come out of HRNZ. Have you ever asked yourself why the owner/breeders of a 2 year old are prioritised with $12,000 bonuses at the expense of owners of 3 year olds and above. Have you ever asked,who are the people who came up with this scheme and do they have self interest. i.e. will the decision makers fall into the cateory of owners/breeders who will benefit from the bonuses. I thought they are supposed to have a handicapping system designed to race like against like to generate turnover. Given 5 horse races will generate next to no turnover,why have they guaranteed the running of these programmed races with only 5 acceptors? If Entain came up with the idea,what type of idiots are running that place,if they think 5 horse 2 year old races will generate turnover and are good for the industry. All those races at places like auckland and cambridge and manawatu and southland. They will not get big numbers. There is only so much of the pie stakes wise to go around. Give a bigger slice to one group and whats left of the rest of the pie is smaller. Even some of the conditions in the scheme are a bit odd. for example.. if a breeder/breeding entity ceases to exist ,only the owner portion of the bonus will be paid.... breeder/breeding entity ceases to exist if they have not bred in the previous 5 years. I mean why do they need that 2nd part of the conditions. After all,2 year old s will not have been bred over 5 years ago. Also,what happens to people who have say a 2 year old trotter up and running early. Given they can't race anything but 2 year olds,do they just run around at the trials for months on end. Thats going to happen in the areas where there are small numbers like southland and auckland. And who do these winners of 2 year olds race. Are they going to run more small fields for 2 year old race winners? I think its a poorly thought out scheme which will just accelerate resentment and disillusionsment amongst many who think their degree of participation is not valued simply because they have a horse older than 2.

4 wins and a 3rd from 6 picks ok. Bennie and the jets didn't go as well as i thought it might when running 3rd,while the one that missed,Watch that man would have won had it got a clear run. So as per normal these days,there always seems one that misses and the multi misses.Bugga.

I would give the driver good marks for consistency.

yes it should be deidre franco. I just put total of $60 on it and its price immediately dropped from $5 to 4.80 to 4.50 to 4.20. All in the one price move because thats how their algorythms work when i have a bet. Funny thing is every time i put an each way bet on these days,whether it be the day before or 2 hours before or whatever,there is 3 immediate price alterations in one go and i only place 2 bets(win and top 3). Honestly,i think its a good chance but $4.20 is not a good price.

My tips would be race 1 royal diedre- 3. mileys ace 5.bennie and the jets 6.watch that man 8 .muscle bank 11. milwood indie. all should win easy.I will take a multi and retire from the profits and never to be heard of again on bit of a yarn.