the galah

That should have read,topaz has earnt $10,000 more in stakes than tanzania has,since mid november.

forbury,i just had a look at the drive you refer to,but somehow i don't think your above post is your best work. Normally i think people read your posts and go,those words are a bit harsh,but i can see what forbury means. But this time,i think you've been a bit hasty pulling the trigger thinking there was ammuntion in the gun,but turned out there wasn't any. Anyways,i watched the waimate cup today and thought what a great field they had. Tanzania ran another top race for 2nd. did you know hes competed in the timaru,akaroa,geraldine,rangiors,motukarara,amberly,ashburton and waimate cups and the rangiora classic,since mid november. hes won one cup,had 3 seconds and 1 third in the other cups. Yet hes only earnt $26,000. compare that to a horse like eagle hanover,a lower grade north island trotter who has raced in 3 races with higher stakes than tanzaniia ever has recently simply because hrnz fund auckland better, and who has started 4 more times in the same time frame and had 1 win,2 seconds and 2 3rds and hes earned only $5000 less at $21,000. Eagle hanover had his win at kapitit and his placings at manawatu and the low grade cambridge meetings. hes also ran a few fourths. a horse like topaz has earnt $10,000 in the same time frame yet is rated 20 points lower than tanzania. so,HRNZ is throwing money at the high class races and the 2 year olds,but taking the country cups horses in canterbury for granted.

southlands problem has been they don't have the numbers to sustain the amount of racing programmed for their region,so you just get a diluted,less profitable profit. And of course the levels of participation is influenced by the returns people get,so if you have a less profitable product then the abilty to sustain levels of returns must drop and subsequently so will partication drop further. Its all just an ever decreasing circle. thats never going to change.so the best approach is to address the issues now,not later. HRNZ are being consistent,.They seem to be taking the same head in the sand approach as they are to the auckland problem. Thats why i often say theres a lack of vision and leadership coming from hrnz. Everyone knows what the problems are,but leadership put off addressing the problems because its simply easier to paint over the cracks,and then move on to postions with greener pastures .Thats how it all seems to work.

looking at last year,the smaller fields and race numbers came in july-september,so maybe no southland harness racing between july and mid september. I'sn't it just common sense to cut out the southland meetings which run at a loss during those months and incentivise redirecting the resources(i.e. the horses) into racing in canterbury or auckland during those same months when their fields are light in numbers,thus increasing the returns from those races.

Actually,the trainer pulled off a feat that would be seldom achieved in harness racing. The gardeners pride won for him at otaki in january,and her daughter,who he also trains,the horse being discussed,senior constble liz,8 years her junior ran 6th in the same race. The trainer would have been smiling that day.

I've previously pointed out southland harness racing is heading in the same direction as auckland . no doubt about it. I've also previously said part of the answer is they should shorten the racing season and have no racing in june/july and august.They simply don't have the numbers to justify racing all year around,its too cold and the small number of southland horses that want to race in those months can be based in canterbury or auckland,maybe with a travelling subsidy,to supplement the field sizes in those areas..Thats what used to happen in years gone by,and thats what they should be doing again. for southland,the age of most trainers and the demise of the number of owner trainers ,who once were so plentiful,are areas of obvious concern. The reasons for the decline is best understood by southlanders. In my opinion,the solution to future proof the sport in southland,is HRNZ should bulk fund,at all current levels provided for stakes and other things,to an organisation comprised solely of southland racing people. I understand currently HRNZ expects clubs in areas like southalnd to set stakes at certain levels.Hrnz need to continue to fund current stake levels,but let southland distribute as they see fit,not as HRNZ see fit. And southland need to come up with their own financially sustainabilty model and get HRNZ to agree to it long term which can future proof that region and avoid any consequences of poor decision making made by HRNZ, having an impact on them. And of course with a more sustainable southland industry as a result of all decision making in the hands of southlanders,they won't be the drain on harness racing in nz that they are becoming.Its a win/win situation.

hrnz press release last month said they paid out 1.15 million last year in bonuses. 1.15 million spent to get more starters and its made no difference to the number of starters. So what have HRNZ done,doubled down on a policy that everyone except them can see doesn't work.Stupid is as stupid does. This week HRNZ will pay out $31,000 in stakes and bonuses for the 4 horse 2yo race at auckland and $24,000 on stakes and bonues for the 3 horse race at addington.

He must just be going around for the experience and the $332 appearance money. After paying the drivers fee i suppose thats about $232 for turning up. The horse actually went well enough last week to have been considered a chance in a non win race,so strange he didn't start in one of those this week where he could have earned much more. you see others do that. Rachmaninov has been around,just for appearance money a few times in races where he had absolutely no chance of placing. I think you started a similar thread about him as well. Brad mowbray has lined up a few 2 year olds in the past,in those bigger races,who seemed just there for appearance money,some of whom predictably broke due to their inexperience when running beyond their capabilities. Its just what some people chose to do. personally i agree with you,whats the point, but its their horse so their decision. And lets be honest. Hrnz,is actively promoting a policy of rewarding trainers of horses bought at this years sales,with appearance money,even if they know they will run a tailed off last, in 2 year old races next year.

yes he did say that,it did sound a bit odd coming from the whale,who has such a thorough knowledge of all things harness.I'm guessing he just confused himself somehow.I'm sure he knows who max hill is and what hes achieved so far.. We can all do that occasionally.

i agree i was good to see the box seat discuss it. The only things i would add are. While i believe r todd was trying to do the right thing by the betting public and warn them pre race of the likely tactics of his driver,both todd and ferguson seem to have doubled down on the assumption there was only one way for the horse to be driven to achieve the least taxing run fresh up. any punter can tell you thats not the case. Fergsuon could have used his well known gate speed and set a slow pace,or used the gate speed and trailed or gone back at the start then moved up when the pace was slow,or etc... There were so many possible scenarios tactically that could have been employed that ensured the horse was put into a position to win and still not had a tough run fresh up. Todd and ferguson seem to be sticking to ,well making the horse run home in 25.3(according to the whale) was easir on their horse, than insread running home a full second slower than if they had been up front and made a tactical forward move on a previous 33 middle quarter. Also,i really think this whole marketplace thing illustrates why bit of yarn had such a long running thread on a horse from the todd stable,mounga,which i started,after it ran over on the coast just on a year ago. The whole point of that thread was to highlight punters displeasure over the questionable tactics employed that day,and specifically the failure of the stipes to even give it a mention in their report. todd may have possibly learnt from that thread and thought he was doing the right thing by the public last week,but judging by last week,the stipes at auckland never learnt anything. so last weeks drive was just history repeating itself and you have to question the sincerity of the motives of the stipes who are now saying they should have at least questioned fergusons drive.

To me,i think the video clearly shows the horse who started in front of tessamae was standing ok at the start,the tape was released and that horse just stood there and then just moved in slightly just after that. so no interference occured prior to the start,so the race had commenced when interference took place. Rough luck for those who backed tessamae,but you would only get a late scratching if interference was happening prior to the start,not once the race had commenced. So i thought the decision to not late scratch tessamae was pretty clear cut correct.

R Todd said in his pre race interview on trackside on the night mouaga would be driven conservatively and would be hoping for luck, so punters were advsied of the tactics.His price reflected those comments. Of course mounga has been a horse we've discussed before on bit of a yarn R todd was previously criticsed for not publicly advising punters at westport of the change in tactics,when a hot favorite. On that occassion the mounga team took punters for a ride when seemingly just there for a quiet run and ended up looking a certainty beaten when a hot favorite.had they advised punters pre race at westport then they would not have received criticism. so,if we are being fair to todd and ferguson as far as mounga goes at auckland,r todd was trying to do the best thing by puinters as regards mounga,so shouldn't be criticised. Still, not a drive by c ferguson that helped his horses chances even under the circumstances. I'm guessing you didn't hear r todds pre race comments around both horses. They are part of why c ferguson is getting criticsed for the marketplace drive and not mounga and those comments are a significant part of the basis for punters trusting those comments and making marketplace,the winner of its last 6 ,including 2 group 1's,the hot favorite and mounga paying about $8.

Me thinks you have taken my inca reference just a tad out of context there gammalite. your doubling down on punters are fools to bet on harness racing. ok,maybe thats what you think. But if thats what you think,then what does that say about an industry when someone with knowledge of it thinks punters are fools to invest on the product they supply.

So you think the punters are fools. i don't think punters are the fools gammalite. the fools are the ones who take their role in sustaining the industry for granted. And,lets be honest gammalite. it wasn't that long ago,there was Operation INCA,remember that. What was the one thing i thought everyone agreed on,,no matter what perspective you had. it was the stipes had the authority to deal with the issues that arose in the inca races,but failed in their duty to uphold integrity matters, which then created an environment and perception that normalised questionable actions whcih ultimately caused considerable harm to those involved and the industry as a whole. so,that race last night, was more of the same and little has been learnt by the stipes,in my opinion. You do realise the stipes are supposed to protect not only the public,but the horsemen from harming themselves by pulling them up and saying be careful to not cross the line.

complartely agree. Like i have said so many times, The stipes in auckland watch the races with the caps on their binoculars. And like i have said before. A significant portion of the blame for operation INCA was the stipes ilack of action in enforcing,or even considring enforcing matters as relates to integrity in races. Last nights stipes report shows they have learnt nothing from operation inca. All they had to do was put in their stipes report that they questioned ferguson about his drive and inform the public why ferguson thought it ok to give his horse absolutely no chance of winning when he could have given it an easy run and won. But no,nothing. They have just green lighted any driver sitting at the back of a field on a red hot favorite and making no attempt to win. Fergusons drive was not a normal drive . What other driver is going to sit at the back on a $1.40 shot when they are going so slow over such and extended distance? how did fergsuon come to have such a mindset, where he knew the stipes would green light his drive as perfectly fine and dandy. . well,the answer is in that races stipes report.

Not sure why your comparing dalgetiy's drive with fergusons drive. You only have to look at the sectionals that the commentator gave out to see they were totally different races. Marketplace: ran a mile rate of 2.02.3 republican party :1.55.9 the 800m between the 1600m and 800m ran in: marketplace: 66.3. republican party:62.0 obviously drivers are expected to be able to assess how a race unfolds and adjust tactics accordingly. i agree Carter dalgety on republican party didn't give his supporters much chance when not moving on a 400 run in 32.2.,but compare that to the 800m run slowly that ferguson just sat there and made no move on a horse who everyone knew could have had he wanted to. you refer to wide draws. Well marketplace drew 5,not 8 like republican party. and of course,your favorite driver won the race from barrier 8. Anyways,i'm not talking through my pocket. Then we had in nz the trackside presenter,virtually saying after the race that the trainer had said pre race he was there for a conditiong run with the aim being for the following week. Mr o'connors comments didn't help,as the trainer said in his pre race interview "the horse is here to win". At least the whale expressed surprise that the driver chose to drive it the way he did,given the race was a group 2. really,there is no fault that should be attached to the trainer on this occasion,its his driver,c fergsuon, who chose to treat the punters with no respect. you know the stupidest thing about mr fergsuons drive,is if you see him driving a $1.40 favorite in a non win race at invercargill,you will see him trying to win every time. But in a group 2 race,he somehow thinks maintaining punters faith in drivers trying,somehow is irrelevant.

But this one didn't get beaten because of either reason you mention.. It got beaten because of lack of intent by the driver.

I agree that the race was a very bad look for the industry. anyone who says it wasn't is denying the obvious. When your driving such a high profile horse,paying a $1.40 ,you have a responsibilty to put your horse in the race when they are running times slower than they run at the workouts.. Non win trotters go faster mid race at auckland than they did in that race. Yet the driver of the best 3 year old in nz chose to give his horse no chance of winning,because he apparantly is more interested in next week. Greg o'connor making excuses for the drive after the race was a bit of a laugh moment as well. mr o'connor must know people watching aren't that stupid.Horses aren't going to have a hard run if the driver moves up and sits parked for the last round when they are running a 1/4 in 33 seconds. Non win trotters do it easily. at least the whale seemed to have a more tranparent view,pointing out the race was a $60,000 race.

The junior drivers premiership is an interesting contest. The tab has wilson hose as the favorite at $2.10 from carter dalgety at $2.40. harrison orange is at $8. Sam thornley is at $4.50. Last month i had thought harrison orange was a good chance of winning,but he doesn't get the same opportunities numbers wise,so in reality its hard to see him winning the title. I think he may be employed by the purdon/phelan training partnership,but they only give him 1 drive a week if hes lucky. I suppose you can understand that as z butcher and c hackett have done the hard yards working for that stable and drive very well,but nevertheless i'm surprised the purdon/phelan stable hasn't taken better advantage of the half penalty wins for their owners while orange is still eligible for them. Actually i think the telfer stable in the North island would win a lot more races if they had h orange driving for them as there number 1 drivera,but i doubt that will happen as they too seem loyal,which i can understand on one hand,but i can't on the other.J dickie is a good driver and i think he may have driven 5 winners in a night not that long ago,but personally i'm not his biggest fan. That stable also has a harrison who is quite capable and the lady from russia started off well,but just seems to lack confidence to show any aggression,so isn't going too good recently. so as far as the junior title goes,i really can't see C dalgety getting beaten and i'm surprised hes still paying $2.40. The trainers title is interesting. M house seems to be on a mission to win that this year.The season is only 2 1/2 months old and already house has 39 wins,which when you comapre it with his 65 wins in the whole of last year,shows he is going to be tough to catch. Hes been having a lot of new horses come into his stable recently and hes doing well as always. personally i would like to see him win as i think he contributes the most to the sport in nz. Interestingly the tab still has the dunns as the favorites.House is currently 25 wins in front of them. I know the dunn stable has stables in both islands,so maybe they will catch up. One thing i have noticed in the last 3 weeks is the improvement in the form of their higher grade horses. The likes of Double time,dalton shard,dancetilldawn,bryces medel all have turned there form around in the last couple of starts so maybe they are going to get on a roll. There lower grade horses have been ticking away without those signs of improvement recently,so maybe they will have a pick up in form as well.They have malakai as a hot favorite in the first tommorrow night. I had thought he may be worth a $ and expected a price around $4,but the $2 price hes currently paying seems like one of those bets where the return doesn't warrant the risk.Maybe the whales tipped him?

I suppose this is still valid . I happened to read it just before, when looking up a separate issue i was discussing with someone. Under general terms and conditions of holding a tab account 6.1 you acknowledge that the laws of overseas jurisdiction prohibits tab from offering wagering services to persons physically located in those jurisdictions. 6.2. you expressly agree that you will not place a bet nor otherwise use your account while you are physically located in australia,singapore or ireland.

Just watching rfk jnr. interestingly he was saying all the heads of his agencies have said the chickens should not be vaccinated,because if you use a vaccine that is not sure to protect the birds against the disease, you turn those flocks into possible mutation factories which may end up with something that is much more likely to jump to other species. He said most of his scientiests are against the culling of flocks that suffer infections,saying instead the best strategy is to isolate the sick flocks,treat them with theraputics and let the disease go through the flocks and the birds that survive,identify their gentetics and in the future those birds with those genetics should be the ones that are bred from.. He said the reason bird flu doesn't have the same effect on the wild population of birds is because the wild birds have evolved to being the ones that have the genetics to not be effected by the virus. He also went on to say,as far as the theraputics being given to sick birds,if they could identify the theraputics that worked on the chickens that would be a good starting point to identifying the theraputics which work best on humans who get infected. also he said chicken farns should be trying to avoid allowing wild birds to drop in and mingle with chicken flocks. Apparently you can get just one duck swooping in for a quick feed and it possible that one bird could lead to a whole chicken flock being infected. he said 166 million chickens have been culled in the usa since the latest outbreak about 18 months ago. nothing to do with harness racing,but nonetheless, i thought it interesting and seems such a logical approach.

i don't think he would have been intending to help his father on this occasion.i know in the past he has been put out for a couple of dodgy drives,but i don't think that was one. Just the way it turned out.Monaro meg had its chance.Just turned it cost him a higher placing.When i bet on a d ferguson drive,i know he may sometimes pull the wrong rein or go too hard or too slow if in front. Actually,if you had watched monaro megs videos when racing in the south island,its best races have been when coming up the inside,so i do see why you thought it odd he came out .t Actually manawatu is one of those tracks that you do see a lot of odd driving. W house in the last race went on the inside after 200m when it seemed the wrong thing to do. Then came out 400m later but 1 position further back. Manawatu isn't a track where you want to get stuck 4 back the fence,but he drives a lot of winners there. H orange and p ferguson are the drivers in the best form at the moment up there in my opinion. C hackett also driving well.

ok,worldpools are obviously always going to be larger than non-world pools.Why,because those races got greater exposure. perhaps best to stick to nz harness racing and how sky racing coverage exposure on saturday effected turnover on the invercargill trots. i don't have the nz tote pools,but they always follow the patterns of tabcorp nsw turnover pools. the first 4 races at invercargill had sky racing channel 2 coverage. They had the 4 highest turnover races on the nsw tabcorp,with the largest win pool being 5113 on race 2 ,the non win pace. the remaining races,races 5-10,had no aussie sky racing coverage whatsoever,they were the 6 lowest win pool turnovers on the day,with 2527 being the highest.. at new plymouth gallops ,the first 4 races were on sky channel 1 and the last 4 on sky channel 2. The races with the two highest turnovers were shown on sky channel 1.

Not sure whether you can answer this one,but do the race meetings you go to,if any,still provide terminals where you can place a cash bet with an operator. I read a couple of months ago that tabcorp victoria was not going to be providing that service anymore at most of their race meetings on all 3 codes in victoria.The gallops lobbied the state government for tabcorp to provide the cash terminals on raceday,but the state government said tabcorp didn't have to provide on course betting terminals. the gallops victoria then came to an agreement to have 140 race meetings in the year covered. tabcorp lost over a billion a year ago and apparently theyre not providing some traditional services to cut costs. the article i read said the taking away of on course terminals was likely to occur in other states in the not too distant future. Imagine that. you go on holiday in australia,go the races and won't be able to place a bet on course.

so how does that work? if say your in australia on holiday,can you put a bet on your nz tab account? If the proposed geo blocking the nz government is considering eventuates,,so they stop nz punters betting on australiain betting agencies,does that mean new zealanders in nz can't bet can't bet on say tabcorp. For example i have a tabcorp account mainly because their website is so much more user firiendly,just a lot better than the nz tab one. just easier to look at.It also has all the replays available of the nz harness races about the same time each race is confirmed,long before they are on the hrnz website and you can view videos of each starters previous nz harness starts on the tabcorp website to help you make selections if you wish. having said that,tabcorp would the worst company to deal with, i've ever experienced in my lifetime. Easy enough to set up an account,but when i first made a little bit of money and tried to sort out how to withdraw it it took about 3 months,hundreds of phone calls,hundreds of emails to get them to help. I even complained to an australain federal agency and they were absolutely no help whatsover, as they said it was a tabcorp issue,not covered by them. They never once replied to emails,phone calls,eventually after months of trying ,i wrote them a letter comnplaining and they contacted me. Tabcorp truly the pits as far as customer service went. I only persevered at the time because i wanted my money out. I still have have a tabcorp account as well as a nz tab one and bet solely on nz harness,not much on the tabcorp one due to the pool size,but just to spread some bets due to the nz pools being too small sometimes,thus efffecting prices.Are the nz government propsoing to stop that Would that mean if i was in ausssie the only betting i could do on nz harness would be through the tabcorp account? brodie,if you can't bet on nz racing as you suggest,do you find a way around that.