the galah

Just watched a part of the box seat. Micky g stating,the purdons coming to auckland is like the greatest training team possible in the world that could possibly set up,to help the auckland club. As i pointed out earlier,the n purdon/m purdon training partnership ,on last years figures had 213 starters for the whole of 2024. They didn't rate in the top 20 trainers/starters numbers wise in nz. This year,in the first 7 weeks they have had 12 starters.not even in the top 60(probably more but i gave up counting)for providing starters so far in 2025. Mickey g.really is easily excited. settle down old son,as your sounding just a tad hyperbolic .

You have to remember brodie ,its really $27,000 being opaid out for these 5 horse,2 year old races.,once you include the bounus. In my opinion,You ,me and anyone with half a brain can see the bonuses they are offering,on top of the stakes, are having next to no impact on the size of 2 year old fields.(As i predicted last year). Gamma may not agree with me,but its a fact that the connections of horses who won bonuses last year are mostly the same people who were influentail in pushing the bonus schemes.You can't blame those people for that,as after all its just human nature. Its the people from HRNZ who have prioritised the value of some participants over others.Thats why HRNZ policies are seen as giving preferential treatment to certain sectors of the industry and if anything,have had more of an impact by discouraging people from breeding their mares. Its a fact that the entain man must have benefitted from the $12,000 and $6,000 bonuses last year. Must have been around $100,000 he would have got in bonuses. I again would ask,what were the number of starters last year,compared with the year before. And how many mares were bred this year and last(,compared with 2 years ago),since the bonuses came in. The new ,extra $5000 bounses they have this year,will have only very limited impact as well. Sure you may get the odd trainer convincing their owners,that bought a horse at tthe sales,that if youat least pay another months,possibly two, training fees and costs,we will line up your horse up twice and earn $4000,even if you run a tailed off last both time. And hey,mr owner,its great, because i get $1000 as well for being the trainer. Yes,you have always occasionally had the odd trainer line up 2 year olds, when their manners show they aren't ready. I can think of one in particular who often does it. HrNZ seems to be expecting lots of trainers to change their thinking,and expose the fact their 2 year old that has just qualified, isn't up to racing as a 2 year old,but hey think of the bonus. Strange. Anyways,,i'm just playing the same record over again .

was a bit unusual,but the mobile barrier gets closer to the people watching,so don't think there was much cause for concern.

Do you think they need to introduce a speed limit? Maybe not, as the Mobile driver may rack up a few tickets though. Maybe he hit the turbo boost by mistake? No cause for your concern about the kids though,as didn't see any running around on the track.. Must have done a good job putting the shoe back on Putere boy. It won paying $40. wonder if he got the word from the driver and sped back and put a bet on?

former nz,graeme telfer trained,Hanover da moon ran a 1.58 mile rate from a stand when bolting in last night at menagle. The locomotive ran third after starting from 40m but really,after beginning well, made little impression on hanover da moon at any point of the race. Interestingly,hanover da moon originally went to victoria and was trained by andy gath,but only managed to place without looking like winning in mid grade races. Certainly it seems to be a different horse now it has a nsw trainer. also last night you had sooner the better,better knuckle up,we walk by faith and another nz horse ran at menagle . They all went ok but never looked like placing. aardies express ran 4th when favorite. Really its been looking really sore again for some time ,but they keep racing it. Its surprising it keeps trying,but it still seems to.

you touch on a point i've discussed previously. Reality is,trainers like thats participation is taken for granted. If we are to judge by actions,its seems very few,including the hierarchy at hrnz could care less whether they turn up with their horses at the races or not. Heck,we are even discussing a topic where you've stated they shouldn't be turning up at the races with their horses. And guess what,people like that always do eventually just disappear.People do tire if losing is to be their only outcome. you know i started a topic a couple of years ago on here,pointing out how the likes of steve lock or paul andrews were taken for granted. i said if they wanted people like that to continue participating,bringing their horses to the races and making up the numbers in areas like southland, where they have ever declining starter numbers,they should at least try and encourage their continued participation. Simple really,just programme races where their horses may have a chance.. for example,all they had to do was programme a race whereby it could be for non winners,or 1 win horses who have not won in say 2 years or whatever. It was unlikely they would have won anyway,but just communicating with them and telling them they were appreciated would have bought a lot of goodwill. I remember giving the example of a 6 horse non win race in southland ,where they could have put one of the andrews trained horses in,instead of making it run in the r35 grade against horses who had won sevreal races. My point was paul andrews started his 3 horses 150 times in 2021.Thats 150 drivers fees for his drivers. thats extra turnover fot the club. steve lock 135 times the following year. Compare that to say the purdon barn who started their multitude of horses 235 times last year. people can go on about mediocre quality horses making up mediocre fields,but they do add value to the product,before they disappear,even if they aren't appreciated.

would that melando chief get around manawatu? Having said that,maybe the grass at otaki or wairarapa,but its silly if anyone thinks you can just turn up to m,anawatu and win. I think melando chief and buddy reign not going good enough to win there.. having said all that,if the trianer is enjoying taking his horses to the races,then thats what he should be doing. Pointless newmarket telling the trainer he shouldn't be doing something ,that he may actually be enjoying doing.

timaru was one of those tracks the messara report wanted to close.Trainers there seem to be nearly all galloping trainers.i would assume the gallops don't really want to see the trots run on the grass. The date timaru has been given shows that in my opinion. geraldine would have gone to methven i suppose ,had they been forced to close, even though the majority of their crowd for the november meeting came from south canterbury. Methven raced at orari a couple of years ago. Also Orari would have been looking for a grass track meeting, so you would guess timaru wouldn't have suited,,as if the timaru club can only negotiate a midweek april date to have their grass track meeting,then why would geraldine have got one. also i've always thought it obvious that many more people would attend the pre christmas weekend meeting at ashburton, if they ran that on their grass track. Never understood why they haven't done that. Mind you a lot of those clubs with galloping and trotting clubs in the same area,don't cooperate well and have had a history of squabbling.i don't know about now,but it wasn't that many years ago,someone told me ashburon was like that. To me the taupo meeting being 4 days before hawera makes sense. Using the same logic is why i think your comments about the date of the otaki meetins seems common sense.

Great to see a couple of more grass track meetings approved by hrnz,at taupo and timaru. The taupo date is reportedly on a possible good date. harness racing should be about taking the product to the people,so dates are of great importance and potentially down the track they can incorporate another taupo meeting into the holiday xmas period,maybe when trainers are on their way down to otaki. Who knows,but using the proven formula of success of other meetings makes obvious sense. Personally i think the grass track meeting at timaru in april being on a wednesday,makes little sense as far as a suitable date. I've advocated on here several times ,suggesting the timaru harness meeting in late niovember,2 weeks before geraldine,would be the perfect date for a another grass rtack meeting. It may or may not detract slightly from geraldine,but theres no doubt combined it would be a big boost for the product in that area. I also see, timaru have said they will be putting pylons 3 metres out from the rail. That to me doesn't make any sense either. Maybe thats a galloping condition,which in reality shows how some galloping clubs only grudgingly want to allow harness racing on a track used mainly for gallopers. Timaru is a track that narrows as you get close to the finish and if you were to walk it,you would see the outside portion is always significantly rougher close to the finish,i would assume because the gallopers who train on the track use that portion much more due to the narrowing of the tack .So running 3 metres out when theres a perfectly good track next to the rail,seems being over precious to me. but ,i do think these announcements about more grass track racingare positive moves.

Then 10 minutes later ,at albury,the commentator aptly summed up what those who watched had seen, saying that had to be one of the greatest races ever seen at albury. Captain hammerhead,who drew just inside swayzee,kept swayzee 4 wide around the first bend as they both progressed around the field. Then it developed into a war with swayzee attacking for the whole race,but captain hammerhead,driven by Moran,always seemingly going just a wee bit better. What looked to be a 3 horse race when captain hammerhead,swayzee parked and cya art trailing ,came well clear of the rest with a round to go,turned into a 2 horse war with 600m to go, as Captain hammerhead endeavoured to shake swayzee. And that he did with 400m to go,but swayzee,wasn't done yet and with captain hammerhead all out ,swayzee made one last lung to keep the million $ dream alive,but captain hammerhead and Moran also just kept giving enough and clung to victory,with both horses ,and the rest of the runners,some distance away, all out at the finish. the crowd who were there would remember that race for many a year,the night swayzee gave his all,but captain hammerhead and moran just wouldn't let him past.You could here the buzz watching it on trackside.

In my opinion,thats a silly thing to say. House contributes far more to nz harness racing than anyone else and makes far better use of harness racings number one resource,the horses,than anyone else. Theres another thread currently on the purdons and how significant they could be for auckland harness racing. So far in the first 6 weeks of the current season,the michael house stable has provided 152 starters and the purdon stable 10. so 15x more starters for house. also ,house is representative of the grass roots of harness racing,regularly training horses that small trainers have had previously. Theres a reason for that.Smaller trainers trust him to cut a deal that enables their horses to race on and contribute to them and the harness racing industry. i could go on and quote facts and figures,but i really don't get the thinking of anyone who underscores the achievements of the house stable and the contribution the trainer/driver/owners make. if anything,i think m house should be running HRNZ. And no,i don't have any connection to m house.

horses just keep going when this fella drives them. I just watched the last race at manawatu and orange summed things up and the horse respeonded with a top effort. I assume s doody ,the horses trainer had discussed the best way to drive jahi and orange executed that beautifully. The only fly in the ointment was jay abernethy,who refused to give the lead to him. I suppose it wasn't a surprise in some ways,as personally i always think abernethy is a tactically very unpredicatable driver. He was driving a horse who you knew was not going to be a hope if driven like abernethy did,but not all drivers are the best judge of other horses form and unpredictability makes racing interesting sometimes. But orange wasn't intimidated and drove the horse to its strengths and the horse was very willing all the way to the finish and was good enough to get the win. personally i don't think i've seen a driver with oranges natural talent before. maybe dexter dunn or maybe his father may come close. Hopefully he doesn't get a big head,as if he continues on a he has started,hes sure to achieve big things. the surprising thing is hes still paying $21 to win the junior drivers title. I guess because you only see him getting good opportunities at tracks like manawatu,he may be flying under the radar ,as far as that goes. He may struggle to get enough opportunities to win the title this year. But theres no doubt hes talented enough to win it.

It had been reported some time ago that their property at rolleston had been sold. The pak n sav next door already has its structure up and they say it will open later in the year and the pak n sav will be the main thing in the new shopping hub there. Obviously the clock was ticking down on when the move had to be made,so i guess its not like nathan purdon had a choice of staying where he was. I had read not that long ago that the pukekohe facilities needed quite a bit of money spent on them to bring them up to standard. But the move north ,whartever way you look at it,is to an area with an uncertain future. we still haven't had any plans announced by HRNZ as to exactly what plans and alternate plans they may have. You don't have to be a maths scholar to understand that anyone suggesting the auckland trotting club will solely finance any new training facility,once pukekohe is sold,is a dunce. Firstly,will they get near that $90-100m from any future buyer,given many say the original chinese buyers significantly over valued the property. Then even if they did,any new buyer you would think, wouldn't pay for the property until just prior to taking possessiion. So given the trainers at pukekohe would have nowhere to train from if a new buyer took possession after a quick sale,then where do all the trainers and horses go. And if they were able to lease it back for a year or two,then auckland wouldn't get paid for some time and would keep having the reported half a million a month added on to their debt,meaning they would not be able to contribute anything to a new training centre. Then even if they decided to sell alexandra park,all that takes time as well,but where would the races be held. And then why would HRNZ come to the rescue. Hrnz must know,that by putting tens of millions into a new training centre,without a guarantee over total control of the money from the sale of either pukekohe or alexandra park,would really tie south island racing to going down with the auckland ship.Having said that,they seem happy to fund the inflated auckland stakes with all the $35,000 finals that the south island never get for that5 grade of horse. And there are other variables that seem obvious,but the next at manawatu's on,thats more interesting than scratching ones head about what goes on in the north island.

seems an irony there. Steven reid moves to canterbury,then the purdons announce a move to train from steven reids fromer barn,at a training centre that the auckland club is desperate to sell,with no guarantee that any future purchaser will extend a lease to enable training to continue from ,even if it was sold. Auckland of course does have a future if sensible,realistic decisions regarding future plans , are made by the club and hrnz. but where's the evidence of anything currently being in place or being sustainable? What is happening with the pukekohe training centre? How many more millions will the auckland club be in debt before they announce a sale and will the sale price be anywhere near what the original offer was and how many million $, (possibly tens of millions) will hrnz contribute to help establish a training centre for the pukekohe trainers and will racing continue at alexandra park.And where does that HRNZ money come from? All those questions you would think must have been in the back of the minds of the purdons,but they have the luxury of having a big bank balance and can set up there own training facilty down the track i suppose. But at the end of the day,the purdons have a history of making wise decisions so lets hope they are happy and prosper and contribute as they have previously, to racing in the upper north island. i would say,they are a definite plus for auckland racing,as auckland harness racing is very much reliant on the professional trainers to provide the horse numbers. Having said that. The purdon stable very much focus on the udr. Last year they lined up 216 starters,and didn't actually make the top 20 trainers nz starters, numbers wise.

Maybe that "previously" definition was used to cover all the bonuses at the time and was more applicable to some other bonuses that they brought in and then cancelled. Like the nz bred stallions bonus. In that example,If you were a breeder and thinking, (or silly enough to think),that the bonus for going to a nz bred sire in the year that bonus scheme was announced,would still be going by the time your nz bred stallion foal got to races,then you may have ended up feeling a bit annoyed when they cancelled it the following year. Anyways,under the previous conditions,if you had bred a horse that won a 2 year old race,then obviously it shouldn't have needed to be stipulated it was within 5 years as it would have gone without saying,that it must have been. But what you say the defintion now is. i find a bit ambiguous personally. because they have used the word "since the 2021/2022 breeding season". does that mean since the start of that season,meaning the breeder of a mare bred in 2021/22 season is eligible,or does since mean from the end of the breeding season,meaning if a breeder hadn't bred after the 2021/22 season,then they wouldn't be eligible for the bonus,if a 2 year old they bred wins. had they used the words,including or after,i think it would have been much clearer. Now heres the main thing about the 2 year old breeders bonus. Did it result in more mares being bred in the season just after it was announced. and,did it result in more mares being bred in the year just gone by. If it didn't,and sadly we know the answer to the first part,then was utilising the money in the way they did,the best way to get more breeders breeding their mares.Clearly no, in my opinion,but this years figures will tell the story ,whenever they put those out.

What you say about the ladbrokes racing club discontinuing in australia is interesting. the tab racing club in nz hasn't been going long,but apparently is still going and has been promoted as being modelled on the now discontinued ladbrokes racing club. from what i've read previously the tab racing club is more about getting people to come along to the races to experience what goes with ownership,without any financial output,nor any financial rewards. They do say members can go into a draw sometimes for bonus prizes,whatever that may be. just last month Entain announced their forecast profit for the 2024 year was likely to be in the 1.26-1.32 billion US $. When they announced that, their shares went up 9%. that may sound good,but last year entains share prices fell by 30% and then a further 12% last month,prior to entains announcement,when the main US sports betting ageancy,flutter,advised they will be taking a hit to its yearly earnings. seems the problem for flutter and entain,who are the big players in USA sports betting, has been the current NFL season has seen the highest % of favorites win in the last 20 years. Entain and its partner(mgm), apparently lost 250 million US $ on the us sports side of things. JP Morgan saying' they think Entain will neeed more time and investments to turn its overall trading and profitability momentum around''. Don't know about the being bought out brodie,as they are still one of the biggest gambling companies worldwide. anyways,back to HRNZ and entains focus on 2 year olds. The biggest issue i have always had is simple, what proof have they given us that getting more 2 year olds to race will mean more overall starters ,of all ages ,in years to come. I mean,ask yourself,shouldn't it be blatantly obvious,the focus must be on getting more starters,irrespective of their age. I mean,by putting their focus on getting 2 year olds racing and neglecting older horses,then even if you achieve your goal with the 2 year olds,overall you still will be losing if you lose the same number of the older horses by ignoring their needs.. Its such a basic ,yet HRNZ ignore it. Which is why i keep saying,i don't think these people are very clever as not once have they addressed the point i just made.Wheres the proof what they are doing will help overall long term?

So the latest press release says they will only pay out the bonus to the connections of winning 2 year olds. the press release says" the big change is that the $6,000 that has been paid for either running second to a previous bonus winner or being the first non winning pacer or trotter home in a ratings race, has been discontinued". Going by that statement,theoretically last year you could have lined up the only 2 year old in a non win race for 2 year olds and older,and got $6,000 even if you ran last. thats going by the latest press release anyway. i think its a good thing they have stopped those $6,000 payments. But then again they are giving away $4,000 payments if you make it to the races ,run last, for horses bought at the sales this year who meet the criteria. And ,these bonuses that they change or cancel each year,if they were supposed to encourage more breeders to breed,wouldn't the breeders be worried that it might change by the time the mare they bred from last year has a foal old enough to race in future years. Anyways,the thing about this press release,is it wouldn't be a press release about 2 year old bonuses,without some smoke and mirrors . The press release says this. "we have more and more 2 year olds racing all the time and hrnz in conjunction with entain are keen to support this trend through 2025 says mathew peden" the number of 2 year olds that raced increased from 18 to 21% of the crop in 2024 and that number will only rise this year''. so can you see what they have done there. They have said theres more and more 2 year olds racing,yet they don't actually say what the number was. Why not use the simplest way for anyone to understand. Compare one figure with the next. But Instead they go to the % of the crops in previous years comparison. of course the flaw in that,which they must know,is if you had a larger crop in the earlier year,then you may in fact have had less 2 year olds racing last year than the previous year.

moran i would give a 3 week suspension and $500 fine,but leave the horse as the winner as i believe,after taking taking into account the winning margin,relegation was not warranted. And i would have used an alternate rule to the ones the victorian stipes used. cam hart i would give a $500 fine given the significance of the race pete mcmullen and dexter dunn -nothing -i would boot that one upstairs for the rule makers to clarify if i had concerns. the victorian stewards i would call them in,tell them ,look at all the crap publicity which resulted from the poor use of their discretion relating to what rule they used to apply to captain hammerheads race,tell them,if you think what your doing isn't fair,then don't do it.use your powers fairly.Then i would say,i'm heading across the road for a subway for lunch,care to join me,i'm paying...(i'm not a big spender) what would you have done?

fair enough. so if you look at the blown up picture on the peter profit website ... c hart has definitely breached rule 170(1) a and possibly b as well. And breached rule 170(2). The focus all coming about as a result of the moran case. Thats what happens when you open a can of worms like the victorian stipes did.

not sure what your on about.But i'll answer it based on whats in the rules. everyhorseman shall drive throughout the race with both feet in the rests of the sulky designed for that purpose.

Consistency in the application of the rules. i've never said i expect all penalties to be the same. in fact i keep telling you the tasmanian case you often refer to,is an example of a breach of a similar rule,but the circumstances are chalk and cheese and deserve different outcomes. so really your take on that part of what i've said, isn't accurate . the consistency in the application of the rules is just a basic in my opinion. I don't understand how someone can say,harts foot being in a different part of the structure of the cart and not the footrest, complies with the rule which says the foot should remain in the footrest except when activating gear. on the moran thing,i think your instincts are good and i think what you posted early on m was fair comment,in my opinion. as to harsher penalties. i get what you say there. but reality is anyone who gets a perceived harsher penalty can appeal and the appeal process is based on ensuring a fair and consistent penalty,based on each cases unique circumstances. so really,i have faith the appeal process of the harness system can deliver fair penalties. but i get what your saying and would agree that penalities in the courts place far too much significance on the criminals rites and too little emphasis on the impact of the victims and the detterence factor. They make out they do,but you only have to read the court news to feel that the justice system is often out of wack. calling peter profit a woke activist on a mission to destroy the sport is not in any way how i view him. You say hes ripped into robert dunn at times. well maybe he has,i can't recall that. i recall him saying negative things about john dunn,mark jones and andrew fitzgerald. Well,in my opinion mr profits negative articles on those people actually undermines himself a bit. He opens himself up for criticism drawing conclusions that aren't obvious,i think he needs to focus more on the obvious,thus should move on from his focus on the aforementioned personalities.Still hes entitled to his opinions,i often don't share them,but hes the one with a successful journalist business.

many,many times mr profit has written factual stories about both australian and nz harness racing, which you never get from the rose tinted nz/australian harness media. examples like ...whats happening at the auckland trotting club,whats happening with the yoles in tasmania, stories about integrity issues where he reveals evidence given at hearings,etc,etc . His opinion pieces he states are just that,but reality is he has a knack for writing about current discussion topics and personalities,which reflects he has many sources who are tapped into the latest gossip. his factual stories are facts and his opinion stories are opinions. i don't know why people get upset about what he says,as reality is,why do they care what he says when they don't value his opinion. he is media,and look around,media everywhere is rubbishing politicians,religious groups,conservative values,etc,etc. As to you suggesting theres nothing wrong with cam hart putting his feet where do does sometimes. Well,to me its a good example of the type of thinking ,where one rule for him and another for everyone else. Just because hes a super talented driver does not mean he should get special dispensation. As i've sdaid before,your comparing moran to the tasmanian race is like comparing chalk and cheese. And like i have said before,horses have not always been disqualified ,in fact its very rare and i have given examples of different outcomes..

so it sounds like your agreeing that he doesn't have his foot in the footrest? hard not to agree with mr profit when the picture shows he doesn't.And he did move it around,no denying that from the video. mr profit is stating a fact.He had a blown up picture of where harts foot is. Personally i think the position of harts foot looks a bit odd,but i couldn't care less what hes up to as nothings obvious to me other than his foot isn't in the footrest like the rules say it should be. But ,i believe the photo of what hart did and the inaction of the stewards strengthens the argument i have been making all along. That is, the double standards of the application of the rules by the victorian stewards and the can of worms they opened by the precedent set ,when handing down the penalty for morans horse. and of course ive pointed out that drivers can unintentionally and intentionally drop their feet from footrests. anyway,from your post above,it sounds like your agreeing with most of that. i did note back at the start of the moran thread,that you said it was a possibilty that moran dropped his foot when becoming unbalanced when driving his horse with the whip. also,i don't think mr profits an idiot at all. His publications are more like tabloid racing stories,or racing gossip columns.. Some are very accurate and informative,but others are just opinions and you can agree or disagree with him if you like.he has his detractors for sure, but I think hes a clever man the way he has built up his business.Thing is,he may not always be accurate when expressing his opinions,but there is enough overall truth and good instincts to give him credibility with many.

i see peter profit has a photo of swayzees driver,cam hart,with his foot not in the footrest when winning the hunter cup. Hart has his foot further down the structure of the cart. In fact you can see from the video of the race,that harts foot seems to move around 4 or 5 times around the vicinity of the horses hocks. Hard to tell whether any contact is made,but going by the assumptions the victorain stipes made about moran,then i think mr profit has a good point ,when he asks why didn't the victorian stipes pick that up and have an inquiry. it actually looks like its something hart may do a bit as he appeared to do the same thing in his latest nz cup win.He didn't do it in his 2023 cup win. maybe theres nothing to it,or maybe mr hart is just a bit more cunning than mr moran.

I don't know. i was using the harness rule and giving an example of imagining what could happen if a similar rule was applied to cars on a 3 lane highway. obviously that went straight between your ears and out the other side. drug testing not required for bit of a yarn,like you suggest. For you , instead of a drug test,i would prescribe a lay down and taking of 3 panadol and 2 prozac if you see the galah has replied to one of your posts.