the galah

I gave an earlier explanation as to what i thought was the most likely scenario,given how they died. I understand you are looking at it from the point of view where no one can say for sure,not wishing to think anything too negative about the stable.

If you or anyone honestly do believe that is a result of over training,then how could you possibly have any respect for a stable that does that. Thats got to be worse than the cause i have suggested,as the signs of an over trained horse would be there before they took it to the races.I at least give the telfer stable credit for having the ability to recognise how to train a horse properly. Tell me when have the all stars ever lost 3,2 or even 1 horse in similar circumstances on the racetrack.You linking the all stars stable to what has happened with the telfer horses is unfair. Tell me,have you even bothered to watch the videos of the said races. I can only imagine what it would have been like to watch a racehorse stagger its way back into the stables ,then drop dead,or be at auckland the night the telfer horse collapsed and dieda few metres from the winning post. I have given what i think is the most likely scenario.What i have said is not hypocritical whatsoever.I accept that not all performance enhancers,and there are many,are illegal or have yet to have been deemed illegal. Comprehend?

So you have suggested the explanation is because they were over trained as well.That our leading stable over trains them to the point they drop dead. Is that one of the advanced training skills you have referred to previously,that is required to become leading trainer? Well chief,i know you think no one ever uses performance enhancers that testing won't pick up. You have stated that many times. And i know your explanation for the large number of high profile trainers being outed in the USA in the last couple of years was because they were dumb enough to be duped by a vet who sold them what they thought were performance enhancers, over several years,but in fact weren't because testing never picked anything up. And you have stated several times that you believe that its a sign of a top trainer,when owners get big bills which show their horses blood has regularly been analysed and given other treatments to peak their horse for the big days. And here i am suggesting that just maybe, that may have prevented these deaths .Make up your mind. I've never said here that the telfer barn is doing anything illegal, but infer what you want,i don't care. And you say i talk bullshit.

So your suggesting a plausible explanation for in the last 4 months, the Telfer stable having a ratio of about 1 in every 20 horses they have taken to the races die,is because they are overtraining them. Do you really think the current leading stable in NZ don't know when they are over training their horses?Signs such as poor performance,fatigue or longer time to recover after fast work would be picked up straight away. Besides,why do you relate over training to how they died?

I find it surprising that someone with a such a knowledge of horse racing and horse welfare would say that its reasonable to argue that these deaths are unrelated,part of racing and just coincidental. No i am not suspecting nobbling. For that to happen someone would have to travel to both the north and south island training establishments. Its not a plausible argument. Swabs and blood tests from the horses concerned no doubt have been taken,but your kidding yourself if you think that will guarantee to discover the reason.It may well give indications of the cause,or it may not.You should read what the USA investigative branches on the integrity side say as far as that subject goes. So what is the likely cause here. Well,a more plausible explanation than yours would be it is most likely that the administration of a treatment given with the intention of increasing performance,has not been effectively monitored by the stable concerned.The reason for that would be there is a significant cost involved in overseeing particular "treatments". For example some treatments given,are strongly recommended to have blood tests taken regularly immediately after work while the treatment is given over a month or so. That is to avoid too drastic a changes in the horse,which could result in the type of thing we have seen. The double standards i refer to are HRNZ making a point of ensuring proper record keeping and proper oversight of the life of each horse,beyond their years on the racetrack,so as to try ensure they are properly and humanely cared for after racing. Yet,we have the type of thing i have referred to happening in plain sight. One of the ways of drawing attention to things like this is through websites like this.

You say ..Horses live,horses die.Happens every day in various ways. This didn't happen in various ways. It happened in the same exact way each time. Waller lost 3 horses in a month?How,because you have to compare apples with apples..I await your reply on that one. How many individual runners would the telfer barn have had in the last 4 months. My guess would be around 50-60. Now 3 less. Of course the Telfers will have a very good idea of what has been the cause. You say no one is being casual. Well ,my opinion is i interpret your reply as being casual.And of course many will treat it the same way. The telfer barn is the biggest operation in nz. The main buyers at the sales. That is why industry leadership should be ensuring a proper investigation of the cause. It will be the opposite,as judging from recent comments,industry leaders will put as main priority how their actions may be perceived by industry participants.Thats no leadership at all in other words.There is an element of possible animal cruelty,irrespective of whether it be unintentional,to this. Just ask yourself this. If it was a less successful trainer who had the same thing happen then what would people be saying?Double standards exist within this industry from those who should not have them.. And i'm not referring to the enforcement arm when i say that.

Can't see it being anything to do with how they are trained myself. An over trained horse gets tired and goes slower. The 3 telfer horses have all done the same thing. They all of a sudden go from travelling ok,to stopping to a walk,struggle a few hundred more metres,then collapse and die. I realise it is unfair of me or anyone,to say someone can't form their own opinions,but it irks me that on trackside,media coverage and then some comments on here,people just focus on the results on the track and ignore something which in my view is of significance. There is a significant pattern to say the Telfer stable is sending horses to the races which are suffering unintended and unexpected consequences as a result of actions being taken at the Telfer stable. 3 unrelated horses dropping dead at the end of their races in identical circumstances in 4 months is an obvious pattern. It is not a one off medical event. Its a pattern. There is cause and effect here. Its a stain on harness racing that people can be so causal about it in my opinion.

As to carter dalgety. I think at this stage he is a thinker who has all the skills to make a real impact as a freelance driver in years to come. I don't know him from a bar of soap,but from what i see on trackside. Dalgety has an excellent ability to judge pace. Our best two drivers,blair orange and john dunn are exceptional at that.keeping your horse in its comfort zone while using it up is a difficult skill to master. Dalgety appears to have the ideal mindset. He is about controlled aggression and driving to maximise the horses ability. Blair orange is our best at that. Horses respond to that by giving their best. Horses know when they have a driver where they are expected to put in,and they know when they have a driver who they know they can bludge a bit if they are that way inclined. Maintaining that mindset is not easy and is why drivers in my opinion go through slumps in form sometimes. He is very fortunate to have the right opportunity. He has access to driving the horses from the stables with the better chances. In this case his parents and the likes of bob butt. He doesn't knock them around when beaten. Horses back up when driven like that and it shows kindness which i think horses appreciate if they have given a 100%. They are far more likely to back up and respond next time if a driver has that skill. There are other talents a top driver has to have but they are some of the main ones that dalgety appears he may have.. The only negative i can see in what brodie has said, is we are currently not seeing him get a lot of drives. You just can't judge someone based solely on how they drive when they are driving the best horses. They have to prove they can get the best results out of the normal racehorses. That may only be a 3rd in a methven non win race when the horse he is driving is only the 6th best on ability.So while he looks a talent,i don't think we should overstate his skills just yet.

If you go by last years form,the all stars will improve significantly just prior to november with the bulk of their team.Their driving tactics indicated they weren't anywhere near their peak yet. As to the Telfer team. Yes,they are doing a great job as far as success on the track goes. However i see your the only one who bothered to reply to my recent post as regards that stable.Stats like that speak for themselves.Amazing that some people on here just ignore stuff like that and ramble on about their success instead.

Seasider,a first starter for the telfer barn became the 3rd telfer horse to die in the last 4 months at the racetrack.This follows on from the lightly raced Cya doit at auckland and another first starter in Alta Debonair at addington. All just collapsed and died after racing. Why is that happening?

Well i backed first rose,and it had its forward momentum interrupted when the horse it was following,obsession, locked wheels and lost momentum as it improved. It looked like Korbyn newman was just able to prevent first rose from breaking,but purdon not so lucky with chambray who suffered from the chain reaction. No fault of either newman or purdon that they got checked at that point. Personally i didn't rate chambray a win chance in that race,but it was travelling well at the time it broke so not sure how it would have finished.Maybe might have run 3rd or thereabouts.

Senz-I have never once listened to it.Such a shame they didn't keep the racing stations and just broadcast what was being said on the trackside channels. Animal welfare-i agree. The horse is what is unique about racing,and having a pro active animal welfare policy is a must to create the proper perception to the public. Sports divide-i guess that comment relates to the skills of the high achievers in the sport that you refer to. I think you are getting carried away with your description of the gap between the best trainers and drivers .as compared to most others. But yes they must feed,train and drive them well. But you lose me when you say..stop bagging the stars of the sport. Who actually does that? I don't know anyone that does. What i do know is there is a lot of people who rue the fact that the legal additives,which legally enhance performance,are so much better now that the gap between those that use them and those that don't is much more noticeable. And of course,with that comes the difference in degree that a hard run may have on future performance.And i know that the people who think that strongly support the enforcement around level playing field type rules,as its a given that some trainers,and some vets are always looking to help their horses performance. I'm guessing that is the type of comment you refer to as bagging,and the reason you criticise the people who think that is because you can't make the argument about what they are saying,because you would know the merit of your argument on that topic is lacking. Marketing-I always have thought for years that marketing is directed at the wrong people. In my opinion it should always be targeted at people with profiles similar to your customer base.At least the tab have an understanding of that. HRNZ board being lightweights. I don't know any of them,but that seems a bit unfair. I do however think a there is a general downplaying in the quality of the product that harness racing has,amongst most levels of those participating. The negativity around the future is over emphasized . Negativity is contagious. Saying something over and over makes people believe its true. You can't help but think that the negative side of the future of harness racing is oversold,and the positive side of the future is undersold.. Its all about mindset. Which is where industry leadership has a role in uplifting peoples mindset. Its fair to say they aren't achieving that.

De fillipi again showed what a top trainer he still is.Hes still got it. Last night also saw korbyn newmann prove that he can deliver when given the best drives in the dunn team. Two well judged drives. Hes one of those drivers that for some reason seems to be under estimated by the punters,and pays more on the tote than they should. Hes a driver that always gives me confidence to invest if i think hes on a top chance..

A great competitive spectacle last night in that race. A 6 win horse with only 15 starts comes out and wins. That type of horse winning in years gone by would have been very unique. The time they went,and the way they ran the race,should have some effect on some of the less race fit horses.Wouldn't have been ideal.I know addington is an extremely fast track,but there were some tired horses and some reasonable gaps at the finish. There is a reason that race is normally such a tame affair.Those running in it want to have runs that help them get fitter,without over exerting.Still great to see everyone try so hard.

Your right,but i think brodie was meaning it only attracts new people for 1 day. Brodie taking a big picture approach was my interpretation. Nothing wrong with having The Race,but long term its benefits i think are minimal. I'm guessing it wont last too long as it won't be sustainable. Look at the jewels. That was a much better concept and didn't last long.

I'm not saying you don't have a point. As to your figures.I see the proposed budget for 2021/2022 didn't have much change from the previous year.The main changes were Governance ,which board fees are part of,but not the sole contibutory factor, that increased by 50%.. $453,000 is budgeted for what was referred to as animal care/welfare. This appears to have been a new aspect, and was listed as being for the likes of rehoming programmes and support, horse traceability, operational costs of horse ambulance,etc. also they are spending $453,000 on promotion which apparently goes to things like senz radio.That used to come out of tab funds. Personally i think the animal care/welfare costs indicate there was a lack of funding of that area previously. There should be money spent on what they are going to spend it on for that.Its better to be pro active than reactive when it comes to those type of issues. I do wonder about the CEO and the boards ability to provide a unified message and direction that creates positive thoughts amongst the grass roots level. I don't think they have achieved that,or even come close. Sometimes it seems that they just say things to placate certain factions within the industry. Thats not real leadership,thats just weakness..

Maybe Brodie its just there has been a gradual drop off in horse numbers in training all year round,and with meetings this time of year traditionally struggling for numbers anyway,thats where that trend will become more noticeable? Maybe the wet canterbury winter hasn't helped either.

Thinking outside the box is often the best way to find workable solutions and your suggestion is an interesting compromise. Personally i like it thehorseman. Punters are currently advised what horses have drivers with no whips,and they factor that in if they think it relevant.

I'm a punter. I have no issues with the whip rule. Apart from brodie,i don't hear other punters i know complaining about the actual rule. And even brodies main focus is on the penalties.If the rule was unworkable,then how come 99% of drivers comply with it. As i have said,i believe the issue is the excessive penalties. If that were the case then i would agree. However,there is no pattern of inconsistency,so i don't think there is an integrity issue around the RIU'S application. In fact i would say its one of the rules where the policing is the most consistent. Go back a few years and i would say the application of the then whip rules were far more inconsistent and actually as much based on who you were as what you did. Have you forgotten that? Maybe the easiest way of identifying why the rule penalties are excessive is just look at who the repeat offenders have been. Look at for example the penalties given to the likes of colin de fillipi or murray edmonds or ian cameron for example. Isn't it obvious that those people have found it harder to adjust because of the behavior imprinted in their brains from years of using it in a certain way. Hasn't it been obvious that just increasing the penalties each time has been unfair and achieved nothing. Whats been the point of having given these people the treatment they have received? It hasn't made too much sense to many.

I think therein you have actually identified part of the cause that has contributed to the anti RIU feeling for some,that you often talk about. In particular i think the whip issue has created a feeling of unfairness. Its not the rule that participants have an issue with,its the penalties which are given which seem too harsh in comparison with other rule indiscretions. Continually suspending a driver who has no intent to break the whip use rule,and who does so based on years of behavior imprinted in their brain,seems unfair. An element of justification for any penalty, is its to act as a deterrent for future indiscretions.Well when someone is already trying very hard not to do something,then the element of being a deterrent does not apply the same.I'm not talking about the likes of the kerryn manning drive when she won the nz cup,but am referring to the vast majority of indiscretions of this rule. The whip rule has nothing to do with integrity. So why are the penalties so severe? Another issue that i think creates a degree of feeling unfairness is what i believe to be excessive driving penalties given because of the system penalties should be based on the number of drives. It may be fair to the high profile/most active drivers but isn't to someone who gets a couple of drives each week. Why give them 10 times the length of penalty of someone who is getting 20 drives a week. The impact from suspending someone based on the number of drives is excessively greater than it should be on those not so high profile. Lets face it,reality is they are finding it hard to make a living out of the game,and then you go and put them on the sidelines for 3 months.Is that fair? But is it really the RIU who are out of touch with what i have just said. Is it not for the controlling body to give some sort of directive? Or is the controlling body and some its leadership currently happy to stoke the anti RIU feeling. It seems so from what i have read recently.

i've been giving my opinion of his current performance as relates to his driving. You have given age as a factor that may contribute to his current level of performance. Personally i don't think its a given that age has to be a factor in performance. Everyone is different ,possiblly you may be right in this case. However if age is a factor,then how come he can still drive such top races when he puts his mind to it? That is why i have suggested its a lack of desire. His performance in run of the mill races isn't as consistent as it is in races of higher quality. As to "non trying". I accepted that may be not have been the best words to describe it earlier. But the definition of the word try is "make an effort or attempt to do something". The fact that he made little effort or attempt to put his horses in a position where they had a chance was the context for my use of those words.

Craig cross. Whats he doing these days.Does he train any in his name? Was he just a fill in while belinda, then john mccarthy served time on the sideline?

I don't have a black book. I just compare form in each field. I take no notice of what trainers or expert analysts have to say. In fact i prefer it when they tip others in a race i bet on. For example trainer ray green on the lincoln farm website said of riverboy ben was "he will need a big form reversal to figure". I had it rated on top by a couple of lengths,and i believe it ran accordingly,just neaten by its own driver. Its all about comparing the form of who you are running against. Incidentally for My copy he indicated it a good chance who he expected to get handy. I read that after they had run to see what type of explanation they would be giving. As to toodaloolou. If he ends up a similar race to last time,he will be a whale watch horse and the Bookies will open him a hot favorite anyway. Tote prices are very heavily influenced by the FF price and if the whale tips them they pay half of what they real price should be.

Better than yours

No own goal. I "m pretty sure i know how to read a race,and evaluate how its driven. You can't seem to work out when we both say he knows what he's doing,it actually supports my opinion.As i have said think about that when you watch the video of toodaloolou at canbridge.Or perhaps the simply sam drive that he got suspended for recently. You say "when you get up and go around,well not a lot can do it.All horses look good chasing." You sound like you think punters are mugs.