the galah

I've come round to your way of thinking gammalite.After keeping records and analysing every harness race in queensland in the last 3 months,i think its fair to conclude that its not worth the time and effort to follow queensland harness. I spent a lot of money,yet only have come out just ahead. Hardly worthwhile given the time involved. The reason for that is so many of the better chances are driven to simply follow them around if they don't get a top draw.The horses themselves are consistent,but apart from the top 6 or 7 drivers i liked,its extremely hard to tell whether the rest were trying.Maybe they are just waiting to back them themselves. This last week i backed 7. All were well favored,and apart from 1,everyone of them immediately made a direct line for 4,5 and 6 back the fence,where they stayed well held until the finish. How can harness racing prosper in queensland if this is how the races are run.Its fair to say i expected better. As regards the drivers. I know a couple of months ago i questioned the honesty of a couple of the barnes and criticised the other barnes for his tactical sense,but i have concluded that they may only look dishonest,and its possible its just a lack of driving skills that makes them look bad.And yes b barnes was driving the one that i backed today.Maybe i should give him credit for immediately being able to get 6 back the fence from the outside of the second line draw. At least he tried earlier this week on the horse rock fisherman,who paid $3,after 2 very negative previous drives when paying $30,but maybe that was his plan all along.Its very hard to tell. So i won't comment in the future on queensland harness racing or their drivers. I'll turn the page.But i am thankful that nz drivers have a higher degree of competitiveness. I have confidence that when punters spend their money here,win or lose,at least they know the intent of everyone driving is to do as well as they can.

Whether they do a great job is for me defined by the consistency in which they apply the rules and whether they do it in an equal and fair way. It is only in recent years in the south island that this has been the case.Go back a couple of decades and before and the stipes were at times bullies,turning a blind eye to some while they were tormentors of the small players who they took a dislike to. Some of them were not deserving of any respect,and got none from many. Times have changed,new personal have taken over,and the stipes today do a very good job. This is reflected in the matter currently being discussed.Not once has it been suggested on this thread that Cameron has been the subject of greater interest from the stipes previously. It is only the one drive that he has been subject to scrutiny over. What i do take from this thread is again when it comes to harness racing things get taken more personally and people defend others not based on merit, but based on the matter being argued around personalities.Because of that things are magnified to a level they never need to be.And the ones responsible for that are those who make it about personalities. In effect the flaws in the argument of those making it about personalities only highlight the individual to a greater degree than was necessary.

"A second to do so" Again showing your ignorance. Split second decisions are made when your amongst the field with traffic in your way dictating where and when you go. Cameron was sitting in the perfect position to make his move. He had ample time to work out what he was going to do,and when those behind were going to make their moves.Do you really think drivers just sit there ,their minds blank,then when it comes to the final 250 they suddenly switch their brains back on and make split second decisions. It does explain some of your posts though.

You said you picked it,but incredibly didn't notice it. What does that say about your assessment of video replays. Anyone watching the race would have noticed it. I said to the wife that he should get a decent holiday as i watched the replay of the final 200m, straight after the race.And i didn't even back it. Your coming at it from a point of view of someone who obviously misses a lot. I'll take that into account from now on.

The gap never came. Hoped to get a late gap. Horse finished closer than he would have. Good stuff.

So are you psychic chief? Perhaps you could explain to the uneducated what issues the horse had that resulted in the driver steering into a dead end.Don't give me the" it was intractible in the early part of its racing career'.What on earth has that got to do with last nights drive. And how about this. Go watch the horses most recent runs before you comment on whether it has had issues when being steered outwards.Whats the point in making excuses when they don't exist. Races are run and people comment on what happens in them.Thats all this thread is about.I don't know cameron from a bar of soap. Good luck to him in the future,but if people comment only on the good things,then your not telling the whole story.

Well most on here have watched all his races.As to not receiving a penalty,more chance of pigs flying than that happening.

Speed duels can bottom a horse out if ,like you say, they have not had a thorough grounding work wise. But i believe it really depends on how hard the driver is on the horse at the finish of a race in which it had the speed duel. The worst thing i believe a driver can do is a pointless chase after the field after a bad start,then to ask that horse for an all out effort at the finish.Its just stupidity. If they want to bottom a horse out,thats the best way to do it. It happens a bit,and i never understand whyThe subsequent results always tell the story,but its too late then.

John dunn did leave his run a bit late,but Ned kelly was having its first race for 8 months,and is a horse who lacks a bit of confidence and has been a bit wayward in the past.So probably he drove it as you would expect pre race. It surprised me how it was 2nd favorite,but it did run well. Asian elvis finished well too,but you don't see g thornley making many mid race moves,so pretty much as expected there as well.

The drive looked like it deserved that long,but having said that i think it was just extremely poor judgment. So maybe they will give him what they gave d ferguson at cambridge earlier in the year,for a more questionable drive on that trotter. 3 days is all he got,which seemed ridiculously lenient at the time.. The thing is anyone watching that race who may have backed saginaw would be thinking that fella is dodgy. So there has to be a penalty which maintains the betting publics faith.

You deserved a better result if you had that one. Can't understand why you are trying to justify such a "dumb as" tactical move? Who angles in to a non existent gap,when you can just ease outwards because there is no one outside you. When a horses head is turned inwards after it has been running straight,as ocurred,i believe that means its being steered inwards.Thats the explanation why it went in,and not out. He's never had a problem pulling it out before.

That was sarcasm. i think you know that.. I don't agree with those who say its the lowest form of wit. As to hiding in the bushes. If hiding in the bushes means they are catching a cheat,well they should hide in the bushes more often. You can't deny its got them some good results recently.

One thing i would agree on,and that is the focus and funding on testing TC02 levels is out of proportion to its significance in this day and age.Testing should still be undertaken,but not on the scale it is. Resources could be far better used. For example i have always advocated for on the ground surveillance. And that is a tool which the riu have been using to greater effect in the last couple of years.Look at the results that tactic has achieved as applies to the harness side of things. They have cleaned out a handful who were cheating,and that industry is far better for it.

I'm trying to keep up,but it appears your now not discounting the suggestion that this fellas horse may actually have been milkshaked? Or are you sticking to the spoonful of feed additive he gave it each day as the cause of the inexplicable(to you) one off TC02 level.If this is still your theory then you would have to wonder how unlucky was he for it to happen on raceday? As to the milkshaking not helping performance. How thick are all those trainers who have used it over the last few decades. Its even cost a few their careers,yet it appears you think they risked it all for no benefit. And your still sticking with the modern day testing picking up all performance enhancers.Great that those doing the testing know the latest performance enhancers being used as soon as the very minute % of trainers that would stoop to that level do. All's rosey and everyones honest,and only the misguided are putting their careers on the line to gain nothing anyway. I'm with you,this RIU seems to be an unnecessary organisation.

How long does r cameron get for his strange tactical move at the 200m in race 7 last night.From watching him drive in the past,you would assume he was trying,but what was he thinking?I would guess 2 months,but who knows. On the postive side,as others have pointed out,you had to admire john dunns driving.

So milkshaking is a therapeutic ,and there's conflicting evidence that it makes any difference to race performance.Got it.

I didn't mind speed duels.Adds a bit of excitement to a race. P Ferguson created it. They both still placed but L whittaker did beat him home.,

Its always blamed on the feed source isn't it.Since you believe that can you explain how come it had such a high tco2 level this day,yet not on the other days it was tested.Fed the same each day.And how come others fed the additive don't return high levels.

So you must think the legal representatives of the persons involved here were not up to it. They submitted a fine of $6000 was appropriate ,yet you suggest they should have only been fined $1700. And they accepted the costs figure as being accurate.( 60% was awarded.) I'm not a defender of the jca. They can't even see whats right in front of them sometimes.Some past cases show they are just rubber stampers of sometimes personalized enforcement .But this type of case didn't require much judgment from them as to whether a rule had been broken. And the penalties pretty much are based on what has happened previously.

So everyone seems to be moaning about the penalty.Can they give suggestions as to what you think should have happened? All this thread indicates is many are anti the enforcement of rules. Some making comment may have personal reasons to feel aggrieved in how they may have been dealt with in the past,but whats that got to do with someones horse having a high TC02 level. If people don't like the TC02 rules,then why not lobby to have them removed and let it be a free for all. See how that will impact the number of participants and punters.

They also barred me from posting. Couldn't work out exactly why,but i formed the opinion they only wanted one sided points of view. There was a definite dark side to that forum. People should be aware of that. My guess was those that ran it could easliy be influenced into suppressing peoples points of view,and used their forum to give one sided attacks on those they disagreed with. I have said this once before on here. After i was banned,someone using my actual name as their nom de plume posted a handful of posts,among them a personal attack on a trainer i used which inferred untrue information. Someone who ran the forum had to have given my name to the person making those posts,and after i contacted mr molloy twice the posts continued. In my view molloy deliberately aided and abetted the sinister posting that they were doing. I still occasionally read it,they have some good posters,but if you want a forum where both points of view are expressed,then this is the forum to get it.JJ flash obviously prefers the other site,thats up to him,but personally i think it good he posts here as well,as he has his own points of view,and when you read everyones point of view on here,it sometimes helps get some balance to your own point of view. Thats the way it should be,and i think this forum works pretty good in that respect.

Do you think the older trainers should step aside and let the younger ones take over? Same logic applies there doesn't it?

So you appear to be linking some of the older drivers still driving to having an impact on current junior driver numbers. If that were the case then why do the junior drivers of this era get more drives,as compared to those of say 30-40 years ago?And we know there was far more younger people employed in the industry 30-40 years ago than now. I don't agree there is a link.Other factors are of far more signifcance. Some drivers do seem to lose the desire and enjoyment,and reduce driving.its up to the individual. Some no doubt voice the opinion they need to give younger drivers a go.But they do so on the basis that what they have done is reinforcement that they have made the right decision. Ask yourself are they any happier? Also take the likes of ricky may. He doesn't train. The reason he drives is because people believe his current driving skills will assist them in getting the best outcome for them in races they have starters in.Why deny them.And of course maybe they like interacting with people like May.

I agree it is a major factor as far as early positioning goes,but personally think the tempo of the race is a more important factor. Obviously horse ability is the most important. Also maintaining momentum is important.What is notable is how the passing lane is not that big a factor over there,unless the leader has forward momentum.

i was referring to age in the context you had used it,i.e. as relates to older drivers. And i never said grant dixon is not good tactically. I said d graham wasn't.But i did say t dixon and c petroff are better drivers at the moment than g dixon. As an example I got a vey nice collect off the horse midnight queen at redcliffe mid week. The reason i backed it was because g dixon sacked himself and gave petroff the drive. The horse had clearly been resenting the way dixon had been restraining it during the running,and turned its form around for petroff. at very good odds. Credit to dixon though,he recognised his style didn't suit and gave the drive to someone better suited. I agree mangos not as good as he used to be,mckendry still as good but not with the same desire,Stormont and May still very good drivers.These fellas should keep going as long as they want. Enjoying what you do doesn't stop when you get older,so why should they stop?