the galah

Everyone always says the faster horses are more likely to break down,but is that backed up by actual research? As i've mentioned before,a european study which involved good numbers said that it was not a major factor and listed track surfaces,gait(often breeding related),training groudwork,medications given,all of more importance than speed. I've always thought the "good horses are more likely to break down" theory is just an excuse as to why a certain high profile stable has these issues. If they didn't have that excuse,then they would have to look at the real reasons,and supporters of that stable don't go there. Isn't it obvious. If you can get any athlete to perform where the restrictions from the natural pain barrier or body performance, don't kick in when they should,then you increase the likelihood of injury. That is why the all stars have had so many high profile horses have injuries in my opinion.

Who were those horses that spankem ran against? They looked to be handy,the equivalent ability of our horses over here that have won 5 or 6 races. And spankem only won by a half head after getting round the field on a slow quarter. Looked like he had lost 2 legs to me,and at no point did he look like he had the eyes popping out,run forever body language that we used to see here when at his best.Thats my opinion of that run,but its only one run so may be a bit premature to write off him improving,but he would need to if his opposition gets any better.

The thing is we heard that the telfers were to set up a satellite stable in canterbury a year ago. All we have seen since is horses with wraps on them come down and normally disappoint. Thats the reality so far.Why would it change? You have to remember Canterbury has far greater depth in its training ranks than auckland.

are you talking from your own experience in the job?

The trainer would have to request it i would imagine. Certainly seemed to handle it ok,albeit a little slow. Would have ended up further back if on the ur.Only issue may come in a full field where there is not as much room. One thing that is obvious when you watch standing starts. Horses who are close to the tape always have a better chance of beginning. And the reverse. If you have a horse standing a half length or more behind the others,4 times out of 5 they will be disadvantaged.It really comes down to the drivers ability to get them properly positioned at the start.

This seems like one of those ideas that makes no sense.For that reason that's why they may actually be considering it. Putting a greyhound track inside a trotting track,which is already inside a galloping track would result in no spectators whatsoever. I've been to addington and forbury dogs.Just the once. And it was a total waste of time,you can't see them because they are so far away. And here you have a suggestion that you put in a track at least another 50-100m further away from spectators. Anyone who watches dog racing in australia can see that they often get reasonable crowds at tracks where the dogs are within touching distance of the spectators.Increase the distance between the on track action and the spectators,and you decrease the numbers attending. Then you have the location of the dog population. Sure,90% of the trainers that currently go to forbury won't have to travel an extra 1 1/2 hours,but if thats the logic being used why not put the track closer to christchurch. There is a couple of smaller greyhound trainers who are listed as living in oamaru,but having 2 or 3 locals really is not saying much. Theres got to be better options than oamaru.And surely if they do put in a new track somewhere in otago,they will design it to make it more enticing to view than most greyhound tracks in nz.

Was john morrison lucky to just get a 3 day suspension for interfering with the horse who had pushed him out 200m earlier? You get drivers being suspended for far longer for 2 or 3 extra taps with the whip than allowed. Its interesting watching the video of morrisons drive. It appears his horse had a tendency to hang in,and as a consequence morrison was often turning his horses head outwards. But just prior to the interference suffered by 3 runners inside morrison,he turns his horses head in,which causes interference.It would be nice to see the head on to confirm what looked like a deliberate move in.The stipes report just states there was an "incident". What a strange way to describe it.Would they call it that if it was a lesser known driver?I don't think so.

i had thought krug was looking cup contender material,but that was a significant drop off in performance yesterday.Its only the 1 oerformance,and i always forgive a 1 off below par performance.so time will tell. I thought the 2 most amazing performances on recent form came from rocknroll mama and kaching kaching. Both showed huge improvement on recent form. It will be interesting to see if they can replicate that form again

so where do you get to see it?

As far as the racing went,Akuta and south coast arden were most impressive.The race may have been set up for akuta to win given how hard they went early,but he made the rest look second rate in the straight.And south coast arden continued the huge recent improvement and looked like a nz cup winner. The flop of the day was krug. Personally pre race, i thought he was so much better than the others that he would not risk the chance of getting trapped on the fence,but it turned out he took the gamble and followed through the winner,and had every chance. Had he not received the best run in the race he would have finished at the back. Natalie rasmussen took no such chances on amazing dream,but unfortunately for her david butcher did what the butchers are good at and got into a shoving duel early with her to push her back in,which ultimately cost both them ground and position, and most likely cost amazing dream the race.Still it was entertaining and good to see the dunns get the win.

As you say jones,you have said nothing but positive things about the jewels. So its disappointing to hear that the club failed to deliver for many of those who attended.All sounds poorly organised. As i referred to in another thread,i thought the trackside coverage of the races was also poor in the early stages of the races. It was like they were experimenting with the drone coverage and were far away in the early races,then all of a sudden switched to close ups for 150m of a couple of horses,then back to normal coverage. No continuity at all in the first part of the races. Sounds a bit of a shame they didn't deliver for many of those who attended on course,as the racing on the track was top class,and the unpredictability of the tactics caused by the draws made it much more entertaining.

They were ok, but to do them as the main shot while the race was run i thought was a mistake and i didn't like it and i thought was annoying.If the drone shots are preferred over the usual coverage,then i know a couple pf people who wouldn't bother watching.I thought the racing was good,the presenters good,but the trackside coverage when the races were run was average.

i happened to see that race. Didn't they say that it was a stablemate of spankem that backed away and swung round about 3 times before they were able to let them go.Given spankem kept standing directly behind it each time it happened it looked predictable interference given what happened pre start.In nz the driver of spankem would have started a bit wider to avoid that.

well done to verstegg. He rated it well.Having only 7 others in the field meant the ur wasn't much of a factor. It helped when jessica young on moment of kaos failed to give her horse much chance(again),by giving the winner a 7 length start at the 400m. But Verstegg deserved the win more on the night.

No field is shit from a betting perspective. The field in question may lack recent form,but its just a matter of comparing the recent form of each contender. Exactly what we do when assessing races like the jewels,only difference is there is often a greater difference in recent form in the fields like the one we are talking about at addington,which logically makes the addington field more attractive from a betting perspective. Maybe michelle will prove me wrong and run somewhere,but the point is why shouldn't the tab price it at more realistic odds.

I see bookies have this horse paying $4.80 on the final field win market for race 4 tonight. My question is,does anyone out there know why anyone in their right mind would back this horse? And why would the bookies have it so short? It actually started favorite 2 starts ago,despite never looking like running in the first 3 for ages. It rates with one over dover as one of the most consistent breakers to have raced for how knows long. I know its won 5 races,and did win 26 starts ago before it started its streak of breaking and hanging every time,but surely the tab should have it at $30 to encourage some support so they can at least say they made money on the race.

the draws do make that an interesting race. Tommy lincoln could help undo kango if he shows the early speed he normally does.Bad to the bone seemed to lack a sprint the other night,and probably is unable to work hard and win,so unless the leaders get an unexpected easy mid race 400m it may be the race where a horse like south coast arden can come from back of midfield.It may all come down to who ends up in the 3 wide line early on,and whether that horse is good enough to keep going forward.

Good to see todays meeting go ahead. $70,000 in stakes paid out,9 winners,an average of 10 horses per race. I see on the other channel someone was saying not a good look and they thought people had been told to stay inside.. Well whoever that was obviously didn't observe the very busy christchurch roads,and the chocker car park due to some big event at the events centre.

The stars and the moon did align.

I can't see blair orange not attempting to come off the fence early on. I think he will likely settle midfield,one off. His biggest problem to do that will probably be d butcher who has drawn alongside him. Butcher probably more interested in keeping krug on fence than he would be in getting himself in the right position .If krug elects to stay on the fence he may as well not turn up,and orange knows that. Krug has a bit over the field ability wise.

So they asked d butcher about the drive,but he said it got too keen. The stipes in the n.i. accept any excuse anyway. I thought it looked like he was trying to set it up for its stablemate that ran 2nd,to ensure it got off the fence,but who knows. No mention in the stipes report so far of the d ferguson drive from 3 weeks ago.Its just an example of the stipes giving d ferguson the opportunity to drive at the jewels,and to lessen the consequences of the dishonest drive he had done on classy operator. Whats the point of having stipes if they are going to worry more about how it effects the drivers than it does the punters and public perception. It says it all really? And i see te louka sunrise trotted all the way in the non win trot,and ran 4th of 7 runners. So the stipes swabbed him. Why pick on him.Why not swab the winner like the rest of the card, apart from bolt for brilliance.

I've taken a few top 4 bets,and some top 2 bets,but i'm wondering if having those extra options makes any difference to my betting and the returns i receive. Obviously you have more chance of a return with payment back to 4th,but when i place the top 4 bet,i'm not spending anymore, just splitting my spend between top 3 and top 4 that i used to have made. On one hand you may get a little more if you happen to run 4th,but on the other hand you get a little less if you run top 3. So i think its going to be personal preference,but its probably not for me. Having more options is like going to the supermarket and the wife has told you she wants a can of baked neans.If there is 10 brands of baked beans and your not sure what you should get,its frustrating. It just as good to keep things simple and only have 3 brands of baked beans. You obviously used to bet in larger amounts than most. I know someone who they told they were going to restrict,but that person just referred them to what he spent on the tote pools,and they lifted the restrictions immediately. Having said that the amounts he bets on fixed odds normally only have returns in the hundreds,hardly ever the thousands.That is except in multis,and i understand he doesn't take them much.

I know. She goes well if shes in front,a bit like her sister. No doubting they both drive there share of winners,and horses do run for them. But if you watch that trotting race i refer to,you could see well before it happened J Morrison would push her out,but she didn't seem awake to that move coming.

Its entertaining to watch some of the driving as well. That last race you had maudachy seemingly over racing while parked,yet she didn't move forward,and you could see john morrison was going to push her out at the 1000m if she didn't go forward,but she wasn't awake to it . It makes a big difference on some of these smaller tracks who drives them.

Who knows,maybe he thinks it will break if it gets amongst them early. But your right,for it to be competitive it needs off the ur. One thing i've noticed is horses who consistently start off the ur seem to bottom out and just don't go on with the promise they show early.I guess they just strain themselves a bit more giving them a start each time,and psychologically i think it takes its toll on them. Trotters aren't as badly effected as the pacers are that way. Theres also many trotters off the ur in those lower grade trots in canterbury,and really the only advantage you get if you have a horse that needs space early is if you draw the outside of the ur.