Special Agent

And yet there seems to be no worries about losing Boys Get Paid, pretty much guaranteed oncourse turnover. Those numbers and dollars spent would take some replacing. The type of clientele the Grand Tour attracts is a whole different ball game. Clubs in different areas have different attitudes towards the same assignment.

I think a valid point is the fact that clubs only receive commission from oncourse turnover. Reefton's might go a tad further than Ellerslie's.

The wording is beautiful, isn't it. From mid-January ... How is the disparity between stake money and on-course turnovers for the two clubs explained away?

Sally McKay Nikki Blatch Robert Dennis Terry Kennedy

I guess it is up to you to contact the elected reps for programming to give your views. Maybe get the draft programme emailed to you by the Canterbury Secretary, Ainsley McLeod.

Central Districts and Otago/Southland also have 4, Northern has 6

John Blackadder Kezia Murphy Matthew Pitman Michael Pitman

It seems there are four trainers on this committee so, you can't blame one trainer for any problems.

There was mention of a sales complex being part of the new Waikato training facility so, the shock should be at a minimum.

Do they not now? I suppose there are some who have the wrong genetic makeup to be referred to as sir.

I think the horses were tougher, and it was okay if the people said the odd word out of place.

The Stipes Report said two horses blundered and riders voiced their concerns. I therefore don't think a track inspection is an unreasonable request.

I see, Race 1. There were riders who rode later in the day but, can't have been in a hurry to be on track for the first. That sort of thing is more usual on a jumping day.

Was it no rider, or no suitable rider?

That's why it is important all groups are represented. Poor quality isn't such as issue as low numbers for turnover. TAB and now Entain tell us regularly this is the case.

With 3 gallops meetings on a day the apprentices would get some much needed practice instead of being shoved aside for the out of area jockeys.

Remind me what Messara's recommendation for Levin was.

I am baffled as to how a positive story about the Southland club having run a successful event for 17 years with a decent profit put back into racing as instructed by NZTR, has turned into a negative rant.

You are talking about an ideal world. Are you telling me you have never sat through meetings where no one gets it? Three or four meetings in and the rest of "the team" finally twig. Opposing view = opponents in my book. Some cannot look at the situation from everyone's perspective, the bigger picture. Trainers are pretty good at talking through lead up race options and any pitfalls with points allocation with the ratings system, the logistics of travelling and campaigning, which group of horses struggle to get consistent starts etc. Clubs are looking at it from a more selfish angle, what's best for their day and turnover.

I don't know the dynamics of the southern programming committee. Is there only one trainer on it? That can be corrected at Trainers Assn level. Several trainers have a voice in CD and are usually prepared with what hasn't worked, what might not work and new ideas to be discussed.

There are other notable trainers from Central and North to attract the punting dollar though. Quite a lot of scratchings today. I find the programme a bit odd. A $100K Cup, $40K MAAT, $30K Sprint and the rest $18,500.

Exactly mikey. The SRC is a racing club where the core business is racing. How many other clubs have 100 marquees/tents pre-sold for a race meeting? To me the $750K, even though like Sean said was originally a huge risk, is a real investment into their event. The fact that their profit of $120K goes into stakes speaks volumes, and is exactly what NZTR has asked of clubs for a long time now. How does anyone know that none of that profit, or money gained by other means, doesn't go into track maintenance? A balance sheet is not the whole story either. There are many factors making up a club's existence. It is easy to make assumptions from what you see from the outside. I can relate such perceptions of the most successful jumpouts in the country. Yes, other entities would like a share of the profits. The overheads to run any successful event are usually substantially more expensive than most would envisage. You have to speculate to accumulate. Congratulations Southland. What an example to other clubs!

What a great job Southland are doing! After 17 years it's still a party and a raging success. What makes the southern shindig inferior to Riccarton's leg of the Grand Tour? This club knows what it's customers want, and prepared to pay for. They are engaging with the community, which is not what happens at Trentham or Ellerslie. When Ascot Park loses it's title of the only track in NZ to host all three codes I hope they can find a profitable use for the inside of the two remaining racing surfaces. Does anyone have any ideas what the greyhound track area could be used for? Velodrome, pony races, dog walking, athletics, retired greyhound sanctuary, something equestrian, pony livery/pony club/riding school, trackwork rider and apprentice school ???

Yes he was. A generous man too. The hospitals would notice him gone.

No, who benefits is anyone's guess. If everything racing was as black and white as the Chief thinks dates and committees would be a piece of cake. The sector groups would meet, apply common sense and everyone in the industry would benefit. Some dates appear to be set in stone and are almost impossible to change. At the moment the trend is Sunday dates for an increased turnover, until another idea surfaces. Aren't the draft calendars out now, so the time to question, query and suggest changes is right now? Like Kenny suggested though, little notice is taken even with multiple back ups. If dates are not working, like the Ashburton example, stronger submissions will be required with backing from every group. Someone with time on their hands needs to co-ordinate a different approach with an improved turnover plan top of the agenda. I don't know what the answer is, other than a different approach. I think online meetings take away the importance and provide dismissive attitudes. You can't beat looking at the whites of your opponents eyes.