curious

I'd have to see the head on but I think you were the one watching a different race.

@ about 39.15. "If you could change anything in horse racing right now, what would it be?" John Francome: "I'd certainly ban the whip"

Had another look but that's what it looked like to me. Nearly clipped heels though it looked like Cannon Hill also had shifted inwards slightly. Laid in again at the 200, under pressure?

What did they miss?

JMO Gamma, But I think they can try hard without bashing horses and it should be stopped.

G Rooke (SHARP ‘N’ SMART) - Admitted a charge in that he struck his mount eight times prior to the 100 metre mark. After considering submissions the Adjudicative Committee imposed a suspension of G Rooke’s licence to ride in races from the conclusion of racing on Wednesday 31 December up to and including racing on Tuesday 6 January, 5 national riding days and in addition imposed a fine of $2000 Hopefully this shit will stop once they bring in the DQ rule.

A prediction to me, is an informed opinion, NOT a fact, as it hasn't happened.

I agree with that. Retrospectively giving undue weight to a factor that doesn't deserve it is a recipe for disaster. That's where a lot of punter and even trainer believed myths are founded and perpetuated but fraught.

Here's an AI view on that question. AI differentiates between fact and opinion using a combination of techniques, but it’s not perfect. Here’s how it generally works: 1. Source Analysis Fact: Comes from verifiable, authoritative sources (e.g., official statistics, peer-reviewed research, reputable news). Opinion: Often found in editorial content, blogs, or statements attributed to individuals or groups. AI checks metadata, domain reputation, and context clues to classify the source. 2. Linguistic Cues Facts often use objective language: numbers, dates, measurable claims (e.g., “The NZ Derby was won by Zonda in 1997”). Opinions use subjective markers: “I think,” “should,” “best,” “amazing,” or emotionally charged adjectives. AI models are trained to detect these patterns. 3. Cross-Verification AI compares statements against trusted knowledge bases or multiple sources. If a claim is consistent across reliable sources, it’s likely factual. Divergent or speculative statements are flagged as opinion. 4. Confidence Scoring AI assigns a probability score based on evidence strength. High confidence = fact; low confidence or conflicting sources = opinion or uncertainty. 5. Context Awareness Some statements mix fact and opinion (e.g., “New Zealand played well because they dominated possession”). AI splits the factual part (“dominated possession”) from the subjective part (“played well”). Limitations AI can misclassify nuanced language or sarcasm. It relies on training data and source integrity—bias in sources can affect classification.

A lot of bookies already use it don't they, especially for sports? I'd say it's only a matter of time, if it's not already being piloted and refined.

Be interesting to see what happens if the TAB start using AI to do their initial FO market pricing.

To some extent it probably depends which AI you use though they all seem to manage to get things wrong or misunderstood. I wouldn't use any that didn't cite sources. Who won the 1997 NZ Derby Copilot said: Copilot The winner of the 1997 New Zealand Derby was Zonda, a bay gelding sired by Zabeel. He delivered a commanding performance, winning the Derby by an impressive margin of over four lengths.wikipedia+1 Would you like me to also share Zonda’s career highlights and major wins?

Well both La Crique and Legarto are nominated.

This is from @Thomass original example. It was repeated 4 times and on the first occasion the horse clearly reacted by shifting its head to the side. I don't see how you could possible argue that this is accidental.

I don't see anything ambiguous about it. I've never noticed an issue with that rule as far as application of the whip to the shoulder goes. May be post a pic of an example where that is being breached so we can see what you mean?

Then you should read the rules before you claim they are a mess, though I agree that they are. No use forward of the horse’s shoulder or near its head.

There's nothing wrong with it is there?

I suspect this is what Entain see and have had enough of. NZTR have persisted for at least 2 decades while the industry shrinks. Sports meanwhile continue to invest in improving their product. https://bitofayarn.com https://bitofayarn.com

And should get it in my view. Especially now that sports seems to be driving TAB revenue growth with racing making little contribution. Racing's claim to the lions share is really only historic, though Winnie is protecting it.

They want more now.

Well racing already gets 80% of the revenue from sports betting doesn't it?

Not sure I fully agree with that. Of the younger people I was around on Saturday, more were watching and betting on the cricket than the racing. That's a 5 day game. Also one of younger people's complaints that I've heard is that racing is boring because it only lasts a few minutes then you have to wait half an hour for the next one. I heard another similar complaint from a group of corporate professionals that had their Xmas function at the races on Friday, even though they were well entertained with food and drink in between races.

Why would you spend money on irrigation or anything else for Woodville if it's to be closed down?

I don't really know what you mean which is why I asked.