curious

Just wondering if it would meet the standards? PRINCIPLE 2: TRUTHFUL PRESENTATION Gambling advertisements must be truthful, balanced and not misleading. Rule 2 (a) Truthful Presentation Guidelines Gambling advertisements must not mislead or be likely to mislead, deceive or confuse consumers, abuse their trust or exploit their lack of knowledge. This includes by implication, inaccuracy, ambiguity, exaggeration, unrealistic claim, omission, false representation or otherwise. Obvious hyperbole identifiable as such is not considered to be misleading. Gambling advertisements must not: Make claims about the chance of winning unless they are factual and able to be proven. Exaggerate the chance of winning or the size of the prize. Falsely state or imply that a gambler’s skill can influence the outcome of the gambling activity unless skill can affect the outcome. Gambling advertisements must: Include the terms and conditions or a reference to where the terms and conditions are readily available. Terms and conditions must be easily understood and must not contradict the advertisement content. Clearly display in the advertisement information about where the gambling can be accessed (e.g. in the case of online gambling a URL address for a website) if it would otherwise be misleading to not display such information.

Doe anyone have the ad or the supporting data? Otherwise, I will request it from the Advertising Standards Authority. I find it unbelievable.

Did you mean dead wood JB?

I'd love to see the business plan for that. Just don't see how it could be financially viable without continuing substantial subsidies. I wouldn't be buying shares in the venture. On the other hand, I agree it is a great place to go racing and was just lamenting waking on New Years day without being there and facing the prospect of 2 consecutive stellar days of quality racing. Introduced a few newbies to the game on those days over the years.

Trainer J Burrows (MAIDINTHEMIST) – Issued with a warning for presenting MAIDINTHEMIST without the notified tongue tie.

Think we are talking about the NZTR board here though aren't we?

He might be right. Just the benchmark is not really too impressive eh?

When I was training down there at Woodend we had the same track manager. I think he's improved since he moved up here but he did a bloody good job down there way back when. Probably done a few NZTR track management courses since and of course he's lucky that he only has 6 horses going round on his track each day, not 600 so it doesn't take long to put the track back. He's pretty much semi-retired these days. You'd probably have to pay megabucks to get him back down there.

No. A going stick that I found there made out of driftwood.

It's probably wide enough already but it goes out quite a bit further by itself.

Down there this morning No track fees and the track manager has it in pristine condition every morning.

Yes. I agree. You can have the feature days still of course but the stakes and costs of those events need to be aligned with what those days earn.

I see NZTR are now promoting this Oz radio network. https://loveracing.nz/News/32100/SENTrackBrendanPopplewell24December.aspx

The prizemoney should at best be the prizemoney, not the sweepstake component.

Think I'll cut the hay in the morning. Ground is drying out now. Happy holidays to all.

So, the race is basically a decent maiden special weight. For 50k?

Yeahh you'd think at least half should break maiden ranks.

It will be interesting to see how many of the 17 have made it to or through R65 grade by this time next year.

You emphasised that one by listing the sale prices. I don't really have an opinion. I was trying to understand the point of your post. I may have an opinion when I price the race tomorrow though. At this point it's just another race to me and even if I have a bet I won't be stopping what I'm doing to watch it. Do you think it has a chance of earning enough revenue to cover say half the cost of staging the event, leaving aside the owner's cost to provide the runners?

So, is your point that there is a lot of high priced horseflesh going round in that race?

OK. Well my guess is that SLB was wondering if you were suggesting that a field of 17 with only 4 previous winners in a 50k 2yo at this time of year was disappointing. I didn't get the point either. Thought you might be suggesting it was either a good/bad betting race or something but wasn't sure.

Nor did you in your head post. What was the point?

I was responding to your query about SLB's post. I assume that's the point he is making.

50k race. 4 previous winners of 17 runners?

How did they leave that off? The generous side of me thinks it is a mistake, a clerical error, or something. Or, do they simply not realise that people, I mean punters, owners and trainers are reluctant to participate in NZ racing because of the lack of integrity and robust anti-cruelty measures? This is what the NZTR guidelines say by way of comparison, though I'd say striking a horse on the flank might be covered under vii. Either way, not much use if not policed. Notwithstanding the above, it will also be deemed to be unacceptable where a rider uses the drawn whip: i(i) when a horse is out of contention. ii(ii) when a horse is showing no response. iii(iii) when a horse has no reasonable prospect of improving or losing its position. iv(iv) when a horse is clearly winning. v(v) after passing the winning post. vi(vi) using the whip with the arm above shoulder height. vii(vii) causing injury to the horse.