curious

No he wasn't allowed to ride. He was immediately stood down. When tested following the running of Race 1 rider C Johnson returned a breath alcohol reading in excess of that allowed under the provisions of Rule 656(4) and was stood down for the remainder of day. An inquiry was opened and adjourned until a date to be set. Rider Changes:Race2THE LAST WORD -B Murray replaced C Johnson (Excessive alcohol reading)3QUINTUPLE TWINS -C Barnesreplaced C Johnson 4BOYSLIGHTUP -T Comignaghireplaced C Johnson5TOP GHIA -B Murray replaced C Johnson6CAMINO ROCOSO -J Lowryreplaced C Johnson 7TURNCOAT -L Callawayreplaced C Johnson8HOT TAP-G Jogooreplaced C Johnson

They are maybe getting their act together to pre-empt the implementation of the Burgess report when Murrihy gets here to do that?

Seems like it. Even did pre-race horse blood testing at Riccarton last week. Thommo will be pleased. Maybe the pokies are going well and they can afford it?

I'll take the maiden. Sounds like a better chance.

Yes. A negative one. Refusing testing comes under a different rule and his original stand down was more of an indiscretion than anything. Well below the legal driving limit.

Oops. Sure does. And a rather big gap from Tim's 50k a year although that is not seemingly allowing for the 10 year relayment cost. “The question we need to address with the NZTR before anything is nailed down is how are we going to approach the situation in eight, ten or 12 years time when the material has to be relaid – that’s the question that still needs to be resolved." It seems peculiar that they are spending all this money on design and planning and holding meetings without first figuring out the actual costs and whether or not it might be affordable.

I'm hoping Tim's figure of 1.6m annual maintenance costs are $HKs. If so, his best estimate is somewhere between NZ50k and NZ300k per year for annual maintenance. You'd think they might want to narrow down that analysis a bit before they call any more pointless meetings spruiking the idea and then wonder why no-one bothers to show up.

http://www.theoptimist.site/riccartons-synthetic-track-debate-heats-up-as-roadshow-heads-south/ So Tim says " The annual cost of maintaining a Polytrack is dependent upon staff, equipment, the base, weather conditions and the amount of usage and the requirement of renovation, and is likely to be different for each track. I have seen documentation detailing annual costs of $1.56 million for maintenance of the Polytrack at the Singapore Jockey Club" And then he says"“If it’s costing $5,000 a week, which is $250,000 a year, there is no way we can run it. Our information is it will cost between $55,000 and $65,000 a year to maintain, and if you look at what we pay to maintain grass tracks, the plough and sand tracks, it’s not in excess of that figure." But they obviously have no idea. I'd say it can't be a goer and it seems that most SI trainers do not support it.

Do you think it's something catching?

Just give him the cattle and he gets the job done. Bourbon nightcap or not.

And that is probably why many of us who could or would have more skin in the game, don't.

What does the 15 year warranty cover? Just the base? Surely not the surface materials?

I'd probably add CJC members to that list.

I'd be interested to know how the 120 invitees were selected? Surely the invites should have gone to all owners, trainers and jockeys participating in Canterbury racing and the meeting should have been made accessible to those who are at a distance from Riccarton?

OK. No need to shout. I'll ring Tim since you who attended the meeting don't seem to have any answers.

If the costings haven't been done, why would Tim announce at the meeting that they were about 50k a year and you say the same thing here? Not much point me asking Tim for them if he doesn't have them.

Also, most trainers and owners who are not full time have other jobs and are unlikely to be able to attend a 1pm meeting in Christchurch. No video conferencing facility was provided which is the norm these days especially during Covid times. No copy of the presentations and Q&A session has been provided as far as I am aware even though the chief has offered to post it here. It's the 21st century. Not 1950.

Isn't it a matter for all Canterbury licensed trainers and owners to consider and comment on? And why should they only have the opportunity to do so by a staged meeting? Surely the detailed analysis and costings should be circulated to all for feedback. How hard can that be?

431 July 2018Minister for Racing Office of Rt. Hon. Winston Peters7.4 Executive WingParliament BuildingsWellington 6160New ZealandDear Minister,I refer to your letter of 10 April 2018 setting out the scope for the high levelReview you have commissioned me to conduct on the New Zealand RacingIndustry, with a focus on the thoroughbred racing sector. You have asked me to:•review the financial viability of the thoroughbred racing Code and howthe current industry model supports the long term sustainability of theracing industry in New Zealand•analyse the current situation, with particular emphasis on thethoroughbred racing Code•provide high-level recommendations, supported by research, forpotential reform, which may include legislative, operational, structuraland organisational changes to the New Zealand racing industrySpecifically, you have asked me to consider:•the Racing Act of 2003 •the Racing Amendment Bill of 2017 currently before parliament•the New Zealand Racing Board (NZRB) and the racing industry’sgovernance structure •the future of the TAB I thank you for the opportunity to undertake this Review.

It's now free membership but pretty much still compulsory unless you go to some effort to opt out. Has the TA surveyed all trainers on the AWT thing or is it just a few squeaky wheels holding sway?

Where does the lost stake money go?

The TA will never have any power if they don't proactively, logically and informedly do something about these sort of things which is bloody hard when they are hanging on sucking the NZTR tit.

I want to be clear that I am not opposed to using, training or racing on AWTs if they are maintained and working as they are supposed to. However, the Trainers' Association or someone needs to hound NZTR and/or the clubs concerned for accurate costing analysis and the implications for owners those will have. They also need to ensure that adeqquate measures are in place to mitigate any other issues such as the kickback ones. I agree with Joe Bloggs that there is no better way to destroy a horse's confidence, perhaps permanently. The course proper at Riccarton with its cutting out nature is already bad enough.

And they didn't fix it! This 2 years later.......... Trainers not happy with Pakenham polytrack Posted by: AAP+ at 2:28pm on 22/7/2019 Posted in: Horse Racing News Trainer Colin Little has been one of the biggest supporters of synthetic track racing in Victoria and does not want his scratching of a runner at Pakenham to be seen as a knock on the Polytrack. Little sought stewards permission to scratch Peko from a race at Pakenham on Sunday and will undertake an inspection of the track before deciding whether Vegas Knight takes his place on Tuesday. The trainer was concerned at the excessive amount of kickback at Sunday’s meeting and that a number of horses returned post-race coughing. Under those circumstances Little felt it was unsafe for Peko to race. Little has no doubts the problems can be rectified and spoke to Polytrack’s Australian managing director Reid Sanders who was heading to Pakenham on Monday. “We’ve got the same track at Caulfield. We’ve had it for six years and it’s saved our lives,” Little said. “Pakenham has spent the most money you can spend on an artificial track and it’s the best artificial track we’ve seen and everyone is putting them in because it’s the best track. “But like what happens to turf, sometimes grass is no good. Something has happened to Pakenham recently and in my opinion it was no good yesterday.” Little said he does not want to be seen as bagging Polytrack and walked the track after the last race on Sunday with Pakenham chief executive Michael Hodge. Hodge tweeted on Sunday night Polytrack was arriving to power harrow the track ahead of Tuesday’s nine race card. Little said the track was terribly loose and what the industry called “delaminated”. “I’m sure they’ll fix it,” he said. “It’s not Pakenham’s fault in the sense. They’ve gone out and spent the most amount of money that’s possible to get the best track in the world, but yesterday, and possibly Friday, it’s gone pear-shaped. “I feel sorry for Pakenham. I didn’t want to be giving them a kicking, but I had to stick up for my horse.”