curious

I'm not sure that I agree with that. The main question that I was hoping would be answered was what needs to happen for NZTR and the clubs involved to improve the safety of our synthetics for both horses and riders. I've only had a preliminary read so far and need time to read more thoroughly and digest it, but from that, it appears to have answered the above to a large extent with quite specific recommendations and provided some interesting information and data as the basis for that.

There are some errors in the report too. For example, it says "Within New Zealand, turf tracks are prepared so they produce a track condition of a good 3 (penetrometer reading 2.3-2.5) for race day (New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing, 2013)." That's obviously very dated. The current policy says: "Clubs should aim to produce a track with a GOOD rating (i.e. a track with good grass coverage and cushion) for the majority of the race meeting". That is either a Good 3 or 4 in today's ratings which were changed 3 years ago and include what was a dead 4 back in 2013.

There are clearly major deficiencies in the track maintenance practices and considerable variance between tracks. One quick example is the Clegg hammer readings which are apparently a contractual requirement of Martin Collins but Riccarton only started doing them this year and still don't publish them for racedays which is an NZTR requirement.

I think this is a good outcome. However it will have to be implemented and monitored carefully for it to work.

I'm not sure about that. It may vary between tracks but is it recorded at the gap which track each horse is using? I.e. do they know whether horses work on the poly or another training track and is that reported to NZTR and available to the researchers?

No idea. They are free though if you get a good graduate student to do them as an assessment task

Yes. I don't think we have any data on soft tissue injury rates for here, at least not reported. Also, I agree that the report suggests that the primary issue is track maintenance standards and race day preparation, not track make up.

Included is a comprehensive track discussion document produced by Professor Chris Rogers and the team at Massey University. ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ No images? Click here NZTR Introduces Quality Assurance Programme for Synthetic Racing Surfaces At the commencement of the 2024 synthetic track racing season, New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing (NZTR) commissioned Professor Chris Rogers, and the team at Massey University, to produce a comprehensive track discussion document. The objective was to consolidate the latest international research on racing surfaces, with a particular focus on the physical properties of synthetic tracks and how surface management influences hoof-surface interaction. The document provides a detailed summary of the physical characteristics of New Zealand’s synthetic tracks, current maintenance practices, and performance metrics. It also draws on global literature to contextualise New Zealand’s synthetic racing environment and describes the physical properties of synthetic racing surfaces, as well as how management can alter the hoof- surface interaction. Key Findings from the International Literature and Domestic Racing Venue Engagement: · Different track surfaces exhibit distinct hoof-loading profiles. Synthetic tracks demonstrate a more acute end to the deceleration phase of the hoof compared to turf tracks. · Horses adapt limb tension at impact based on their previous experience with a given surface. · Injury rates on New Zealand synthetic tracks are in line with international benchmarks, though slightly higher than those observed on domestic turf surfaces. · Horses are recording faster speeds on synthetic tracks compared to turf tracks during the synthetic season. · Like turf tracks, synthetic surfaces are responsive to environmental conditions such as temperature, as well as to maintenance and preparation protocols. NZTR to Implement Quality Assurance Programme One of the key recommendations from the Massey University report is the establishment of a coordinated NZTR Quality Assurance Programme. This initiative aims to ensure a consistent and uniform racing surface at the three synthetic venues: Cambridge, Awapuni, and Riccarton Park Racecourses. “The goal of commissioning this document was to ensure that our maintenance and preparation practices were best practice internationally, and to also understand further what factors alter the surface and how we can manage these effects more consistently” said NZTR COO Darin Balcombe. “The development of a quality assurance programme will provide all synthetic venues with consistent management practices, leading to improved track performance. “This coordinated approach will provide industry participants with confidence that each synthetic track is being prepared to its optimal specification, in alignment with the report’s recommendations and Martin Collins’ international best practices,” said Balcombe. https://nztr.co.nz/sites/nztrindustry/files/2025-05/Synthetic track surfaces review_v4_6.pdf Corporate Communications New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing nztrcommunications@nztr.co.nz Synthetic track surfaces review_v4_6.pdf

I assume that GRNZ has reached out to the othe other codes to ask them for what help they think they need or would like? I haven't seen any requests like that.

Hmmm....

Well if it were me, and he showed up on Gavelhouse say, I'd be keen, Probably get him vetted and try to buy but I doubt I'd go to 5 figures, let alone 6. It's your site, you can do what you like.

Not at all, but I might be better at assessing ability based on performance. I love this type of horse but he hasn't won a race in 2 years and that was a 2400 maiden. Not sure why you put it up here.

Looks like that's what suits but even beyond 2000? He's only performed at 2400+ though. Where's the proposed programme?

@ 2400 +? Just can't see where they've outlined that.

Are there any races for him in Victoria in the next few months? I can't see any prospective programme for him.

Rain on the day, so yes the right decision. 35mms there yesterday. https://loveracing.nz/Common/SystemTemplates/Modal/Video.aspx?v=http%3a%2f%2fwww.racingreplays.co.nz%2fmedia%2f202505%2fM2_TAUR_R04_280525.mp4&i=%2fCommon%2fImage.ashx%3fw%3d565%26h%3d314%26a%3d1%26o%3d1%26z%3d1%26bg%3deeeeee%26p%3dhttp%3a%2f%2fwww.racingreplays.co.nz%2fmedia%2f202505%2fM2_TAUR_R04_280525.jpg&r=Race 4 - TIERRA MAIDEN 3YO&rs=1&jwsource=cl

I agree. I think Entain are doing both. That is handing the codes money and suggesting ways they could use that to enhance wagering revenue. Entain are a highly successful international betting and gaming company that have or are buying a little wagering business here in NZ. That doesn't need NZ racing for it to be successful for them, and I don't see much sign of the codes adding anything to it that Entain might want or need to keep longer term.

If you'd rather buy a beginner pony for your grand kids that's wasn't a racehorse, here's a nice one though past his competition prime. https://www.trademe.co.nz/a/marketplace/sports/equestrian/horses-ponies/ponies/listing/5338596549

You can't seem to get through your head that the thoroughbreds and standardbreds ARE kids actual ponies, and in most cases, a lot cheaper ones for parents and kids than a top show pony, eventer, or show-jumper.

Well if you enter a mini Cooper in a Ferrari race, more fool you. I suppose you'd also complain if you entered a 10 start maiden in a Group 1 and it got beaten?

It was definitely a pony under the rules for these races. The same but stricter criteria than for pony showing and other equestrian events. Of course it's a race. I'm sure the ponies and riders as well as the spectators think so. You are talking a lot of nonsense. Pony • Mount can be up to 148cms or 14.2h – any full height pony requires an RAS height certificate. • All mounts are to be aged 4 years and over. • All Thoroughbred and Standardbred Pony entries must be entered with their racing name included and/or breeding if unnamed for racing – or brands provided if unknown. • Any Thoroughbred or Standardbred Pony entry must not have raced or been in race training within the past 6 months. • Any Thoroughbred Pony entry must be showing as retired on LOVERACING.NZ. • Any Standardbred Pony entry must be showing as retired on hrnz.co.nz. • Every Thoroughbred and Standardbred Pony entry must provide a current RAS height card as proof of 148cm or under.

What do you mean? They are all ponies up to 14.2hh with RAS height certificates.

It's impossible to understand. Why would you add meetings when a KPI like starters per race is in decline? No attempt to do anything but tweak the abysmal programming issues. And yes, instead of the above spiel, what about giving participants a bit of detail has to how this decision was arrived and the analysis supporting claims like "maximising wagering, increasing returns to the code and building long-term sustainability", so we can try and grasp the logic? This sort of thing completely belies their claims to be improving transparency to participants.