curious

That has to be the case. The stewards' report doesn't stack up. If the gates had in fact opened spontaneously without being activated by the starter, for serious health and safety reasons, they surely could not have restarted the race, nor continued the meeting without the fault being determined and corrected. Testing that the gates opened when activated before doing so would not eliminate the risk of that happening again. So, I think either the report must be inaccurate, or they've continued the meeting on a very risky basis. Whichever, neither is a good look imo.

Yes. And Just As Sharp from even further back with the best last 800 in that race.

They are there. Have a look and come back to us.

Jockeys. Where a Jockey is not able to fulfil any riding engagements due to the abandonment. $300 Where a Jockey has ridden in 1 race on the day but was unable to fulfil further engagements due to the abandonment. $200 Where a Jockey has travelled from one Racing Region to any other Racing Region. $200, in addition to the amount paid as above. Where a Jockey was able to fulfil 2 or more riding engagements before the meeting was abandoned no compensation is paid.

No. They had a balance of $1,197,934.88 after the win in the 5th. Then put half that on the Orchestral/Talisker bet in the last which missed.

It is the same amount at the same price and appears to be the start of the actual bet but incomplete in the TAB post.

They got back 1/2 their original investment, not a 50% profit. 7:30pm Total bets placed: $1,908,323.15 Starting balance: $1,196,647 Current balance: $598,323.50

He didn't pull the trigger.

That's not supposed to be until next week. It's also what they are supposed to be using on the track prior to irrigation preceding meetings. Did they?

I couldn't agree more. We have a dead horse, badly injured rider and a mid-summer abandonment at great cost to participants, in the midst of a very reasonable weather pattern. I don't know if the coincident accidents were related to the unsafe and inconsistent track that was delivered, however, it is not a good look either way and this is the product that we continue to present to the world alongside the gates fiasco in a G1 and the water trough incident on another G1 day in recent weeks. I am not opposed to the initiatives announced this week of a Champions day and a slot race (nor the other date and programming changes) provided that they are not designed in a way that interferes with the Pattern. What would really stick in my craw though is if it turns out that NZTR have provided any of the funding for these events from funds that could otherwise have been allocated to upgrading or renovating our now disastrous tracks and equipment.

I wouldn't call the 350k SI trained race in April "absolutely nothing" whether or not they deserved it.

Don't think it has anything to do with it starting again. It will likely lose the race in question if it were the winner but it's quite entitled to start again thereafter.

Probably wasn't leaked per se. Owners would have known (and there's 13 of them) and probably told others. No conspiracy. Or, do you mean did the troughs leak?

Wild guess but I'm picking 6-700k

Yes. It will. Wonder what happens if a number don't sell. Also, the bidder strategies. Do you go early and pay what you have to, or wait for the last ones and hope the demand is quenched at the risk there may be more competition if there are still a number empty handed.

There is a reserve of 450k. Otherwise it's as normal for an auction. The market will determine the price for each slot.

It seems self-explanaoiry to me. Once you buy a slot, it's yours for the three years. You can't resell it, though you can lease it year on year. What do want clarified specifically?

Yes.

Yes. A NZ bred horse might have been sold at any sale say the Gold Coast or Sydney and still be eligible. Just that a non-NZ bred sold in NZ is also eligible. They have expanded the eligible sales to include all NZB auctions. I don't know what happens if a competing sales company starts up in NZ during the 3 year term. (c) is for three-year-olds only that were either: (i) bred in New Zealand, as determined by NZTR in accordance with the New Zealand Stud Book and Register of Non Stud Book Mares Regulations (as published from time to time by NZTR); or (ii) sold through the ring at a Thoroughbred sale (including on-line sales) conducted by New Zealand Bloodstock Limited or on-line by its subsidiary, Gavelhouse Ltd. or passed through the ring at any such sale and sold within 30 days of the sale at not less than the price at which the horse was passed-in.

Saw this vid there as well. Quite like it.

Are the Commerce Commission likely to be taking a look do you think?

I notice that it also says that international horses seeking transport should contact NZTR for referral to NZB freight.

Is it? I assumed it was coming from contestants with NZB underwriting any shortfall.

That may be but at the reserve presumably. So, a 25k risk over the 3 years. What do you think the auctioned slots will go for?

You mean of next year's 3yo's I'm picking.