Reefton

Exciting? To see a photo finish when the result has already been verified? I am usually too busy trying(usually unsuccessfully) to sort out the next winner The NZ Racing site has had it since probably half an hour after the event. I just cannot fathom how looking at a photo finish is exciting BUT if the Ferrando people had asked I am sure the stipes would have shown it to them. As far as anyone else desperate to see it well I guess they have the NZTR option though given how close that finish was I guess the Trackside ought to have hunted it down. Clearly your idea of excitement is different from mine

Can you explain how it would have made a difference to the result? Or even assist someone in assessing future winners. And clearly given the Judge took seven(?) minutes to declare a winner putting it up in seconds would seem to me to be impractical. I would be a bit more upset about slow trial videos (or no trial videos as in last week at Ashburton).

I think if it was a bad decision then we would have heard about it. I cannot recall too many times in history (since photo finish has been in use) that the judge has got it wrong. Getting the photo (which was soon available) did not alter the fact that Enzo's Lad just got there. Besides which the thread us titled '72 hours later' which implies the photo had not been published three days later which it clearly has.

So TFC waited three days to complain that he/she didn't see the photo finish immediately? Because early this afternoon the question was if anyone had seen the photo. Clearly it has been on the website since Saturday As since it is the Judge's job to declare the winner(which was clearly a tough job in this case) I would leave it to him - I am sure the stipes had a look before divs were declared so again I am sure the result is legitimate and correct. If the speed that photo finish shots are made available is the biggest problem in NZ racing then we have f all to worry about. I am not quite sure why seeing it is so important.

it appears to be on the NZTR website where photo finishes usually are

Probably due to them plastering water on tracks as much as horse quality wouldn't it? Not that I am saying horse quality is comparable to earlier times.

The Swiss Maestro another northern reject who returned for Pitty to kick arse as well. Amazing how the southerners are so competitive when it comes Wellington Cup time

Yes well done Pitty. Great to see a great supporter of West Coast racing getting a great result in the big one. And who was it bagging southern form on here a couple of weeks back?

Makes a change. And his response was coherent. Wonderful! Nice of him to interrupt his family holiday (where is he now? Somewhere on the EAST coast of the SI I hope?)

Yeah I wasn't there at that stage but heard the Commentator say it was drawn the outer so must say I was surprised I hadn't noticed that when scanning the fields. Anyway it worked out OK but would be a bit irritated had it got beat from the wrong draw.

Yeah sorry

The gates are numbered 1 to 12. So when they are at Hoki the inside is 12 and the outside 1 ( though if my memory serves me correctly we got magnetic numbers specifically to allow them to be switched when they arrived at Hoki - certainly those gates can be steered from either end specifically for dealing with the Hoki way of going) So if you have a nine horse field and the inside is #12 then the horse drawn widest will be #9. The three unoccupied gates will be 3 2 and 1. So it cannot be used as an excuse that he loaded them based on the numbers on the gates. He made a mistake pure and simple. And we all make plenty of those. Remarkably I managed to back the winner even though it started from the extreme opposite gate to that intended.

I don't think too many of the jockeys call them Mr or Sir any more And as I said previously Fantasy Flight was not in stall 1 but stall 4(there being only nine starters the outside three - 1 2 and 3 - would be empty) I do not think the Riccarton cones or starter assistant being run over(twice!) got more posts than this incident

Well that blows the myth that FOB is getting proportionately greater and greater because last year our FOB was about 80% of our ordinary off course - this year it is down to about 50%(and looks similar for Matamata). Which brings into question the reliability of the info you are relying on Anyway off course is irrelevant - clearly decent punters are going to be more inclined to back horses ridden by Collett Allpress Bosson and Coleman than Bholah Jugoo and Hirini. The point is the performance of the venue. If off course is the barometer then we may as well just pick all the racing up from Randwick and forget NZ racing.

We don't charge so don't know but those who looked at the intertrack tell us there were ten times as many at Reefton as at Matamata.

Where are you and your gypsie friends and family right now Thomass? Outside parliament looking for a statue of Woeful Winston to pay homage? (News reports had you close to Wellington last evening) Please don't come down our way - we don't really like wankers down here.

Actually tomorrow at Trentham - $1.01m in stakes and maybe $3m(????) turnover on and off - now that is really unsustainable! Maybe Reefton is better to step aside and wait for the whole lot to implode on itself

When you think about it - Total turnover on and off say $1.42m and total stakes and payouts to the Clubs for the day probably $200,000. Those numbers certainly cause concern(about sustainability) do they not?

We are talking about oncourse. And where do you get your figures from? - the TAB specifically told us they could not provide fixed odds info(because I wanted it immediately) And even allowing for all that Matamata only doing $781 off course is hardly anything to skite about. More like something to cry about

Cannot remember but I do not have much confidence in her so suspect $20 each way. I am fairly disillusioned with the game just now and have never (1)been much of a judge or (2) bothered to study form so accordingly am not doing too much punting(never have been a particularly big punter in any case - I love - or did love - the game, the horses and the people in the industry but Winston is telling me I no longer have a place so I am happy to walk away). As far a Huey suggesting one big punter might have inflated our turnover it has been consistently good for most of my years on the committee so that did not likely affect the turnover this time. Because we turn on a good day(usually! - pretty relaxed and on the Coast you are always close to the action) we have some very loyal supporters and that stands to us. And Houseboy your question re people betting in cash - well I imagine the same proportion at either meeting but if there was more tote betting proportionately at Reefton it indicates we are likely initiating a lot more people into the game than Matamata was that day so who is likely contributing more to the long term growth of the industry in that case? Thomass I am going to ignore you as you are as usual (1) out of your depth in a sensible discussion (2)incoherent in your responses and (3) an idiot. Why don't you go back to wherever it was you recently where? In fact I have just had a thought - Thomass you aren't one of those poms causing havoc around the Country are you? You fit the profile - argumentative, barely understandable,rather rude and clearly not very bright. I think we may have cracked the mystery of Thomass!

Virtually no capital depreciation at Reefton - the stand is old and would have a nil(or close to) book value I imagine and our only significant depreciating asset is our share of the gates(another thing Winston is going to have to fund because while we have a storage shed for them neither Greymouth or Kumara do - we have always looked after the West Coast gates and will not be doing so if we are not racing). Reefton costs the NZ industry stone cold zero to have as a racecourse.

it is not just the NZ Racing Board or NZTR Turny 20 Years ago when Chittick was going to eliminate us I did a comparison of the admin(not the track staff just the straight out office staff) between my two clubs at the time(Greymouth and Reefton - I was Secretary of both) and the CJC. The per raceday admin salaries at Riccarton at the time were $10,000 per day where ours cost $3,500 per day. I know ours are probably 2 and a half times that now but I will bet Riccarton's are 3 times the amount they were then. With all due respect to Tim Mills(the CJC - small club relationship is a hell of a lot more cozy now than it was then) if I couldn't run Riccarton with a secretary(capable of running a race meeting if I was absent) and maybe a part-timer for the couple of weeks prior to the Cup Meeting I'll go hee. Like a lot of things in NZ racing (and all NZ where people are not paying their own bills - councils, hospitals, government departments and big companies) there is a culture of excess.

well yes but as a barometer of the appeal of the industry to the wider public you want to see faces at the races. That is how , in this day and age, you will get long term devotees to the industry(not by hoping that they will read a Te Akau ad and think 'gee I can own a guaranteed group one winner' of by hoping they will be flicking through Sky channels one day and say 'this trackside action looks fascinating').

Our figures are consistently good and comparable 'chosen one' venue figures are consistently bad. People want to attend our meetings and do not want to attend theirs. Why oh why am I not entitled to highlight that in defending my patch? Is it an inconvenient truth for Messara report devotees? This is not a recent phenomena - this is happening all the time these days. People do not want to attend these 'glamour' courses but do want to attend the basic 'beer and a pie' venues

You do not address the question Thomass (a habit you share with your idiot friend Peters). The required response is to explain why two meetings, one with every possible advantage over the other, could return such contrasting oncourse results (with the disadvantaged one clearly outperforming the other). It is a simple question and, given you seem to have an opinion on everything, one which you should be able to answer without reverting back to this 'them versus us' crap. The Waikato mafia are behind Witless and his report but they will clearly neither attend nor bet on their own meetings. I want to know why (and it would be nice to have a concise and coherent answer with proper grammer not this gobledegook rubbish you throw up) What say you?