Jump to content
Bit Of A Yarn

Freda

Members
  • Posts

    4,077
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    108

Everything posted by Freda

  1. That is a separate matter that has been debated for years. There are a few who have their heads around it well, but unfortunately they didn't - and still don't - get listened to.
  2. Well done, Chief, you've done it again.
  3. Do they? tell our lot, will ya?
  4. Fear not, everyone. It's ' expert-led' ..it'll be grand.
  5. How can you make that statement? It does seem as if temperature has an effect on the wax part of the composite, therefore must have some bearing on speed/times. Apart from the fact that it was first published in 2010 so may be rather out of date.
  6. Riccarton has around 250 horses utilizing the tracks per month. Rangiora, 120. That doesn't include the harness numbers which i forgot to ask for.
  7. Looks like Vicki Ramhit
  8. Geez, fellas, can we put away the swords?
  9. Oh, for goodness sake. Im not proud of sinking to the depths that others do at times....but the stupid, ill-informed comments got right up my nose. But no, I certainly didn't ask for the removal of any posts, as far as I am aware the glitch was an IT matter and as such, well above me.
  10. Bloody hard on the horse's back/withers though. I hate them.
  11. Well, it beats hanging around going nowhere with no grass meetings locally. And Blenheim used to put on a great breakfast for stable staff, so costs wrt accom. were kept to a minimum
  12. Didn't think so either. If you look he would have been 4-5 wide if he had elected to improve, he's young and inexperienced, may have been scared to do that. You can do that at Invercargill along Finlay Rd but likely no one has told him.
  13. As far as Riccarton goes, there is one meeting 21st June before the National meeting. Hardly over-use. One wit remarked that they wouldn't want to do the work putting the track back if racing had gone ahead on the turf. Fact is, that those who nominated for the Riccarton turf meeting did so knowing that there would be heavy going. The track had no surface water and although very testing, would have been safe. The discussion is academic to me, I didn't have anything in, but the biggest insult was that the decision was made without any consultation with the stakeholders involved.
  14. Yeah only one I could pick too
  15. Well, shoot me down in flames if y'all like, but I like the concept. Promoting our stars is something we do badly and while it may not appeal to we older folk, we aren't the target group.
  16. Yes, they could. But would they?
  17. In the 70's, 80's......and on...very probably.
  18. An effing sight closer to Ellerslie than Timaru and Winton.
  19. I friend and occasional client from the Auckland area told me two years ago that the CD and S I were surplus to requirements, Auckland was where it was at and elsewhere didn't matter. He's usually pretty on to it so I didn't dismiss him out of hand, but privately hoped he was wrong in this instance. Appears, probably not. Will be interesting to see if the poly trials scheduled for Tuesday go ahead.
  20. Sorry..I didn't mean the poster was absurd, the fact that that cost had to be built into the shift in venue, I thought absurd. That is just how out of touch NZTR are, and continue to display.
  21. Yes, they do use the synthetic tracks in Sydney, but not for racing. Not to be pedantic, but just for some balance here.
  22. CD? I thought Hawera was in Taranaki.
  23. FFs, that's more expensive than the return ChCh to Invercargill. Absurd.
  24. Agree with all the above. And, chatting to Kelvin Tyler, as he pointed out, those trainers who nominated for Saturday ( today ) were very well aware the track was going to be wet. I walked it last night, no surface water at all and apart from the rough surface ( which is normal) , fine to race. To express concern for those people traveling to the races from out of the district is utter b/s when those same people were afforded zero consideration on Thursday in the middle of a regional state of emergency. The safety of participants was not considered at all , and neither was the safety and well-being of those travelling through flooded and potentially dangerous areas. Absolute plonkers.
×
×
  • Create New...