Freda

But you'd have to feel a bit sorry for him, veterinary work is pretty expensive...

He was pretty canny all right. Street smart. That's exactly the matter that J.B.was referring to, the falls that we see now compared with the relatively few in his riding days. Now, many just don't see what's coming, they don't know their times, they can't read a race.

No, Kin looks like a young Malaysian man of Chinese ethnicity....nothing equine about his appearance at all 🤔

Yes, it certainly has. And the comment was made tongue in cheek, but seemingly you didn't get it. I've had female apprentices and many of the immigrant riders are my friends. But the clock in the head is badly lacking in many of them. The training of young riders ATM is creating a real problem. My former partner, a good rider in his day, used to reckon it was becoming next to impossible to ride a good race. Defensive driving was the order of the day.

Yes, agree with that. However, we know - looking at the latest TAB figures - that the industry is running on empty. The development at Auckland, and the possibility of a Greenfields development in Cambridge, will largely be funded by commercial means not industry money. So, whether 'pressure' is put on or not, you can't get blood out of a stone, if money's not there it just ain't there. So pointing the finger at Australia is not comparing apples with apples. Because their respective state operations do have money . Your former nemesis used to be very scathing of the idea that any extra funding should go towards stakes. Infrastructure, training, and r & d were vital to the overall health of the industry he used to maintain and he was right. But, as stated above, there just isn't the surplus to keep everyone happy.

Well, if that happened here, there may not be the problems we now experience, and have done in some shape or form since reconstruction. But it doesn't, apart from very occasional slicing, vertidraining and sanding. Can't you comprehend the difference? and the reason for the frustration of many stakeholders? Clearly there is neither the money to undertake a complete renovation every four years, nor the will to recognise there is even a problem. And therein lies a bigger one.

Good bloke, Pat. I remember, on one particular occasion, two senior riders [ Mouse McCann and Perry Thomas ] waving down his tractor to bring it to a standstill, and then proceeding to bring him up to speed over the state of the plough. To his credit, he took it all on board, and did the plough himself for quite a while after. It improved quickly and there were no more complaints.

Ah...now I'm not sexist, not in any shape or form, but you wouldn't have had little girls or Mauritians to dodge, would you ?

Health and Safety rules now, J.B. To be fair to administrators, they just can't risk anyone falling as result of unsafe conditions. Back then there weren't such concerns.

Bullshit [to quote Reefton]. Just do what needs to be done, properly.

Yes. Quite a few years ago there was a meeting held at the Yaldhurst Hotel to discuss a 'vote of no confidence' in the track management processes. A good number of stakeholders attended and, of course, in the [ robust ] discussion that ensued, the contractors who carried out the reconstruction work in 1998 were given a sound bagging. Some of us were given tasks, mine was to email Godber of the [ then] RIU and express our concern not only about the condition of the track, but also the 'misinformation' given out. My reply was that ' this is a beat-up, there is nothing to address here' ...and so on. He also seemed to think that I was a troublemaker, although I had taken great care to explain that I was 'forwarding the concerns of the meeting', not conducting a personal vendetta. The 'misinformation' concern was brushed aside as a 'misunderstanding' . So that, as might be expected, went nowhere. However, as one who likes to get as much information as possible before coming to a decision, I decided [ this off my own bat ] to find out just exactly what specifications the company involved had to work with. It took a fair bit of ferreting out, as the principal of Laing's had since retired, and was, at that time, operating as a consultant. But, where there's a will there's a way, and eventually I tracked him down. Duncan Laing was very approachable and was happy to discuss the situation. I won't go into all the detail, but he was clear that the company was given a scope of work by the RIB...that being the old Racing Industry Board, before the 2003 Racing Act that morphed that body and the TAB into the R.B [ Racing Board ]. He also said that he had produced a manual for the management of the new-laid track, and felt that the incumbent manager [ Rob Lory ] had understood the requirements therein, and had done his best to follow them. He was of the opinion that subsequent appointments had probably tossed it away as he didn't seem to think things were going as well as they should. The thing to take out of all this, is that Laing's followed their instructions. I don't think any contractor can ignore their scope of work and do something else. So the company shouldn't [ IMO ] be held responsible for the construction faults, whatever they may be. Those [ experts ] responsible for producing the instructions have to wear that. And we have seen problems arise not just here, but reconstruction work at Randwick[ ? ] I think had issues, as did Eagle Farm and I'm sure there will be several others come to mind.

Not sure if 'slipping' is the reason, although you may be right. Slipping is seldom a problem at Riccarton, with its sweeping turns and roomy track.

I rang to enquire the rationale for that..was told that the aim was to produce a gd 4 on racemorning. I pointed out that we have had rain on and off for a month...hardly dessicating weather. Riccarton was bad enough last time, Timaru was a welcome relief and a credit to all concerned.

Yeah...I have to admit I was struggling to see what benefits were likely if the ownership of the TAB was returned to the codes....but thought I'd say nothing in case it was seen to be a good idea and I was left with egg on my face, and JJ Flash or Tasman Man came out of hiding to berate me.

Yes, it has better focus than some of BdL's former work. He does get a wee bit off target sometimes and his obsession with the breeders' lobby is a tad annoying, although understandable given his background. But good on him for bringing comment out of the wardrobe, so to speak. I imagine it reaches a different audience than the one we air our opinions on, and he has a passion for the industry as a whole.

Eloquent as always, J.B.! My interest is sparked by the immigration situation..namely how, in the midst of a visa processing system that seems to be almost comical in its ineptitude, these folk can arrive quickly without too many problems. Good luck to them. I remember Brandon Morgenrood, a quality rider at best and a likeable,personable guy, but with a history of corrupt riding and heavy drug use. Deported now, after conspiring to kill Tina C. in a race at Riccarton, luckily the girls in the jockey's room blew the whistle because the judiciary don't seem to be gifted with twenty-twenty vision. He told me his involvement with Russian mafia was to blame for his personal woes...Oatham was quite sure he ' wouldn't transgress again'...NZTR sure did its homework ...lucky Tina is made of tough stuff. I think these lads will be more than able to deal with what they find here, whether societal or in the riding ranks.

Yes, La Crique I thought impressive, showed a lovely action. Nice mare.

Nope. Memory not accurate there

Mr Illusion was a very good sprinter indeed. Am I right in remembering that he was ridden by Jackie Oakshott ? he had a ridiculously light weight and Jackie weighed about 47 kg dripping wet.

I agree with the 'expertise' allusion. However times have generally been quick at Ricc, since the renovation in 1998. Good horses can really fly - but even moderate ones go fast as well, it may have something to do with layout, camber, incline, whatever, but the trouble is, it isn't consistent. And horses will cop a couple of runs on unforgiving ground, but most can't manage too many. Years ago, not long after renewal, I had a very average horse which posted a time of 1.10 for his 1200 mtrs. Fair go, he couldn't have run 1.10 downhill with a tail wind.

I can too. The Hazlett jumpers I recall particularly.

A healthy industry has to have strength at the bottom levels. Throwing an extra 50k or more at Grp 1's won't stop the exodus of promising horses which can earn good money without being elite runners. Those with modest performers are still struggling, and the 14- 15k industry day stakes, while certainly better than the 7k on offer only a few short years ago, goes nowhere with the ever increasing coats across the board - and don't forget, we had 7k days some 30+ years ago [ ..and some pretty fair jockeys too, you could toss your colours into the jockeys' room and it wouldn't matter who picked them up.. ] Add the increasing number of tracks deemed 'not necessary' while those favoured ones are frequently unusable, no, sorry, Mr Goodson, I don't see any remedy in your mindset.

Unfortunately Goodson - along with his then sidekick, one G Purcell - demonstrated his lack of understanding of the nuts and bolts of process, when given the work done by two educated statisticians on the effects of handicapping policies, allowances, and so much more. All done pro-bono, and probably consigned to a drawer somewhere as clearly neither understood one side of it. Why he should now have a silver bullet, I fail to comprehend.