Freda

Just - the best ever.

I do like the idea of a straight track for greyhounds. The injuries they must sustain from scrambling around tight turns doesn't bear thinking about.

But the track?

Makes sense. The stabling costs interest me, as they could hardly be limited to one code, surely ?

Hope you're right.

The new move by the TAB is one positive - and good on them for sure - but, it will be a while before any benefits are felt by the racing codes. And, when those benefits accrue, I have to wonder if there will be much of an industry left to support.

An interesting flow-on from the above discussion is the plan to build more stabling at Ashburton. Also in the discussion stage is the idea to build a dog track as well. Where is the funding coming from? Hardly likely to be from private sources, one wouldn't think. Ashburton racing don't have the dosh. So...NZTR? HRNZ? CJC ? given that Ashburton is their nominated 'secondary' Canterbury club with the intended demise of Timaru, Rangiora already lost to gallopers and the already completed deaths of Waimate, Geraldine and Motukarara venues.

I would assume ( rightly or otherwise) that said assets would go to the CJC given their 'assumption' of the ownership of Rangiora.

Reefton has been tossing this idea for Riccarton around for a fair while, it's not a new concept. The difficulty would lie in overturning the 'deed of gift' or whatever it is called, of the parcel of land that is now Riccarton Racecourse. This was given to the people of Canterbury by the founding fathers of Christchurch City for the purpose of ' the racing and breeding of thoroughbred racehorses '. The breeding concept has obviously disappeared, but the intention was that it was never to be sold. That, however, was shoved aside pretty effectively when a tract of that land was sold for the housing development now well on the way. I'm sure, given that actuality, that the rest could be flogged off if there was sufficient will. The property arm of Ngai Tahu will have done particularly well out of it so far, smart operators that they are. But, interestingly, John Austin [ former head of the TAB and CJC Chairman ] also had that idea, many years ago. It was tossed aside as cloud-cuckoo stuff...but the man who is more known for refusing to consider that 'internet stuff' for TAB customers certainly had at least that innovative notion.

You know how I love a verbal scrap....good to see you two back.

Riccarton?

Indirectly, pokies have to be subsiding tracks/clubs/stakes...because the 14 mill that is swallowed up by the RIB would otherwise be going in their direction.

I don't think public opinion would accept it again, surely?

I just had another recollection..one of the points in the Messara report was that punter confidence [ and therefore revenue as a result ] would improve with consistent, safe tracks instead of a hotch-potch of wet, soggy, inconsistent, rough, hard, biased - and in some cases, downright unsafe - racing surfaces, and I'm pretty sure the AWT's were seen to provide that. Early days yet, but - as Huey says - it would be good to see some comparative figures.

What he said. In addition, the previous Minister was sold the idea of AWT'S on the basis that abandoned race meetings cost the industry significant income. Apart from the costs and inconvenience to stakeholders, abandoned racedays likely save money ( no stakes to pay, no tea lady required) so he was duped there.

An astute observer of betting trends / statistics has the opinion that punters are not likely to lose any more as a result of the presence of AWT'S. However, he doesn't feel they will necessarily lose less, either. Which, given the current betting data ( which we don't see without a bit of digging) indicates that ( lack of ) profitability isn't likely to alter.

...and, obviously, some horses will be suited, others not. That fact ain't rocket science.

I'd like to correct a misapprehension. There seems to be a notion in some quarters that I am against AWT's. I have said repeatedly that I have nothing against them in a general sense...that fact seems to escape some. An alternative work surface is part and parcel of a modern, quality training facility - along with uphill gallops, tracks with turns of both directions, water treadmills, hyperbaric chambers, areas for walking/trotting away from the general hubbub of faster work...just look at the facilities in many quality establishments elsewhere ; Lindsay Park, Ciaron Maher, just a couple to highlight; we can but dream. What I was, and still am, critical of, was the use of taxpayer funds for a training track. The notion that, somehow, this option will 'revitalise' N.Z racing. Locally- the difficulties faced by trainers during the installation of said track, with little understanding of day to day concerns. Safety matters seemingly ignored. The removal of many good training tracks [ 13 in all, not counting the course proper of course ] to leave us with three plus the poly. The biggie - for me - is, however, the plan to scuttle many provincial venues to justify the AWT. As an optional extra - fine. But, as has been said by others, whether or not a club is viable is up to market forces, not some preconceived plan with self-interests running high.

Unfortunately, Brian is another who - although he has real passion for the industry, and is not scared to speak - is blinkered about much of how it really works, and shifts his allegiance as well. He and I used to have much dialogue about the wisdom of pinning racing's fortunes on Winston. Even the former Hokitika president, who was a NZ First member and had worked with Winston quite a bit, was positive that the old bugger would step up and 'save' Hokitika. Winston has always been about the regions, he used to say. We know how that turned out. After the Messara report [ which Winston did get initiated ] we used to argue about track closures. He would dismiss my concerns, airily. That's just a red herring, he would say. You're hung up on that and it isn't important. Now he's hammering the immorality of just such actions.

I think Robert has a position with the Chamber of Commerce in Invercargill...someone may know more details. Certainly beats sloshing around in the mud seven days a week.

Interesting. Yes, that makes sense. Also Interesting, the oft - maligned Colin Wightman predicted just this and more, from his figures on foal crops back in 2011 at a Purcell roadshow. The switch from the club-based Racing Conference to a 'professional ' management model in NZTR....the swelling numbers of salaried personnel as a result ....the abolition of the old district committee model...the RB's notions of 'driving turnover ' flawed, as also predicted by a few smart cookies and chickens have well and truly come to roost as a result. So much more, nearly all predictable, back to NZTR and the handicapping/programming issues ....all pretty much resulting from the changes inherent with the 2003 Act.

Hasn't done too bad so far.

You are no doubt more eloquent and forceful, and have argued for the 'whole' circuit as well...JMO.

Yep.