Freda

Why do we care ? Isn't the topic ' Kumara' ?

I'm wondering, in the face of all this, where is all the extra money coming from to manage the training and testing of all the licensees? If licensees are to be 'educated' on a regular basis as a condition of said licence, where will the extra people doing the assessing coming from? Who trains them, will they be competent themselves? The structures to educate new riders, where are they? Where are the academies, the facilities to safely introduce young people to racehorse riding? The initiative of the Nakhles at Byerly Park, while welcome, is a private model. To adequately train young riders, there needs to be suitable stabling and horses, which must be looked after, staff must be employed to keep such horses fit and well to cope with the demands of being ridden by novices as well as being suitable to gallop.....I could go on, but I'm sure you get the drift. And who, exactly, of existing licensees of the training side, will be 'educated ' ? Will there be a universal "test' that we all must undergo? ( I'm not averse to education in any shape or form btw) but what exactly will be examined? I have a vision of a questionnaire like that which was required for new trainers licenses at one stage, with questions like ' what goes on first, blinkers or the bridle ' and ' where is the number cloth placed '.... ye gods, surely not. We have the situation now where some will take horses to the races and can't saddle the things. The fault here is with those who granted licences, will those incompents be educated too? As for the incumbents in NZTR who can't/won't answer their phones, acknowledge emails, and certainly cannot go to the letter box and deal with the old-fashioned stuff that arrives in the mail..... educate them too , you clowns.

They wouldn't have gone, much better on the Coast.

The only one I can relate to from either list is Teina Walters, the lad whose infectious delight was so very entertaining when one of his [ Te Akau ] charges saluted the judge. How that 'skill ' can be reproduced from behind a desk, I can't imagine. And what, exactly, does a 'content creator ' do?

I sincerely hope they aren't.

To be fair, most on here are as critical as Brian....and some, better informed. For several years, Brian worshipped at the altar of Winston Peters; and, with his personal friendship with John Messara, was probably instrumental in facilitating the connection between Winston and J.M, and then the Messara report. We had many a discussion about the wisdom ( or lack ) of relying on that slippery old self-server, but he was adamant that Winston was our only hope. I think most on here would agree that the Racing Act 2020 is not the panacea hoped for, any more than the 2003 version was. I have to agree with you however that at least Brian did SOMETHING.

We trained a little horse for him, back in the day. Of no account, unfortunately. That was a while ago! As for Mary, didn't realise she was the former Ms McCarty. No wonder she seemed to know what was going on. Between Mary and Marty Burns, the matter got sorted. I find that Marty can be nearly guaranteed to answer his phone - if not, a quick text and then a call-back. For that reason, the poor guy ends up dealing with stuff that has little to do with him, merely because he is the only one I can contact. But at least he will get off his ass and try and motivate the person concerned.

Yes, that makes good sense. Personally, I don't think we have the horse population or geography to adequately run a tiered structure...but if we must, then there has to be a better way of smoothly getting horses through the grades, instead of the ridiculous logjam in R 65 that exists. Yes, of course you can enter and run out of your class, if you must, to get a start - but why should you? It doesn't seem too complicated - IMO - to have the lower class horses competing on industry days with ample maiden opportunities, and [ say ] R 58 - 62, 63- 68, whatever, and then have the R 70's and up on the better days with better money. With that sort of arrangement, no horse would be forced to wait around for weeks on end to have a run; and if it had good ability, would quickly be through to having a go at slightly better stakes on a feature day.

Is the 'Tim Barton' the same Tim who used to be a journalist, or similar, in Canterbury? As for Mary - I have to give credit where it is due, inasmuch as when I was frustratedly trying to find SOMEONE to answer the bloody phone at NZTR.....anyone ? nobody home? I finally tripped over Mary - by cellphone - and she wasn't even at work, but off with a broken leg. However, she was both pleasant and very helpful. The NZTR positions above are astounding. WTF do they do? I wonder if that same lady would care to be reminded of her blog posting of four and a half years ago?

No.

Yes, that point was brought home to me yesterday, chatting with a training friend. I hadn't thought of it, but - as he said - wouldn't you think that breeders would be kicking up about the implications? Where will their 2nd and 3rd tier horses go, if the smaller trainer is squeezed out and the big shots have picked the eyes out pf the catalogues?

No apology needed, we arrived a bit later in the day and I hadn't been aware of the 'wristband' thingy. Far too hot for alcohol - and I'm not a beer drinker - but was very grateful to be able to have copious amounts of lemonade. Given that the so very popular Gisborne / Wairoa circuit has now been consigned to history, it is, I suspect, largely due to the eloquence and energy of your good self that the Coast still survives as a 'circuit' but they are clearly doing their best to fix that. The absence of a Westland day can only be 'payback' for the actions of the club....and what is the silliest thing of all ; the improvements deemed necessary to bring the track up to standard [ if that was a major factor ] could have been funded by the club itself. Industry money was not needed, or expected. They had the funds to do whatever was required, be that improving the camber, re-aligning a bend, etc...as well as plenty of local voluntary help.

Was a super day - heat notwithstanding. Caught up with so many old friends, among them former very good trainer Helen Preston, along with a happy and enthusiastic crowd. I hear the next year's days for the three Coast clubs are Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday. Westland again misses out, although I'm told they applied for a day. The prospect of these wonderful days getting transferred to the AWT is alarming.

Yep. But I'm not going to criticise the winningest jockey NZ has ever seen. He sweated buckets on the truck, that in itself may have been enough to cost him a wee bit of lift. But not too many options if the front wasn't happening. Quite happy. Going well and trying hard. Good on the horse, he's had issues and looks very genuine now.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions....and, I am opposed big-time to the vaccine mandate. But, your observation is about where I sit too. If vaccination wasn't being forced upon people, but rather a matter for free and informed choice, there would, IMO, still be nearly as many vaxxed. No division, angst, and far less fear in the community. No businesses facing either huge costs in the form of fines, or compliance - or closure. About the same amount of infections. And, how about reporting - and helping - those who are actually seriously ill? instead of a clusterfuck of testing, isolating, quarantining - and vilifying - people who aren't sick?

I'd be there to brush a tail.

WRT the 'senior person' to represent him ; things have obviously changed since I had apprentices...but if I couldn't be at the races, another trainer or suitable other [ retired and reputable jockey, etc ] had to be nominated. In the early days, the apprentice was given a letter to hand to an official, but as said apprentice became more proficient and knew most of those folk at the races, it was sufficient for me to ring a stipe and say ' Pitty is representing......if necessary ' and that was enough.

Neither have I. Only from NZTA. That arrived Sunday, with a request to RSVP by Monday....!! Curious expressed his thoughts far better than I could...no specific 'agenda', aims, or points of discussion, with opinions and/or suggested solutions called for. No research that I could see as a term of reference, with evidence that a particular plan might work. Just a lot of fluffy stuff, with that awful comment ' elite trainers will not have to compete with the lower-cost model ' which has offended people at the track this morning, I can assure you. But most will have the same view. The roadshow will be an expensive waste of time, the dissenting voices will get no traction, I've been going to meetings, both out of interest, and on behalf of others, for forty-odd years. Nothing relevant ever seems to eventuate. I won't be wasting my time either.

Yes, I get muttered at for being critical, at times...and I do agree that it is far easier to take pot-shots than actually 'fix' things. Go to programming meetings, I was told, seeing you know so much. But, where do you start? Tinkering at that level achieves little, the whole thing needs a complete re-vamp, far outside the scope of those meetings. And programming, while a significant matter, isn't the whole deal. As NM says, a daunting task indeed, to fix the wider industry.

Precisely.

Notwithstanding all the other ramifications of these proposed changes, this particular idea merely returns classifications to yesteryear. Public trainers and owner- trainers were the only categories then. I well recall the resistance to the idea of the permit-holder, when it was brought in. Objections from the Trainers ' Assn branch that I was involved with ( Canterbury/Westland ) included worries about undercutting fees, and dropping standards of service. Also, the training of young folk, either potential trainers or apprentice jockeys, was going to be compromised. Subsequently, permit-holders were not allowed to have apprentices, but that has, like many rules/standards, has been slowly eroded and now we find apprentices being indentured to trainers who are away at their main job for the day. I wonder, however, where the likes of say, Lance Noble fits? Essentially now a private trainer for the Lindsays/Cambridge Stud, but certainly a professional of good repute for a long time. And where does Te Akau fit? Multiple owners, yes, but the 'operation' is all-encompassing, so Jamie could, at a stretch, be a 'private ' trainer himself. Typically, little thought put into terminology and ramifications thereof. As J.B says, young trainers over the ditch were steered towards the more provincial tracks, with only A class trainers permitted stabling at the main city tracks. I don't know whether that was a specific policy, or whether the cost of such stabling meant that the provincial/country option is simply more suitable for one starting out. Clearly, with country and provincial tracks in NZ getting squeezed out both by attrition and policy, that option won't be available for new trainers here.

Yeah, they sure would have. Remember C George trying to tell the winningest rider in NZ of all time, how to do his job?

Plenty of ice, Chief.

Was in the bar watching.

Have to take issue with your comment in this case - although I am usually very critical too. I know Matt and Sarah well, the mare is quirky and has her own ideas about what and how she does things. A 'conventional ' ride may, and in fact has, caused the mare to switch off and refuse to compete. She doesn't like to be near other horses, and has ( I believe) been difficult to train and place. Kin Kwo won on her a while ago, storming down the outside away from traffic...but underwhelming in the extreme in subsequent starts. I'm not getting into what the rider should or could have done better, but just thought a wee bit of background might help make sense of what seemed to be a horrid display.