Freda

Yep, agree totally. Nothing wrong with it by all appearances, the consistency ( if maintained ) will have a steady pool of horses taking full advantage of the conditions and the proposed regular racing. But it will be a shame if those genuine wet trackers are now not catered for, elsewhere. That may not be the case in the Waikato but will certainly be the case down here, with permits/racedays shifted to justify the AWT....and the likes of Timaru with its gd 2 track for today are rubbed out as a matter of policy. The provision of superior training facilities is a plus for those able to utilise them but that was not the reason for nicking 20 mill from the public purse. If turnovers, and ultimately revenue, is improved, then we might have a show of moving forward- if not squandered or mismanaged. But wagering statistics don't show any significant difference elsewhere.

The state of the visiting yards/stabling in many places is not up to scratch. Testing is now so sensitive that the sloppiness of yesteryear just isn't acceptable, and security is nonexistent as well.

Hmm. Slick indeed....and I imagine, very effective.

I wasn't aware we had a grass track championship series....unless you are referring to the annual Racing Awards, which isn't quite the same thing. I thought the surface looked pretty firm.

I know how soft it was to walk on...and how hard the racing surface was in comparison. Again, look at the brown dry looking grass when Horlicks raced in Japan. Not saying it was the same grass but certainly different from what is used currently here.

As Pitty said, browntop. It'll be fine. You may recall an earlier conversation, where I mentioned that I had walked the dogs over an 'unimproved' and unwatered portion of the track, and found that the cushion was significant, despite the burnt-off appearance. A lot more 'bounce' than on the watered and green portion. That is a thought that others have had, following discussions about other renovated tracks and the issues that many have; that, despite the 'expertise' of the turf specialists, the grass types are not necessarily the best to use.

His neuro-transmitters are well and truly damaged. What a shame, and what an awful, destructive drug.

Riverton is a super track. Pity it is so far away.

True that. however, looking back, it has been shown repeatedly that it is not just the ARC that is being subsidised, but the bigger clubs generally. It is a no brainer that some sort of funding has to be set aside for the staking of Grp races - esp. as races here in NZ don't return their stakemoney through betting revenue on racing. They need to drag in all sorts of additional income just to maintain a veneer of profitability. But the smaller clubs have been squeezed more and more, to the point where, when the volunteers become too old, too tired, or just too dispirited to keep doing what they have done for years, facilities become shabby and rundown; that combined with poor dates....gone. So, if 'the Hill' development falls behind what is envisaged - what is left to get squeezed? And will future committees of the ARC be as keen to devolve their profits into propping up the rest of the industry?

And that is another thought apart from the affect new facilities close to the action may have on other areas. Funding these races? The idea is ( as I understand) to provide over-the-top money from the investments made. All well and good, if these investments remain profitable into the foreseeable future. But is that good business to pour profits down the sink? Betting revenues may increase as a result of improved quality of product, but will it be enough? And, as pointed out above- will there be expectations of additional funding from NZTR? Will - or should- the ARC be subsidizing the rest of NZ racing? I have heard a comment suggesting some clubs should expect less funding...but that is only hearsay I must point out.

No they don't. A huge point of difference.

In the last decade - or more - turnovers have not made any race a revenue-positive area, is my understanding. The lesser-staked meetings just lose less, that's all. Which is [ one reason ] why the wail about abandoned meetings costing millions is a crock. No stakes to pay out, no ancillary costs either, only costs are on the beleaguered stakeholders who in many cases have outlaid money for transport, staff wages, etc, for the raceday. So yes, novelty aside, I would think we would be in the same place as before wrt revenue. There seems to be little evidence statistically to indicate that betting will be worse, despite many comments about punters hating allweathers. Obviously, some do, but equally, others may not. After all, people bet on greyhounds, which I find an utter bore-fest - even though I love dogs, and have a rehomed greyhound. Can't see that there will be any significant change in punting behaviour really, although I'm no statistical expert.

More double posts....that gremlin still here.

Any luck? How about trying the vendor listed, you might get some info there.

No luck? How about contacting the vendor listed in the results, you might be able to get some help there. He/she/they would have to know who purchased and where she has gone.

some don't want to ??

Well, yes. My thoughts too. I was just pondering the likelihood of relocation of trainers to Riccarton which was considered very probable, following the new AWT and programming changes favouring that. For example, the Marsh team at the moment, has stables here and Cambridge. Would the Pukekohe option not be more attractive? Three stable bases? or pull Riccarton? Interesting times.

Any thoughts on the affects of this impending development of this area, whether is be a ' sale ' in its entirety, or a sell/lease type of deal ? If the mooted actions do in fact take place, with modern, purpose-built training facilities at Pukekohe, there may be trainers now incumbent at Cambridge or Matamata who see the proximity to the 'new' Ellerslie, with its Strathayr , much reduced travelling times, regular racing and and large stake increases, as being the next logical step forward for their businesses. Where, then, does that leave other regions [ particularly the Sth Island and specifically Riccarton ] in terms of appeal? Would a 'satellite' stable then be required for, say, a Cambridge trainer?

I think we all get your drift.

So, I walked twice round the track and up the chute looking for a lost plate on Sunday. The chute was very good, junction harder and quite rough, the rest of the track not too bad; but on the fence esp down the straight, like a ploughed paddock. So the riders weren't too far wrong by getting off the rail. Didn't find the plate either, although a couple of observers reckoned they could see it fly about at the junction.

Great video all right, sure brings back memories. Very easy to forget just how good some of these horses were.

A bit away from the headpost - and please correct me if I am wrong - but I think both Hendra and Ebola viruses are ' haemorrhagic' viruses....I recently watched a very interesting doco about the Black Death in the middle ages. This awful infection has been long assumed to be Bubonic Plague, but the researchers showed clearly that there were significant points of difference between the ' black death' and the later outbreaks of plague [ bacterial ], not the least being the differing populations of the black and brown rat at specific times. It did seem as if the black death may have been caused by a virus similar in its effects to the Hendra and Ebola ones.

She trained Silky Red Boxer for Albert, and the whole operation went from there really. I wasn't aware she went to Sydney, thought Chris went on his own.

Jocks I spoke to reckoned track fair with a nice bit of give. Well done, however that happened. Rail 4m out so shouldn't have been tricky on the 'fence '.

I'll give you a ( subjective ) report when I get home.