All the Best Awapuni!

[Wingman]

1 minute ago, Special Agent said:

Management should take the wrap for rushing back to race day.

You can't blame this on trainers, jockeys or people of the past.

Yes but which Manager. NZTR? RACE? Fat chance. "We will review our processes, take learnings from this unfortunate experience and going forward ensure best practice is our ultimate goal". 

[Special Agent]

3 minutes ago, Wingman said:

We cannot answer the Why? however it is also the reason the track managers cannot be held to blame. Move the rail out and get on with it is not the track managers decision.

Why would a Track Manager not decide to move the rail?  What is the Track Manager paid to do?  Manage the track I would have thought.

Management of a racing club and racecourse includes CEO, Committee, Racing Manager and Track Manager.

I think the buck stops with one of those.

[Wingman]

3 minutes ago, Special Agent said:

Why would a Track Manager not decide to move the rail?  What is the Track Manager paid to do?  Manage the track I would have thought.

Management of a racing club and racecourse includes CEO, Committee, Racing Manager and Track Manager.

I think the buck stops with one of those.

I gave you a bouquet on a post of yours the other day, now with the degree of naivety you are displaying consider yourself now receiving a brickbat. Smack yourself with it to your hearts content.

FACT. There was a problem area 3 metres out around the final bend area so to avoid that the rail went out to 6m. 

The track manager moves the rail after consultation but it is done at at the high levels of management at RACE and NZTR. The track Manager does not dictate in the final decision as to race or not. 

[Special Agent]

Job title needs reviewing then.  Doesn't need manager attached.

[Murray Fish]

9 hours ago, Special Agent said:

10 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

 

As someone eluded to earlier not many are putting their hand up to be interviewed.

yip, and perhaps especially so if Engrish be your 2nd or 3rd language!

[Chief Stipe]

53 minutes ago, Special Agent said:

Management of a racing club and racecourse includes CEO, Committee, Racing Manager and Track Manager.

I think the buck stops with one of those.

So you are looking for a scapegoat?

Someone to blame

Just like you've found Bryce Mildon at Hastings to blame based on the advice amd misinformation from who knows.

So you find these scapegoats and their heads are rolled.

Then what?  What are you going to do at Hastings?  What are you going to do at Awapuni that hasn't already been done?  If you are going to employ someone else who are they?

[Wingman]

33 minutes ago, Special Agent said:

Job title needs reviewing then.  Doesn't need manager attached.

Call them track superintendents' shall we? and all going forward, using best practices, will be just super. 

[Freda]

12 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

Might be too late by then.

They don't seem keen to speak out for some reason.  I'm not sure their Association has any nerve or desire to rock the boat even behind the scenes.

The T.A is funded by NZTR.   Hardly surprising those few who have independent thought, wish to bite the hand that feeds it.

The majority, as alluded to by Wingman, are flat out trying to juggle a lack of track riders, paying bills, and keeping owners happy.

Taking a political stance is simply beyond many, time- and resources-wise.

[Freda]

We'd all like to find a scapegoat.  It's easier, and much more satisfying than dealing with nameless, faceless organisations or committees.

But it is right, in a manner of speaking,  that we all stand accountable for the current state of affairs to some degree.

I can only refer to local events, but probably they have been replicated country-wide to some degree.

Years ago, Riccarton raced at National time,  Cup time, midsummer-meeting  [ late Jan/early Feb],   Hororata, Easter, then May meeting, then Hunt Club and National again.  May meeting held the first steeplechase over a modified course, minus Cutt's Brush.

 3 days at each of National, Cup and Easter.

In and around all that as supporting acts there was Motukarara, Geraldine, Timaru, West Coast [ twice ] with their four clubs, Westport, Nelson, Blenheim, Amberley [ which moved voluntarily to Rangiora ] and Rangiora itself.

So, as mentioned in another post, there was not really any need - and certainly no recognition of that - to renovate tracks.  There were plenty to keep everything going and not really any track getting the hammering that happens now.

When Rangiora was canned as a racing venue there was a group of stakeholders who did an enormous amount of work fundraising, and even retaining a lawyer to fight the CJC with its takeover design.   Zero support from the majority of trainers outside the immediate North Canterbury area though.   Trials were retained however and were well run for several years until the push to centralise gained yet more headway with the arrival of the polytracks.   

 They have suffered significant bad press, some deserved with maintenance issues which, hopefully, have been addressed now.

But internationally, alternative surfaced tracks have been in use for 30-odd years or more.  Improving all the time, but certainly not a new concept.

But many of those most vocally in favour of those AWT's are now yelling from the rooftops about the lack of grass trials.

The bad state of many of the favoured tracks could have been foreseen, if the consequences of closing so many had been considered.  But it wasn't.

Given that prescience is a gift most of us don't have, it is pointless pointing the finger.  

What to do going forward is a more productive use of what talents concerned folk might have.

Great to hear that Levin is gearing up for a fight.   All power to them.

One thing that does stand out though, and most of us here have pointed it out repeatedly, is the bucketloads of moolah thrown at our industries by Entain.  Please God, could someone stick a bomb into the Boardroom at NZTR and blow some sense into them?   Now that there is, actually, money in hand, direct some of it to infrastructure and not at top end stakes.

[Special Agent]

13 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

So you are looking for a scapegoat?

Someone to blame

Just like you've found Bryce Mildon at Hastings to blame based on the advice amd misinformation from who knows.

So you find these scapegoats and their heads are rolled.

Then what?  What are you going to do at Hastings?  What are you going to do at Awapuni that hasn't already been done?  If you are going to employ someone else who are they?

So, let's pretend everything is peachy then.

How does Hastings go from a premiere surface to a skating rink?  No human error involved?  What has been done, and the advice sought has not fixed the problem so why would you not take a different approach?

Awapuni needs further time, as simple as that.

It's not that bloody complicated.

[Special Agent]

13 hours ago, Wingman said:

Call them track superintendents' shall we? and all going forward, using best practices, will be just super. 

They used be Caretakers, employees of the club but, I'd have thought almost a free rein to maintain and manage the track successfully for training and racing.

Maybe "manager" only offers a better remuneration.

[westbrew]

The Big picture is that a number of years the "Industry" has been consolidating assets, with clubs merging and or closing and now NZTR coming for clubs which still have assets to provide relief for Clubs NZTR deem to be worthy. This tells me one thing the "Industry" is living beyond its means, they have been paying out dividends (stakes), without having worked out how much they require to maintain and refurbish their tracks. Thus the necessary work and money required to get their infrastructure back to decent standard is growing all the time.

Once again i believe this is a critical failure of the NZTR Board and the members council. So how do you fix a problem that the Governance area of your "Industry" is effectively playing lip service to??? If you own a factory you work out what it costs to run and what it costs to upkeep and what it costs to replace in the long term and then you pay your dividends out with the money left over, these so called directors at NZTR do it the opposite way, they work out what dividend (stakes) they want to pay and then tell the clubs that's what's left for you to maintain the infrastructure for the "Industry". Thus we now have the situation where the funder of the infrastructure payments NZTR is blaming the clubs because they have not spent the money on upkeep that NZTR never gave them. And guess what NZTR answer is,  shut down racing and or training in large geographical areas of NZ.

So if we are having a witch hunt my vote is for NZTR Board and members council not the poor buggers at the coal face who have been totally underfunded for 20 plus years.           

[Freda]

25 minutes ago, westbrew said:

The Big picture is that a number of years the "Industry" has been consolidating assets, with clubs merging and or closing and now NZTR coming for clubs which still have assets to provide relief for Clubs NZTR deem to be worthy. This tells me one thing the "Industry" is living beyond its means, they have been paying out dividends (stakes), without having worked out how much they require to maintain and refurbish their tracks. Thus the necessary work and money required to get their infrastructure back to decent standard is growing all the time.

Once again i believe this is a critical failure of the NZTR Board and the members council. So how do you fix a problem that the Governance area of your "Industry" is effectively playing lip service to??? If you own a factory you work out what it costs to run and what it costs to upkeep and what it costs to replace in the long term and then you pay your dividends out with the money left over, these so called directors at NZTR do it the opposite way, they work out what dividend (stakes) they want to pay and then tell the clubs that's what's left for you to maintain the infrastructure for the "Industry". Thus we now have the situation where the funder of the infrastructure payments NZTR is blaming the clubs because they have not spent the money on upkeep that NZTR never gave them. And guess what NZTR answer is,  shut down racing and or training in large geographical areas of NZ.

So if we are having a witch hunt my vote is for NZTR Board and members council not the poor buggers at the coal face who have been totally underfunded for 20 plus years.           

Spot on.

[Muzza]

4 hours ago, Freda said:

We'd all like to find a scapegoat.  It's easier, and much more satisfying than dealing with nameless, faceless organisations or committees.

But it is right, in a manner of speaking,  that we all stand accountable for the current state of affairs to some degree.

I can only refer to local events, but probably they have been replicated country-wide to some degree.

Years ago, Riccarton raced at National time,  Cup time, midsummer-meeting  [ late Jan/early Feb],   Hororata, Easter, then May meeting, then Hunt Club and National again.  May meeting held the first steeplechase over a modified course, minus Cutt's Brush.

 3 days at each of National, Cup and Easter.

In and around all that as supporting acts there was Motukarara, Geraldine, Timaru, West Coast [ twice ] with their four clubs, Westport, Nelson, Blenheim, Amberley [ which moved voluntarily to Rangiora ] and Rangiora itself.

So, as mentioned in another post, there was not really any need - and certainly no recognition of that - to renovate tracks.  There were plenty to keep everything going and not really any track getting the hammering that happens now.

When Rangiora was canned as a racing venue there was a group of stakeholders who did an enormous amount of work fundraising, and even retaining a lawyer to fight the CJC with its takeover design.   Zero support from the majority of trainers outside the immediate North Canterbury area though.   Trials were retained however and were well run for several years until the push to centralise gained yet more headway with the arrival of the polytracks.   

 They have suffered significant bad press, some deserved with maintenance issues which, hopefully, have been addressed now.

But internationally, alternative surfaced tracks have been in use for 30-odd years or more.  Improving all the time, but certainly not a new concept.

But many of those most vocally in favour of those AWT's are now yelling from the rooftops about the lack of grass trials.

The bad state of many of the favoured tracks could have been foreseen, if the consequences of closing so many had been considered.  But it wasn't.

Given that prescience is a gift most of us don't have, it is pointless pointing the finger.  

What to do going forward is a more productive use of what talents concerned folk might have.

Great to hear that Levin is gearing up for a fight.   All power to them.

One thing that does stand out though, and most of us here have pointed it out repeatedly, is the bucketloads of moolah thrown at our industries by Entain.  Please God, could someone stick a bomb into the Boardroom at NZTR and blow some sense into them?   Now that there is, actually, money in hand, direct some of it to infrastructure and not at top end stakes.

Well said Freda, and oh so spot on. 

[Chief Stipe]

2 hours ago, Special Agent said:

How does Hastings go from a premiere surface to a skating rink? 

When was it last a Premier Track?  That is a serious question.

[Chief Stipe]

2 hours ago, Special Agent said:

What has been done, and the advice sought has not fixed the problem so why would you not take a different approach?

Nothing had been done to fix the issue after many abandonments.

[Chief Stipe]

2 hours ago, Special Agent said:

Awapuni needs further time, as simple as that.

It's not that bloody complicated.

How much time?

What protocols will you use to test that it is ready that were different to those used prior to the race meeting?

Obviously simply galloping four horses across it on race morning, running a couple of hundred horses across it in trials and a total of 500 horses run across the surface is too complicated.  

What is the ubloody uncomplicated approach you recommend?  

[Chief Stipe]

5 hours ago, Freda said:

So, as mentioned in another post, there was not really any need - and certainly no recognition of that - to renovate tracks.  There were plenty to keep everything going and not really any track getting the hammering that happens now.

I agree with the majority of your post - it is well thought out and reasoned.  It's just this quote I don't agree with.

Are tracks really "being hammered"?

In 2006-07 Season:

 

In the 2023-24 Seaon:

There were 292 meetings - 7 less than 2006-07 BUT

404 less races which is the equivalent of 40 less race meetings.

Are tracks really getting "getting hammered"?

[Chief Stipe]

2 hours ago, westbrew said:

Once again i believe this is a critical failure of the NZTR Board and the members council. So how do you fix a problem that the Governance area of your "Industry" is effectively playing lip service to??? If you own a factory you work out what it costs to run and what it costs to upkeep and what it costs to replace in the long term and then you pay your dividends out with the money left over, these so called directors at NZTR do it the opposite way, they work out what dividend (stakes) they want to pay and then tell the clubs that's what's left for you to maintain the infrastructure for the "Industry". Thus we now have the situation where the funder of the infrastructure payments NZTR is blaming the clubs because they have not spent the money on upkeep that NZTR never gave them. And guess what NZTR answer is,  shut down racing and or training in large geographical areas of NZ.

So what is the logical outcome of your very valid analysis?

Assuming that we expect a racecourse to live within its means AND to keep racing and training infrastructure up to scratch what are the key sources of revenue?

1. Horses trained on course - 500 minimum;
2. Horses trialed on course - 20 trials a year?;
3. Horses raced on course - 25 meetings a year?

If you look at number 1 and consider that there are currently only just over 2,500 horses registered - half of which are trained at Cambridge and Matamata - how many courses do we need?  

We certainly don't need Trentham which only provides on half on the third criteria - 12 meetings a year.  If it wasn't for Ellerslie's capital invested (which incidentally must have taken a hit recently) they'd struggle as well.

 

[Special Agent]

Judging by Brad Taylor's latest update maybe Kate Hercock was correct about more water required.

[Special Agent]

14 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Are tracks really getting "getting hammered"?

Yes.

[Special Agent]

30 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

How much time?

What protocols will you use to test that it is ready that were different to those used prior to the race meeting?

Obviously simply galloping four horses across it on race morning, running a couple of hundred horses across it in trials and a total of 500 horses run across the surface is too complicated.  

What is the ubloody uncomplicated approach you recommend?  

If you think known kick back is okay, good on you.

[Assange]

11 minutes ago, Special Agent said:

Judging by Brad Taylor's latest update maybe Kate Hercock was correct about more water required.

I thought a lot of his explanation on Weigh In was a lot of techno speak without a lot of understanding. Suggesting watering the night before races?  We have experts on tracks. We have experts on horses. There seems to be a lack of communication between the two.

[Chief Stipe]

22 minutes ago, Special Agent said:

Judging by Brad Taylor's latest update maybe Kate Hercock was correct about more water required.

Well lets make Hercock the National Track Manager.  How much irrigation did she recommend prior to the meeting?  

[Chief Stipe]

23 minutes ago, Special Agent said:

Yes.

So you reckon "Yes the tracks are getting hammered".

In the figures I posted above I didn't account for the fact that not only were there 400 less races last season than in 2006 but another 300 races (30 meetings) were run on the AWT's!  That's 700 less races on the turf tracks and you are saying they are getting "hammered"!

Hell some are saying that Trentham has been hammered and it had 3 extra meetings than what is normal!!!

Tracks being hammered by too much racing is a myth not supported by the facts.  If Tracks are behaving as if they are hammered it is because they are stuffed!!!