All the Best Awapuni!

[Chief Stipe]

1 hour ago, curious said:

Exactly. Someone/s. In a situation where they can ease if it feels insecure.

I don't see any mention of reports from riders who rode the gallops 48 hours out or on race morning?

Yes and apparently FOUR horses were galloped on the track in the morning.  Given that was under RIB control where is their report and recommendation?

[curious]

13 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Yes and apparently FOUR horses were galloped on the track in the morning.  Given that was under RIB control where is their report and recommendation?

It's not necessarily under RIB control is it? It's the clubs responsibility and often before the RIB take over.

[Chief Stipe]

30 minutes ago, curious said:

It's not necessarily under RIB control is it? It's the clubs responsibility and often before the RIB take over.

Don't RIB take control Raceday.  Are you saying they don't take control until the horses are in the birdcage for the first?

[curious]

4 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Don't RIB take control Raceday.  Are you saying they don't take control until the horses are in the birdcage for the first?

602 (1) From 7:30 am on Race day, the Stipendiary Stewards shall:
(a) have the control of the Race Meeting and be charged with the duty of ensuring that the
provisions of these Rules are applied and enforced in respect of that Race Meeting;
(b) determine any question as to whether that day of racing or any part thereof should be
postponed, abandoned or cancelled;

[Chief Stipe]

5 minutes ago, curious said:

602 (1) From 7:30 am on Race day, the Stipendiary Stewards shall:
(a) have the control of the Race Meeting and be charged with the duty of ensuring that the
provisions of these Rules are applied and enforced in respect of that Race Meeting;
(b) determine any question as to whether that day of racing or any part thereof should be
postponed, abandoned or cancelled;

Right so when did the 4 horses gallop?  Before or after 7:30am?  Wouldn't the protocols be that the RIB are in attendance as it is they who have the authority to abandon the meeting?

Or is it a game of chicken?  Was NZTR there when the 4 horses galloped? If before 7:30am?

[curious]

47 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Right so when did the 4 horses gallop?  Before or after 7:30am?  Wouldn't the protocols be that the RIB are in attendance as it is they who have the authority to abandon the meeting?

Or is it a game of chicken?  Was NZTR there when the 4 horses galloped? If before 7:30am?

The race morning gallop is solely required of the club for the purpose of confirming the track condition. Nothing to do with confirming safety. They are usually on the rail, only say 800-1000m and often at nowhere near racing speeds.

Edited 23 hours ago by curious

[Chief Stipe]

19 minutes ago, curious said:

The race morning gallop is solely required of the club for the purpose of confirming the track condition. Nothing to do with confirming safety. They are usually on the rail, only say 800-1000m and often at nowhere near racing speeds.

If that's the case then the protocol is wrong for even confirming the track condition!  No wonder the track ratings are often wrong!  

Which brings us back to the initial question what protocols/processes should be put in place to check the safety of a track before racing commences?

[Chief Stipe]

raceday-track-safety-inspection-involving-jockeys-procedure---revised-10-jan-2024.pdfThis is the VRC policy - note that Jockeys can express concern BEFORE racing commences:

Racing Victoria and the Victorian Jockeys' Association (VJA) have agreed Stewards and jockeys will refer to the following Raceday Track Safety Inspection Involving Jockeys Policy in the event of a track inspection being required on raceday. 

If, at any stage on raceday prior to the first race or during the race meeting, the Stewards and/or jockeys express concerns regarding the condition of the track, the Stewards and jockeys will initially discuss those concerns in the Stewards’ room. 

If, following that discussion, it is considered necessary by the Stewards, the Stewards, the Track Manager, the Club CEO and all jockeys or delegation of jockeys who are engaged to ride in the first (or the next race) will inspect the track at the area(s) of concern. Jockeys who are also VJA Directors will be invited to inspect the area(s) of concern (irrespective of whether those jockeys are riding in the upcoming race). 

No other jockeys are able to enter upon the course-proper during this time and until a decision has been made in respect of the continuation of the race meeting. 

For the duration of the track inspection, all Jockeys will be under the strict control of the Stewards and must comply with any directions of the Stewards. 

Following the track inspection, the Stewards, the delegation of jockeys, and the Track Manager will discuss carrying out any remedial work which may address the concerns surrounding the affected area. 

If remedial work is considered possible, the Track Manager will be instructed by the Stewards to carry out that work. If remedial work is carried out, the site will be further inspected as per above.

Note: If there is any concern regarding track condition prior to a race meeting the Track Manager must contact the Chairman of Stewards panel Chairperson for the meeting and the RV Tracks & Facilities Manager as soon as possible. The contact information is contained in this document. 

All of the above conditions apply to any RV organised trials. 

Training for club staff in revised penetrometer operation can be arranged by RV, if required.

Raceday Track Safety Inspection Involving Jockeys Policy

[curious]

That seems a reasonable policy. A lot better than using the first race to determine whether or not the club and track manager have delivered a safe track or not.

[Special Agent]

4 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

Then why did Trainers and Jockeys start if they knew it was dangerous?  Wouldn't a Senior Jockey publically pulling the pin BEFORE the meeting have more credibility than saying after the fact "I told you so!"

Why don't you go and ask said trainers and jockeys first hand, instead of goading those who have information from on the ground that you don't like?

[Assange]

3 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

Right so when did the 4 horses gallop?  Before or after 7:30am?  Wouldn't the protocols be that the RIB are in attendance as it is they who have the authority to abandon the meeting?

Or is it a game of chicken?  Was NZTR there when the 4 horses galloped? If before 7:30am?

Considering the time and money spent on this track (and the fact that Ellerslie had a big oops at their first meeting back) there should have been more checks made on the morning of the races - especially when the rail was moved after the trials.

If the RIB take over on morning of raceday, what protocols do they have to check the state of the track?

 

 

[Chief Stipe]

37 minutes ago, Special Agent said:

Why don't you go and ask said trainers and jockeys first hand, instead of goading those who have information from on the ground that you don't like?

I'm not goading them.  Would you turn up to work if your thought your workplace was unsafe?  Would you race your horse on an unsafe surface if you knew beforehand?  To be fair I've only seen firsthand one trainer scratch after walking a track on raceday morning.

raceday-track-safety-inspection-involving-jockeys-procedure---revised-10-jan-2024.pdf

[Chief Stipe]

2 minutes ago, Assange said:

If the RIB take over on morning of raceday, what protocols do they have to check the state of the track?

Especially when we are led to believe that "many Jockeys and Trainers had concerns"!!

[Special Agent]

31 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

I'm not goading them.  Would you turn up to work if your thought your workplace was unsafe?  Would you race your horse on an unsafe surface if you knew beforehand?  To be fair I've only seen firsthand one trainer scratch after walking a track on raceday morning.

raceday-track-safety-inspection-involving-jockeys-procedure---revised-10-jan-2024.pdf 163.49 kB · 1 download

No and no.

[jess]

On 27/04/2025 at 2:21 PM, curious said:

A statement has been provided regarding Friday's abandonment at Awapuni   ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌
Awapuni Racecourse Track Update   A statement from RACE Inc. General Manager Brad Taylor   In the wake of the abandoned race meeting at Awapuni Racecourse on Friday, RACE, in conjunction with New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing (NZTR), has made the decision to bring forward the planned renovation of the track, with work to commence immediately rather than following the James Bull Rangitikei Gold Cup meeting on May 17.   The race meeting was abandoned after Race 1 due to safety concerns arising from a slip on the newly renovated Awapuni track.   Brad Taylor, RACE’s General Manager of Racing, expressed the Club’s disappointment at the situation.   “We are extremely disappointed with the abandonment of Friday’s race meeting,” Taylor said.   “We understand the frustration and disappointment from participants, stakeholders, and fans. However, the safety of both horses and jockeys is paramount, and under the circumstances, we fully support the decision to abandon the meeting.”   Taylor explained that the incident was most likely caused by the compaction of the surface and how quickly the track dried between the initial moisture reading at 6:30am and Race 1 at 1:14pm.   The moisture reading at 6:30am showed an average of 38%, which was within the target range of 38–40%. After 5mm of irrigation on Wednesday night and 18mm of rain earlier in the week, readings taken on Thursday were 44% at 8:30am and 42% at 3:30pm. Based on these readings, and with a forecast low of 4 degrees, a joint decision was made not to irrigate on Thursday night. Following the abandonment, moisture readings taken in the area of the slip ranged between 29% and 33%.   The rail for Friday’s meeting had been moved out six metres, a decision made based on advice from track specialists engaged during the 19-month renovation process and grow in process.   “There were two reasons for putting the rail out six metres,” Taylor said.   “Firstly, after Verti-Draining, a small area near the 600m mark required repair after a rock was brought to the surface. Secondly, the trials held on April 8 with 13mm of rain caused significant damage to the renovated track leading to the decision to put the rail at 6 metres.”   Taylor added that the area where the slip occurred had been subjected to significant use during reconstruction, including a gallop session involving 28 horses on Tuesday morning in preparation for Friday’s scheduled meeting.   Following a meeting yesterday between the Club, NZTR, Racing Integrity Board (RIB) representatives, and track specialists Liam O’Keeffe and Callum Brown, an immediate plan of action has been put in place to address the compaction issues.   “We are grateful for the advice from the experts as we continue to refine the preparation processes for this new track surface, which differs considerably from the previous Awapuni track,” Taylor said.   RACE will now commence renovation works immediately, involving coring, verti-draining, and adding additional sand to the surface — actions originally scheduled after May 17.   RACE sincerely apologises for the inconvenience caused and greatly appreciates the support and understanding of the racing community. The Club remains focused and committed to working closely with all stakeholders to ensure the best outcomes and remains confident in the future of the renovated Awapuni track.   Corporate Communications New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing nztrcommunications@nztr.co.nz

I struggled to make sense of of this or follow the logic of the explanations - but it could just be me.

Someone please remind me what was the last official word re the "enquiry" into the Awapuni synthetic?  If the report is overdue as someone suggested, that doesn't bode well.  Maybe bad news to come? - or bad news being spun into not-so-bad news so it "lands" better with the stakeholders ( don't ya hate the corporate bs-speak).  Would be a tough pill to swallow to have zero racing options at the track after all this.  

Poor old Central District.  Have a look at the programme & try to chart a course over the next few months for a galloper who's currently in work.   The options are not plentiful ....  

[Chief Stipe]

I would doubt that there is anything fundamentally wrong with the Awapuni AWT other than a lack of regular maintenance.

[curious]

20 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

I would doubt that there is anything fundamentally wrong with the Awapuni AWT other than a lack of regular maintenance.

Then why are they "flipping" it? It's the worst of the three.

[Chief Stipe]

26 minutes ago, curious said:

Then why are they "flipping" it? It's the worst of the three.

I don't understand the term "flipping".  Please explain.

[curious]

12 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

I don't understand the term "flipping".  Please explain.

I am quoting @Special Agent

[curious]

Repeated abandonments damage racing as NZTR deflects blame

by Brian de Lore
Published 27 April 2025

The continuing theme of racing abandonments due to unsafe tracks is causing immeasurable harm to a racing industry that doesn’t seem able to get its act together.

Accountability seems to be a major problem. You can’t blame the jockeys if a track is unsafe, and you can’t blame the stipendiary stewards who are bound by the Health and Safety Act. That only leaves the track managers and the protocols for the preparation of tracks that come from NZTR.

Imagine that you’re an Auckland owner with a horse trained in Matamata that was supposed to trial at Taupo on March 25^th. You drive to Taupo to watch it, but after two trials, they are abandoned, and you’ve made the trip for nothing.

The same horse is an acceptor for Awapuni last Friday, so you drive to Palmerston North, stay in a hotel the night before, and expect to go racing the next day. The races are off after race one, leaving the owner angry, deflated and out of pocket. Don’t imagine it; it’s a true story.

That owner is now inclined to give up ownership due to his rising blood pressure and depleted bank account.

Awapuni last Friday adds another statistic to the countless number of abandonments we have seen over the past few years. When there is torrential rain and surface water, we all know that abandonment is inevitable, but here we are talking about avoidable abandonments after the meeting has started.

How much is it costing owners?

How much has it cost the owners who pay for everything on raceday? How much has it cost the TAB/Entain partnership in loss of betting revenue, and Entain in particular, because they pay the cost of running the TAB and guarantee the increased stake levels?

Little wonder there has been a strained relationship between NZTR and Entain.  

The buck must stop with NZTR, but you wouldn’t think so reading the statement made by the new NZTR CEO, Matt Ballesty, following Friday’s Awapuni abandonment after race one.

He said, “I trust that, while understandably frustrated, all participants will continue to show respect towards the track staff and club management. A significant amount of effort, resources, and consultation from track management, consultants, and officials has gone into preparing the track for racing, and the recent setback was entirely unforeseen.”

RACE Awapuni General Manager Brad Taylor expressed his disappointment but was eager to review processes to prepare for future racedays.

“We will examine the process leading into today and learn from it and hopefully resolve this issue to be back racing here in three weeks,” he concluded.

Unforeseen track problem claim disputed

New CEO Matt Ballesty’s claim that the problem was ‘unforeseen’ is disputed by several observers close to the action.

He should also cut out this rubbish about being nice to the track staff because that only suggests they are to blame. NZTR is hiding behind the track staff. By saying that, he is deflecting accountability from himself as the boss of the organisation that put the structures in place.

Okay, he’s been in the job only a short time

A reliable source of information has told The Optimist that two Regional Track Managers in succession wouldn’t sign off Awapuni as ‘ready for use’ (one very recently), and that’s when NZTR involved two Australians, Liam O’Keeffe and Callum Brown, to advise as consultants.

NZTR wanted to get racing again at Awapuni and were too impatient, according to my informant.

The rail at Awapuni was positioned six metres out because rocks had appeared coming through the surface during verti-draining at one small area of the track near the 600-metre mark, about three metres out. The accusation is that they took the cheaper option to fix the problem.

The horse that slipped on raceday was the widest runner, possibly another six metres out from the false rail on ground that had not been galloped on.

All this after 18 months of remediation of the entire course – the last Awapuni meeting took place in September 2023; it’s a ridiculous outcome, but consistent with the Hastings debacle. My informant says that Hastings could be in use now if they simply kept the rail in its true position. Darin Balcombe and Bruce Sharrock made a hasty, ill-conceived decision to sideline Hastings.

Former jockey and now trainer David Walsh testing the going at Riccarton

After the Taupo trials abandonment, which had followed the Tauherenikau abandonment, NZTR released a statement saying they took some responsibility but mostly blamed the track staff.

It said: “NZTR Chief Operating Officer Darin Balcombe said, ‘New Racecourse Managers are difficult to find, and we must provide them with stronger induction, training, and support systems.’ 

“ ‘Preparing track surfaces for racing is a specialised skill that comes only with experience, support and proper training,’ he said. 

“NZTR accepts that earlier involvement may have avoided the Taupō outcome. Work is already underway to strengthen support, oversight and accountability across the tracks and infrastructure network.”

Abandonments keep mounting up

Perhaps Darin Balcombe needs to refresh his own memory and count up the number of abandonments racing has had under his watch.

NZTR has some parallels with a book I’m currently reading; it could even be the NZTR anthem. It’s entitled MISTAKES WERE MADE (but not by me), which the Wall Street Journal reviewed by saying “Illuminating when you recognize yourself in the stories it tells – mortifying.”

The New Zealand Racehorse Owners’ Association President, Bernard Hickey, has written to NZTR claiming the problems at Awapuni were known well before the race date, and the meeting should have been transferred to Otaki.

His letter also said, in part,” …evidence from my point of view is that RACE, RIU and NZTR were culpable in terms of the provision of the Health & Safety Act in not showing due diligence in its decision-making process. No doubt the Club’s Risk Register was updated when the hazards were identified during the week that led to the rail being pushed out, which is a risk in itself at Awapuni, but I doubt such documentation even exists.”

The Trainers’ Association does nothing. It is a toothless, benign organisation that is seemingly frightened that its members won’t get their licences renewed each season if they say anything.

In the first week of December 2021, NZTR put out a statement to the stakeholders entitled, “Actions following Trentham Abandonment 4 December 2021.”

Here is the second half of it, outlining the ‘actions’ they would take. While reading it, think about how much of this gets done and the multitude of abandonments we’ve had since it was written:

What NZTR said in 2021…

 Actions

“The NZTR Board has considered a report and recommendations from NZTR Management. One of the major issues identified in the report was the lack of a clear shared understanding between NZTR, the RIB and Clubs about each organisation’s respective responsibilities and accountabilities to prepare a track surface, and the consequences for those entities where non-compliance is identified.

“This is no longer acceptable and the NZTR Board has agreed to a suite of changes to the track preparation and management process so that it is clear what the obligations are and who is responsible for them.

“The agreed actions going forward are:

• NZTR to review and update the Track Preparation Policy and Abandonment protocols by the end of January 2022;

• NZTR to determine, in consultation with Clubs, an investment plan for track equipment and resources for the next three years by the end of March 2022;

• NZTR and NZSTI, in consultation with Clubs, fast track the implementation of and compliance with mytrackmanager.nz – an online portal for all clubs to regularly monitor track performance, build data comparisons, provide training tools and real time access to track maintenance planning by the end of June 2022;

• NZTR to implement a more robust compliance program for Clubs that do not adhere to track preparation procedures and annual maintenance plans, including consequences for non-compliance with policies and procedures, by February 2022;

• NZTR to investigate and arrange a whole-of-industry weather service, with decisions made by March 2022;

• NZTR, in consultation with Clubs and RIB, to set a communication process to enhance the sharing of track surface information to all participants by the end of February 2022;

• NZTR, in consultation with clubs, to set a plan to ensure that track renovations are aligned with the annual race date allocation process by the end of February 2022;

• NZTR, in consultation with RIB and Clubs, to determine a process to manage queries/concerns from participants before and after each race meeting by the end of January 2022; and

• NZTR to implement a reporting and action framework for clubs to notify track performance issues during race meetings by the end of January 2022. “

Footnote:

Will the situation improve in the future? – doubtful. Will more NZTR-Stakeholders meetings be held to fix the problem? – bound to be, just as they have done in the past. It’s called Groundhog Day.

No one will get sacked, and NZTR still appears to be accountable to no one.

It’s simply a further reminder of Albert Einstein’s definition of insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

[Chief Stipe]

17 minutes ago, curious said:

I am quoting @Special Agent

Yes but what does 'flipping" mean?  I suspect it means putting the right machinery over it with the right moisture content and de-compacting it.

[Chief Stipe]

13 minutes ago, curious said:

Repeated abandonments damage racing as NZTR deflects blame

by Brian de Lore
Published 27 April 2025

The continuing theme of racing abandonments due to unsafe tracks is causing immeasurable harm to a racing industry that doesn’t seem able to get its act together.

Accountability seems to be a major problem. You can’t blame the jockeys if a track is unsafe, and you can’t blame the stipendiary stewards who are bound by the Health and Safety Act. That only leaves the track managers and the protocols for the preparation of tracks that come from NZTR.

Imagine that you’re an Auckland owner with a horse trained in Matamata that was supposed to trial at Taupo on March 25^th. You drive to Taupo to watch it, but after two trials, they are abandoned, and you’ve made the trip for nothing.

The same horse is an acceptor for Awapuni last Friday, so you drive to Palmerston North, stay in a hotel the night before, and expect to go racing the next day. The races are off after race one, leaving the owner angry, deflated and out of pocket. Don’t imagine it; it’s a true story.

That owner is now inclined to give up ownership due to his rising blood pressure and depleted bank account.

Awapuni last Friday adds another statistic to the countless number of abandonments we have seen over the past few years. When there is torrential rain and surface water, we all know that abandonment is inevitable, but here we are talking about avoidable abandonments after the meeting has started.

How much is it costing owners?

How much has it cost the owners who pay for everything on raceday? How much has it cost the TAB/Entain partnership in loss of betting revenue, and Entain in particular, because they pay the cost of running the TAB and guarantee the increased stake levels?

Little wonder there has been a strained relationship between NZTR and Entain.  

The buck must stop with NZTR, but you wouldn’t think so reading the statement made by the new NZTR CEO, Matt Ballesty, following Friday’s Awapuni abandonment after race one.

He said, “I trust that, while understandably frustrated, all participants will continue to show respect towards the track staff and club management. A significant amount of effort, resources, and consultation from track management, consultants, and officials has gone into preparing the track for racing, and the recent setback was entirely unforeseen.”

RACE Awapuni General Manager Brad Taylor expressed his disappointment but was eager to review processes to prepare for future racedays.

“We will examine the process leading into today and learn from it and hopefully resolve this issue to be back racing here in three weeks,” he concluded.

Unforeseen track problem claim disputed

New CEO Matt Ballesty’s claim that the problem was ‘unforeseen’ is disputed by several observers close to the action.

He should also cut out this rubbish about being nice to the track staff because that only suggests they are to blame. NZTR is hiding behind the track staff. By saying that, he is deflecting accountability from himself as the boss of the organisation that put the structures in place.

Okay, he’s been in the job only a short time

A reliable source of information has told The Optimist that two Regional Track Managers in succession wouldn’t sign off Awapuni as ‘ready for use’ (one very recently), and that’s when NZTR involved two Australians, Liam O’Keeffe and Callum Brown, to advise as consultants.

NZTR wanted to get racing again at Awapuni and were too impatient, according to my informant.

The rail at Awapuni was positioned six metres out because rocks had appeared coming through the surface during verti-draining at one small area of the track near the 600-metre mark, about three metres out. The accusation is that they took the cheaper option to fix the problem.

The horse that slipped on raceday was the widest runner, possibly another six metres out from the false rail on ground that had not been galloped on.

All this after 18 months of remediation of the entire course – the last Awapuni meeting took place in September 2023; it’s a ridiculous outcome, but consistent with the Hastings debacle. My informant says that Hastings could be in use now if they simply kept the rail in its true position. Darin Balcombe and Bruce Sharrock made a hasty, ill-conceived decision to sideline Hastings.

Former jockey and now trainer David Walsh testing the going at Riccarton

After the Taupo trials abandonment, which had followed the Tauherenikau abandonment, NZTR released a statement saying they took some responsibility but mostly blamed the track staff.

It said: “NZTR Chief Operating Officer Darin Balcombe said, ‘New Racecourse Managers are difficult to find, and we must provide them with stronger induction, training, and support systems.’ 

“ ‘Preparing track surfaces for racing is a specialised skill that comes only with experience, support and proper training,’ he said. 

“NZTR accepts that earlier involvement may have avoided the Taupō outcome. Work is already underway to strengthen support, oversight and accountability across the tracks and infrastructure network.”

Abandonments keep mounting up

Perhaps Darin Balcombe needs to refresh his own memory and count up the number of abandonments racing has had under his watch.

NZTR has some parallels with a book I’m currently reading; it could even be the NZTR anthem. It’s entitled MISTAKES WERE MADE (but not by me), which the Wall Street Journal reviewed by saying “Illuminating when you recognize yourself in the stories it tells – mortifying.”

The New Zealand Racehorse Owners’ Association President, Bernard Hickey, has written to NZTR claiming the problems at Awapuni were known well before the race date, and the meeting should have been transferred to Otaki.

His letter also said, in part,” …evidence from my point of view is that RACE, RIU and NZTR were culpable in terms of the provision of the Health & Safety Act in not showing due diligence in its decision-making process. No doubt the Club’s Risk Register was updated when the hazards were identified during the week that led to the rail being pushed out, which is a risk in itself at Awapuni, but I doubt such documentation even exists.”

The Trainers’ Association does nothing. It is a toothless, benign organisation that is seemingly frightened that its members won’t get their licences renewed each season if they say anything.

In the first week of December 2021, NZTR put out a statement to the stakeholders entitled, “Actions following Trentham Abandonment 4 December 2021.”

Here is the second half of it, outlining the ‘actions’ they would take. While reading it, think about how much of this gets done and the multitude of abandonments we’ve had since it was written:

What NZTR said in 2021…

 Actions

“The NZTR Board has considered a report and recommendations from NZTR Management. One of the major issues identified in the report was the lack of a clear shared understanding between NZTR, the RIB and Clubs about each organisation’s respective responsibilities and accountabilities to prepare a track surface, and the consequences for those entities where non-compliance is identified.

“This is no longer acceptable and the NZTR Board has agreed to a suite of changes to the track preparation and management process so that it is clear what the obligations are and who is responsible for them.

“The agreed actions going forward are:

• NZTR to review and update the Track Preparation Policy and Abandonment protocols by the end of January 2022;

• NZTR to determine, in consultation with Clubs, an investment plan for track equipment and resources for the next three years by the end of March 2022;

• NZTR and NZSTI, in consultation with Clubs, fast track the implementation of and compliance with mytrackmanager.nz – an online portal for all clubs to regularly monitor track performance, build data comparisons, provide training tools and real time access to track maintenance planning by the end of June 2022;

• NZTR to implement a more robust compliance program for Clubs that do not adhere to track preparation procedures and annual maintenance plans, including consequences for non-compliance with policies and procedures, by February 2022;

• NZTR to investigate and arrange a whole-of-industry weather service, with decisions made by March 2022;

• NZTR, in consultation with Clubs and RIB, to set a communication process to enhance the sharing of track surface information to all participants by the end of February 2022;

• NZTR, in consultation with clubs, to set a plan to ensure that track renovations are aligned with the annual race date allocation process by the end of February 2022;

• NZTR, in consultation with RIB and Clubs, to determine a process to manage queries/concerns from participants before and after each race meeting by the end of January 2022; and

• NZTR to implement a reporting and action framework for clubs to notify track performance issues during race meetings by the end of January 2022. “

Footnote:

Will the situation improve in the future? – doubtful. Will more NZTR-Stakeholders meetings be held to fix the problem? – bound to be, just as they have done in the past. It’s called Groundhog Day.

No one will get sacked, and NZTR still appears to be accountable to no one.

It’s simply a further reminder of Albert Einstein’s definition of insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

I give De Lore zero credibility.

[Freda]

1 hour ago, jess said:

I struggled to make sense of of this or follow the logic of the explanations - but it could just be me.

Someone please remind me what was the last official word re the "enquiry" into the Awapuni synthetic?  If the report is overdue as someone suggested, that doesn't bode well.  Maybe bad news to come? - or bad news being spun into not-so-bad news so it "lands" better with the stakeholders ( don't ya hate the corporate bs-speak).  Would be a tough pill to swallow to have zero racing options at the track after all this.  

Poor old Central District.  Have a look at the programme & try to chart a course over the next few months for a galloper who's currently in work.   The options are not plentiful ....  

It's not flash down here either, Jess...if you own a transport company it would be ok...

[Freda]

8 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

I give De Lore zero credibility.

I know, many share your opinion.  I can't find too much to get offended by in this piece all the same.

[Freda]

42 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

I don't understand the term "flipping".  Please explain.

Flipping refers to the practice of a deep groom where the sand  [ which tends to settle and separate from the other material ]  is evenly worked back through.  It is different from a power harrow [ as I understand it ] and different again from the daily work done with the gallop-master after trackwork.

I had a pic of the compacted sand, which made it look as if the horses were getting through to the tarmac base.  That wasn't the case, but after 'flipping', reports were that the track rode well.

I think maintenance was pretty average for starters but has improved greatly.  The Aus contractor was pretty happy with what he saw at Riccarton.

I'm pretty sure that a limited maintenance requirement may have been one of the attractive points of poly vs tapeta...however, we know that that is not the case and regular work is vital.  What happens when the top-up of poly material needs doing is another matter....won't be cheap and can't be far away from being deemed necessary.