Report on Awapuni Synthetic Track

[Chief Stipe]

13 minutes ago, Freda said:

Learn from it?  Is that a new concept?

So what are YOU going to learn from it?  What's a safe track for your horses?

[supporter61]

4 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

So what are YOU going to learn from it?  What's a safe track for your horses?

I remember a time when you picked one race over the Christmas period at Ellerslie , because you knew your horse was going to be to jarred up to race soon after. I can remember turning horses out , especially young ones , because tracks were so heavy it just tore the guts out of them. Didnt need a report to tell us that. AWT's are telling us what we need to know just the same. Noted 149 horses accepted for Riccarton Synthetic Thursday. Seems the Canterbury owners and trainers dont need a report either.

[Doomed]

21 minutes ago, supporter61 said:

I remember a time when you picked one race over the Christmas period at Ellerslie , because you knew your horse was going to be to jarred up to race soon after. I can remember turning horses out , especially young ones , because tracks were so heavy it just tore the guts out of them. Didnt need a report to tell us that. AWT's are telling us what we need to know just the same. Noted 149 horses accepted for Riccarton Synthetic Thursday. Seems the Canterbury owners and trainers dont need a report either.

I'm sure there are a few differing opinions on the 147 accepters at the Yaldhurst AWT. It may well be that Canterbury trainers absolutely love the track and can't wait to race there. Interesting there are only two accepters from all of Otago and Southland. Surely that must be a record low for a feature meeting.

[Chief Stipe]

@Freda you wrote the following:

 

That observation about 'trust' i think encapsulates the major issue.

How can stakeholders 'trust ' an administration that continually obfuscates,  hides facts, produces tracks newly renovated that aren't fit for purpose...and just keeps rolling on with impunity?

Those who can read will be well aware that synthetic tracks of various designs have been in use for 30 years or more, all over the world.  They aren't new and have been, given initial teething issues,  well received.  A godsend as alluded above.

They suit some, not others.  Same as any surface.  Its up to NZTR to produce the report they are sitting on and encourage discussion with folk who actually know a bit about the things.  I could mention a few names but won't. 

___________________

 

[Chief Stipe]

12 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

They suit some, not others.  Same as any surface.  Its up to NZTR to produce the report they are sitting on and encourage discussion with folk who actually know a bit about the things.  I could mention a few names but won't. 

What would be the objective of these "discussions"?  It is known that the AWT's are safe if properly maintained.

Quite frankly the industry participants that I've seen "discuasing" the loudest are way off the mark and are making things worse.  Be it Senior Jockeys who know very little about track maintenance or rabid lunatic conspiracists like Colin Wightman ( @Transparency ) banging on about who knows what.

The fact is the fundamental problem has been and always has been a lack of investment in track maintenance and ongoing resourcing of it.

If anything needs to be discussed it is that and a reality check for the industry about how to achieve while living within our means.

[curious]

42 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

What would be the objective of these "discussions"?  It is known that the AWT's are safe if properly maintained.

Quite frankly the industry participants that I've seen "discuasing" the loudest are way off the mark and are making things worse.  Be it Senior Jockeys who know very little about track maintenance or rabid lunatic conspiracists like Colin Wightman ( @Transparency ) banging on about who knows what.

The fact is the fundamental problem has been and always has been a lack of investment in track maintenance and ongoing resourcing of it.

If anything needs to be discussed it is that and a reality check for the industry about how to achieve whole living within our means.

It would be useful to know the outcome of the latest discussion between the TA and NZTR on this? I agree that the issue is a perpetual lack of investment in track maintenance and renewal.

[Freda]

56 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

@Freda you wrote the following:

 

That observation about 'trust' i think encapsulates the major issue.

How can stakeholders 'trust ' an administration that continually obfuscates,  hides facts, produces tracks newly renovated that aren't fit for purpose...and just keeps rolling on with impunity?

Those who can read will be well aware that synthetic tracks of various designs have been in use for 30 years or more, all over the world.  They aren't new and have been, given initial teething issues,  well received.  A godsend as alluded above.

They suit some, not others.  Same as any surface.  Its up to NZTR to produce the report they are sitting on and encourage discussion with folk who actually know a bit about the things.  I could mention a few names but won't. 

___________________

 

I did indeed. 

Do you have a problem with it?

[Freda]

50 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

What would be the objective of these "discussions"?  It is known that the AWT's are safe if properly maintained.

Quite frankly the industry participants that I've seen "discuasing" the loudest are way off the mark and are making things worse.  Be it Senior Jockeys who know very little about track maintenance or rabid lunatic conspiracists like Colin Wightman ( @Transparency ) banging on about who knows what.

The fact is the fundamental problem has been and always has been a lack of investment in track maintenance and ongoing resourcing of it.

If anything needs to be discussed it is that and a reality check for the industry about how to achieve whole living within our means.

Completely agree.

[Freda]

15 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

So what are YOU going to learn from it?  What's a safe track for your horses?

I should think there would be a great deal....are the tracks performing as they should, yes or no...if yes, then all the hoo-ha and hysteria can be put to bed.   If no, why not? And do something about it.

[Special Agent]

21 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

But what are you going to do with the information?  Point a finger?  Isn't the goal a safe track?  

Or revert it back to grass.

[Special Agent]

3 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

If anything needs to be discussed it is that and a reality check for the industry about how to achieve whole living within our means.

Got it in one.

[The Centaur]

On 12/05/2025 at 1:42 PM, Freda said:

What do Hawkes Bay members have to do with the synthetic track review?

Yeah.. I once travelled 150 miles to the "races" then when I got there was told the races were 100 miles the other direction.

[Chief Stipe]

6 hours ago, Freda said:

I should think there would be a great deal....are the tracks performing as they should, yes or no...if yes, then all the hoo-ha and hysteria can be put to bed.   If no, why not? And do something about it.

Firstly please excuse the typo's in my posts.  Eyesight not what it was and fighting auto correct!

Anyway...

I don't believe "The Report" will achieve anything UNLESS NZTR and the Clubs have worked out a plan to address the issues.  The only gotcha would be if the the design and covering of the track is not fit for purpose.  That I doubt.

Time to bury hatchets all over the place and get on with fixing the fundamental problems.  That will involve honesty from everyone involved.

The harsh reality is that we have reached THE crunch point.  With 3 years of guaranteed money left from ENTAIN we only have a short time left to get our infrastructure right.  There will be some hard decisions to be made to make the industry sustainable i.e. able to live within its means.

The obvious strawman for that is can the Wellington Racing Club present a business case that shows they can run a sustainable business based on horse racing at Trentham.  My analysis says NO they can't.

[jess]

I don't quite get the "bury the hatchets" comment.  If there's anything I'd like to bury - it's the rumor, speculation & uncertainty about that track.

And a good start to do that would surely be to release the report!  Bearing in mind when it comes to said report - 

1.  one way or another - people like me helped pay for it

2. that I'm led to believe they undertook it WOULD be released   

J.

Edited 5 hours ago by jess
typo

[Chief Stipe]

46 minutes ago, jess said:

.  one way or another - people like me helped pay for it

The track?  Only as a taxpayer.

The report?  ENTAIN shareholders paid for that.

47 minutes ago, jess said:

2. that I'm led to believe they undertook it WOULD be released   

So what are you going to do with it when it is released?

It won't change the fundamental issue which sadly you and every other stakeholder has turned a blind eye to for decades.

[Freda]

5 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

The track?  Only as a taxpayer.

The report?  ENTAIN shareholders paid for that.

So what are you going to do with it when it is released?

It won't change the fundamental issue which sadly you and every other stakeholder has turned a blind eye to for decades.

Don't be a plonker.

Most of we 'stakeholders ' are not soil scientists,  drainage specialists or turf experts.

We have trusted those that are to 'get it right' and they haven't. 

You are right wrt under-investment for years, no doubt about that, but unfair to lay the blame on those who get up at stupid o'clock and work very long hours working horses, foaling mares, getting hay in, etc, etc.

I think the responsibility lies elsewhere. 

[curious]

16 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

The report?  ENTAIN shareholders paid for that.

Really? I thought it was commissioned by NZTR?

[Chief Stipe]

2 hours ago, curious said:

Really? I thought it was commissioned by NZTR?

Who pays NZTR?  What they pick up in licensing fees and acceptances barely covers the cost of administering them.

I wonder where the brains trust on the dark side thinks Trentham is going to get the 10's of millions to bring it up to a professional racetrack standard let alone earn the money to pay for yearly maintenance.  Same narrow minded non-business approach as always so I guess they will accept assets need to be sold elsewhere to prop it up while they chase a memory.

[supporter61]

2 hours ago, Freda said:

Don't be a plonker.

Most of we 'stakeholders ' are not soil scientists,  drainage specialists or turf experts.

We have trusted those that are to 'get it right' and they haven't. 

You are right wrt under-investment for years, no doubt about that, but unfair to lay the blame on those who get up at stupid o'clock and work very long hours working horses, foaling mares, getting hay in, etc, etc.

I think the responsibility lies elsewhere. 

The responsibility lies with you. Did you need a report on the track at Kumara , or Rotorua or Ruakaka before deciding to race or not? Or did you trust yourself , your trainer or the experienced people you trust in the industry? Why do you need a report on the AWT? Is it because you are all wound up in the conspiracy and outright lies? Or you have all of a sudden decided to ignore the experience and personal judgement you have relied on all your life?