Wilson house Race fixing

[Forbury]

Wilson house takes on the favourite for the lead in race 1 Addington on rack um up 26.0 shot and is gone before the home corner and is tailed off Well done Wilson showing off your race fixing terrible driving skills your moto should be if your horse wants to get destroyed and finish in its worse position I'm available 😂

Edited April 17 by Forbury
Spelling

[Chief Stipe]

6 minutes ago, Forbury said:

Wilson house takes on the favourite for the lead in race 1 Addington on rack um up 26.0 shot and is gone before the home corner and is tailed off Well done Wilson showing off your race fixing terrible driving skills your moto should be if your horse wants to get destroyed and finish in its worse position I'm available 😂

So the $26 shot finished where the market priced it to finish?

[Forbury]

The funny thing is Wilson would of been in the same position 3 back on the markers had he not taken on the favourite and done no work and would not of been gone before the corner and 💯 finished in a better position so it was 💯 a race fixing drive to diminish the horses chances I'm on to you boy and I've called you out 3 times

 

[Chief Stipe]

19 minutes ago, Forbury said:

The funny thing is Wilson would of been in the same position 3 back on the markers had he not taken on the favourite and done no work and would not of been gone before the corner and 💯 finished in a better position so it was 💯 a race fixing drive to diminish the horses chances I'm on to you boy and I've called you out 3 times

 

So what was the reward for this "race fixing"?  Was there odds for finishing down the track?

[Shad]

   Had a smile when I seen Courage Reactor , not handing up the lead to Buddy Reign in race two, but no issues handing up to stablemate Santana Mac, not suggesting anything in it, but just don’t think it looks good.

 

                  

[Brodie]

2 hours ago, Shad said:

   Had a smile when I seen Courage Reactor , not handing up the lead to Buddy Reign in race two, but no issues handing up to stablemate Santana Mac, not suggesting anything in it, but just don’t think it looks good.

 

                  

It was Robbie Holmes in the cart and to be fair he doesnt like to hand up a lot of the time, but the fact that is was Wilson on Santana Mach the stablemate was the difference.

Was not the right thing to do by Robbie Holmes though, not handing up to Buddy Reign but thats racing!

[Shad]

6 hours ago, Brodie said:

It was Robbie Holmes in the cart and to be fair he doesnt like to hand up a lot of the time, but the fact that is was Wilson on Santana Mach the stablemate was the difference.

Was not the right thing to do by Robbie Holmes though, not handing up to Buddy Reign but thats racing!

Certainly is racing, but only to hand up to stablemate, when not handing to other runner, for me just doesn’t look good from any angle, regardless of driver, Never had any bets on the race, so unbiased opinion, and they wonder why punters cast doubts over racing game, and throw around accusations.

[pete cook]

When it comes to racing, punters always have and always will throw around accusations and cast doubts, based on their own ideas and perceptions. A driver is entitled to hand or not hand to any horse he wants, stablemate or not. It's called judgement, and that's what they get paid for. What people read into it is their problem and whatever happens, some will find a way to invent something. Betting on sport only relies on humans. Horse racing is more unpredictable, partly through how the horse feels, partly how the horse is driven, and partly how the race is run. And like most of us, drivers can make mistakes. Personally, I think it adds to the appeal, and if you can't accept that, maybe tiddly-winks is a better option.

[Brodie]

9 hours ago, Shad said:

Certainly is racing, but only to hand up to stablemate, when not handing to other runner, for me just doesn’t look good from any angle, regardless of driver, Never had any bets on the race, so unbiased opinion, and they wonder why punters cast doubts over racing game, and throw around accusations.

Yes it was not the right thing to do by Robbie Holmes in not handing up to Buddy Reigns, as it wouldve trailed for the rest of the race!

However we all know that there are many drivers on the track that dont actually think overly hard during a race and it shows in their UDR!

That is why Blair Orange, John Dunn, Carter Dalgety etc. have the higher UDR’s they actually do their homework and do best for the owners and punters.

Shouldnt have doubts over the harness game, it is a gamble when wagering, take the good with the bad!

much bigger issue for Brodie and others is actually the TAB allowing us to wager what we want!

 

[the galah]

 

mr cook,you make good points in your above post..  

most assertions can be dispelled by just watching a video and are based on a lack of understanding of the tactics and character of the people involved.. 

 

5 hours ago, pete cook said:

 What people read into it is their problem and whatever happens, some will find a way to invent something. 

but of course,you can't get away from the  fact that  on occasions,people make assertions based on fact, albeit rarely,that sometimes there are issues with driver intent.so not all assertions are baseless,some are true.So its the ones that are true that provides the bases for both the true and mostly false assertions as to driver intent.

so,punter criticism,justified or not, is part of the industry and just as you say punters should take up tiddly winks if it annoys them ,well you can't just have it one way.

In other words, so  should industry participants ,if they get unduly offended by criticism on the likes of social media sites, which air such assertions.That goes for those in the media and those in charge of the industry as well.

for example the likes of m guerin criticises keyboard warriors,but never ever highlights cases where drivers drive with a lack of intent.In other words,they are two faced.So people like that want the tiddly winks analogy only one way, when here are 2 sides to that coin.

Now,we all should have faith in the stipes to oversee and take action against drivers who lack intent.

But i would say,only canterbury stipes, have the confidence of punters for that. 

Case in piont yesterday.

rangiora race 3. Katelin,driven by c de fillippi. suspended for 7 days. 

Now,any punter with knowledge,would not have bet on that horse to win,because they would have believed de fillipi was going to try and run second.Why,because they have seen it so many times over the years and just as importantly,understand why.

I mean lets be honest,he knows that if he were to win,because of a poor handicapping system as relates to 1 win horses,his inexperienced young horse would jump up into a grade where next time it would have to run aganst horses ,many of whom had won between 10-20 races.Which of course would set the horses confidence back and after all,hes just spent the best part of the last 2 years trying to get its confidence up.

but reality is reality,if he lines up at the races he knows hes expected to be driving with the intent to get the best possible placing so he jas no grounds to be frustrated with the stipes decision.

Tjhe canterbury stipe,mr renault,fully understands its punters watching a driver preferring to place than win that damages the industries reputationso ,he took action. If that had been in the north isalnd the stipes would have said nothing because they simply don't care much aout punter perception.

I've only used the de fillippi example because it happened yesterday. We all know hes a great guy and very respected,but reality is the reason some people think theres a lack of intent sometimes is because there is .And that  creates the environment for other assertions,whether they be true or not.

Edited May 4 by the galah

[pete cook]

You also make some good points Galah. Regarding the handicapping system, as I've said before it's not perfect but nor is any other system. They are programming more 1 win only races these days and, as I've also said before, anything can be achieved with good programming, e.g I win horses and those who have had 10 starts with no form. However, that sort of thing can only be done if the pool of horses is big enough.

Poor Colin, he either gets done for too much whip use or not enough!

[pete cook]

Just a further comment on the handicapping system. Another programming option would be horses that are low rated but have won more than, say 5 or even 10 or more races. Bear in mind that those horses maiden winners that have to line up against those horses, can sometimes beat up the multiple winners, e.g Kawatiri Jack. On the other hand, for example the wonderful Buffy Northstains has lined up almost every week, sometimes twice, thereby creating turnover for the Industry. The likes of her trainer and M.House play the system brilliantly and reap the rewards. Without checking, I'd imagine Buffy has won more races than some of our top trotters, yet if she lined up against them, she would be lapped. Surely that's the sign of a system that works.

[pete cook]

21 hours ago, Shad said:

   Had a smile when I seen Courage Reactor , not handing up the lead to Buddy Reign in race two, but no issues handing up to stablemate Santana Mac, not suggesting anything in it, but just don’t think it looks good.

 

                  

Me again! I've just watched the video of the above race and I must be watching a different version. Kyle was into Buddy Reign and Robbie wasn't encouraging Courage Reactor, in fact had a hold of him. Unfortunately, Buddy couldn't muster enough to get past, so Robbie stayed there. Why would Wilson not go forward in that case if he wanted to lead.

[the galah]

 

2 hours ago, pete cook said:

Just a further comment on the handicapping system. Another programming option would be horses that are low rated but have won more than, say 5 or even 10 or more races. Bear in mind that those horses maiden winners that have to line up against those horses, can sometimes beat up the multiple winners, e.g Kawatiri Jack. On the other hand, for example the wonderful Buffy Northstains has lined up almost every week, sometimes twice, thereby creating turnover for the Industry. The likes of her trainer and M.House play the system brilliantly and reap the rewards. Without checking, I'd imagine Buffy has won more races than some of our top trotters, yet if she lined up against them, she would be lapped. Surely that's the sign of a system that works.

i would say buffy northstains is being given preferential treatment because of the level of unfair junior concessions that hrnz have in place.

thats not b negus fault. good luck to him,but in my opinion,if i was in cahrge,one of the first things i would do would be to cancel the half penalties. They could programme races where a horse may be eligible if say 3 points above the rating band for the race,but at least that way you would not get the likes of buffy northstains lining up against the horses it beat  3 starts prior,every 2-3 weeks,instead it would win every 6 starts and that way the wins would be spread around more and buffy northstains would still line up just as much.

its simply unfair that a horse like buffy northstains or eagle hanover can win a penalty free junior race,then 2 normal races and still end up with the same rating penalties from those 3 wins,as a horse with just 1 win driven by a professional or an owner trainer.Those consessions are just as detrimental to participation as they are a positive.. 

an industry that tells people they are of less value because they are older is an industry practising preferential treatment and who is tone deaf to those they under value. 

Its just another example of why i say,almost everything hrnz comes up with i think ithe opposite of.

actually ,i happened to see a bit on the box seat where they asked the panelists if midweek meetings should be all for junior drivers. Fortunately all the answers were common sense ones,but whoever came up with that question should never be in a position of decision making as the question showed a total lack of understanding of the industry and why people particpate. 

Hrnz and many others have this blinkered obsession with youth in the industry. They subsidise all sorts of things if you are considered in that special group of people who are more valuable.personally i don't don't get how people can't see those who are cross subsidising the youth,look at5 it and say,why don't they ever do anything to shopw that my contribution is valued..

Edited May 4 by the galah

[Brodie]

The system is designed to keep horses in NZ but I also agree it is not right that horses can win 30 races snd still be racing 1 win horses, crazy.

Bruce Negus, Michael House and Mark Jones all take advantage of the rating systems and using junior drivers, and why wouldn't they.

Negus and House do such a great nob in filling fields and we certainly need them.

Thing is though Bruce will probably start training a smaller team and Michael House would probably drop team numbers if the rating system was changed, so a difficult one.

What we need is more racing for low class horses for less stake money and that would come from the stake money that is currently being paid and can not afford to be paying at the moment.

TAB turnover needs to increase and that is only going to come from the Changing their stupid policy and making it enticing for punters to offload.

Edited May 4 by Brodie

[the galah]

whenever HRNZ come up with a scheme to give  preferential treatment to one group,it does so,knowing it is doing it at the expense of another.

Whenever HRNZ places greater importance of the participation of one group of participants,over another,it does so knowing that the group not prioritised will view that as being under valued and unfair.

Show me any evidence of the type of thinking that comes out of  hrnz  that has produced results for the overall betterment of the industry. 

recently the best examples of failed hrnz policy of preferential treatment.

2 year old bonuses.-hrnz prioritised the owners and trainers of horses who race as 2 year olds.-the result-not one bit of improvement in numbers. 

all hrnz policy for the 2 year olds achieved was to reward the special interest lobby groups with the ear of hrnz with bonuses and higher stakes and who will pay the price of hrnz's policy of continually running  unprofitable,small field races for high stakes,it will be the grass rooots particpants who will pay,when HRNZ cut stakes because their business model has been so ridiculously flawed.

junior drivers-if the junior driver preferential treatment was working,then why are there less junior drivers than ever. If the junior driver preferential treatment was working ,then why are those with very limited success and opportunities receiving ,zero,yes, zero, more drives. Just look at the stats if you want confirmation of that.There are about a dozen junior drivers over the whole of nz currently getting more opportuninites because of the half concessions. Those people would get the opportunities anyway if there were no half penalties,just spread over an extra season or two.

If hrnz truly wanted to encourage those juniors who aren't and never will get enough opportuntites,then they would be programming races,with conditions, where juniors with under 5,10,20 wins ,whatever,were eligible to drive in. For example.We have many 1 win horses who are lost to the industry because they immediately become uncompetitive once they win a race. So why aren't they allowed to run in the mid week races against non win horses if driven by a junior with under say 10 lifetime wins.Theres so many ways they could programme races to maintain greater horse numbers,or provide greater opportunities for those struggling to continue, but they don't and its because they don't place any value on the ones that they don't cater for.Its as simple as that.

reality is what hrnz and the media say about providing greater opportunities is just noise for appearances sake with no substance.Hrnz and the media are just noise with no substance on this issue. Just look at the stats. For every stat they may give to say its working it could give 2 to say its not by just referring to the same figures. 

andf then you have what hrnz does with their breeding subsidies. Now,ask yourself this,are you more likely to breed the mare you've just retired if its earnt money during the year or are you more likely to breed the mare with similar qualifications but who hasn't earnt. Its obvious,you will prioritise the one who has earnt the money. So what do HRNZ do with their breeding subsidies,they encourage people to breed the mares they were going to breed anyway and do nothing for the ones that the breeder was in 2 minds about.

again just look at the stats. The likes of brad reid hails it as a success that theres mores large scale breeders,but ignores the number of small scale breeders for which the subsidies did zero for.He can quote his stats,well the stats could just as easily be used to say they failed in other areas.

The whole point is if you throw money at something and prioritise one group over another,you get better results form the people youve thrown the money at but poorer results from those you haven't valued ,and in reality nothing overall changes except your pool of participants shrinks numbers wise. 

theres a complete lack of common sense thinking that has existed in harness racing for years now.

everyone should be valued.no one should be prioritised over another interest group who have the ear of administrators.. 

and one last point.

Whats the point of trying to encourage the type of young person the industry currently loses,to make a career out of harness racing,when everyone knows there are no training facilities for people with only small numbers.I've advocated on this forum for many years for a training facilty to be established in canterbury,to at the very least provide future affordable,strategically located,accessable  facilities,but its never happened and now the administrators have spent the money on inflated stakes for age group races and australian owners.Just dumb.

Harness racing is always trying to solve problems,but seems unable to comprehend that targeting one sector over another does nothing to improve the overall picture. Everyone should be treated the same,everyone should be made to feel valued,everyone in the industry should be made to feel  appreciated. That should be at the forefront of thinking of  administrators.. Then future decion making goes from there.

Edited May 5 by the galah

[pete cook]

Not sure I altogether agree Galah. 

First of all, the 2 year old bonus was paid by the boss of Entain Dean Shannon, out of his own pocket. That is, until half way through 2025, when he wasn't the boss of Entain anymore. However, without telling anyone, HRNZ were guilty of picking up the slack and kept paying it out of Industry funds, despite it not achieving anything.

Yes, the half points may be overplayed a bit, however, how many of the older drivers does it affect? How many of them are free-lance drivers? The majority, apart from Maurice Mckendry and Blair Orange train their own horses, so if they want to put a junior on, it's their call and their financial loss. I have argued for many years that a young driver learns far more competing against the seniors that they would in junior only races, and you only have to look at the respect the better ones are getting out on the track now to see the evidence of that. For decades it has been hard to keep these people in the game when they come out of juniors, unless they are attached to a big stable with plenty of drives available. Not only do they need drives financially but also to gain experience the only way they can.

It is a balancing act, like programming, but without good young people to replace the ageing ones, there is no future. 

Totally agree about the training centres, the money they've pumped into slot races would have been a good base to fund them, but that horse has bolted.

Edited May 5 by pete cook
add a word

[Chief Stipe]

13 minutes ago, pete cook said:

For decades it has been hard to keep these people in the game when they come out of juniors, unless they are attached to a big stable with plenty of drives available. Not only do they need drives financially but also to gain experience the only way they can.

Very good points.  Many a young driver has been lambasted on BOAY over the years to later turn out OK or better with experience.  Good Punters adjust accordingly.  

[the galah]

1 hour ago, pete cook said:

Not sure I altogether agree Galah. 

First of all, the 2 year old bonus was paid by the boss of Entain Dean Shannon, out of his own pocket. That is, until half way through 2025, when he wasn't the boss of Entain anymore. However, without telling anyone, HRNZ were guilty of picking up the slack and kept paying it out of Industry funds, despite it not achieving anything.

Yes, the half points may be overplayed a bit, however, how many of the older drivers does it affect? How many of them are free-lance drivers? The majority, apart from Maurice Mckendry and Blair Orange train their own horses, so if they want to put a junior on, it's their call and their financial loss. I have argued for many years that a young driver learns far more competing against the seniors that they would in junior only races, and you only have to look at the respect the better ones are getting out on the track now to see the evidence of that. For decades it has been hard to keep these people in the game when they come out of juniors, unless they are attached to a big stable with plenty of drives available. Not only do they need drives financially but also to gain experience the only way they can.

It is a balancing act, like programming, but without good young people to replace the ageing ones, there is no future. 

Totally agree about the training centres, the money they've pumped into slot races would have been a good base to fund them, but that horse has bolted.

you say dean shannon paid half the bonuses out of his own pocket.

to me that infers he personally paid for them,not entain. So maybe you should clarify that.Entain announced they were paying the bonuses,not dean shannon.And if it was entain,do you not think they budgeted for that in some way to be spent on racing promotion. In other words,it was directed into 2 year bonuses instaed of directed elsewhere for racing..

And i've pointed out many times,who was the biggest benefactor of the bonuses. Well,dean shannon was.His owned horses won so many of the bonuses.

So,thats the real picture.

when you talk about half penalties,and it not effecting older drivers..Well that wasn't the point i was making.

My point specifically is about the unlimited half penalties the winning horse gets from winning and how a horse like buffy northstains,eagle hanover,etc, could in theory win 9 races a year and get the same rating penalties as a horse that had won 4. How is it fair that a 9 win  a year horse could be treated the same as a 4 win a year  horse. That may be fine for you ,but it doesn't look at all fair to me.of course it effects every trainer and owner who has to line up against the same horse that beat them 3 starts prior. Its not other drivers who are most effected,its other owners and trainerts who are. 

you mention juniors learn more driving against older drivers. No argument from me there.

But i gave an perfect example of how they could programme races with conditions that would result in just that. So if your saying they need half penalties  for that to happen,well thats not true. Just programme races like i said.

in the past i have put forward ideas on this site that would benefit thejuniors who get  less opportunities. Its simple. I won't go into them again,other than to saywhat i proposed would get the desired results for the lesser juniors,far more so than half penalties.

if the half penalties are ensuring more juniors,then why are there less than ever. Can you answer me that?

Its easy enough to see they aren't helping those at the bottom end. just because people says it is,doesn't mean its true. Just look at the stats.

tell me who is more important. The junior who hrnz deems worthy of subsidised linence renewals,gear packages worth hundreds,or the bloke down the road who trains and provides a couple of horses to race each week .

my answer to that is simple. Both are just as wortthy as each other.You seem to have inferresd that juniors need financial incentives. Tell me,why does someone single and young need financial incentives more than someone older with a familly who has 2 jobs to pay for their harness racing hobby. perhaps you can answer that as it beats me .

i'm glad we agree on the training centre. I always thought they should have got the forbury club on board with their money for that. those forbury people aren't stupid,they could have been sold on that idea,as long as their district was to benefit as well.   imagine if they had bought land just south of christchuch.Imagine the capital gain and the extra hortses they could have for racing. 

as  to you saying ,without young people to replace the older ones,there will be no future.To me thats just a load of rubbish.i consider that  flawed thinking.The answer is not,they need more young people,the answer is and always will be,they need more people irrespective of their age.I've always argued the best way to get people into the sport is through inter generational transfer of the interest. Your,with your young person approach,is missing where the best use of resources is.

I mean,i've been around for a long time now,and i've heard for donkey years,qwe need more young people in harness racing and i've seen over and over how they target young people with incentives,and in all those years,they have failed. And its obvious they have failed,because they are still saying we need more young people.

 

Edited May 5 by the galah

[pete cook]

A fair bit to unpack there!

I can confirm that Dean Shannon paid the bonus out of his own pocket, that's why, when he left in July last year, HRNZ, with no publicity that I saw until it was already dished out, paid the bonuses out for the rest of 2025. Not sure it's of any consequence that he won some of the bonuses (Do you know how many, I don't). When he put the money up, he had no idea if his horses would win them or not. That's the real picture.

Why are there fewer juniors (if that is the case). That's simple, harness racing involves hard work, long hours and a minimal income. I have personal experience of that. A young man named Ben Laughton drove for us when we trained and won five of his career tally of eighteen wins on our horses. An intelligent lad, because he wasn't getting opportunities, he decided to do an apprenticeship as an electrician. I felt I should have tried to talk him out of it, but I couldn't come up with a valid reason to. Perhaps if the current system of half points had been in play, I might have had a better case.

Sorry, I don't understand your reasoning when you say we need people of all ages. Of course we do, so that the older ones can teach the younger ones, but how many older people are going to give up their occupation to become involved in harness racing as a profession? So you're saying that other sports, industries, or any walk of life don't need young blood coming through? I love cricket, but I hate to think how the Black Caps would be faring if the likes of John Wright, Glen Turners and Geoff Howarth were still playing for them. What do you suggest happens when Herlihy, May, Butcher, McKendry, DeFilippi, Curtin, et al retire?

By all means programme races for juniors that haven't won many races, but of course that would depend on how many connections of horses would be willing to enter their horses in such a race, so it's not that simple.

I've been around for a while too, and I would say the current crop of juniors are as good, if not better than at any time in the past. You only have to see their record in open races to realise that.

Good debate

[the galah]

1 hour ago, pete cook said:

A fair bit to unpack there!

I can confirm that Dean Shannon paid the bonus out of his own pocket, that's why, when he left in July last year, HRNZ, with no publicity that I saw until it was already dished out, paid the bonuses out for the rest of 2025. Not sure it's of any consequence that he won some of the bonuses (Do you know how many, I don't). When he put the money up, he had no idea if his horses would win them or not. That's the real picture.

Why are there fewer juniors (if that is the case). That's simple, harness racing involves hard work, long hours and a minimal income. I have personal experience of that. A young man named Ben Laughton drove for us when we trained and won five of his career tally of eighteen wins on our horses. An intelligent lad, because he wasn't getting opportunities, he decided to do an apprenticeship as an electrician. I felt I should have tried to talk him out of it, but I couldn't come up with a valid reason to. Perhaps if the current system of half points had been in play, I might have had a better case.

Sorry, I don't understand your reasoning when you say we need people of all ages. Of course we do, so that the older ones can teach the younger ones, but how many older people are going to give up their occupation to become involved in harness racing as a profession? So you're saying that other sports, industries, or any walk of life don't need young blood coming through? I love cricket, but I hate to think how the Black Caps would be faring if the likes of John Wright, Glen Turners and Geoff Howarth were still playing for them. What do you suggest happens when Herlihy, May, Butcher, McKendry, DeFilippi, Curtin, et al retire?

By all means programme races for juniors that haven't won many races, but of course that would depend on how many connections of horses would be willing to enter their horses in such a race, so it's not that simple.

I've been around for a while too, and I would say the current crop of juniors are as good, if not better than at any time in the past. You only have to see their record in open races to realise that.

Good debate

so your saying dean shannon paid  half the 2 year old bonuses out of his own pocket.

I have to admit i find that very hard to believe that shannon paid out close to a million $ of his own money in bonuses.The total bonuses paid was 1.74 million,half of that is $870,000.

according to goggle which aligns with and all previous media reports,entain provided the money through the entain carnival fund,which was a $10m fund specifically provided in the entain/tab deal for the enhancement of racing.

my guess is once shannon left,they may have cancelled  the future funding like you suggested and that may be why you say hrnz then threw the industries money at the owners of 2 year old winners. A bit like the harness ownership groups that shannon organised and entain funded,then entain pulled the plug on when they mutually parted ways.

i would guess ,someone has told you shannon paid the bonuses,meaning shannon/entain. Still,if you have a source that said he paid his own money and that entain reneged on the deal. well that says 2 things,well actually 3. Shannon is one heck of a generous man with a million  dollar giveaway,that entain can't be trusted because they said many times it was entain providing the funds and thirdly,what about the lack of publicity by hrnz about them having to stump up close to a million dollars>going by what you say,either way,thats just another reason for people not to have faith in hrnz management of industry money.

my question about why are there less juniors.

i asked it,because i was making the point that you were saying the half penalties is creating an incentive for juniors to pursue a career in harness racing. And i was saying,no they aren't. look at the stats,in particular look at the number of juniors driving. in 2025 there were 45 juniors who drove during the season. in 2026 there has only been 35 drive.Thats a 24% drop. i doubt we will see many more new drivers driving this year.

so the concessions have done nothing to increase the junior driver numbers.

as to ben laughton.i remember him. You gave him lots of opportunities.But reality is,he must have realised that if he were to marry ,start a family then being employed in the harness industry is going to hinder him and his family finacially,so he did the only sensible thing and moved to another occupation.

Now,hes a good example of the type of person that the industry should keep track of and rekindle their passion for harness racing in the future ,when hes financially and family wise,situated in a position to re engage. But instead hrnz and seemingly you agree with them,focus on spending resources targeting young peiople who will just do exactly the same as laughton did. So isn't it obvious,you spend your resources setting up systems which target people when they are older and in a position to re engage. Im not saying don't suppiort the juniors as well,i'm just saying use their brain and widen their net and divert resources to both the juniors and the laughtion group.

if i was in charge,i would set up a system that recorded all past harness racing participants,kept records of all their emaiils,current phone numbers and addressess. have someone every year contact them and invite them and their friends and family to specific race meetings with entertainment for them and their families and at cost food be provided,access to the stables for them to see old friends and where they would be made to feel they are still valued by the harness racing community and that any future re engagement would be welcomed. If he had a family the grass track meeting are the type of thing . a couple of race days specifically for those previously involved. Not just ex licence holders,but ex owners,breeders,etc. grass track meetings in summer ideal for families and a winter a addington meeting on a sunday.that really wouldn't take that much organising if it was all done electronically. 

the point is,thats why i say,getting humg up on this youth thing is never going to get you anywhere. it hasn't for the last 50 years and it won't for the next 50. resources should be directed into areas that get results,not areas that don't.

personally i dont think tthe current srop of juniors is any better than those in the past. they may be just as good,but no better in my opinion.

i agree that getting people to provide horses for juniors to drive who have limited race day drives isn't straight forward.But the solution to that is there if they want to use it.But they don't do they. Just ask yourself,would you rather line your 2 win ,with no placings in its last 10 starts,in a r35 race and run against winners of 6 and 7 races and earn no money,or would you rather line the same horse up in a non win race where the conditions  say you can start if you put a junior with lass than 5 wins on.What would you chosde,a chanc eto earn or a chance to not.And you may say ,well what are the non win horses connections going to think.Well,thats simple.If they are good enough to win a few races they will beat you and if not,and they can only win 1,then they will see the same opportunity for themselves down the track and if they simply are never going to win a race,then they should be in a race against similar type opposition,not against your 2 win horse. 

 

Edited May 5 by the galah

[pete cook]

I'm sure I'll be accused of bailing out, however we both have our set opinions, and it just seems like we are going round in circles. Hopefully discussions like ours are taking place in HRNZ HQ, where they are in a position to actually put some of the strategies in place.

[Westview]

11 hours ago, the galah said:

so your saying dean shannon paid  half the 2 year old bonuses out of his own pocket.

I have to admit i find that very hard to believe that shannon paid out close to a million $ of his own money in bonuses.The total bonuses paid was 1.74 million,half of that is $870,000.

according to goggle which aligns with and all previous media reports,entain provided the money through the entain carnival fund,which was a $10m fund specifically provided in the entain/tab deal for the enhancement of racing.

my guess is once shannon left,they may have cancelled  the future funding like you suggested and that may be why you say hrnz then threw the industries money at the owners of 2 year old winners. A bit like the harness ownership groups that shannon organised and entain funded,then entain pulled the plug on when they mutually parted ways.

i would guess ,someone has told you shannon paid the bonuses,meaning shannon/entain. Still,if you have a source that said he paid his own money and that entain reneged on the deal. well that says 2 things,well actually 3. Shannon is one heck of a generous man with a million  dollar giveaway,that entain can't be trusted because they said many times it was entain providing the funds and thirdly,what about the lack of publicity by hrnz about them having to stump up close to a million dollars>going by what you say,either way,thats just another reason for people not to have faith in hrnz management of industry money.

my question about why are there less juniors.

i asked it,because i was making the point that you were saying the half penalties is creating an incentive for juniors to pursue a career in harness racing. And i was saying,no they aren't. look at the stats,in particular look at the number of juniors driving. in 2025 there were 45 juniors who drove during the season. in 2026 there has only been 35 drive.Thats a 24% drop. i doubt we will see many more new drivers driving this year.

so the concessions have done nothing to increase the junior driver numbers.

as to ben laughton.i remember him. You gave him lots of opportunities.But reality is,he must have realised that if he were to marry ,start a family then being employed in the harness industry is going to hinder him and his family finacially,so he did the only sensible thing and moved to another occupation.

Now,hes a good example of the type of person that the industry should keep track of and rekindle their passion for harness racing in the future ,when hes financially and family wise,situated in a position to re engage. But instead hrnz and seemingly you agree with them,focus on spending resources targeting young peiople who will just do exactly the same as laughton did. So isn't it obvious,you spend your resources setting up systems which target people when they are older and in a position to re engage. Im not saying don't suppiort the juniors as well,i'm just saying use their brain and widen their net and divert resources to both the juniors and the laughtion group.

if i was in charge,i would set up a system that recorded all past harness racing participants,kept records of all their emaiils,current phone numbers and addressess. have someone every year contact them and invite them and their friends and family to specific race meetings with entertainment for them and their families and at cost food be provided,access to the stables for them to see old friends and where they would be made to feel they are still valued by the harness racing community and that any future re engagement would be welcomed. If he had a family the grass track meeting are the type of thing . a couple of race days specifically for those previously involved. Not just ex licence holders,but ex owners,breeders,etc. grass track meetings in summer ideal for families and a winter a addington meeting on a sunday.that really wouldn't take that much organising if it was all done electronically. 

the point is,thats why i say,getting humg up on this youth thing is never going to get you anywhere. it hasn't for the last 50 years and it won't for the next 50. resources should be directed into areas that get results,not areas that don't.

personally i dont think tthe current srop of juniors is any better than those in the past. they may be just as good,but no better in my opinion.

i agree that getting people to provide horses for juniors to drive who have limited race day drives isn't straight forward.But the solution to that is there if they want to use it.But they don't do they. Just ask yourself,would you rather line your 2 win ,with no placings in its last 10 starts,in a r35 race and run against winners of 6 and 7 races and earn no money,or would you rather line the same horse up in a non win race where the conditions  say you can start if you put a junior with lass than 5 wins on.What would you chosde,a chanc eto earn or a chance to not.And you may say ,well what are the non win horses connections going to think.Well,thats simple.If they are good enough to win a few races they will beat you and if not,and they can only win 1,then they will see the same opportunity for themselves down the track and if they simply are never going to win a race,then they should be in a race against similar type opposition,not against your 2 win horse. 

 

I'm a huge fan of getting people back on track, if you get someone to fall in love with horse's we all know you have them for life.   It's really not that hard with the right promotions but unfortunately our governing body seems devoid of ideas. Tonight at the Night Market the Canterbury Trotting Owners Association in conjunction with Addington Raceway are running stable tours , prizes of rides in mobile,  hopefully outside tote at the bottom of the stairs where everyone is heading.  The good people of the Market are going to promote the activities on their media streams.  unfortunately next week is the last Wednesday night for awhile but I'm sure if successful which if will be we will go again when they start up again. 

[pete cook]

Wonderful idea, Nigel. With the stadium and the dogs disappearing, Addington need to explore new income streams.

[the galah]

5 hours ago, pete cook said:

it just seems like we are going round in circles.

you'd have done that a lot over the years, training your horses.

my comments about hrnz keeping engaged with previous harness racing participants . Hrnz already have shown thy can do that.e.g. they email and phone every few months when tracking whats happening with older horses. At least they have to me anyway.

Edited May 6 by the galah