Name The Honest Trainers !!

[Newmarket]

Jim & Reg Curtin

[hunterthepunter]

Tim and Antony butt outstanding trainers over 70 group 1 winners both have good eye for a good horse 

[the galah]

In my opinion there is only a very,very small % of trainers who currently would look to gain an advantage through the use of illegal performance enhancers. And this very,very small % seem a little  spooked at the  moment ,probably due to currently  having a pro active riu in the enforcement of the rules.Personally i think the drop off and often inconsistent performance of that small % is evidence of that.

Whether it be the top trainers,or the so called battlers,or the small time trainers,i think they all just want a level playing field.

Some of the trainers i admire are paul nairn,mark jones,ken barron,michael house,the o'rellys,dunns but the list is too long to list,really anyone who is out there doing things by the rules,which is nearly everyone.

Edited February 28, 2021 by the galah

[Noodlum]

42 minutes ago, the galah said:

Some of the trainers i admire are paul nairn,mark jones,ken barron,michael house,the o'rellys,dunns but the list is too long to list,really anyone who is out there doing things by the rules,which is nearly everyone.

But some of those you mention don't meet Newmarket's criteria for "Honest Trainers"......go figure!

43 minutes ago, the galah said:

And this very,very small % seem a little  spooked at the  moment ,probably due to currently  having a pro active riu in the enforcement of the rules.Personally i think the drop off and often inconsistent performance of that small % is evidence of that.

Correlation doesn't equal causation but I guess that would get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

[Gammalite]

10 hours ago, the galah said:

Where's the evidence to support your theory that a battler trainer is far more likely to try something dodgy than the trainers on your list?  Name a couple of battlers with similar records relating to positives to those you have mentioned on the harness side? 

I don't see why you have singled out Mcgrath when the dunn,dalgety and the all stars stables have had just as many issues.  

Doesn't matter who they are,i don't believe anyone would  give their horses something that they thought would return a positive if tested.  

You put the trainers you have mentioned as being better than others,fair enough.No arguement there from me.. But why do you think for some reason they are not ahead of the game when it comes to the use of performance enhancers that will not show up in testing. Thats are very selective approach.

It would be naive to think that horses are not going around without 'professional ' help. 

The line is crossed when traces of a substances are able to be determined 'excessive' according to the rules of the sport. Cobalt, bicarb CO2 levels spring to mind causing much angst around the place.

McGrath a Convicted , disqualified for 8 YEARS NO LESS Cheat , SO I can name him as such. (so I did)

Newmarkets accusations that Allstars , Dunns or TeAkau are Not good people and are NOT honest and NOT worthy of his list here, (even with no convictions) is just awful really . (Bagging your champions) They run multi million dollar operations from being SKILLFUL , not cheats, and risking it all for a poppy seed morphine thing Jamie Richards ? ??no chance. 

you are a smart person Galah (and Newmarket)  and could pull some names out of DISQUALIFIED folk in NZ for using dodgey enhancers. I could list 100 in Aus if you wan't but what's the point. Webberley(tas), Hunter(qld) spring to mind, and are DQ so I can name them as cheats.

They have been caught and disqualified many times each, over the years for example, trying to keep up. Hunter won a couple of NZ cups with an old washed up Tasmanian( like myself .lol......... ) early this century, now that should of been checked by your swabs team, BUT until convicted, MY VIEW is you're a GOOD ,honest horseperson and Congrats on any win , whether it be Avantage, Self Assured, Amazing Dream or Aveross Spitfire. 

 

 

[the galah]

1 hour ago, Noodlum said:

But some of those you mention don't meet Newmarket's criteria for "Honest Trainers"......go figure!

 

You work on the assumption that i believe those who have had past positives in their horses have all been deliberate, and also that past behavior means present behavior. I have not said that.  I do believe that the best way to predict future behavior is to look to past behavior,but of course you have to factor in people learn from their mistakes. Its my opinion,so in my mind what i say makes sense to me.

1 hour ago, Noodlum said:

 

Correlation doesn't equal causation but I guess that would get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

You call it conspiracy theory,because you do not agree with it. I would say you ignore the evidence supporting my views,and choose to interpret the evidence in a way that suits your entrenched opinion. My opinion has been formed over a period of time. The more i see,the more i believe what i say.

[Chief Stipe]

33 minutes ago, Gammalite said:

They run multi million dollar operations from being SKILLFUL , not cheats, and risking it all for a poppy seed morphine thing Jamie Richards ? ??no chance. 

I agree 100%.  One big concern I have after a fair amount of research on the subject is that NZ Racing's rules, regulations and processes are outdated and at the very least misaligned to advances in testing technology.  I've given up trying to work out what the management of the RIU are doing but I'm convinced they are not keeping up.  Now this cuts both ways in terms of catching cheats and unfairly punishing those that are for all intents and purposes are innocent.

For example - the feed contaminant issue and specifically "poppy seed" contamination leading to morphine positives.  All three codes have been affected by this issue.  Recently Te Akau - thoroughbreds (hay), Amber Hoffman - harness (horse foraging), and a case in greyhounds where dogs were fed bread containing poppy seeds.

Now there is a "zero tolerance" for morphine but what does that mean?  Testing technology is such that very very minute levels of any substance can now be detected.  Levels so minute that they can have no performance enhancing or even therapeutic affect on horse or dog.  

The Nobel Prize winner that invented the PCR test that we are all now so familiar with stated (before he died and well before the current pandemic) that it had the potential to be misused.  It is so sensitive that single molecules can be detected.  He also said that you could find anything you wanted in someone's bloodstream if you processed enough cycles (each cycle magnifies the presence of a molecule).  So he postulated when does a positive actually become a positive?  For example you may have remnants of a virus in your body but you are not ill, not infectious and never will be.

So should there be published testing tolerances like there is for TCO2 for "zero tolerance" substances?  Is a 0.01 micro-grams result the same as a 0.00001 result when that substance to have any affect whatsoever would have to be present at a level of 0.5?  For example an adult person weighing 100kg who eats one poppy seeded bagel can return a positive to morphine!

My view is that there should be published tolerances for any substance that can be found freely in the environment - to have a blanket "zero tolerance" policy is lazy and impractical.  Further specifically looking at the morphine contamination it is possible to determine its origin by chemical analysis.  Should that type of testing be undertaken?

Theoretically if you fed your US dollars to your horse it would return a positive to cocaine!

[the galah]

32 minutes ago, Gammalite said:

It would be naive to think that horses are not going around without 'professional ' help. 

The line is crossed when traces of a substances are able to be determined 'excessive' according to the rules of the sport. Cobalt, bicarb CO2 levels spring to mind causing much angst around the place.

McGrath a Convicted , disqualified for 8 YEARS NO LESS Cheat , SO I can name him as such. (so I did)

Newmarkets accusations that Allstars , Dunns or TeAkau are Not good people and are NOT honest and NOT worthy of his list here, (even with no convictions) is just awful really . (Bagging your champions) They run multi million dollar operations from being SKILLFUL , not cheats, and risking it all for a poppy seed morphine thing Jamie Richards ? ??no chance. 

you are a smart person Galah (and Newmarket)  and could pull some names out of DISQUALIFIED folk in NZ for using dodgey enhancers. I could list 100 in Aus if you wan't but what's the point. Webberley(tas), Hunter(qld) spring to mind, and are DQ so I can name them as cheats.

They have been caught and disqualified many times each, over the years for example, trying to keep up. Hunter won a couple of NZ cups with an old washed up Tasmanian( like myself .lol......... ) early this century, now that should of been checked by your swabs team, BUT until convicted, MY VIEW is you're a GOOD ,honest horseperson and Congrats on any win , whether it be Avantage, Self Assured, Amazing Dream or Aveross Spitfire. 

 

 

I didn't intrepret newmarkets earlier post to say any of those you have mentioned were not good people,were not honest ... 

I think what he was saying was history shows at times they have been shown to have horses race which have had illegal substances in their system,therefore because of that it is up to each of us to form our own opinion as to where the trainers mentioned currently stand in relation to the use of performance enhancers. I think that is a reasonable statement to make.

As to mr mcgrath.Yes you can call him a cheat. But in his case i think that label does not really paint an accurate picture of who he really is in totality. I think if you knew him you would form the view that he was a very good person,and for some reason he compartmentalized what he did with his horses in a different box of standards to everything else he does in life. He quite rightly has paid a price for that,but i would say out of proportion to others who have behaved similarly in the past. 

Edited February 28, 2021 by the galah

[Rangatira]

2 hours ago, hunterthepunter said:

Tim and Antony butt outstanding trainers over 70 group 1 winners both have good eye for a good horse 

did tim train raglan ?

[Rangatira]

justin and lynn smith,

paul nairn,

malcolm shinn

[Gammalite]

9 minutes ago, the galah said:

I didn't intrepret newmarkets earlier post to say any of those you have mentioned were not good people,were not honest ... 

I think what he was saying was history shows at times they have been shown to have horses race which have had illegal substances in their system,therefore because of that it is up to each of us to form our own opinion as to where the trainers mentioned currently stand in relation to the use of performance enhancers. I think that is a reasonable statement to make.

As to mr mcgrath.Yes you can call him a cheat. But in his case i think that label does not really paint an accurate picture of who he really is in totality. I think if you knew him you would form the view that he was a very good person,and for some reason he compartmentalized what he did with his horses in a different box of standards to everything else he does in life. He quite rightly has paid a price for that,but i would say out of proportion to others who have behaved similarly in the past. 

I did see it that way , as Newmarket downvoted my selections of Mark + Nat, Robert+ John Dunn early in thread.

Apologies for dragging Te Akau into it. Mr McGrath sounds like a sad situation from what you say. Godspeed to him.

Mark Purdon whom I know, is a fabulous bloke, a fine horseman , a good person too, and his dad Roy MBE , he is a legend.! I'm not surprised at the GOOD results. I think worthy of being on this thread list just as as much as any Battler.

3 hours ago, the galah said:

In my opinion there is only a very,very small % of trainers who currently would look to gain an advantage through the use of illegal performance enhancers. And this very,very small % seem a little  spooked at the  moment ,probably due to currently  having a pro active riu in the enforcement of the rules.Personally i think the drop off and often inconsistent performance of that small % is evidence of that.

Whether it be the top trainers,or the so called battlers,or the small time trainers,i think they all just want a level playing field.

In Fact , you have summed it up perfectly up above, and Fully agree with this opinion of yours. sounds 'Spot on' to me.

[hunterthepunter]

1 hour ago, the galah said:

I didn't intrepret newmarkets earlier post to say any of those you have mentioned were not good people,were not honest ... 

I think what he was saying was history shows at times they have been shown to have horses race which have had illegal substances in their system,therefore because of that it is up to each of us to form our own opinion as to where the trainers mentioned currently stand in relation to the use of performance enhancers. I think that is a reasonable statement to make.

As to mr mcgrath.Yes you can call him a cheat. But in his case i think that label does not really paint an accurate picture of who he really is in totality. I think if you knew him you would form the view that he was a very good person,and for some reason he compartmentalized what he did with his horses in a different box of standards to everything else he does in life. He quite rightly has paid a price for that,but i would say out of proportion to others who have behaved similarly in the past. 

what did he get 8years for?

[JJ Flash]

Barry Purdon

[Rangatira]

10 minutes ago, hunterthepunter said:

what did he get 8years for?

RESERVED DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DATED 3 JULY 2020

[1] The Respondent, Nigel Raymond McGrath is a licensed Public Trainer and Open Driver under the Rules of New Zealand Harness Racing (HRNZ). He has been a Harness Trainer since 2000.

[2] The Respondent admitted three charges of offending deemed to be serious racing offences under Rule 505(1) of the New Zealand Rules of Harness Law. These charges are:

(a) Attempts to administer (A11684) Rule 1004(1).

On 13 March 2020 at Christchurch together with Robert George Burrows did attempt to administer to “Steel The Show” which was entered in Race 8 at the NZ Metropolitan Trotting Club’s meeting at Addington that evening, a prohibited substance by way of nasal gastric tube.

(b) Refuses to make a statement (A11685) Rule 1001(1)(i).

On 13 March 2020 at Christchurch refused to supply information by answering the questions of a Racecourse Investigator regarding the tubing equipment located in his possession and the attempted race day administration of the horse “Steel The Show.”

(c) Obstructing a Racecourse Investigator (A11686) Rule 1001(1)(j).

On 13 March 2020 at Christchurch obstructed a Racecourse Investigator by preventing him from seizing tubing equipment as evidence in the course of an investigation into a race day administration and ordering Racecourse Investigators to leave his property.

[Newmarket]

3 hours ago, Noodlum said:

But some of those you mention don't meet Newmarket's criteria for "Honest Trainers"......go figure!

Correlation doesn't equal causation but I guess that would get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

You must have a very short memory Noodlum, you telling me that all of these guys have not clashed with officials😆. 
 

This is the whole point of this thread, you guys forget what trainers have done in the past, that is the reason they keep doing it. 

[Newmarket]

22 hours ago, Gammalite said:

Mark Purdon and Nat, Robert Dunn and John, Cran D... 

and anyone else that was having to compete against the convicted cheat Nigel McGrath?

They are the worst examples mate, just for starters, 

Mark Purdon, disqualified for 4 months, fined $15k after admitting administering substance to light and sound! 
Yeah I know, supporters will say it was only herbalife or some shit, i dont care, still illegal. 
Maybe you need to google the others,

[the galah]

14 minutes ago, Newmarket said:

You must have a very short memory Noodlum, you telling me that all of these guys have not clashed with officials😆. 
 

This is the whole point of this thread, you guys forget what trainers have done in the past, that is the reason they keep doing it. 

You have hit the nail on the head there newmarket. Whenever there is mention of anyone getting a positive,you have this rush of support from the from a small but vocal group within the industry.

The very same people seem to pick and choose who they defend.Those who criticised the riu over the mcgrath case,don't seem to care when it comes to J alford. They are hypocrites.

Edited March 1, 2021 by the galah

[Rangatira]

neil gardner

nora bishop

Edited March 1, 2021 by Rangatira

[hunterthepunter]

1 hour ago, Rangatira said:

RESERVED DECISION OF JUDICIAL COMMITTEE DATED 3 JULY 2020

[1] The Respondent, Nigel Raymond McGrath is a licensed Public Trainer and Open Driver under the Rules of New Zealand Harness Racing (HRNZ). He has been a Harness Trainer since 2000.

[2] The Respondent admitted three charges of offending deemed to be serious racing offences under Rule 505(1) of the New Zealand Rules of Harness Law. These charges are:

(a) Attempts to administer (A11684) Rule 1004(1).

On 13 March 2020 at Christchurch together with Robert George Burrows did attempt to administer to “Steel The Show” which was entered in Race 8 at the NZ Metropolitan Trotting Club’s meeting at Addington that evening, a prohibited substance by way of nasal gastric tube.

(b) Refuses to make a statement (A11685) Rule 1001(1)(i).

On 13 March 2020 at Christchurch refused to supply information by answering the questions of a Racecourse Investigator regarding the tubing equipment located in his possession and the attempted race day administration of the horse “Steel The Show.”

(c) Obstructing a Racecourse Investigator (A11686) Rule 1001(1)(j).

On 13 March 2020 at Christchurch obstructed a Racecourse Investigator by preventing him from seizing tubing equipment as evidence in the course of an investigation into a race day administration and ordering Racecourse Investigators to leave his property.

administering what?

[Rangatira]

7 minutes ago, hunterthepunter said:

administering what?

not sure that is relevant

and even less relevant if one pleads guilty (hopefully i read that right)

[Gammalite]

1 hour ago, Newmarket said:

You must have a very short memory Noodlum, you telling me that all of these guys have not clashed with officials😆. 
 

This is the whole point of this thread, you guys forget what trainers have done in the past, that is the reason they keep doing it. 

I do agree with Galah that 'some' have 'Erred in their ways' , but may of learned from it and mended their ways. (hopefully) and now be training in a reputable manner.

I do agree with Newmarket that some are 'repeat ' offenders and were always looking to Cheat with performance enhancing products. I named a couple of Aussie ones in Webberley and Hunter.

I don't agree that people can just pop names on the 'GOOD GUYS' list without knowing How they treat their horses in 'All reality', and say others are not treating horses Honestly , and can't be on list. (JUST because they win the Most) lol.......  

I can't name anyone in that case lol.......

[Davis]

3 hours ago, Rangatira said:

did tim train raglan ?

Yes, but that was only the arsenic "tonic", used as an appetite stimulant and coat conditioner, only. 😅😅

[hunterthepunter]

1 minute ago, Rangatira said:

not sure that is relevant

and even less relevant if one pleads guilty (hopefully i read that right)

your know allso what was administed ? 

[Noodlum]

1 hour ago, Newmarket said:

This is the whole point of this thread, you guys forget what trainers have done in the past, that is the reason they keep doing it. 

Rubbish the whole point of the thread is just a shit stir on your part.  Honest trainers have been caught up in crusades.  

 

[Rangatira]

4 minutes ago, Davis said:

Yes, but that was only the arsenic "tonic", used as an appetite stimulant and coat conditioner, only. 😅😅

did his 6 month disqualification get quashed on appeal ?