Leaderboard

Too much racing available for people to bet on........the digital and global scene means there are dozens of meetings every day across the 3 x codes.Folk can bet 364 days a year in most parts of the world at any time of day. Ditto on sports which is more 'universal' and more 'popular' than horse racing which is limited by many factors and harder to 'learn'. Horse racing used to 'rule' in NZ where gambling was strictly regulated....in 1987 LOTTO arrived then Casinos ! Lotto has the 'life changing' purses , racing is small fry as too many 'pools' has slaughtered divis. NZ population is too small ......racing DNA has dwindled ! 95% of gamblers lose.....now this happens quicker than previous ! Racing relies on money gambled to fund itself. NZ still breeds great horses because of the climate etc ,but even that is dropping as money leaking off the merry-go-round. Racing is going well in Australia ,Hong Kong and areas with greater population and more racing/gambling in their DNA. Our best racing people can go elsewhere ,ditto our best horses. We left here with our memories of Phar Lap, Sunline , Show Gate and Grey Way ,and collects off a $1 double which almost bought a house ! Those were the days my friend...........

Agree. A while ago an 'open entry' type of system was in use at Blenheim, distances available were listed and horses entered for those distance categories. Fields were then made up according to the grades/ratings of those horses entered. I thought it was a great idea, but there were complaints about the process....meant that fields couldn't be manipulated with multiple entries....but oh, how shortsighted. A perfect example about how self-interest holds sway in this industry over the bigger picture.

There appears a few races for lower end horses in next 8 weeks in Canterbury . Why not next year trial a few blank meetings on these low end days . Trainers have a set time maybe three weeks out to put in who they want to run , and trip range . Set races from there to accommodate maximum amount of runners and see how many follow through with noms . If it don't work it's a couple of low grade meetings been messed with that's all . Planning needs to be more flexible .

You ,We're Doomed seem to have a very keen interest and good understanding of the various Calendar and programming issues which seems to dog the Industry. You should document your concerns and ideas ,get some support from folk with a bit of weight/influence and make suggestions to this lot that makes the decisions. You seem to have a grasp of the numbers ,%'s and glaring gaps where there is room for improvement. Years ago some genius or person similar to yourself must have come up with the idea of the dual code meeting on Jan 2 at Tauherenikau....I guess they thought horses of either code could be short cos of holiday racing [probably gallopers] plus there are XX harness in the area , so lets have a dual meeting. Its a true holiday meeting ,very popular and seems successful. It has always amazed me why there isn't more flexibility in the Calendar and programming and I wonder if there is a regular stocktake or inventory done of horses getting ready ,or already willing to race.....in their categories. e.g. if a region gas 40 horses in r65 hoping to race over 1800m to 2400 and 30 sprinters ,then programs should reflect that. Too often it seems horses are missing out on starts and or some races going ahead e.g. 72 or r82 with 4 to 6 starters. It seems too obvious. One probable roadblock to change or flexibility could be in the make-up of the "Committee"......my experience tells me that personal or conflict of interests comes into any decision making. Its rare to strike a committee without that being a big factor.Decisions made are often done to best suit those making them. Human nature ! For starters a trainers rep and a club rep would definitely be looking after own back yard !

It's not really all that hard. Someone creative needs to come in and tidy things up, and the trainers need to buy into it and make sure they support clubs that put up the decent stakes. They were very poor fields at Riccarton last week. There needs to be a review to decide why that was and what can be done to prevent it happening next year. As it is, a lot of money is being wasted funding poorly performing premier meetings.

Seems legit. NZ Herald; 1 December 2018.

Yes, I've promoted the idea here for ever. Programming imo should be done monthly not quarterly and based on some survey system of available horses likely to be ready to start. Some places in the US it is done fortnightly. The 'additional race' idea here was a step forward in piloting that idea but they've been doing it for years now without ever deciding whether or not to expand the practice or even any formal assessment of it that I'm aware of. Hopeless.

Nothing nasty in that post and nothing to do with social media. It's in the public domain for all to see. https://www.bsa.govt.nz/decisions/all-decisions/chilcott-and-television-new-zealand-ltd-2013-056/?fbclid=IwAR0aVkBAhHqKN7yMheiqaNrsImrOE8jD8GPeA9RyQv5CWLSXs3ueMlnYHNE

Never had a sports bet in my life and never will, matter of principle for me, should never been allowed.

I doubt stakes are going down very much , a very prominent racing figure said stakes are doubling prior to last year's sales and I guess he knows the inside oil very well. Stakes are doubling , it is written , in the papers , it's true . 100 per cent sure that it's 60 per cent certain just like Sex Panther cologne.

No point in offering up solutions, they don't listen to facts, common sense ,analysis or commercial sense for that matter. They take a short term view of everything,the latent bias is there for all to see and that's why it's in the state it's in.

There are no races today or yesterday because trainers owners breeders even jockeys are participants at the yearling sales.

Many thanks to Dean for responding to these questions and to you Scooby for facilitating that process. I'm particularly pleased to learn that the 20% net profit increase required to sustain the balance sheet with current funding distributions has now been maintained for the first 6 months of the current FY.

They used to fell giant Kauri's with wedges.

Good on ya Shad. The late, great, Richie Benaud once said; "never bet on anything that can talk." I have to agree with Richie there. Unless of course it is one of those bloody smart horses that can talk. Keep your ear out for them. All too often, one will hear a trainer say to a racing journo or broadcaster: "yeah nah, we decided to give him (their horse) a brief spell, but he'll tell us when he's ready (to come back into work)." Smart animals those talking horses.

I've made this same point several times, a database with the numbers and grades of horses in the districts shouldn't be that complicated, surely? Then races could be worked around horse availability. Leggy will correct me, but I think as long ago as when Balmerino was campaigning abroad, he took part in an 'overnight' handicap in the US which reflected exactly that practice .

So compulsive liar Shifty Schiff says he doesn't know the whistleblower Eric CIAramello. His transcript will blow the dems apart. Click on Greg Rubini's tweet at the end and be shocked

Pretty sure that in 2005 a Hong Kong citizen paid 1.6 million for 50%.

Why don't they have an option in the trainers centre menu where trainer can give their opinion/vote on what races they are looking for their horses in the future or where they are heading etc.Surely that isn't hard to do, instead its like you have said a few trainers pushing for what they need and the industry hoping pie in the sky thats going to be good enough.

I am no expert on these sort of deals but $5.4 mill for 35% of the stud which operates on leasehold land seems a fairly high price.

Always happens.every day u cop it.personally I don't care but some take it to heart. Social media cruel

Thanks for your replies Dean. Equity aint looking pretty July 2017 $69.3m July 2018 $53.5m July 2019 $24.9m ( against a budget of $60.3m) The outcome of the balance sheet not deteriorating further is, as you suggest, "challenging" Substitute John Allen for the late Terry Jones and cast yourself as John Cleese and there's some similarities emanating!

Watching the end of the cricket last evening, I was certain I'd seen it all before. It's the one where The Black Caps can't possibly lose.......and then they lose .

Wouldn't be the first time that NZ has lost when the opposition 'expected' NZ to win. Go to a Ken Rutherford talk sometime and he tells of games where dodgy things went on ,and he very close to the action ! But NZ should have won that game in regulation time ,Williamson's dismissal from a terrible ball ,then it turned to custard ! But hard to take those 20/20 games too seriously....really a hit and giggle , a bit of fun !

Stuff Japan., they murder thousands of Dolphins every year in Tarji., Down with Japan!!

Thanks Dean and to you Scooby for facilitating this. I too am pleased to hear that we are on target for a 20% increase in profit based on the first 6 months turnover. It surprises me to hear that we have achieved that target, I wonder if there could be some analysis of how the target has been achieved and what impact it will have on each of the 3 codes

Not guilty .There is no finer ambassador. Is that u Donald Trump. Still we get used to it.the great unwashed sitting in the stands.dont let the truth get in the way of a good story.

Hi Everyone, here is the responses from Dean McKenzie to the questions you all posed, as well as a couple of more he answered as well. Once again thanks for the questions and thanks to Dean for taking the time to answer them. Racecafe Questions poundforpound Hi Dean Are you happy with the current performance of the RIU ? I note you’ve unfortunately appointed yet another ex Policeman to head this organization. Given the level of concern about the influence of a couple of ex Policemen currently employed by the RIU, their paucity of racing knowledge, and the fiasco evolving with Operation Inca, including the harness code demanding intervention, is RITA likely to do anything about the RIU, including but not limited to appointing some persons with racing experience & knowledge to that organization ? Thanks Leo Hi Leo In short: the Racing Industry Bill currently before Parliament proposes a new Governance structure for racing integrity in New Zealand that RITA believes will support greater performance in both the RIU and the JCA. As recommended by John Messara, we commissioned an independent review of racing judicial functions (including the RIU). This report was carried out by Malcolm Burgess who is a former Assistant Police Commissioner. Malcolm is RITA’s representative on the RIU Board. Malcolm’s report is available on the DIA website and essentially identified that to improve independence and provide effective accountability, there needed to be the establishment of one independent integrity board (the RIB) to provide governance of the stewarding, investigation and judicial functions. The Bill provides the tools that enable the current functions of the JCA and RIU to come under the new streamlined RIB. Stables What is Mr. McKenzie's view of the current racing legislation before parliament and the comitment to racing of the current minister for racing? RITA is happy with 80-90% of the Bill but have identified a few aspects of the Bill which we believe require amending, include (but not limited to) the following : ● Changes to the Offshore Betting Charges provision as the legislation does not currently allow the degree of flexibility the industry requires. However, as indicated in the First Reading speeches, we understand this is an area the Government intends on proposing amendments to during the Select Committee; ● The Bill intends on introducing a framework for new products that RITA is not currently able to offer (subject to satisfaction of specified criteria). Unfortunately, the wording of the Bill potentially reduces the scope of existing betting permissions. This outcome is at odds with the intention of the reforms, and in the Board’s view an unintended consequence of these provisions. We are engaging with officials on this matter and are hopeful of constructive change; Furthermore, there are a number of amendments required which are technical in nature, but nonetheless necessary. The purpose of the Select Committee stage is to make these types of technical changes. LeggyUnbeaten G1 - R124 ● What misinformation do you think is out there and what else do we need to know to clear that up? There’s been plenty of misformation about what the Bill does and doesn’t do: right from IP through to outsourcing. I’ve tried to address much of these issues in correspondence sent out to the industry which can be read here - https://www.rita.org.nz/news Gubellini Dean what are your projected figures for minimum gallops stakes in the 2020-2021 Season? Ultimately, the Codes are responsible for determining how much of their distributions are paid out in stakes. The RITA Board is simply focused on ensuring the overall ‘pot’ available to the Codes is as big as possible. We hope to be able to make further announcements in this space in the coming months. slam dunk Do you think the TAB is necessary for NZ racing as the exclusive local based operator for wagering on NZ racing? To clarify the question. I don't mean betting on sports or overseas racing events. If you believe that TAB is necessary then is there a forum or mechanism I can prove to you that is not the case? If TAB is actually not necessary doesn't that blow out of the water the claim by TAB to all intellectual property rights etc? Also are you prepared to listen with open mind to a. overseas bookies are not needed in NZ? b. there exists a far better betting format than tote, bookie or exchange? c. Trackside and media should be separate to wagering operators as in other jurisdictions? Yes, the TAB is the industry’s biggest asset and the primary source of revenue for the three Codes. The TAB doesn’t just turn over wagering on New Zealand racing product, it exports New Zealand racing, derives revenue from imported racing and sports, and provides gaming revenue for the industry. I’m prepared to listen with an open mind to any ideas, and indeed many took the opportunity to do that on the recent meetings I held with industry up and down the country. Berri Unfortunately I have an awful lot to ask about the proposed Act. I will always refer to the proposed Act amendment. So this will be the first of a number of separate concerns culminating in perspective question.... I note that the Act relates to New Zealand racing and that the reason for changing the Act is to promote the long term viability of NZ racing. Does this mean that the Act (3 (a) (ii) is making New Zealand Racing as the default beneficiary of the Act (i.e. the primary beneficiary)? Yes, the Racing Industry stays as the default beneficiary of the Act. There is a slightly confusing clause in the new Bill which looks like Sport NZ is introduced as a new beneficiary for TAB profits, however this clause applies only to the distribution of gaming duty savings and is capped at that amount (4% of gross betting revenue). Additional questions will be asked regarding 3(a) (iii) and 3(a) (iv) but they will follow Nukkledragger Here is a question that I hope you can answer,the bookies here in nz are run as a monopoly by the tab and bookies cut you off if you are a winner, they target losers (possibly contrary to 3 b as above ) whereas tote betting is absolutely fair to all but apart from the rank failure of triple trio , no innovations have been tried for tote betting.Bookies markets are bad value in all ways compared to the tote ( recent headlines about big punters say it all) Are there any tote upgrades or new bet types specific to tote betting planned? The only choice is through the bookies.One bet I would like to see developed is a cross code multi type bet done through the tote pools as well as cross code poker type bets, they are only available with bookies whose odds are crap ,we as punters have nothing to lose by betting through the tote. Million$ was spent on upgrading systems for the bookies so they can gouge us more efficiently ,how about some fair betting options for the rank and file punters. Yes, the Board is looking at new ways of improving our product offering for customers. A couple of options we are working through are fixed odds exotics, which could provide a useful alternative if tote pools are low, and same-game multis. The new betting platform has also given us the ability to pick up any new innovations developed by other bookmakers using the same system. ShaneMcalister I personally think there joining a world TAB pool is worth investigating. This would attract large punters, knowing two things: 1. They can get big bets on which is. It the case with most bookmakers 2. the market could absorb their bets, and price not drastically change. Are we looking at possibility of joining a world betting pool? The TAB currently has a co-mingling arrangement with Tabcorp through our longstanding agreement with them. Conversations around a world tote pool are ongoing on an international basis and is something that the industry will need to continue following closely. Eclipsed Two questions..... 1. when, as a date, will RITA determine the code body funding distribution quantum for the 20/21 racing season? In July last RITA confirmed that distributions to the Codes for the 2019/20 season would be held at the current level of $151.6 million. As we are only halfway through the current financial year, the Board hasn’t made a determination about distributions for the 2020/21 season. 2. given speculation over the sustainability of the current level of funding in the current 19/20 season, what will be the key determinant in assessing the distribution quantum for the 20/21 racing season? The Minister has set some clear bookends for the business: keep distribution at least at the same level, but don’t deteriorate the balance sheet. Essentially that requires us to get a 20 percent uplift in profit. Six months in we are on budget, but the next six months will be challenging and the Board will have a close eye on new revenue initiatives and cost management. Berri Dean Betting is different from “Games of Chance” (lotteries, pokies, cards etc), which could be colloquially expressed as straight out gambling. A “Bet” could be described as: “Where the outcome of a wager is based either in full or in part on the outcome of an event where an element of human skill and judgement is required in order to predict the outcome of the event”. And a “Wager” could be described as: “Where an agreed amount of currency is staked by two participants or more in order to complete a bet”. The DNA to our potential income streams for our entire industry should be premised on being allowed to take bets on anything that is classed as a “Bet” and in particular being able to engage with the rest of the World (either by ourselves, in partnership, or on our behalf) to offer as many products to as many people with offerings that could be classed as a “Bet”. TAB NZ should be known around the World as the best place to engage with/ offer/ be licensed under in order to offer bets so that it can clip the ticket as many times as is possible to support the financial viability of racing as the primary beneficiary (hence my last query), and the sports associations. In Part 1 Clause 5 (Page 8) of the proposed Bill (attached) we have the Interpretations Section. The one of considerable interest to me is the one concerning the interpretation of a “Bet” and the associations with the “Bet”. It is as follows: The two obvious interpretations that are then needed to understand are the definitions of “Race Betting” and “Sports Betting”. “Race Betting (Page 10) is as follows: “Sports Betting” (Page 12) is as follows: The important issue in respect of “Sports Betting” is what a “Sporting Event” actually is. “Sporting Event” (Page 12) is as follows: So here we are in a World environment, where betting competition is about to increase dramatically due to increased betting events and Blockchain betting solutions, but we (NZ, NZ Racing and NZ Sports) are restricting ourselves to racing bets and sporting bets, or a combination of both (why?) where the sporting events are events covered by (a), (b) or (c) above. If this Bill is meant to be relevant for the next 20 years, why are we supporting legislation that restricts our potential competitiveness and betting revenue to racing and sports contests only, where a registered NZ sporting authority has signed an agreement with TAB NZ? Is that the future we have to look forward to? Did you know that virtual gaming and sports are currently the fastest growing betting events? Recently a virtual team game commanded an estimated $1.2b of bets...a single event. If you had a betting account with a betting service provider who only offered a small proportion of the betting opportunities available, and you were approached by a much larger betting provider who offered all the betting options, which betting service provider would you probably become loyal to? If that large betting service provider could offer the alternative bets to NZ customers due to an outsourcing agreement, but the returns of these bets couldn’t be captured by NZ racing or sports because they are not registered agreements in NZ, then why wouldn’t you open the gain to allow every bet that was legally a bet and not just bets on racing and sports? In addition, if you entered into an outsourcing agreement with a larger betting service provider, and were able to provide all types of bets and not just the conventional bets whose appeal is currently diminishing, would not the potential agreement be much more lucrative if you could offer all bets? Please change the definition of a bet. Your comments would be appreciated. Compared to Australians, for example, New Zealanders tend to have a more conservative view towards gambling and that is reflected in our legislation. Therefore, in our representations to Parliament, we need to strike the right balance between advocating new revenue for the industry whilst acknowledging some prevalent contrasting views. The current legislative framework for gambling does make it difficult for the TAB to be adaptable and keep up with advances in new products compared to our competitors. This was a point made by Messara and one that we have continued to reiterate to the Government. The overall structure of gambling is determined by the Gambling Act 2003, which isn’t up for consideration in the Racing Industry Bill currently before Parliament. However, the Gambling Act is being reviewed by the Minister for Internal Affairs, Hon Tracey Martin, and we have been making submissions and representations to her raising many of the points you’ve made. The Government has included one provision in the Racing Industry Bill which we are supportive of in principle: this is a new approval mechanism would allow the TAB to offer products that would normally require a legislative change, subject to a range of tests being met, such as harm minimisation. We will be advocating changes in the Bill we believe will make this mechanism more enabling. If our changes are implemented, we are confident this will help ‘move the ball down the pitch’ but will only go so far. We will continue engaging with the Government on their broader review of gambling in New Zealand and advocate many of the points you’ve raised.

Looked like the Indians were trying to lose the way they fielded. But then we blew an early run out chance on the first ball over the Super over. Confusing...

Japan are the biggest loser out of all this and Aust should stick it right up them by banning their horses from competing in Aust races. AUSTRALIAN Racing has the best prizemoney in the world by a long way. The spread of races with good stakes is exceptional. Aust Racing doesn’t need Japan.

I think that 3 months ahead gives little time to map out a horse's programme options - personally - and I don't think I'd be the only one. WRT to the recent situation mentioned by others, there are four meetings at Ricc in little more than a month, some only industry days, but then there is Champions Day at Dunedin and Southland Guineas day to work in around it all...not an easy fix IMO....and, as well, summer in Canterbury is typically fiercely dry, many are looking to get their horses off concrete so travelling has to be factored in - or don't run anywhere. Costs with public transport companies are huge for anyone trekking up and down the island as well. Economics aside, knowledge of local conditions used to be a factor in race dates, up north of course too, not just down here. The two West Coast circuits [ Nov and Jan ] were a great opportunity to get your horses away from the heat and dust in Canterbury over that period, Otago/Southland had its own circuits too, that seems to have been forgotten with people complaining that 'there should be racing here over the holiday period'....well, it happened like that for a reason. Once autumn conditions kicked in, then racing returned to local tracks. Same thing re.climate happened down south, racing shut down in Southland after the Riverton Easter meeting, too close to Antarctica to be going racing..! Some trainers moved to Oamaru, or Waimate [ Rex Cochrane] with the teams they wished to keep going. Dunedin Queen's Birthday was the last Otago meeting until the spring other than at Oamaru's excellent winter track...but the timing and general organisation worked. Populations, economics, etc. all change and you can't go back in time - but we have definitely lost the connection to the pastoral reality that made it all work. And I don't really have the answer going forward.

I'm told that a former employee will be getting the blame for the "mistake" this time. Isn't this her 3rd (maybe more) positive swab? Plus a criminal conviction (oh sorry - another mistake): https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10852253 What a great Team Teal Ambassador!

Programming has gone from poor to completely hopeless in the last 7 or 8 years in my opinion. Are there still regional programming committees?

One nine horse field, the biggest field of the day. Four races with less than 8 starters. They continue to run North Island meetings with tiny fields, often for big stakes, while South Island horses can't get a start and are balloted and eliminated every week, even in $10,000 races.. We saw a desperate maiden start in an open race at Riccarton last week as there is only one maiden race in Canterbury for seven weeks. As racing these days is almost exclusively an off course betting option, why are the races not run where the horses are? And it is cheaper to provide product in the South. And has anyone noticed that the small fields are almost invariably at the favoured tracks. The better fields are usually at those "unnecessary" tracks earmarked for closure as quickly as possible. And this is all managed by NZTR who expect people to take notice of their rita submission listed elsewhere.