Diver Dan

Quote from Herald today:
Despite the suppression order, in the hours and days after the verdict overseas media and social media users - including in New Zealand - published the killer's name.
Beard, the police officer in charge of the case, warned Kiwis about breaching suppression orders relating to the case just a day after the guilty verdict.
"While we appreciate the public feeling around this case, we do want to remind the public that it is an offense to breach a court order such as a name suppression - this includes naming someone on social media," he said.
 
Please tell me it wasn't our beloved poundforpound.
The poor girls name gets dragged through the mud by the unscrupulous defense and the "scumbag murderer" gets name suppression???
The only reason he gets name suppression is that he's got a dodgy past.
It only takes 2 seconds to find this "scumbag murderers" identity via other news outlets.
The suppression law in NZ in this case is outdated and not fit for purpose.
How is any of  this fair and quantified as justice.
Merry Chistmas to all RC members and take care on the roads.
 

What a load of rubbish.
I know of 2 that are with other agencies.
Tried to get a position here around 15 years ago - they were completely threatened by his knowledge/experience/betting insight.
It was comical seeing Typhoon/Triple Trio and place pot all all being raging failures - would have saved a fortune with a competent stroke of his pen.
Don't even mention the new platform.
The irony is that our TAB mirror Bet365 on most sports and he's collecting fat pay checks from said employer.
You couldn't make this s..t up.
 

I've always been amazed how the NZRB and NZTR have made such odd decisions in regards to personnel. You could swear that they've been hired to ruin racing, so pitiful the decisions that have been made these past 15 plus years. The spin lacks any evidence that things are about to improve, in fact it looks completely rudderless and looks headed for further demise.
The latest Deloitte's report  is another desperate attempt to find answers. WTF do they(Deloitte) know about betting and betting platforms - how much was wasted on this?
Why wouldn't you employ someone that knows a thing or three.
I know a slight/maybe big stretch but take Bet 365 for example - Denise Coates.
Coates started out as cashier, marking up results in a small number of betting shops owned by her father, Peter, as a sideline to his main business of football stadium catering.
After graduating with a first in econometrics – the application of statistical methods to economic data – from Sheffield University, she expanded the family’s Provincial Racing betting chain to nearly 50 shops. Now CEO of Bet365 her salary last year was 199 million pounds.
The point I'm really trying making is wouldn't you hire for the position required.
We have experts at ledgers, sending post and chucking heavy objects - whoever hired them the problem.
Why (20 years ago and still to this date) wouldn't you hire an expert in betting/bookmaking/betting platforms???
 
 

ignore #4 in the first race

Get rid of the whips - no place for it these days
I took a couple of teenagers to Alex Park 2 years ago - they don't want to go back because of this.

Get rid of the whips - no place for it these days
I took a couple of teenagers to Alex Park 2 years ago - they don't want to go back because of this.

Get rid of the whips - no place for it these days
I took a couple of teenagers to Alex Park 2 years ago - they don't want to go back because of this.

Get rid of the whips - no place for it these days
I took a couple of teenagers to Alex Park 2 years ago - they don't want to go back because of this.

Another wonderful feature of the new website is a bug which makes it roughly three times more difficult to get a bet on in play. I find that more than half the time I get a message saying "an unexpected (lol) error has occured, please check your pending transactions" - which is bad advice because 100% of the time when this message comes up the bet has NOT got on. The message should be "As expected, an error has occurred please try again or sign up to bet365.com" Throw in a 5-8 second delay and price changes every 30 seconds, and you have all the hallmarks of the quintessential NZ TAB betting experience - frustrating and unsatisfying - and this is in comparison not only to every other bookmaker in the world, but also to the old site which let's be honest was pretty crappy. But then, who could have predicted that the it was possible for the TAB to spend $50 million to construct a worse one, that is already costing them shit tons and is going to see both fixed odds turnover and profit nose dive, the exact opposite result that we've been promised by Allen. What price you think at that point Allen would hold his hands up and say, "Ok enough is enough, I admit I actually have no clue what I am doing"... an unexpected error has occured....

Oh I can help there. 
1. Employing two failed greyhound bookmakers to implement and oversee the introduction of fixed odds betting
2. Renewing the contract of those same failed bookmakers for two years after they had effectively done nothing the previous year (this was done by an outgoing CEO the day he left and told to me by a former head of Sports Betting)
3. Paying $14 million for a supposedly innovative betting system (Typhoon) to replace Jetbet despite the fact it had been rejected by many other firms including the Tasmanian TAB. It didn't work.
4. Triple Trio - launched with a massive fanfare and marketing budget including prime time TV advertising and championed as the long awaited massive pool bet to challenge Lotto. No one including the TAB understood how it worked (the Trio is not a betting option here) and it was buried after six months. 
5. Canning Pick Six - it was later brought back
6. Place Six - like triple trio a copycat of a popular bet in another jurisdiction. works when you have have handicap fields of 20+, not so well here where sometimes there are only six race cards with 6-8 runners per race. Pools are embarrassing.
7. Hiring Chris Bayliss
8. Hiring Glenda Hughes
9. Hiring John Allen
10. Race Fields Legislation - a waste of time, money and energy, Supposedly Hughes was going to use her influence in the Internal Affairs to make this ridiculous idea happen, but even Winston Peters saw it for what it was - unworkable and unenforceable. Embarrassing that that was the legislation that the NZRB tried to push through. And yet no heads rolled!
11. Getting rid of phone betting, thereby disenfranchising a large percentage of their customer base.
12. Selling their buildings in Ellerslie and Petone (has it sold yet?) to offset the massive shortfalls as result of criminally incompetent management. 
13. Not the NZRB's fault, but moving the Derby and Auckland Cup from their traditional dates of December 26 and January 1 to sometime in March, transforming two of the country's most iconic races from major sporting events to just another (usually wet) race day.
14. Distributing money from unstruck pools and inputting in bonuses as they see fit each month, instead of doing the logical thing and jackpotting it to the next race or meeting. Imagine if the 90k from the Ellerslie quaddie had jackpotted to the next northern meeting - what would that pool have got to? Instead it will be distributed as $1500 first four bonuses on the Palmerston North greyhounds or the like.
15. Hiring Bernard Saundry.
16. The Racing Integrity Unit. Basically a joke, especially given their budget. 
17. The ridiculous use of false rail at every gallops meeting up and down the country supposedly to protect the tracks. They hardly ever used the false rail 20 years ago and most of the tracks were in far better shape than they are now.
18. Trackside. All its branches. What other betting operation needs two TV channels and one radio station and yet still sees its turnover crashing every year? Again. A joke. "World class television," according to KFE, who humbly said she thought it was an advantage that she knew nothing about racing when she was originally hired. WTF?
19. The appalling state of virtually every racetrack. What happened?
20. Not hiring me to run their sports book in 1996. I was on a shortlist of three but didn't get the job because according to Bob Gwynn "I knew too much". The bloke they hired lasted six months.
Ok that's a start, I know there is loads more. Sorry for the negative post Scoobs, Happy New Year!
 
 

Great analogy P4P - The ironic part is that Viagra was a complete fluke. They were testing a blood pressure tablet when they found purely by chance that many men got great .......
There is a chance that this could good long term - let's hope so.

Our product is abysmal - another argument altogether.
The new platform will not change the way most perceive NZ racing.
There are any number of alternatives - I have a/cs with Ladbrokes and Betfair.
This is just another "me too" product, I see no golden bullet.
This will not help NZ racing other than not having a "melt down" on busy periods.
I'd be very happy to be proven wrong.

Great analogy P4P - The ironic part is that Viagra was a complete fluke. They were testing a blood pressure tablet when they found purely by chance that many men got great .......
There is a chance that this could good long term - let's hope so.

Bloody champion!

As a degenerate gambler, with no background or specialist knowledge of racing barring 40 years experience of betting on it, I was curious about Michael Coleman's ride on Jimmy Rocket, the well backed favourite in Race Six at Taupo on Friday.
Jimmy Rocket was a 2.80 shot on fixed odds betting early in the day and started the race as 2.40 favourite. To my ill-informed eye, it appeared that it was not ridden with much urgency especially considering it was a well-backed favourite. Slow away, Coleman settled third last and sat there happily ("Patiently ridden" according  to George Simon) and didn't push out at any stage, allowing 20-1 shot That's Funny  to pass him at the 600m, forcing him to hope for a lucky run through traffic on a tight turning track. In the straight Coleman rode the horse hands and heels, before being "steadied when placed in restricted room just short of the finish."
Before you drown me out with cries of "WTF do you know?", I invite you to view the video of the race and draw your own conclusions as to whether this ride fulfilled the requirement of Rule 636 (1b) which states a person "being the Rider of a horse in a Race, must take all reasonable and permissible measures  throughout the Race to ensure that his horse is given full opportunity to win the Race or to obtain the best possible finishing place."
http://loveracing.nz/RaceInfo/47249/6/Race-Detail.aspx
Now, I'm curious as why, in a slow paced race (the previous race - a maiden - was run two seconds faster), Coleman didn't push out in front of That's Funny and swoop round them three wide, which I'm sure would have given him a much better chance of winning the race than staying on the rails, second last or last, behind a wall of horses heading into a 300m straight.
Being the favourite, I was sure the stewards (Messrs Coles (Chairman), Oatham and Robinson) would at least question Coleman on his ride, but if they did question Coleman it didn't appear in the report, which was as follows:
JIMMY ROCKET (M Coleman) – Slow away. Held up passing the 500 metres until obtaining clear running early in the final straight. Steadied when placed in restricted room just short of the finish.
Hmmm. So according to their own report, the well-backed favourite was PLACED IN RESTRICTED ROOM just short of the finish, and yet this doesn't merit asking any questions of the rider?
Ok, again it's probably just the fact that I am a layman and have never ridden a horse myself etc. that is causing me to ask these naive questions, including mainly how the Stewards DIDN'T deem it necessary to question Coleman.
I decided to ask a friend of mine who works in the integrity unit of the VRA what would be the procedure in Victoria when a well-backed favourite was so "patiently ridden" on a tight turning  track with a very short straight. 
Here is his reply:
Those ones normally get a thorough going over..we’d have a look at price movements on dynamic odds and the TAB in NZ and betfair price move
If there was something we didn’t like ie it was very easy we would adjourn and send request to wagering providers to see who backed it
If stable support is absent…a clue
What horses were they following..roughies or fav..if following roughies and then why when you are on a fav Past runs of horse suggests maybe not good coming through them. Given that looked to have an opportunity to come wider with the sweepers to get some momentum Awareness…..given it looks like they’ve gone slow….on pacers unlikely to collapse…it’s going to be a risk. What were the instructions Mr rider? Definitely speak to trainer or trainer rep…what were the instructions..(separately) to see what stories we get [we get a lot!!!!] Did the stable fancy it today..yes?no (why) have you got a communication you sent to the owners. If it’s a careful ride like that…has it had any problems leading into the race..see above (g) Then the stuff that normally isn’t in the report…Ask the jockey had they spoken to anyone about the horse leading into the race..Do you have a form person? What is their name…do they bet, did you And I’d have a look and see if there was a “$” race in this grade for it…..”set” “target” in case this was a maintenance run Is there a relationship between winner and this one…nude wrestlers…stablemates Plenty of things to consider - one can only assume Messrs Coles, Oatham and Robinson considered all of these and deemed there to be nothing untoward and then felt it unnecessary to mention that in the report. Because the alternative is that between the three of them they actually did NOT ask even ONE of these things, summing up the ride with a 28 word report which in itself raises two massive red flags which even Mr Magoo could see merited at least two follow up questions to Coleman: (1) Why didn't you move earlier? and (2) Why did you place your mount in "restricted room" during the final 100m of the race?
Thoughts, Racecafers?
 
 

https://www.star.kiwi/2018/09/media-personality-caught-up-in-horse-racing-investigation/
THE news that Trackside presenter Greg O'Connor has been questioned by police over the harness race fixing scandal should serve as a warning to all codes of the need to draw clear lines between the media and those involved within the industry when it comes to wagering.
O'Connor has not been charged with anything  but according to the above website he "may now become a key witness as court cases over alleged race-fixing and drug offences unfold over the coming months."
The NZRB declined to comment which is interesting given that O'Connor is pretty much the face of south island harness racing on the channel.
I have no reason to believe O'Connor has done anything wrong but the mere fact that he was involved in the investigation is not a good look for Trackside or by association the NZRB.
But the whole episode will hopefully prompt the RIU to actually do something proactive for once and prohibit media from moonlighting as jockey agents, a massive conflict of interest if ever there was one.
Because you can bet your bottom dollar that once this investigation is over, the National Organised Crime Group are going to turn their eye to the thoroughbred industry, and given O'Connor's involvement in this investigation, the likes of Aiden Rodley and Bevan Sweeney, agents for various jockeys, are an obvious place to start.
Again this is not to besmirch the character of either Rodley or Sweeney. But the thoroughbred industry is in crisis at the moment and it not only needs to be clean, it needs to be SEEN to be not just clean but squeaky clean, which for what it's worth I think it is far from at the moment.
Glenda Hughes was so proud of the fact that they caught David Walker and banned him for five years or whatever, but only a fool would believe he is the only jockey to pull this stunt - he's just the only one to get caught so far.
With the NZRB apparently oblivious to this massive conflict of interest, the RIU needs to act quickly to reduce the possibility of a similar scandal in the thoroughbred industry. You can't have jockey managers presenting on Trackside where they obviously can influence betting massively. They need to be objective but also SEEN to be completely objective - at the moment they are anything but.
 
 

Pukekohe

It makes you wonder how these places operate.
WTF???

Two years ago I emailed Dennis Ryan and said dont pussy foot around put your up price to $10.00.
This is our unbiased NZ racing weekly source of news and accurate race fields.
Such an amazing NZ publication.. Trainers/ Jockeys/ Sires / indexes.
Mathew Francis  as,  the Informant's publisher wrote today the price would increase.to $8.50.
Matt you should have rounded it up to a simple $10.00 .
 
Rev Somervell
 

Fancy running an Easter HP   3weeks after Easter   absolutely ridiculous
This race was formerly regarded as the number 1 mile in  NZ
It was stuffed by certain smart asses at the Auckland   Racing   Club

Yir Tiz needs to be swabbed!!!

He's far too colourful and knowledgeable to be on Trackside - surely you know this already.

Taken from an article in Australia we need to make this move.
Stewards across the country want to amend the rules to stop riders’ agents from having an interest in or facilitating a bet on races a rider they manage has a ride in.

Jockey managers around the country were informed of stewards’ intentions on Monday.

“The Chairman of Stewards Committee (COSC) has recently become aware that a number of riders agents have commenced providing paid tipping services after being issued with a licence by a PRA (Principal Racing Authority),” the release read.

“COSC is concerned about the significant conflicts of interest that will inevitably arise where such agents are tipping on races (and likely betting themselves) in which their clients are riding.

“The arrangements which are currently allowed pose an integrity risk to the industry.

“Accordingly, COSC recommends that riders agents are prohibited from betting on, or providing tips in relation to, races in which their clients are engaged to ride.”

There are around 100 riders’ agents across the country and Racenet believes that less than five of them offer a tipping service.

Three jockey agents, Mark Guest, John Scorse and Wayne Harris all work for Sky Racing and tip as part of their role.

The jockeys’ agents have until close of business next Monday to make submissions for or against the proposal and a “group of them” have engaged lawyer Paul O’Sullivan to represent them.

“Importantly there is already a rule in place which is AR175B which prohibits a rider’s agent from laying a horse where their rider is engaged,” O’Sullivan told RSN.

“The note indicates that an integrity risk has been imposed but there’s been no compromise of integrity identified that has occurred in the past so to an extent we’re just looking at shadows at the moment.”

The stewards’ new recommended rule – AR85A (7) reads.

Except with the written permission of the relevant Principal Racing Authority or the Stewards, any riders agent who:

bets, has an interest in a bet, or facilitates a bet; or
provides either directly or indirectly to any person for any direct or indirect financial or other benefit (regardless of whether such benefit materialises) any tip, or any other information or advice that may influence any person to bet,
on any race in which a rider whom the riders agent represents is engaged to ride commits an offence and may be penalised.

I've always been amazed how the NZRB and NZTR have made such odd decisions in regards to personnel. You could swear that they've been hired to ruin racing, so pitiful the decisions that have been made these past 15 plus years. The spin lacks any evidence that things are about to improve, in fact it looks completely rudderless and looks headed for further demise.
The latest Deloitte's report  is another desperate attempt to find answers. WTF do they(Deloitte) know about betting and betting platforms - how much was wasted on this?
Why wouldn't you employ someone that knows a thing or three.
I know a slight/maybe big stretch but take Bet 365 for example - Denise Coates.
Coates started out as cashier, marking up results in a small number of betting shops owned by her father, Peter, as a sideline to his main business of football stadium catering.
After graduating with a first in econometrics – the application of statistical methods to economic data – from Sheffield University, she expanded the family’s Provincial Racing betting chain to nearly 50 shops. Now CEO of Bet365 her salary last year was 199 million pounds.
The point I'm really trying making is wouldn't you hire for the position required.
We have experts at ledgers, sending post and chucking heavy objects - whoever hired them the problem.
Why (20 years ago and still to this date) wouldn't you hire an expert in betting/bookmaking/betting platforms???
 
 

I've always been amazed how the NZRB and NZTR have made such odd decisions in regards to personnel. You could swear that they've been hired to ruin racing, so pitiful the decisions that have been made these past 15 plus years. The spin lacks any evidence that things are about to improve, in fact it looks completely rudderless and looks headed for further demise.
The latest Deloitte's report  is another desperate attempt to find answers. WTF do they(Deloitte) know about betting and betting platforms - how much was wasted on this?
Why wouldn't you employ someone that knows a thing or three.
I know a slight/maybe big stretch but take Bet 365 for example - Denise Coates.
Coates started out as cashier, marking up results in a small number of betting shops owned by her father, Peter, as a sideline to his main business of football stadium catering.
After graduating with a first in econometrics – the application of statistical methods to economic data – from Sheffield University, she expanded the family’s Provincial Racing betting chain to nearly 50 shops. Now CEO of Bet365 her salary last year was 199 million pounds.
The point I'm really trying making is wouldn't you hire for the position required.
We have experts at ledgers, sending post and chucking heavy objects - whoever hired them the problem.
Why (20 years ago and still to this date) wouldn't you hire an expert in betting/bookmaking/betting platforms???