Hawke's Bay Lad

Cheers for that, and yes - all good here thank you and I hope the same with you and Mrs vS. Dad's first Bank Manager's job was in Foxton, then to Richmond and then the Hutt. He passed away about 4 years ago, was still living in Upper Hutt. Best John

Well - there you go. I'd better not cancel that room I've booked at the rest home!!

Dead right - Alan Jones had him. I just think he (Northfleet) spent time in the CD, maybe in his latter years. Just looked up what I could on the NZTR site about him, it only shows what I'm assuming is his last 30 starts between 1979 and 1981 and about 28 of them were in the CD. Like I said I thought Cyril had him at one part, in fact I'm sure he did. Unless I've gone totally crazy though I'm positive Noel Eales had him too. I do hope I'm right about the latter as I was apprenticed to "the Boss" (Noel) and I'm sure Northfleet was there, for a while at least. If I've got that wrong (which is very possible!) then I'm definitely at the brain fade age!!

Ha ha ha - no it wasn't Kismet. A double bridle would have been way too flash for him. He was more the hackamore sort!! Had a grey pony called Ali Baba after Kismet, Ali was way more posh! Also remember Shorty's Dad, pretty sure his name was Bill. He was at the stables most everyday, one thing that always stuck in my mind was he used to eat cold pies. And Cyril Pfefferle was at Richmond in those days too, before he went to Trentham and had the likes of Fountaincourt, and Northfleet too I think (?). Good days and memories

So sorry to hear this. Shorty gave me my introduction to racing. Many many years ago I was a horse loving kid going to Waimea College in Richmond, got a job with Shorts one Xmas holidays as I wanted to earn some money to buy a double bridle for my show pony. Xmas came and went and so did the pony!!!! – I was hooked. I remember having my first ever gallop on a horse named after JNJ called Short Legs. He also had a pretty handy galloper at the time that was also appropriately named – Mr Richmond. Lots of great times and memories have come from the opportunity Shorty gave to me, which I will be ever thankful for. RIP JNJ and love to the Healey family. John McGifford

And that may well be true, I'm only going on what has been quoted and I am negligent in repeating that without investigating myself. The point remains though, being that given their revenues NZRB should be able to fix this themselves - and without adhering to "government conditions/whims" that may see the industry poorer (if that is possible G@d forbid!)

Sorry - I haven't read or watched the Labour leader's (sorry - the PM's) comments but surely the racing industry would be crazy to agree to such a deal. Like P4P I believe the pokies are a blight on society but currently it is what it is so why would racing want to give that away. I don't know what the NZRB distribution from their pokie revenue is annually. I did see some figures from a gaming trust recently that said they had distributed $1m in their last round. So even "a round" say every 2 months equals $6m per annum, which I would suggest is reasonably small fry to some trusts. But taking that trust as an example, and if that's about what the NZRB returns, it wouldn't take many years to get to the quoted $20 million to fund an artificial track and even it's ongoing maintenance at say 20% per annum. So, if the NZRB wants to be proactive why don't they direct all revenues from their pokies to track infrastructure? And maybe that's not an artificial track that will only benefit those close too. Maybe it's a $x million investment over x number of years that will support x number of tracks, from the far north to however deep is needed to go in the south. And I would suggest that could mostly come direct from their pokie revenue, wrong as that may be but as aforementioned that is the way it is at the moment. Once that is done though there may well be some decent track facilities established which can support/provide an alternative when the unfortunate climatic conditions of late occur. And I must add that even though I live a long way from the City of Sails I am fully in support in recognising Ellerslie as our flagship venue. A Strathayr track, or whatever improvements there are to that, is a must - the Auckland RC probably have enough monies themselves to do it but whether that be the case or not it should be part of a bigger industry plan. In closing I would suggest we don't need government "conditions" on investment. The GDP alone should convince them of their need to invest and if the NZRB is everything it is made out to be in terms of revenue they are the first ones that should be putting monies forth.

Do you see you point Ted around the barriers but can’t accept there’s as much risk of not getting a fair start jumping from the barriers as an open start. In my humble opinion when you get a number of horses milling around freely in an open space there’s always going to be more chance of something going wrong than when they are confined, as they have been taught to be. And as it’s fairer, not only is there more chance for things to go wrong in an open barrier but as I said in an earlier post there’s more opportunity for a start to be manipulated. Interestingly, and going back to my comment about being confined in the barriers, I am aware that one of the arguments for open starts is that it gives horses that may be barrier rogues an opportunity to continue racing. The horses are generally the exception rather than the rule but I do understand what is trying to be achieved there. I would question though if the exception should dictate what happens over those that have conformed to the rule. By way of example I am fortunate to have a small share in a handy hurdler. I’m sure he will be steeplechasing one day and I hope he gets to contest the major races. He can get a wee bit fired up though and I’d suggest it’s “highly likely” (please excuse the pun!) the old wheels will start turning in an open barrier and he’ll be difficult to control. So he’s disadvantaged in favour of the horse who can’t conform to the rules of being barrier compliant. Is that fair? You’ll remember the old days Ted when the barrier rogues used to start from the outside of the gates, was pretty unfair in flat races I agree but it could work in steeplechases (?). In closing I can’t see one argument for not having barriers that supersedes having them. I know it’s said it saves the track by not having to drag them around the course in the middle of winter but really? They do it for all the flat races, what’s a few more in the sake of fairness, equity and professionalism. I do hope the open starts steeplechases at Trentham go well today, but even if they do I’ll never agree they are right as in their current format there are still disadvantages presented – as well as unnecessary risk. Cheers

Actually I have. Probably had about 1000 rides over jumps back in the day too, and won my fair share. I would agree the barrier draw in a steeplechase has little bearing. I would say being left by 10 lengths at the start because your horse won't line up does. And speaking from experience what also does is if you can hang back a bit then rush up to the open start with a bit of momentum. Obviously that can't happen with barriers. I'm not arguing it shouldn't have been a false start. As eluded to above what I'm saying in the best interest of fairness and equity barriers should be used. Maybe that should have been the subject of another thread and if it has been before I apologise. I don't read this site every day. I also don't know what due diligence has gone into the decision for open starts. Also accept whatever has may be conclusive (to some) but I'm still entitled to my opinion nonetheless.

Must admit I have a real issue with all jumping races (I believe) being open starts these days. What happens when a horse doesn't get a fair start (which is less likely with barriers) then get's beaten a nose. Maybe, and just maybe, you don't care so much if it's a maiden steeplechase but imagine if its a prestige jumping race. I see they even started the Waikato Steeples without barriers the other day. Surely owners, trainers and jockey's in jumps races deserve just a fair go as flat horses, not being let go like Brown's cows.

Thanks guys. It was a huge thrill. Loving every moment of it, apart from the hangover this morning! Cheers. John

All good Richie. I certainly wasn’t defending anyone about that second day abandonment. I don’t know how it came about but if it was HB Racing’s fault then heads should roll. I also believe in credit where credit is due though and if HB Racing has reversed some fairly ordinary oncourse turnovers over the Carnival then well done to all concerned. And I hope it continues, not only for racing but to because of the uncalled for personal attacks on Mr Castles when he was appointed. Whether he’s any good or not time will tell, but again for the sake of the game I do hope we see some humble pie being eaten.

Wow - are you serious? Clearly getting more people on course having a good time and betting isn't a positive in your eyes. So please explain to me o'wise one why I'm a dickhead? .

Early days yet I know but surely all those critics of Butch Castles getting the top job at HB Racing must be worrying what humble pie tastes like. Interesting to see the recent three days in the Bay on course turnover was only $27k behind last year, even with the abandonment of the middle day. Also interesting that the 3 days were way up on the 2 years previous to last year, again even with the abandoned day in 2015. We may be a long way from the old Kelt Carnival turnovers but at least it’s heading back in the right direction following some less than positive signs in recent years. Didn’t go to any of the days myself but I’ve heard the atmosphere on course was fantastic. Well done Butch, if you are pie eater as they say mate you may soon have some people joining you!

When you say "new" - how do NZTR introduce a new rule?. In most organisations I've been involved with rules can only be introduced/ amended at an AGM and/or SGM. Did have a look at the NZTR Constitution on line and it talks about amendments only (as far as i can see anyway) and I quote: "Notice of every proposed resolution to amend, add to or revoke the Rules (indicating clearly the nature of the proposed amendment, addition or revocation) shall be given by the Board to every Totalisator Club and published in the Official Calendar at least one month prior to the date of the meeting at which the resolution 29 will be considered and the Chief Executive shall report to the Board any submissions or recommendations received in response to such notice". So - is it new?, or was it an amendment? and if it was the latter were the clubs made aware and was it advertised? If the was an amendment and the correct procedure was followed then stakeholders need to be quite vigilant so as things don't slip in under their guard. I'm not saying NZTR do that, just that if it's not done at a public forum that is inclined to happen. Must admit I wasn't looking at the NZTR Constitution for this reason. I refer to another thread when i say I was looking to see if Funding Policies need to be approved by stakeholders, given the impact of the proposed new funding model on some of the country clubs. Couldn't see any reference to it so I assume NZTR have every right to implement what they see fit in this regard. I really thought those affected would have been able to fight their imminent demise................................