RaceCafe..#1...Tipsters Thread.... Share Your Fancies For Fun...Lets See Who The Best Tipsters Here Are.

John Clydesdale

Members
  • Posts

    305
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Posts posted by John Clydesdale

  1. Surely this subject has to go to the tenancy tribunal. The nature of whether it is horses or people changes nothing in relation to how a lease is applied. I  would has at a guess there are more personal challenges involved here, again which could be resolved legally through a tenancy tribunal as it is a commercial tenancy. Years of acceptance is an informal contract, and clearly  Mr Vile needs some good legal advice.

  2. All expenses, not a token amount, should be reimbursed by NZTR promptly. They have a full responsibility to present a safe track to race on, they have failed to meet a suitable standard to meet that criteria. Therefore, like any normal business, the costs have to be meet by those who have incurred losses to fulfil the commitment made by acceptances confirmed by NZTR.

    Whomever is in charge of track management should receive a second warning on his employment record as a result of this debacle.

    John

  3. 5 hours ago, Leggy said:

    What? Don't punters significantly fund returns to the other stakeholders you mention? As a punter, my return is related to the number of bets I have. If those are reduced by abandonments, then my return is diminished.

    But Leggy, the costs to the trainers, jocks and owners doesn’t diminish does it? Owners get 19 cents in the dollar return on their investments. Punters, if they bet well, get 86 cents in the dollar. Who wins in that scenario?

    Work it out.

    John

  4. Good to see a stallion born and raced in NZ delivering a good 2YO performer in Sydney, albeit a restricted race. I was on track when he streeted the 3YO’s in the 2000 Guineas by a margin on hard track, as impressive as you could get, but as a stallion he ended up at Newhaven in the Hunter Valley, a stud renowned for appreciating NZ talent. Hope the 2YO goes to the Slipper, even to show we can breed stallions that can deliver some early speed in the cauldron of Australian precocity.

    Cheers

    John 

  5. Not having seen the document, I can’t comment on its contents. However, would it not be in the best interests of NZTR to ask the Owners, via some very basic research platforms available, “what they would like to see improved within the industry”. They, the owners, fund the breaking and training aspects of the horse.

    NZTR are woeful on so many fronts that they should look at themselves before consulting the wider industry about other aspects that require addressing. An independent audit of NZTR would have to be interesting reading for all participants in the industry. 

    Cheers

    John

  6. I was at Flemington the day ran like a drunken sailor and won the straight six. A big strong unit that won on raw talent, but then they didn’t quite know how much talent he had. The Brits found that out later. Really well trained and managed by Paul Perry and set a platform for other trainers to travel to Britain. A pioneer that set a path for international sprint competition.

    A gold medal standard.

     

    John

  7. LOL,

    You have to be kidding!!!!!

    We need someone with wisdom and experience and an ability to plan and implement a a future that the Board and new Chairman can orchestrate and design. Someone that understands the requirements of the industry that is in need of great foresight and direction.

    The incumbent came from a really good industry experience in the VRC, with premium resources available, but missed the cut. NZTR doesn’t have those resources, so they have to be innovative, resourceful, and vastly experienced to understand the magnitude and challenges confronting the local requirements for all industry participants.

    With due respect to Bruce, I don’t think he could meet that challenge.

    Pundits, there are other choices available, so long as the objectivity in the selection process is retained.

    Just my MHO.

    John

     

  8. On 11/5/2021 at 10:03 AM, Dopey said:

    I’m not sure that’s true. Guess it depends on what your definition of results is…let’s think improving long term quality of the breed …Notwithstanding the dates imported for use stallions like Last tycoon (O’Reilly), High Chaparral, Defensive play (great broodmare influence) etc have left a lasting influence … for decades…in producing stakes horses.

    I have to laugh at this note., Peter Keating, Bloodstock Manager at Ra Ora at the time, said to me when I said I was sending a mare to to the first season sire in Defensive Play, he said “a big rolly horse, a handicapper” you will get a broodmare stallion. Well he was right, dam sire of a stakes winner for us, here in NZ and the the US, but alas did not produce the stake winner we wanted☹️ Pete is happy and well on the Gold Coast enjoying life, how right he was.

    John

  9. If I may 6xes, I am an eligible commentator as a registered Maori.

    The 3 Waters scenario is total deception and also total undermining of democracy in NZ as we know it. Having read the 3 Waters proposal, boring as, when presented to Councils, it asked for input. That was pure lip service. Ms Mahuta had an agenda, and after gaining the support of Board of Local Council NZ representation in Wgtn, she circulated the outlining documentation. It was clearly a premeditated political manoeuvring that had an outcome before it was released. But what was the surprise to Ms Mahuta was that the majority of Councils said NO. So, as is her want, and having the party majority, she gave the finger to democracy of the local representatives and owners of the assets, and said I will mandate this to be done and dusted. Democracy superseded by a mandate of something that a working group has generated and not been peer reviewed in the public arena. How stupid do they take New Zealanders to be, it will be the downfall of a diminishing confidence in the current governments management of all things. 

    I am embarrassed to witness the demise of democracy and Gareth Tremain captures plenty of reality in some of his humour.

     

    John  

  10. I think Roggigiani is a reasonable horse, but to chuck him in a Group 1 at the weekend was a bit reckless and hopeful. Tardis will go well tonight but to think Time Test will have a Group 1 horse in the NH is a big call. We’re getting to the pointy end of the NH season and I imagine if he can pick up a good Gr 2 winner or Gr1 placing he is going extra good. They will get better next year.

    I have a very athletic TT filly and looking forward to what may prevail in the Summer here, but she looks as though she has precocity as an asset..

     

    Cheers

    John

     

     

  11. I’m not sure why this topic has been moved to the general site as the question was asked in the thoroughbred environment.

    My reason for choosing that site was predicated by the fact that Mr George is presently our Chairman of New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing. I am somewhat surprised that we have had such little reaction from keyboard critics as to the question asked. Perhaps there is only one supporter and one critic, for a billion dollar industry reaction is somewhat mute.

    Cheers

    John 

  12. When the payer for water rates is the consumer, is not that consumer the part owner of the system. He/she is paying for the service of water supply, maintenance of the system, consumption of the volume of water, expansion of the infrastructure as required and also administration of the supply chain to deliver water to that consumer. The administrator of that infrastructure is the local council. The local councils vary in their delivery of many things, some good some not so good. The Wgtn Council not so good with water, nor is Akld. But why does Labour believe they have ANY right to takeover the infrastructure it does not own, has never paid for, never contributed to, and has absolutely no expertise in management of. The ratepayer of NZ own that infrastructure and if there is to be any change in the ownership of said infrastructure it should be a referendum staged by each Council with ratepayers. There is a short timeframe as the Minister wants answers from Councils by the end of September regarding the 3 Waters proposal, what rubbish. The Minister has not right to demand such an answer as each Council needs to ask each ratepayer whether they support such a proposal, and only after each ratepayer has the information to make an informed decision. That is how democracy works, we are not in Putin territory……yet.

    Cheers

     

    John