Stables

Shame, but it was well known that he had soundness problems, that's why he hadn't raced as a younger horse. Lets hope they can get him back

There are 12 juniors in the North Island. Myself, Luke Whittaker, Fergus Schumacher, Dylan Ferguson, Nate Delany, Craig Smith, Taitlyn Hanara, Kim Blakemore, Kaleb Bublitz, Andrew Drake, Scott Iremonger & Sheridan Rapley (who is yet to have a drive).
I believe both Nate & Sheridan don't have drives in the race this week after 4 of the horses were withdrawn from nominations. 
This would be the first time in over a year (or more) that any junior race received more nominations than there were drivers, at least this way this gives the kids starting out their careers the opportunity to have a drive, rather than them missing out & if a trainer really wants they can fly up someone from down south, Johnny Morrison had a drive a few weeks ago and i'm sure others are open to travel. 
Agree that more needs to be done to get kids involved, but in an industry with limited opportunities, long hours & average earning opportunities, it is always going to be a struggle.
Also there has been numerous talk that the horsemen's association was trying to pass a rule that if the junior race was to not get off the ground that horses nominated for the race would still get a penalty free win if they were driven by a junior in a 'normal' race- I believe it was passed but couldn't confirm for sure. So the same thing should of really happened with the horses that were forced to change fields they still should of got in to those fields with a junior on under penalty free conditions. Maybe something that should be discussed with clubs more thoroughly?

It would be totally unfair on Juniors to make them compete against amateurs, the obvious solution wouls have been for the club to call for South Island Juniors to make themselves available and for the club to pay their fares

You could use the same argument for saying why bother having an award for national harness trainer of the year.

I agree, what trainers other than Phil train in that area. I don't mean to disparage Phil, he's a great trainer but it's a farce really

I never caught the Weigh In programme and I probably should not comment as no doubt I am going to piss a few people off. However I think there are a few things that are never mentioned regarding the state of the industry. All I hear is that the stakes are too low and it is driving owners out of the game. That is true but not the entire story
. Owners are getting stuffed up the chutney left right and centre ( to quote my good mate Leo!) Not all of it from the powers that be. Some of these so called" top trainers" are charging anywhere from 85/day to 100/day, clipping their tickets on chiropractor charges, jump out fees, administration charges, vitamin charges, gear charges, and whatever they can think of. They cry poverty  but still manage to take a holiday to Hawaii, Fiji , world cruise or whatever once a year. They drive an Audi or other luxury car a, have a big TAB punting account etc. As they read this they know who they are. They get away with it by forming syndicates . Some of the Cambridge Trainers have between 55 and and 140 horses in their stables so don't let me hear them crying poverty at the rates they are charging! Throw in some of the vets, and farriers that charge like wounded bulls and you have an industry that is in shit street not all of it at the feet our administrators.
In saying that NZTR still have a lot to answer for. Like them or loathe them,  Race Course Inspectors, J  McKenzie, B McKenzie and the the like seemed to police the industry  without all the cost that is now happening.  NZTR  have around 30 personal policing the industry (and a policy of dob your mates in) . NZTR programme trials at Ruakaka or Avondale  so an owner with a horse in Cambridge is up for between 350 and 500 in transport costs alone. The big stables don't care as they have a syndicate horse or big money owner.  It appears that people are employed at NZTR in vital positions but have no real empathy at what it is really like out here. They have no idea of the costs involved when they do the programmes.
Meanwhile there are a lot of trainers trying to keep owners in the game by charging affordable training fees and no hidden charges so big ups to them!
 

How many horses would be able to run 3.12.9 for 2600 metres first up with only one trial

Nothing will change. The board will continue to be irrelevant and the chairman totally inept. Hopefully now with RITA at the head of racing almost all decisions will be taken out of their hands

Nothing will change. The board will continue to be irrelevant and the chairman totally inept. Hopefully now with RITA at the head of racing almost all decisions will be taken out of their hands

The man's 73 years old for gods sake. Get off his back. As for Trumps allegation that the Pike River recovery plan was a lefty feel good bubble, I would remind him that the recovery plan was instigated by the previous National government. I assume Trump is emulating his name sake by spouting false news

That Ken is a leading light in the industry at Governance level or should I be looking at the sleep emoji. It concerns me that Rita has be running the show for several weeks now and nothing appears to have changed. HRNZ don't even appear to be aware that there was a Messara report. They have restructered their board, but all thats achieved is disenfranchise all sub entities such as the Breeders Association and the Owners Association These organisations are no longer guaranteed seats on the board and consequently the opportunity to advocate for their members.

If it was a poor drive Ricky would be the first person to say so

I agree with what you say Leo, but unfortunately we're not all saints

I gave up punting on horses when the Tab started announcing during lead up time that "this horse has taken a $5k bet at 2.80 and another $3k bet at 2.70" etc etc blah blah bollocks! There's no way the tab would take bets of that amount and the horse starts still paying $2.70! Furthermore I did not see even one of these horse's win! Utter bollocks and misleading info and backed by the fact we could never ascertain if these bets were actually placed. 

You will be amazed DKC but I agree with you, that is away over the top. I can live with it for major races like the NZ Cup but the Maurice Holmes Vase is just another race and should be acceptance fee free

You will be amazed DKC but I agree with you, that is away over the top. I can live with it for major races like the NZ Cup but the Maurice Holmes Vase is just another race and should be acceptance fee free

I've got a horse with Kerr. His attention to detail and proactive approach to his horses is second to none. He deserves the success he gets

I've got a horse with Kerr. His attention to detail and proactive approach to his horses is second to none. He deserves the success he gets

It's a messy situation, that's for sure. 
Bulk funding, in some ways, removes the demand of attempting to get people on course to bet at your race meetings, something which makes me feel uneasy. So much emphasis at a club level used to be on how much money was turned over on your meeting as it ultimately resulted in how much of a payout you would get from either the on course/off course betting and also the Fixed Odds betting - the percentages weren't excessively high - but a good successful meeting could net a club a very nice payout once the bean counters had done their thing. 
Now we are faced with a situation where some clubs, particularly those who run multiple, low stake, meetings in a season will focus more on other things rather than driving turn over and be happy with the status quo pay out from the bulk funding model. The more proactive clubs however will see the opportunity to hopefully increase their percentage share by consistently delivering good numbers when it comes to turnover to then enhance their ability to push more money back into stakes. 
There's no hiding from the fact that are stake levels are atrocious, especially when sitting alongside a handicapping system which doesn't do a lot of favours to the up and coming exciting horse who wins a few races in a row. Every club would love to be running for a minimum maiden stake of $10k - but for some, it's just not realistic. 
 

Control of fundin for stakes paid should be taken from the clubs and allocated by a central body. Stake levels are appalling at the moment. In most cases stakes paid to race winners are between 3 and 4 thousand dollars. Higher stakes such as in group races are funded by breeders and owners and clubs often conribute very little. Central administration of stakes would eliminate the problem of clubs running most of their races at the minimum level and pouring the rest of their funds into country cups etc. to the detriment of the most of owners. If you win one of these races you're lucky to get enough to cover a months training, shoeing and vets bills

The blacking of the Judges name is a record with a scratch and if you want to stoop to that level look at the RIU staff performance . 
Have you got anything else to say - like they got it wrong and Nigel should never of been charged ?

What A Post. Many of your posts on this subject were based pretty much on the basis that the people charged were guilty. In Nigel Mcgrath's case in particular you should withdraw and apologise. I think you will also have a bit more apologising to do in the near future

Looks like you were correct P4P

KS is still a client of Nigel's. By the way P4P I agree with everything you say about this Inca investigation. The activity of the police and the informants was in my opinion "Criminal"

P4P I think you will find that the charges against Nigel weren't dropped they were dismissed by a judge