Taku Umanga

PLUS - the Monte races have their own handicapping system meaning they are penalty free - a rating 40 trotter could win could win say 3 Monte races (nearly $10k) and still be rated a R40 trotter!  Why isn't this special treatment given to horses that compete in Junior Driver (only 1 penalty free win) or Amateur (no penalty free wins) races?

Amateurs - no contest

PLUS - the Monte races have their own handicapping system meaning they are penalty free - a rating 40 trotter could win could win say 3 Monte races (nearly $10k) and still be rated a R40 trotter!  Why isn't this special treatment given to horses that compete in Junior Driver (only 1 penalty free win) or Amateur (no penalty free wins) races?

I feel the new HRNZ website has also added frustration when wanting a quick look at race results.  I hate having to expand races and scroll through page after page on my phone. At least with the small fields at Auckland I won't get a wrist strain.

The ATC  chose the higher risk/higher return alternative did they not.
Don't current realities indicate they got it badly wrong. They won't be judged on good intentions.
Putting that to one side. 
Why is it those running the ATC think increasing stakes would result in increased numbers?   
For years they have been saying the same thing, and for years that has not happened,so why all of a sudden would a failed strategy work?.
The ATC aims to cater for the higher quality horse.  So they would rather programme 8 races and have 6 or 7 in them, rather than programme 10 races with many having full fields.    Its all about the quality.
Do  they  not realize how dumb that sounds, but that is how they think.    
As I've asked before,does a full field rating 40-to 45 with a good but lesser stake return the club more or less $  from betting than a 6 horse high quality field,normally dominated by a favorite?  And what about the fuller fields contributing to more connections turning up to the races, and the long term positive effect success,at whatever level,will have on future participation.
I actually think the atc has contributed to decreased participation with their high quality approach,and once those participants with horses lower in the ratings give up,,You won.t get them or their horses back.,and they don't get replacement horses...

Are you Iraklis in disguise?

Are you Iraklis in disguise?

Are you Iraklis in disguise?

Are you Iraklis in disguise?

Are you Iraklis in disguise?

Garrick Knight‏ @GarrickRKnight 21h21 hours ago More Hearing Greyhound Racing NZ CEO Mauro Barsi has been appointed as the new CEO at @AlexandraPark and the Auckland TC. He’s also the Greyhound rep on the (soon-to-be-disbanded ?) NZ Racing Board. Top appointment but walking in to a volatile situation.

A good old claimer. He'll probably go around in them for another 2 or 3 years and earn regular money.
Why couldn't it happen here? Because not enough owners here can bear the thought of putting a realistic value on their horses to populate the claiming pool in the first place, and god forbid it should be bought by someone who goes on to win races with it.
New Zealand owners like to see their horses sold and win races overseas ... not sold across town and win races in front of them!

So I take it that all the people that are pro it will have no problem if hrnz makes it compulsory for the lab to notify every horse that they spin blood from. Let the punter know what horses are using this treatment. 
Will this tell a story.
Who knows but if there is nothing to hide then why not tell everyone which horses are receiving the treatment. It's pretty simple isn't it?

Iraklis, you're letting your freakish levels of exuberance cloud your comprehension.
The issue is with the the treatment itself - not anyone using it. There is no hate. There is no wrong doing. There is nothing being alluded to or alleged. The rules permit the treatment ... for now.
This treatment is a disaster for the industry. But who can blame the opportunists for jumping on it. What it's doing is driving the wedge between the elite stables and the average stables even wider, which will force more people from the game. Effectively what it's doing is saying to the already struggling owners and trainers that "you need to folk out another grand for this or fall even further off the pace".
The question marks over ACS use are obvious to any fair minded person who steps back and takes an unbiased look at the "before and after treatment" performances.

Just spoken to one of the owners, Jerry is on the unruly because of the trainer request.  They have tried in the past putting him back in the draw but he was disrupting the field, wouldn't it be great if a few other trainers did the same.

Brent Mangos' property

Brent Mangos' property

No insinuations or unsubstantiated allegations from me. Simply asked a few questions about the latest fad product and it's legitimate uses. I haven't alleged anything about any person to have to retract.
People have been using products in this game from day one to try and find "an edge". I merely question whether this is happening here or not.

Welcome to the discussion Lee.
I must say I'm a tad disappointed in your response. I expected you come out strongly in defense of ACS and tell us what a great breakthrough it is in animal welfare.
But no, not even a denial that it's just another pain killing anti-inflammatory treatment, albeit one that won't as yet trigger an irregularity.
Instead you play the age old "you must be an All Stars hater" card, although I must commend you on the introduction of the term "All Stars Derangement Syndrome" which at least brings something slightly less boring to the debate. Appreciate if you could point out where I singled out the All Stars for any special mention, or even alluded to them.
It's not surprising that you should try and re-focus attention on to my identity or the so called All Stars haters. After all, anything is better than opening the controversial ACS treatment up to public scrutiny isn't it?
Kudos on the Box Seat "expose". You'd have to be pleased with that as a PR exercise. The average punter eg Iraklis, watched it and still had no idea afterwards that ACS is even a pain killing anti-inflammatory treatment.
By the way, would be interested to hear ...
1. What legitimate ie. non-performance enhancing, reason could a trainer have for giving a horse this treatment in the days leading up to a race?
2. If there is no reason, or it "doesn't happen", then why should ACS not have a significant withholding period as do other pain killing anti-inflammatory treatments.

Yes, that's right Tim.
I know that this may not be a popular comment, and I'll live with it.. but sometimes when people post, we see what we want to see and not their whole post in context.   I see what Jack is saying here.
Why would someone be using a healing agent so close to a race.  If the horse is healing then why would it be racing, in fact is shouldn't be racing.
However, if this healing agent did in fact enhance performance there would be a reason to use it close to racing.   The point is proving that it was administered because the horse did have something wrong with it in the first place, or whether it was used as an additive.
Now I'm not saying someone did it, or were thinking of doing it, but that is what I derive from the posts above.
It's not a volatile query, it's just a query and if it can be explained then great.  If it can't be then there is an issue.  That is what discussion is about on a forum. 

Assume that is what was happening here .....
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/racing/94229662/harness-racing-trainer-mark-purdon-cops-hefty-fine

Nothing being missed here Iraklis I can assure you! Been in the game too long to be taken in by the thin veneer of bullshit and self interest that the "average punter" is sold on.
Nobody is denying that this product has significant healing properties. but as with every other equine treatment from arsenic through to zinc, it can be used for legitimate health reasons, or for reasons less altruistic.
Ask yourself a couple of simple question - "What healing is a fit and healthy racehorse in need of immediately before to a major race?" and if it does need healing "Why is it racing?"
The product has legitimate out-of-competition uses ie. to speed up recovery from injury.
The product has no legitimate racing use other than to reduce pain and inflammation and make horses run through the pain barrier ie. artificially increase stamina.
The long term price the industry will pay for this treatment is increased injury rates, and give the animal welfare groups further ammunition.

Some quick points Tim.
1. At no point was this discussion limited to the All Stars use of this treatment. It's about the treatment itself and whether it's use should be permitted. We all know of several other stables using it.
2. Injecting joints whilst a very common treatment, doesn't fix a problem, it hides it. That's why it becomes less effective the longer it's used. The problem joints are worsening without the horse feeling them worsening ... as long as the injections continue.
3. The Warriors can authorise any medication they like within the rules. People have a choice. They're fully aware of the consequences they may face later in life.

I think I've had enough to say on the matter. There's enough information in this thread already to draw your own conclusions on whether this treatment should be allowed in a horses system on raceday. For some it's obvious, for others nothing is obvious.
The whole topic boils down to the true definition of "performance enhancing" - does it only mean something that makes a horse artificially stronger and faster, or does it also include things that artificially increase their pain threshold to prevent injuries slowing them down"?
The obvious danger inherent in the second part of definition is that increased pain thresholds also worsen injuries and increase catastrophic breakdown rates. The animal rights activists are going to have a field day with this at some point. 
 

Not anti-inflammatory or pain blocking? You're kidding right?
The company website claims otherwise....
How can I administer ACS?
1)Intra-articular (IA) injection – For the treatment of degenerated sore and/or injured joints. ACS’s potent anti-inflammatory and repair properties allow for immediate relief to inflamed/injured joints through regenerative proteins in the serum.
2)Intravenously (IV) – For an overall anti-inflammatory and pain-blocking response throughout the body. For an elite performance horse this form of administration is extremely beneficial and with no anaphylactic response.
3)Nebulized through the EBS’s MPTS360 – For regeneration of the air space to the lungs and airways to the respiratory system and has a dual action as it also goes directly to the blood stream.
4)Intramuscularly – Used with dual action acupuncture or without acupuncture points and also in physiotheraphy.
 
I you want to know what this stuff really does read this instead of being taken in by the Box Seat rubbish which was pure PR spin!
http://www.equinebloodsolutions.nz/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Updated-ACS-NZ-Brochure-Veterinary-Use.pdf