Fernlea25

Favourite dog is Thrilling Ransom...
 
Cost me plenty in the early days of his racing career when he was super quick but erratic, and now he's costing me even more as he's my recent GAP adoptee.
 
Super dog

Favourite dog is Thrilling Ransom...
 
Cost me plenty in the early days of his racing career when he was super quick but erratic, and now he's costing me even more as he's my recent GAP adoptee.
 
Super dog

Favourite dog is Thrilling Ransom...
 
Cost me plenty in the early days of his racing career when he was super quick but erratic, and now he's costing me even more as he's my recent GAP adoptee.
 
Super dog

I understand the races at Cambridge were hand-starts today after a failure with the starting mechanism led to a no race in the first. I'm not 100% sure if both the 375m and 457m distances were hand starts, but I think that they were. I'd be interested in the thoughts of those more learned than me on these matters as to how much the slightest difference in the time the boxes open can make to the way greyhounds begin. I think we can all agree that the first 20m to 30m can be absolutely critical to the outcome of a dog race. Whilst I'm sure starters are doing their best when triggering a manual start, it must be virtually impossible to replicate the timing of automatic starts. I taped some races today and saw that in the C5 457m the clear best two beginners were the 7 and 8, neither of who are notoriously fast trappers (albeit that the 8 was fresh and up in weight), and other dogs in the race who generally jump quick (Fancy Idol and Fancy Jill) were both pretty indifferent at the start. I know trying to draw any conclusions from 1 race is pretty silly given that they are dogs and not machines, but I just wondered whether the timing of the boxes opening contributed to this? Someone once told me that a long lure at the start will lead to the dogs drawn the outside jumping better, and the boxes opening slightly early will be helpful to the dogs drawn the inside. Thoughts? On another note (but kind of related), anyone who has watched the greyhounds from Warragul may have noticed on the tele that the triggering mechanism for the traps seems to be a few metres past the boxes. I've also noticed that a number of dogs miss the start very very badly at Warragul - it may be that there are a lot of inexperienced / poor dogs racing there - or it may be something related to the timing of the boxes opening. Surely the rules require the placement of the triggering mechanisms to be standardised across all tracks?

How long has Rozo been calling?
 
Hope it's only been a coula weeks cause he's pretty average.
 
Ok presenter/interviewer but hollow voice not tuned for race calling. Calls a bit too fast for mine, and In a close finish he echoes trying to get all the dog names out.
 
Did the advertise for a decent greyhound caller overseas or Rozo have a trial period before being given the permanent job ahead of Daryl? At this stage Daryl's 5 lengths ahead of Rozo.
 
But oh WHAT A LOSS Brian is to the industry
 
In the mean time Rozo, slow down half a beat! You do have time and it will even out the tone of your voice

I'm sure plenty will disagree with me, but I don't like the idea of running heats at different venues to the final. 
 
Yesterday, there were 4 dogs in the race who hadn't raced over 527m at Auckland and another who had raced there once previously and was unplaced.  Some may say that it adds a bit of interest, but in my opinion it results in a weakened field. 
 
Pretty negative post from me, which I don't mean it to be    It just seems strange to me that you'd be able to qualify for a final over 527m at Auckland by winning or running 1st or 2nd over 457m at Cambridge... even the form between Addington vs Wanganui vs Auckland doesn't always stack up very well... each track is different in it's own way.  I know Piggy Back qualified via the Cambridge route, but he probably would have qualified via any of the venues. 
 
If you were to select 8 dogs to race at Auckland, you probably wouldn't have selected half of the ones who lined up yesterday.  For a Group race I just think it makes more sense that the heats and final are at the same venue.
 
Thoughts?

I'm sure plenty will disagree with me, but I don't like the idea of running heats at different venues to the final. 
 
Yesterday, there were 4 dogs in the race who hadn't raced over 527m at Auckland and another who had raced there once previously and was unplaced.  Some may say that it adds a bit of interest, but in my opinion it results in a weakened field. 
 
Pretty negative post from me, which I don't mean it to be    It just seems strange to me that you'd be able to qualify for a final over 527m at Auckland by winning or running 1st or 2nd over 457m at Cambridge... even the form between Addington vs Wanganui vs Auckland doesn't always stack up very well... each track is different in it's own way.  I know Piggy Back qualified via the Cambridge route, but he probably would have qualified via any of the venues. 
 
If you were to select 8 dogs to race at Auckland, you probably wouldn't have selected half of the ones who lined up yesterday.  For a Group race I just think it makes more sense that the heats and final are at the same venue.
 
Thoughts?

I'm sure plenty will disagree with me, but I don't like the idea of running heats at different venues to the final. 
 
Yesterday, there were 4 dogs in the race who hadn't raced over 527m at Auckland and another who had raced there once previously and was unplaced.  Some may say that it adds a bit of interest, but in my opinion it results in a weakened field. 
 
Pretty negative post from me, which I don't mean it to be    It just seems strange to me that you'd be able to qualify for a final over 527m at Auckland by winning or running 1st or 2nd over 457m at Cambridge... even the form between Addington vs Wanganui vs Auckland doesn't always stack up very well... each track is different in it's own way.  I know Piggy Back qualified via the Cambridge route, but he probably would have qualified via any of the venues. 
 
If you were to select 8 dogs to race at Auckland, you probably wouldn't have selected half of the ones who lined up yesterday.  For a Group race I just think it makes more sense that the heats and final are at the same venue.
 
Thoughts?

What happens to the current commentator?  I thought he was doing a very good job given the size of the boots he was trying to fill... was he always purely a stop-gap?
 
I'm sure Roso is a lovely guy but the jury is out on his commentaries for mine

He is a good guy.........but they already had a good guy!!

Yeah, I was watching and it was horrible.  If a champion mathmetician counted how many mistakes he made in one day they would lose count. 

Usually agree with you Reilly but can't here.  Rules are rules, just because the TAB stuffs it up and advertises the wrong boxes doesn't mean that the rules get ignored - i.e. the dogs need to start from the boxes as specified by the rules, not the TAB.  The TAB may have told you that they acted on incorrect information from the track... but sounds like they're just avoiding responsibility in my opinion.  
 
I do, however, agree that this is not good enough from a punter's perspective.  Box draws would be one of the most important considerations when deciding which runners to select, and so this being wrong is fundamental.  Should it be a no-race?  Not sure... how far would you take this... regularly runners from Aussie are listed in formguides with incorrect form or box stats... would you declare these no-racers too because incorrect information was published?  How about fastest winning times... these are often wrong too...
 
The answer is that checks and balances should be in place to ensure this doesn't happen.
 
I really have no faith in the TAB after a number of years ago a dog race from Australia was broadcast (Sunday evening from memory) and the field had been redrawn since the runner information was sent through to the TAB.  I backed number 5, and number 5 ended up winning, but the dog I thought I was backing actually came out of Box 7... 6 of the 8 dogs in the field as advertised by the TAB started from different boxes, and the other 2 were different dogs altogether!  I don't blame the TAB for this having happened, BUT:  I fully expected all bets to be refunded... not the case.  Paid as passed the post.  I emailed Michael Dore at the TAB to ask if losing bets were refunded and he replied telling me to "Go away because he was busy dealing with people who had genuine complaints".  Pretty much sums up the arrogance.  

The chances of drawing box 4 twice are as much as drawing any other box twice which is quite high.  You always get trainers and owners who have strange runs of box draws.  It's like Lotto-someone said what are the chances of getting 1,2,3,4....It's the same as any other combination of numbers.  Because there is a huge amount of combinations it may never happen. 

Surely the whole point of RaceCafe is so that people can share their view, opinions, and ask questions to garner the opinions of others...
 
Sometimes it can get a bit personal on here but I can't see any problem with the thread Dusty has started.  Any number of issues are discussed on this forum, and dogs not chasing is merely one of them.  Why can't he have his opinion on this without getting jumped on?  You may not agree with him, and that's all you need to say.
 
It's a shame that as greyhound people we seem to have a problem with being able to maintain respect for one another when we disagree... life would be pretty boring if everyone shared the same views on everything!
 
Let's just work together to take this wonderful sport forward.

Surely the whole point of RaceCafe is so that people can share their view, opinions, and ask questions to garner the opinions of others...
 
Sometimes it can get a bit personal on here but I can't see any problem with the thread Dusty has started.  Any number of issues are discussed on this forum, and dogs not chasing is merely one of them.  Why can't he have his opinion on this without getting jumped on?  You may not agree with him, and that's all you need to say.
 
It's a shame that as greyhound people we seem to have a problem with being able to maintain respect for one another when we disagree... life would be pretty boring if everyone shared the same views on everything!
 
Let's just work together to take this wonderful sport forward.

Jason. Dusty is not shooting his mouth off. He is expressing his opinion.
why would he want to have his real name on here?
alike myself, I dont want people slagging me off personally. It only gets dirty otherwise.
I love reading what dustyy has. To say, as he is very knowledgeful, in my opinion, and has his point of veiw, alike you and myself.
so why worry about who he is?
he has asked a question.
Not slagging off anyone personally.
so get a grip mate.
just trying to stir things.

You can add Hat Trick Chaos and Sheza What What to the list of non-chasers currently going around.  
 
Zippit Sweetie is another that has some question marks on it... but will watch it's next couple of runs before straight out declaring it a non-chaser.
 
 
 
 
 

It's a great idea Mike.  I'd be too busy calling 'through my pocket'.

In ozz they have 'Punch One Out' and its in group races - lol

I know what you mean - Stolen Money has apparently run 17.90-something for 520m at Addington... that's pretty good going.  How it continues to be published without anyone just fixing it is a bit disappointing.
 
I like the Aussie Dogs comments...  some bizarre comments come up there.  E.g. 50-start maiden - "Looks too good for this field.  Top Class".  Classic.

I know what you mean - Stolen Money has apparently run 17.90-something for 520m at Addington... that's pretty good going.  How it continues to be published without anyone just fixing it is a bit disappointing.
 
I like the Aussie Dogs comments...  some bizarre comments come up there.  E.g. 50-start maiden - "Looks too good for this field.  Top Class".  Classic.

The other one which happens too often is where they're doing a Video Watch and the wrong race gets played. 
 
On Friday night there was approx 7 minutes of lead in to the big race at Wanganui.  In that time, all heats could have been shown which would have taken up maybe 4 minutes max, and then they could have had 3 minutes of lead in comments.  Instead, we got 5 minutes of the studio presenter (who with all due respect is not an expert on greyhounds) reading comments off a script with the back-drop of the Wanganui grandstand / seating area.  I thought showing the heats would be a given but it didn't happen.

I know what you mean - Stolen Money has apparently run 17.90-something for 520m at Addington... that's pretty good going.  How it continues to be published without anyone just fixing it is a bit disappointing.
 
I like the Aussie Dogs comments...  some bizarre comments come up there.  E.g. 50-start maiden - "Looks too good for this field.  Top Class".  Classic.

The other one which happens too often is where they're doing a Video Watch and the wrong race gets played. 
 
On Friday night there was approx 7 minutes of lead in to the big race at Wanganui.  In that time, all heats could have been shown which would have taken up maybe 4 minutes max, and then they could have had 3 minutes of lead in comments.  Instead, we got 5 minutes of the studio presenter (who with all due respect is not an expert on greyhounds) reading comments off a script with the back-drop of the Wanganui grandstand / seating area.  I thought showing the heats would be a given but it didn't happen.