Dazzer

Admittedly not a completely scientific study, but have checked the late quaddies for the dogs for the dogs since the change and the pools of the quaddies are no bigger. In my case, my spend has gone done - I enjoyed the place 6 on the dogs as upsets can and do happen - so if I'd done my analysis for the place 6 I would often place a quaddie as well. Kind of ironic that the new bigger better in this case means less options!

I'm assuming that Place 6 is not an option on the new platform they are talking about for April

Here's the Formpro Ratings speed map for the last. Switowski was another expected pace influence based on its previous starts but made no effort to run on pace. Even so, it was on of those races where on paper at least there was a high likelihood of a lack of pace.

Cuz?

I can't comment on that and keeping in mind that the Coles will have a large number of handlers given the numbers they have racing. It's a pretty tight nit community too so people often help out. Someone may have more information as I'm obvs commenting from afar

If you have multiple accounts, they have been closing accounts and communicated such

The issue here is assuming the market is right. Messi was up in class and two dogs including Hinda had better T&D times based on my ratings. Messi's best was the best time in the last 90 days but it was a C1. So I think the market had that one wrong or rather the punters were backing form not performance. Race 5 was another messy race (pun intended) where the better rated dogs had slower box speed. Butler mapped to lead and was dog with the most significant dropback - 2 starts prior was racing in C2 and showed immediate improvement back in C1 last start. Not trying to sound smart after the event but rather it's information that is available and one of the things I like about punting the dogs is the market often gets things wrong.

The TAB cannot offer tote betting on any race involving more than 24 runners. It's actually a classic example of bad database design that creates this limitation although in fairness when the platform was implemented, clearly no one expected to be providing better on English races. So in that context, it makes sense why there was no tote betting but it would seem have been sensible to provide some type of placeholder for the GN for those that aren't interested in database design!

There was a technical issue affecting Chrome 64 with a notice posted yesterday. Still no fix by the looks of things. I'm back using IE ... the irony. https://www.tab.co.nz/information/#news/2018-01-26/technical-update-chrome-64-issues

First, I accept we need to highlight what's wrong but credit to GOM for making the effort to highlight what's right. Liz is rightfully a star and has done a lot for the dogs on screen and off. It's a real pity she's going - she's a real intergenerational star. She has the respect of the old school but is also championing changes ahead particularly with the way information is presented. The fundamentals of racing will always be the same but there is a real need for change in the data and information space - you only need to see the growth of sports betting with younger generations. While it's a pity to see her go she has already left her mark and you never know - she may come back with even more experience and ideas to grow the game. Top person all round.

I stopped posting anything to do with sectionals ratings etc on the instructions of admin. To be fair, his site and he makes the rules.

Shouldn't back the roughies ...

App is on a different platform but the web site still hasn't slowed down yet. Problems with watch and bet seem to be ongoing - I had a problem with Chrome but no such issue with IE.

Interesting. The site seems supercharged today coupled with the fact that they have said top ups will be delayed makes me wonder if they have put in place some backend solutions to cope. Always like to back a roughie so perhaps the site won't crash although I agree it is early days.

Sorry folks but as much as I think the Coalition of Losers is not the right outcome, I don't get why some comments rely so heavy on causal racism and sexism. And I suppose why they have been challenged. Perhaps the closed attitudes of some in racing is one of the reasons racing is in the mess it is.

With respect, I think you're missing the point of the series and the nature of media/news/infotainment. Doing what you have always done and hoping people will share your interest simply no longer works. All forms of sports entertainment have had to reinvent themselves to an extent or develop new concepts along the way - with cricket think ODIs and then 20/20, rugby has gone from the NPC to Super Rugby etc. With marginal sports like racing - it's no longer a mainstream sport - few people outside of the engaged have interest in the standard racing. What is so different about the NZ Cup or the Auckland Cup? How is it different from any other race? Who is it different from the previous year's race/s? If the series managed to gain air time - even to core racing audiences - that has to be good for the code and potentially for interest in other major races.

I haven't been to all NZ greyhound tracks but have been to the most and Hatrick is a standout - in terms of experience, the only racecourse I've been on that has a similar leave of raceday experience is New Plymouth. It's a real pity that there isn't a similar type of facility in Wellington. I went to Wenty the last time I was in Sydney on a Saturday night - compared to NZ tracks, the number of young people on course was staggering. Would love to have seen something like that in Wellington.

This meeting was actually transferred to Foxton in 2008.

Rescheduled - Monday @ Awapuni http://www.nzracing.co.nz/RaceInfo/22152/Meeting-News-Article.aspx

Worth noting that Shandon Golf Course in Petone is also closed tomorrow which puts Trentham into context.

I had a note from Formpro (Neil Davis) re the timing of the races and the inaccuracies. It is really serious from a punting and integrity point of view as any races that have seriously incorrect data create a follow on effect for any punters who are making investments on the basis of incorrect data.

NZ strategy for the dogs must start with animal welfare. Nothing else. https://www.punters.com.au/news/act-government-to-ban-greyhound-racing_160158/

Cost. It's always hard to guess but it looks like a reskin than a rebuild. The page names appear to be the same especially for the dynamic content eg results. So that would be a much cheaper option that a complete rebuild. Any figures I put out there will likely cause shock - but it's all relative. If you want to take another perspective, having say an intermediate developer/designer would could around $70K pa (excluding other benefits) and you would struggle to get someone at that level to do everything needed for a project this size. So a small organisation like GRNZ has a problem that they can't afford the specialist staff but then can't avoid the external costs associated with changes. I've only tested the new site on an iPhone 6. There are no issues that I can see with images and it is fully responsive on my MS desktop using Chrome.

As you may realise, browsing experience differs depending on OS and browser - there is no single standard. The old site would almost certainly developed with a particular desktop model in mind and it definitely did not respond to changes in the browser window ie it wasn't responsive. The new site is responsive and as you change the browser window size, it appears to respond as you would expect. Design is much more subjective but in terms of accessibility it is definitely a major step forward. I can't answer your question about the other sites. Is there some functionality or content in particular that is missing? Would be interested to know. In case of any doubt, I have had no involvement with the site rebuild but have worked in web since the late 1990s

I think it's easy to refute your final point - the major benefit clearly is for mobile devices and any web site that is not optimised for the mobile is dead. There is significant improvement in this space. While it may not be something that is relevant to people on this forum, it is a fundamental of any web site to be mobile first. Based on the comments on 8 May, I would expect that there are some major security benefits too. While these aren't necessarily visible, the challenges of retrofixing an old web site means a major security upgrade (especially for a small site) can be more effectively achieved through a relaunch.