GONSTA 1,148 Report post Posted October 5, 2014 I see they've just reopened the tote for the 2nd at Auckland... Surely it's a no race? I'm on tee kay yapper / joe black all up for nothing massive but a decent bet, but sure as hell wouldn't want to be on after that... Surely it's gotta mess with a dogs physcology?? Interested on others thoughts? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lad27 404 Report post Posted October 5, 2014 I was on the 8 for a place. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GONSTA 1,148 Report post Posted October 5, 2014 From a trainers perspective i can understand why THEY wouldn't mind it being re-run, they are obviously trying to make a living and good on them, but this industry won't survive by making trainer's happy, punters need integrity when punting and surely that's an automatic no race!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lad27 404 Report post Posted October 5, 2014 I thought it would be a no race myself but in that situation the trainers get a say in the matter as well which is fair enough. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GONSTA 1,148 Report post Posted October 5, 2014 What a F*ing joke... So is I'm Joe Black going to get a holiday after that performance?? Obviously slowing up and looking for the lure where it broke down the first time... Good on you stipendary stewards of the NZGRA you have just lost a punter that spends 90% of my turnover on local racing, think that's going to be going across the tasman now... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay4 30 Report post Posted October 5, 2014 What was up with the 3 dog in the rerun? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alltheway!!! 640 Report post Posted October 5, 2014 Its a non-chaser, ran no different to how it runs every other week, got beaten a nose thur and ran how it did today the same way that it did the previous two times, the three did not look like it was injured after it dropped back to last so idk what happens there, dont really think you can put dogs out after incidents like this though as its not the dogs fault the lure broke where it did (especially because there all maidens) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GONSTA 1,148 Report post Posted October 5, 2014 Its a non-chaser, ran no different to how it runs every other week, got beaten a nose thur and ran how it did today the same way that it did the previous two times, the three did not look like it was injured after it dropped back to last so idk what happens there, dont really think you can put dogs out after incidents like this though as its not the dogs fault the lure broke where it did (especially because there all maidens) Disagree it ran the same way it did on Thursday... Wasn't genuine at all today and the integrity of the stipes is on the line, they decided to re-run the race and I'm pretty damn sure there isn't a rule regarding leniency on chasing issues when a race has been re-run, regardless of the age or class of the race. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
modest mouse 469 Report post Posted October 5, 2014 Agree with you ReillyM. It should have been a no-race. Punters were done. This from a trainers perspective. But no one wants to take 28 day stand down, as would have happened, I'm sure. GONSTA 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yankiwi 782 Report post Posted October 5, 2014 Surely it's a no race? I'm on tee kay yapper / joe black all up for nothing massive but a decent bet, but sure as hell wouldn't want to be on after that... Interested on others thoughts? I don't think the race should have been re-run, but it not my decision to make either. I can however fully understand why the trainers would like for it to be re-run. What I feel would make it fair to EVERYONE is to refund all bets made prior to the false start. Then open the tote starting again at a zero balance and let the punter decide if they choose to take the risk or not. What did happen today I feel was very unfair to punters. Slim Shady 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydreamnz 493 Report post Posted October 5, 2014 Don't they have to run a certain distance for it to be a no race? They didn't run far. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yankiwi 782 Report post Posted October 5, 2014 Don't they have to run a certain distance for it to be a no race? They didn't run far. I don't know if there is a certain distance or not. What I did see is them start from the 527 boxes, start catching the lure in the first corner and continue on the lure to in the area of the 318 boxes. To me that's basically half a lap as they continued to run after first contacting the lure until it stopped and the handlers caught the dogs. http://www.agrc.co.nz/track-information-xidc56445.html With a circumference at inner rail of 460 meters, the dogs being asked to run roughly half of that (or 230 meters) and then shortly thereafter to run the normal 527 meters is getting near the Silver Collar distance! The stewards, vet and trainers would have known what the dogs were going to be asked to do if the race was re-run. The punter was not. I had placed my bet on a dog who was to run in a 527 meter race, not a 757 meter race (230 + 527) with one pit stop and was given no choice on the matter. Thus my statement earlier. "What did happen today I feel was very unfair to punters." So TAB, keep my tenner if it's that important to you. I didn't really need it. If I had I wouldn't have risked it in the first place. But anyway, what do the mug punters have to do with the industry, other than fund it? My prior suggestion of refunding the original bets placed, then open the tote from a zero balance starting point a second time would have given the people who fund the industry a choice too. On another note, does anyone know why handle keeps going down? dustydreamnz 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydreamnz 493 Report post Posted October 5, 2014 I agree with that though. The punters should get a choice to cancel bets. Slim Shady 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GONSTA 1,148 Report post Posted October 5, 2014 Don't they have to run a certain distance for it to be a no race? They didn't run far. "The lure stopped after the dogs had gone approx 150 to 180 metres." It's close to a third of the race dusty, seems pretty far to me when the race is advertised as 527M. Like Yankiwi stated above I certainly didn't bet on a 700m race. I just cannot believe that Im Joe Black's racing manners were not mentioned in the stipes report... No one could honestly tell me he was pursuing the lure the whole race... Well it's nice to know where the PUNTER stands to those in charge of the NZGRA... They might finally start getting the message when theirs no one left betting on there product... Because believe me there is no shortage of things for punters to bet on these days. Interestingly the trackside presenter at the time stated it would most likely be a no race, Michael Dore from the TAB said he would have called it a no race before the handlers got to the dogs after the lure broke down... But no the NZGRA stipes obviously have no balls and are too shit scared to make a hard decision because it might upset a few trainers.... Where has the integrity to the punter gone people!!!! modest mouse 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
modest mouse 469 Report post Posted October 5, 2014 I can't find anywhere in the rules what the distance is a dog can run, before it's not allowed to start anymore. Had the same thing happen years ago in Cambridge, over approx. the same distance before they got the lure. The race was declared a no-race. I also don't understand why there was no re-fund on bets placed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yankiwi 782 Report post Posted October 5, 2014 Where has the integrity to the punter gone people!!!! I personally wont be worried about the integrity with the Palmy meeting today. I will be watching the races with interest, but wont be clicking the send button to place a bet. My personal boycott for yesterdays decision to re-run race two. It's my money and believe it's the only noise that is heard by some. I also don't understand why there was no re-fund on bets placed. Not an option anywhere I can see MM. Within 1 minute at a bet window it's possible to cancel a bet. If placed online, as mine was, I'm stuck with it and leave it in the Stewards hands to see that I'm treated with fairness & integrity. Was I yesterday? Last month, in the 5 Monday meetings, my average spend was $396.34 per meeting. So with that data, my personal protest should take about $400 out of today's handle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnybooy 52 Report post Posted October 5, 2014 Yes I have boycotted about 80% of my Betting on the dogs as well, due to a similar scenario on a re run, and unable to cancel my bets, incidentally the hot favorite I backed at the time finished last on the Rerun after no interference. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alltheway!!! 640 Report post Posted October 6, 2014 Yes, the punter was done wrong here, but what about the trainers? They provide the product dont they? Incidents like this can happen and complaining about it will not solve the problem. All the trainers thought there dogs were well enough to re run the race so i see no problem with it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yankiwi 782 Report post Posted October 6, 2014 Yes, the punter was done wrong here, but what about the trainers? They provide the product dont they? Incidents like this can happen and complaining about it will not solve the problem. All the trainers thought there dogs were well enough to re run the race so i see no problem with it. My point exactly Alltheway. In the first start the lure broke down with between 1/3 and 1/2 of the race being run. The steward acted within the rules by having the dogs vetted and the trainers were consulted and agreed that it was all right to give it a another go. Where the punter has been let down is by not having the choice (or even better being forced) for a refund of their bet after the false start and prior to the second start. I bet on a dog with early pace to place in a 527 meter race. Not necessarily the best tactic to use, if the dog ends up being required to run 700+ meters to the ultimate finish line. alltheway!!! 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
