Yankiwi

PNGRC

24 posts in this topic

Does anyone know why it would be permissible for the PNGRC to ignore their own selection criteria in composing the Race #9 invitational field on Friday night?

Clearly 2 dogs of lesser grade have been accepted to the field while 2 dogs of superior grade are on the ballot.

PNGRC Selection Criteria clearly states:

4. Entry into Restricted Age, Invitational, and other restricted races will have the highest graded Greyhounds entered first. This points system is then applied to determine the order of entry for the remaining available place in the field.

It would not be wise, to push ones luck, with criteria so clearly defined within the clubs own rule book. It's been well documented previously where "luck pushing" in the industry can lead someone.

 

 

 

Edited by Yankiwi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe he has pushed his luck one too many times?

Although when you have a public trainer being the President of a club, and his staff being the Secretary of the same club, you are always going to have a conflict of interest.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A board member answered this on the radio on Wednesday. Firstly the said man you are talking about had nothing to do with the field selections. Secondly the class 2-4 does not mean higher class first , he said it is selected on times etc. maybe the class 2 dog had better points and or form ? Surely if it was to be just class 4's it would have said that , but that class 3 or 2 can nomm too? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly the said man you are talking about had nothing to do with the field selections.

 

Secondly the class 2-4 does not mean higher class first , he said it is selected on times etc. 

Firstly: the said man also was not responsible for altering the scratching date of Gibbonator, it was entirely the fault of the secretary, remember? What roles are the said man & that secretary in now? 

 

Secondly: Class 2-4 means nothing other than a title (name). The race is listed as "Invitation Stakes" as noted in the class column "INV".

https://www.thedogs.co.nz/catch-the-action/11882/97426/field-detail.aspx

As a "Invitation" race the club has the right to "invite" any dogs they choose to. It's questionable, as per GRNZ rules, if a "C2-C4" invitational race can even be carded as the rules state invitational races are for dogs graded C1+, but that's a whole other issue to the one I've highlighted.

Regardless, the club obviously made their invitations (for c2-C4 dogs) and the 10 drawn to the field were those that accepted their invitation.

Once they have 10 dogs confirmed, which were invited, then their selection criteria states that as an invitational race, it will have the highest graded Greyhounds entered first. (as noted in my original post) Both the #9 & #10 have a higher grade than the #1 & the #7 dogs (neither have downgraded since noms closed either).

So why is it ok to have a C2 & a C3 in the field with two C4's on the bench?

It seems to clearly breach their very own selection criteria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having inquired further into this , for once i have to agree with you. Stitch up.

 

Wonders never cease, welcome to the dark side. Hahaha.

The exact same case can be made for Race #2 on the same card.

Dog #1 is graded C2 while on the bench are a C3 & C4 dogs.

adam2.thumb.jpg.fddd5c572cd733c6a990b0ce

It'll be interesting to see if the the Ahern and/or Turnwald kennels do the ethical thing and offer to scratch the aforementioned entries since they have been accepted (mistakenly?) to a field they do not have a righteous place in. Surely the RIU would allow this penalty free in an attempt to correct the "error".

<insert second Tui sign here>

Edited by Yankiwi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how is this affecting you ? if these people want to enter their dogs of a lower class they must think they are up to the standard of the race, personally i think it is an excellent race and that every dog is competitive. looking forward to watching it !

if selection policy's are able to be ignored and modified for certain dogs then what the hell is the point of having one? 

Had to laugh at the racing managers replies to Craig Robert's emails trying to get to the bottom of this.

it may not affect you 'lover' but put your self in the shoes of the owner of the C4 dog and see how you would feel. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how is this affecting you ? 

How is this affecting (infecting) the integrity of the racing code?

A similar stunt from the inside of a listed company on the stock market may or may not affect me, but it'd be fun to watch too.

Volkswagen's recent computer chip issue may not affect me directly either, but I have to breath a mixture of the air affected by the exhaust from the cars of people who were directly affected.

Edited by Yankiwi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's just a pity somebody like Gary Harding didn't have a dog on the ballot that got denied a start by the club president, he would of got an injunction put on the race, and rightly so too. It will take something like that to happen before anything seriously gets done as our association doesn't seem to give a damn, or just simply doesn't have the ability or knowledge to see what s going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well well,

Now that it is all said & done, the two very questionable INV races have seen one SI winner & one overseas winner.

So much for ignoring their own selection criteria.

The next race saw the North take out the Nancy Cobain.

but maybe all wasn't lost, there was still the Manawatu Cup to be contested.

A few minutes later, that was gone too when Spud Missile & Opawa Diesel grabbed the top two spots. Neither of which needed any luck for their success, they already had KARMA working for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a sad man/woman you are Yankiwi and you don't even have the guts to put your name to these PNGRC posting you make. And find it amusing the people her like your postings all have issues with PNGRC, really sad. Build a bridge and get over it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a sad man/woman you are Yankiwi and you don't even have the guts to put your name to these PNGRC posting you make. And find it amusing the people her like your postings all have issues with PNGRC, really sad. Build a bridge and get over it.

 

 

maybe the fact that so many people have an issue with the PNGRC tells you something Janet?

and I don't know if it is so much the club, rather than just the person running it, although I guess he had to be voted in so in a way people get what they deserve, let's hope when the next election comes around someone  steps up for the position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Are you in support of the PNGRC ignoring their own selection criteria to draw races?

Are you in support of the president of the PNGRC insinuating to hit me with a rake?

Anyhow, once there is a point in time when the PNGRC & it's leader (who knows exactly who I am) begins to act with integrity and shows the professionalism expected from the president of a greyhound racing club, consider that bridge built.

History says (at least thus far into it) that it probably won't be happening any time soon, so if my posts are that bothersome to you, feel free to block me in your settings.

http://www.racecafe.co.nz/forums/index.php?/ignore/

 

I haven't had any issues with the Auckland GRC or John Roberts's professionalism or integrity.
I haven't had any issues with the Waikato GRC or Wayne Steele's professionalism or integrity.
I haven't had any issues with the Tokoroa GRC or Mike Lozell's professionalism or integrity.
I haven't had any issues with the Taranaki GRC or Peter Taylor's professionalism or integrity.
I haven't had any issues with the Wanganui GRC or Bill Hodgson's professionalism or integrity.

I haven't had the pleasure of meeting any of the other GRC's presidents as of yet. However, I can not recall ever seeing an instance which has made me even question any of their professionalism or integrity.

 

Today, the dog "Springvale Harry" has come to my interest.

I find it "interesting" that for his second start in the country he had the #10 rug on because two kennel mates had been scratched from the race.

http://www.thedogs.co.nz/catch-the-action/11846/98015/result-detail.aspx

I find it even "more interesting" that for his forth start in the country he had the #10 rug on because two kennel mates had been scratched from the race.

http://www.thedogs.co.nz/catch-the-action/11855/98139/result-detail.aspx

Is twice in his first four starts more than a coincidence?

You'd have to search long & hard to find another instance, if one even exists.

And the dog just happens to be under the watch of a GRC president. Any guess which one?


 

Edited by Yankiwi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep up the posting Yankiwi.  You raise some very important issues that do need to be addressed and the sooner the better.  

Thank you for the support.

I only want what is best for the code.

It sometimes seems as if those whom are meant to be overseeing and/or policing the code are happy to turn a blind eye to the real underlying problems.

They seem to be able to go the one step to charge a handler for wearing grey pants or a trainer for forgetting some paperwork (both negligent acts that most children could police). However, they seem to be seriously lacking the ability to put 1 and 1 together to get to a second step. It is a bit deeper and does actually take some thinking. That's the level some of the real problems lie (integrity issues) & those issues are acting as a cancer in the code that could ultimately destroy it from within. Finding a cancer in the early stages greatly increases its survivability. If it's ignored until the end stages, it will see the code injected with some form of morphine to ease the pain until the last race has been run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Judicial report: AUTUMN LIGHTS was a Club scratching after having his Qualification rescinded due to not meeting the qualification time required by NZGRA.

https://www.thedogs.co.nz/catch-the-action/11885/stewards-report.aspx

So just what is a "club scratching"?

62.1 A Greyhound must have completed and met the conditions of a Qualifying Trial and its racing papers endorsed to that effect by a Steward before being Nominated to Race. If this requirement is not complied with, the Nominator shall be liable to a fine not exceeding $1,000.00.

The stewards report makes no reference to a breach of the rules.

If it was scratched, surely it had been nominated, right?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Yankiwi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, the PNGRC was back to holding a total of 6 INV races for specific grades (which is in breach of GRNZ rules in my opinion) during the month of February & the numbers from those races are now in.

From what kennels did the 48 dogs which had gained a penalty free start come from?

  1. A. Turnwald - 13
  2. M. Roberts - 10
  3. Thirteen other trainers combined - 25

So between two kennels alone, they were one start short of having 50% of the entrants.

They sure were lucky weren't they?

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2015 at 11:33 AM, Yankiwi said:

 

Today, the dog "Springvale Harry" has come to my interest.

I find it "interesting" that for his second start in the country he had the #10 rug on because two kennel mates had been scratched from the race.

http://www.thedogs.co.nz/catch-the-action/11846/98015/result-detail.aspx

I find it even "more interesting" that for his forth start in the country he had the #10 rug on because two kennel mates had been scratched from the race.

http://www.thedogs.co.nz/catch-the-action/11855/98139/result-detail.aspx

Is twice in his first four starts more than a coincidence?

You'd have to search long & hard to find another instance, if one even exists.

And the dog just happens to be under the watch of a GRC president. Any guess which one?


 

Looking at Friday nights fields I see the trouble marker ( Springvale Harry ) is again on the bench as No.9 in race 9

Now is the million dollar question ......

With its trainer having 3 others in the race who will be sacrificed to give it a start  this time ?

I'd hate to be the owner of Sherlock Izmir ( box 1 ) but Boston Heart ( box 5 ) has been used before to gain it a start or will it be Miss Eldora ( box 8 ) 

Oh the chooses to have.  

If I was a punter i'd have my money on the box 1 with a sly $1 each way on the owner less Foxton trained pair in boxes 6 & 7 for longer odds. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two more interesting statistics from the six invitational races held by the PNGRC during February.

 

From what region were the 48 entrants in those races normally based?

  1. CD - 47
  2. SI - 1
  3. Nth - 0

 

Which kennels had multiple entrants in a single INV race of the 6 held?

  1. A. Turnwald - 4
  2. M. Roberts - 2
  3. L. Ahern - 1
  4. B. Goldsack - 1
  5. Eleven with - 0

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now