The Greyhound-Data Forum has been created to act as a platform for greyhound enthusiasts to share information on this magnificent animal called a greyhound.
Greyhound-Data reserve the right to remove any post that is off topic, advertisements or opinions they consider to be offensive.
If you answer then please try to stay on topic. It's absolutely okay to answer in a broader scope but don't hijack posts by switching to something off topic.
In case you see an insulting post: DO NOT REPLY TO IT!
Use the report button to inform the moderators so that we can delete it.
Do you have questions about greyhound racing? Do you need advice on how to train a greyhound?
GRSA Please Explain!!!
Jamie Quinlivian Australia (Verified User) Posts 8727 Dogs 10 / Races 0 10 Jan 2019 09:51
(8)
(7)
Meeting abandoned tonight at Angle Park. Not sure why but that's not really the issue.
They had 2 heats of the SA sprint championship. First heat run and won by Cawbourne Swade in a cracking 29.48 Second heat not run due to abandoned meeting. So they decide to do a random draw from the second heat to make up the final. Strange enough, but current SA superstar Fabwik, who has won her last 7 in a row and is almost unbeatable, did not get into the final. That is totally unfair. The match up between Cawbourne Swade and Fabwik, and Honcho Monelli, would have been a ripper final. Surely they could have re-run the heats next week. Unbelievable decision.
Craig Cooper Australia (Verified User) Posts 125 Dogs 0 / Races 1 10 Jan 2019 11:03
(5)
(3)
greyhound racing in this country is so amaturish in so many ways
the garbage ballot tops the lot
lets not even start on the reason the meeting was abandoned
what is the system/technology that runs the lure ...surely in 2019 there is technology that can run backups or a better system in the first place ?
embarrassingly inept
Anthony Jeffress Australia (Verified User) Posts 3669 Dogs 54 / Races 10 10 Jan 2019 11:13
(10)
(1)
Sorry to be the one to tell you lads, but this decision is seemingly spot-on in line with the present rules.
Stewards have little to no discretion when it comes to situations which are clearly defined. There would (rightly) have been an outcry if they HADN'T gone the way they did.
A shame indeed for connections of the "best" credentialled runner/s from the Heat which wasn't run, but "them's the breaks".
Andrew Paraskevas Australia (Verified User) Posts 984 Dogs 55 / Races 22 10 Jan 2019 11:47
(9)
(1)
Anthony Jeffress wrote:
Sorry to be the one to tell you lads, but this decision is seemingly spot-on in line with the present rules.
Stewards have little to no discretion when it comes to situations which are clearly defined. There would (rightly) have been an outcry if they HADN'T gone the way they did.
A shame indeed for connections of the "best" credentialled runner/s from the Heat which wasn't run, but "them's the breaks".
Similar situation at Sandown a few weeks ago in the semis of the Laurels. Pre-post favourite missed a berth in the final.
Anthony is right - there are set guidelines in place that deal with these situations - its probably these rules that could be looked at to allow for discretion, seeding, etc.
Jamie Quinlivian Australia (Verified User) Posts 8727 Dogs 10 / Races 0 10 Jan 2019 21:06
(2)
(0)
Yes I get that rules are rules and Heaven forbid if we ever let common sense get in the way. I understand with the Laurels, trainers travel from all over the state, maybe interstate, and Sandown has a stack of group races that fills the calender. Hard to shift from one week to the other. But with GRSA, they have recently been running 4-5 dog races, 10 race programs, they only have one group 1 race and half a dozen group 3s, most trainers live down the road and race at the venue every week anyway. They could have shifted the heats back a week, as they did with the group 3 SA Oaks in 2017. And the lure at Angle Park has a history of malfunctioning, usually at the 600m boxes. But yes I get that the rules must be adhered to.
Robert Conway Australia (Verified User) Posts 462 Dogs 4 / Races 0 10 Jan 2019 22:12
(2)
(0)
(2) (a) Where an event is abandoned pursuant to Rule 57(1), if, in the opinion of the Stewards, a greyhound would have qualified to be eligible to participate further in the series had the event not been abandoned, they may order that the greyhound be so qualified and exempt from any ballot conducted for the remaining positions pursuant to Rule 57(2)(b).
Andrew Paraskevas Australia (Verified User) Posts 984 Dogs 55 / Races 22 10 Jan 2019 23:03
(2)
(0)
Jamie Quinlivian wrote:
Yes I get that rules are rules and Heaven forbid if we ever let common sense get in the way. I understand with the Laurels, trainers travel from all over the state, maybe interstate, and Sandown has a stack of group races that fills the calender. Hard to shift from one week to the other. But with GRSA, they have recently been running 4-5 dog races, 10 race programs, they only have one group 1 race and half a dozen group 3s, most trainers live down the road and race at the venue every week anyway. They could have shifted the heats back a week, as they did with the group 3 SA Oaks in 2017. And the lure at Angle Park has a history of malfunctioning, usually at the 600m boxes. But yes I get that the rules must be adhered to.
If one heat was already run and won it makes it very hard to be fair to everyone and move them etc.
Jamie Quinlivian Australia (Verified User) Posts 8727 Dogs 10 / Races 0 11 Jan 2019 00:16
(3)
(0)
robert conway wrote:
(2) (a) Where an event is abandoned pursuant to Rule 57(1), if, in the opinion of the Stewards, a greyhound would have qualified to be eligible to participate further in the series had the event not been abandoned, they may order that the greyhound be so qualified and exempt from any ballot conducted for the remaining positions pursuant to Rule 57(2)(b).
Obviously stewards didnt think that a dog who has totally dominated for 7 weeks was in danger of running inside the top 4, in a 6 dog field.
Andrew, if 1 heat of the Melbourne Cup was run, then the meeting was abandoned, do you think they would randomly pick 1 dog from the remaining 7 heats to make up the final? I'm not so sure.
Wade Gallagher Australia (Verified User) Posts 372 Dogs 117 / Races 0 11 Jan 2019 00:44
(2)
(2)
Jamie Quinlivian wrote:
robert conway wrote:
(2) (a) Where an event is abandoned pursuant to Rule 57(1), if, in the opinion of the Stewards, a greyhound would have qualified to be eligible to participate further in the series had the event not been abandoned, they may order that the greyhound be so qualified and exempt from any ballot conducted for the remaining positions pursuant to Rule 57(2)(b).
Obviously stewards didnt think that a dog who has totally dominated for 7 weeks was in danger of running inside the top 4, in a 6 dog field.
Andrew, if 1 heat of the Melbourne Cup was run, then the meeting was abandoned, do you think they would randomly pick 1 dog from the remaining 7 heats to make up the final? I'm not so sure.
Don't know about the Melbourne Cup, but same thing happened at Sandown recently in the Laurels. Black Opium missed out.
Correct ruling made.
Craig Cooper Australia (Verified User) Posts 125 Dogs 0 / Races 1 11 Jan 2019 01:43
(3)
(4)
we arent debating the rules
but it is absolutely amaturish to have ballots ...thats quiz night down at the footy club stuff ...surely the industry is better than that ? time to change it (maybe go on last 5 runs or PB times i dont know but random insults ppl who invest time and money into their dogs )
"Thems the breaks" isnt good enough anymore
what im about is why SA racing continues to embarrass itself with these tech failures ......its 2019 and we cant get a lure around a 500m track ? surely there are backup technology systems somewhere incase of first failures ?
Bruce Teague Australia (Verified User) Posts 2092 Dogs 0 / Races 0 11 Jan 2019 05:31
(5)
(0)
Craig,
If a different rules were in place then the other half of participants would be complaining. No future in that mate.
But you make a good point. Basically, the current lure systems have been running for yonks now with only minor enhancements as time goes on. Failures are relatively common, maintenance is high for what is really a very basic mechanical system of cables and engines.
In an era of electronics/electrics/lasers there should be a better way of getting a lure around the track. It's time that someone put out a tender for something modern and reliable. If we can do a driverless car or kill people with a drone then a new lure should be a doddle.
Ashleigh Kay Australia (Verified User) Posts 15 Dogs 0 / Races 0 11 Jan 2019 05:48
(0)
(0)
Such a shame, would have been a cracking fonal :(
Andrew Paraskevas Australia (Verified User) Posts 984 Dogs 55 / Races 22 11 Jan 2019 05:58
(4)
(1)
Wade Gallagher wrote:
Jamie Quinlivian wrote:
robert conway wrote:
(2) (a) Where an event is abandoned pursuant to Rule 57(1), if, in the opinion of the Stewards, a greyhound would have qualified to be eligible to participate further in the series had the event not been abandoned, they may order that the greyhound be so qualified and exempt from any ballot conducted for the remaining positions pursuant to Rule 57(2)(b).
Obviously stewards didnt think that a dog who has totally dominated for 7 weeks was in danger of running inside the top 4, in a 6 dog field.
Andrew, if 1 heat of the Melbourne Cup was run, then the meeting was abandoned, do you think they would randomly pick 1 dog from the remaining 7 heats to make up the final? I'm not so sure.
Don't know about the Melbourne Cup, but same thing happened at Sandown recently in the Laurels. Black Opium missed out.
Correct ruling made.
Jamie, put it another way.
If you had the dog that won the first Laurels heat and you came all the way from SA to race (and win) and a couple of hours into your journey home they called and said youve got to come back next week and run again? I think that is far worse than leaving a dog out that hadnt run.
Craig Cooper Australia (Verified User) Posts 125 Dogs 0 / Races 1 11 Jan 2019 10:04
(2)
(0)
spot on bruce
driveless cars, lasers etc its 2019, there are tech companies out there that would be able to engineer a lure system or something surely ?
spend the money and find out, you lose more by not having races than spending money guaranteeing that 10-12 races run without issues
btw i dont own a grey good enough to make a final so the ballot farce doesnt affect me , but im talking as an SA industry participant and mug punter - its embarrassing and amateur
Jamie Quinlivian Australia (Verified User) Posts 8727 Dogs 10 / Races 0 11 Jan 2019 10:41
(3)
(0)
Andrew Paraskevas wrote:
Wade Gallagher wrote:
Jamie Quinlivian wrote:
robert conway wrote:
(2) (a) Where an event is abandoned pursuant to Rule 57(1), if, in the opinion of the Stewards, a greyhound would have qualified to be eligible to participate further in the series had the event not been abandoned, they may order that the greyhound be so qualified and exempt from any ballot conducted for the remaining positions pursuant to Rule 57(2)(b).
Obviously stewards didnt think that a dog who has totally dominated for 7 weeks was in danger of running inside the top 4, in a 6 dog field.
Andrew, if 1 heat of the Melbourne Cup was run, then the meeting was abandoned, do you think they would randomly pick 1 dog from the remaining 7 heats to make up the final? I'm not so sure.
Don't know about the Melbourne Cup, but same thing happened at Sandown recently in the Laurels. Black Opium missed out.
Correct ruling made.
Jamie, put it another way.
If you had the dog that won the first Laurels heat and you came all the way from SA to race (and win) and a couple of hours into your journey home they called and said youve got to come back next week and run again? I think that is far worse than leaving a dog out that hadnt run.
Yes thats a fair point. This series at Angle Park though, was 2 heats with 6 dogs in each heat, so the first 4 go through. And looking at the fields, the first and second placed dogs from heat one would make the final walking. Speaking as a lover of the spectacle of greyhound racing, it is a shame that Fabwik does not get the chance to race for something more than $2500
Valerie Glover Australia (Verified User) Posts 239 Dogs 2 / Races 0 11 Jan 2019 19:12
(3)
(2)
Craig & Bruce , We had battery operated lures on two turn tracks 40 odd years ago, they were the answer to a perfect back up system for all tracks now, but try getting common sense into ptb these days, this was back in the days of lead acid batteries and poor quality chargers,driven by remote control,if you doubt it's possible ,look at the DRONE"S of today, big discovery,in small time folk?? what is available today I promise, and these now would be made for a trickle of the cost of what people imagine, plenty of people have asked about them but they {ptb} don't carry anything out ?? how many times they take now to get track altercations better?? How many tracks have squeakers that work for all events/trials as well ?? Bob Glover
Craig Cooper Australia (Verified User) Posts 125 Dogs 0 / Races 1 11 Jan 2019 23:55
(2)
(1)
valerie
its amazing modern technology these days...we have remote sensors and GPS and even computers
surely a system can be run without failure that includes a backup
Do you have questions about greyhound racing?
