Has there ever been a dog that has raced without trialling?

Despite constant reminders over the years the PTB in Tassie have refused to update/modernise their system. I have asked by email and in person - to no avail.

1. As published on Ozchase, half the sectionals are wrong and there is only one, not 8. This data is what goes into permanent career records in Ozchase and GRV, therefore misleading everyone and corrupting any analyses.

2. What is available on the local website is a mishmash. There are videos without runners being named, etc. Some runners have sectionals against their names, others don't, but you have no idea of the actual source of the times - eg is it just the odd one or the average of a lot? Essentially, they are asking you to rely on a local tipster. That will be the day!

3. The absence of decent data is why I have always been unable to bet on Tassie races. I am a customer, therefore I am right and they are wrong. The fact that Tassie refuses to conform to a practice that is followed by all other states does them no good.

4. Tassie also produces a local formguide which must be the worst one ever produced - too few races and not enough detail. In total, all this is evidence of a mob that does what it thinks is right and not what customers need. Having said that, Ozchase is pretty poor, too.

Righto, I have updated myself and find that there have been some improvements in the tasracing.com.au >Results area.

It looks pretty and contains all the basic time data you would need. But it has two problems; first, it is not downloadable and is therefore only for lookers; second, it is different to what is on Ozchase which is effectively the "official" version because that's what everyone uses - including other authorities.

I hope you are clear on that. When a Tassie dog goes interstate he takes with him only the fraudulent times published in Ozchase. What Tasracing does at home is neither here nor there.

Here are examples for the first five races last Monday at Hobart.

Don't forget that Ozchase shows only one sectional (because that's all Tassie gives it) whereas Tasracing now offers eight locally.

R1 is fine. Both show Connected running 5.11. Ozchase ignores the other 7 runners.
R2 is fine. Both show Frampton running 5.22. Ozchase ignores the other 7 runners.
R3 is wrong, Ozchase gives winner Definitive Signs 5.14 but the dog that ran that time was Harry's... Def Sign actually ran 5.40
R4 is questionable because Gamblers Loot has both 5.18 and 5.18, depending where you look.
R5 is wrong. Ozchase gives winner Buckle Up Izy 5.03 (it ran 5.11) whereas Wind Walker actually ran the quicker time.

So, as I said, about half are wrong and therefore a complete waste of time for analysis. Anyway, without lots of research you will not know which are correct and which are not.

You may not keep detailed records yourself but lots of people do. To do that efficiently you need files for each meeting in comma-delimited format which you can then download and insert into the program of your choice. (If you check GRV Fasttrack they are the files with little commas between each set of numbers).

If you are not interested in that - so be it - but you will never remember all the info and you will make mistakes.

You may then point out that Ozchase (a NSW/WA creation) also does not offer downloadable form or results files. Very true. They are living in the dark ages. That's why I gave up betting on their races a few years ago. Doing things manually is just too hard. Further, Tassie is too lazy to provide Ozchase with sectionals for all 8 runners, which is partly why it gets the leader's time wrong.

Victoria is fine because it does provide downloadable files and it covers all runners.

As for "what more do I want" - what Vic does.

PS: Run home times are very popular but statistically they are a waste of time in themselves. They are never published later and you can never makes comparisons or even be sure what ran them. Nor are they a reliable guide to whether the dog can run a longer trip. Bar talk only.

PS2: Some use sectional times for just the last one or two races. This is dangerous as they may not be representative. Personally, I use an average of the last 10 runs but at least 5 would be advisable.

Funnily enough, this sectional hassle is not limited to dogs. Although I don't work on them, the gallops in all areas have had comparable problems with nil or incorrect sectionals - so much so that you now see commercial firms offering that info for a price, together with tips.

Given the overall picture, it suggests that authorities or clubs, or both, place a very low priority on getting and publishing sectional times. Or, if they get them, they don't bother to check them to see if they are correct or usable. (The classic example is GBOTA - via Ozchase - wrongly shifting a whole column of 2nd sectionals at Wenty into the column for 1st sectionals. After which those incorrect times get repeated in future formguides - much like the crook Tassie times. GBOTA and GRNSW are also jointly responsible for near zero sectionals being shown for Bulli races).

As against that, it is odd that Tasracing has shown initiative by developing GPS tracking at the gallops (via the saddlecloth) in order to automatically derive sectional times. Comparable technology has also been used at Meadows to track routes followed by dogs.

Whatever, if you make life hard for customers, very soon you will lose them. This is yet another reason why mugs in pubs now dominate. They would neither know nor care what a sectional is, even though they are hugely responsible for success or failure in greyhound racing - breeding, too, for that matter. (Check out Orson Allen at Meadows last night).