Printable View
What's everyone's thoughts on how these races should be set? my time in Victoria I remember they were picked from the lowest points to allow horses to build up points to get into full C class races here in NSW now it seems they go normal field selection criteria , I do have vested interest as one of my horses with very low points is an emergency and. 2 last start winners get a run , I can't race anywhere else for another week as with no points won't get a run till next restricted meeting ,
I see where you are coming from Dave, but I'm not sure what is the best way to go with field selection, on the one hand it seems wrong to put in the worst ten horses, but on the other hand how do we stop the game bleeding owners when you nominate for a restricted race and come up against horses that are way out of your horses depth?
And this scenario is occurring more and more for a couple of reasons, one of which is the way the drop back clause is working, it's creating a pool of horses that are not really C1 types but more C2 and C3 types, which in turn is putting an end to the careers of a lot of horses once they break their duck.
There are changes afoot around handicapping in NSW, maybe these issues will be addressed in the new season.
As I've said before on this forum, I'm for anything that helps participation rates improve, over the last ten years or more we have had a shrinking game, from foals born to owner numbers to licencees, and we desperatley need to reverse the trend.
cheers,
Dan.
Would varying the stakemoney help? Your typical Restricted race has prizemoney of $3k in Vic, what if you had one R1 for $3.5k or $4k and on the same program had another R1 for $2.5k or $2k, would this see the trainers nominate their better horses for the better staked race and give more chance of a horse needing points to get a start in the lower staked race? i am however thinking they may well nominate for both. Alternatively we could have some bottom up races - we have it a lot in the C0's so why not R's. As should be the case with bottom up C0's I would prefer to see these races run for a lesser stake as I do not like the idea of rewarding mediocrity.
Last year at Warragul we introduced C1 races selected from "the bottom up", as has been tried with success at other tracks. We struggle for entries and cater for lower class horses, and this type of race is often a life saver, as it can be divided to give us eight races.
And they tend to be more "open" betting events too.
Last year a heats and final series of this type was run into the Warragul Cup meeting. There were five heats into a $7000 Final - the Inter Dominion would barely draw that many horses these days!
Back in the day in Victoria you could go to Bacchus Marsh or Warrnambool or Traralgon and others and race for a minimum stake and run 2:05 and know you would be just about over the line. So while today the breed has been improved out of sight, the racing is faster and safer on you beaut tracks, the "grass roots" participants have been largely killed off from our great sport, and with them have gone the numbers required in participants and horses to maintain a healthy racing circuit across three distinct levels - restricted, country and metro. I would rather see 200 "moderate" entries per country race meeting, spread across 70 or 80 trainers than 70 starters between 15-20 barns.
The attraction of harness racing was that you could have a horse, maintain it very cheaply and race it in your spare time with friends, for a minimum investment. That does still exist in some form, but perhaps too much ground has been lost in past years to make this a good publicity angle for our sport again.
Last Thursday night, Life Of Ted won its 10th race at the Swan Hill meeting, yet raced for less prizemoney than Minda Under Fire which won the C0. Why can't we introduce a sliding scale on stakemoney so that you race for, and win more stakes in the "C" class races as you progress?
I would prefer to see these races run for a lesser stake as I do not like the idea of rewarding mediocrity.
Hi Kev . I really think that if we got rid of the mediocre horses we would only be able to have 1 race a week , or we could give them to certain "outstanding" trainers and make them all good horses . I understand your idea of different prizemoney levels , but these outstanding trainers will just put horses in and win both . Newcastle put on a race for trainers who hadn't won a race all season and it disgusted me to see that it was only $1500 . Surely these Die Hards are worth more .
Penrith are heading in right direction putting average mile rate last 6 starts as a condition for some restricted and thier is a heat and final series coming up with same conditions, the horse I have was sent to me by the owner who got some bad advice to buy it in the first place and I'm trying hard to find races suitable , but it's hard to tell him after he has paid his training fees his horse didn't get a run in the lowest class of races and we have to wait a week before we get another chance him and his partner are ready to chuck it in
Good luck David, just keep being honest with them and if they stay in the game they will stick with you. In the meantime maybe they could get interested in their horse's breeding so that they can follow its family. If they have not already discovered these then they need to
http://www.harness.org.au/index.cfm?.../hraonline.htm
http://classicfamilies.net/