First the Stands, next the Mobiles! Bring it on fellas.

[doinmabest]

Just trolled back through a few months and found two SS Pacers races at Menangle 26/6 and 20/8 (There may be a few others in there )
At these meetings the SS on Breeders day held $45K in the win- The highest win hold of the day. This may be for several reasons EG/ later in the day (was r8 of 9), Karloo Mick was in it.

The SS on the 20/8 held 39K in the win, the 3rd biggest win hold of the night. Again, it needs to be taken into account that it was race 1 that night so would of got a spillover from those punting on the gallops that day.
I realise it will be a different kettle of fish turnover wise running stands at Penrith, but positioned early in the card, they might hold commensurate with what they would for some of those mobile races dominated by an odds on fav...At least with the SS, as GMac says, there may be some false favourites and less likelyhood of one horse stifling the market......
Can only give it a go and see how the participants feel via noms and punters via turnover.....

[triplev123]

G'day Fred,
I think the Standing Start aspect of this is ultimately going to be somewhat beside the point mate.
More than anything else I believe it is being aimed at slowly but surely more widely educating Trainers & Owners to nominate their horses using full-on Conditioned Racing principles...this instead of the bullshit C & M handicap them out of contention/push them out through the top scenario that we have at present. That is of course going to be a very long row for HRNSW to hoe...but a journey of 1000 miles starts with a single step.

[Danno]

G'day Fred,
I think the Standing Star aspect of this is ultimately going to be somewhat beside the point mate.
More than anything else I believe it is being aimed at slowly but surely more widely educating Trainers & Owners to nominate their horses using full-on Conditioned Racing principles...this instead of the bullshit C & M handicap them out of contention/push them out through the top scenario that we have at present. That is of course going to be a very long row for HRNSW to hoe...but a journey of 1000 miles starts with a single step.

The point is not lost on all! Maybe JUST MAYBE....... there is a glimmer of hope that a trainer may be able to place a horse where it has a better chance to reclaim some expenses for the owner. Forgive me guys but this game is not just about punters and turnover. Someone needs to feed the bloody horses and if that means we have to re-educate punters ( and trainers/drivers/horses) to sustain owners who are the lifeblood of the game then so be it.

I remember many years ago the move to mostly mobile racing, we were all told how the yanks were paying so much prizemoney cos they had all mobile racing. What a load of crap!! look at the US now, can't run a track without the support of "slot machines" cos the punters are bloody bored to death and have been punting on numbers for years!

Mobile racing in this country has been pushed by the commercial breeders to falsely enhance the value of stock in order to enhance their own returns, just like mammoth prizemeoney for juvenile racing ie; look at what the major yearling sale "providor" did to their own series recently, carved it up to further promote two year old racing ( I like to call it two year old ruining... the more you push the babies the more you wreck).

God save the owners who, for as long as I can remember, have been getting the rough end of the pineapple due to the selfishness of a number a noisy groups.

[ringman]

The only people ss can benefit are horses who cant must enough pace behind the gate and drop out when in SS they may be able to get into the race at least.

[Danno]

Thanks ringman, spoken like a true, half asleep punter!!!!

[triplev123]

The point is not lost on all! Maybe JUST MAYBE....... there is a glimmer of hope that a trainer may be able to place a horse where it has a better chance to reclaim some expenses for the owner.

[VVV] Others may see it differently but the way I see it....if a horse that you have is only ever going to be competitive in a short series of specially designated, specially conditioned standing start races at Penrith & you're wanting it to pay it's way...then maybe it's time to think about getting another horse. One of the biggest mistakes Owners make is hanging on to a horse that is going to cost more to keept & to train that it will ever have a hope of earning. I've done it myself in the past. Not anymore. If they can't go...then off they go.

Forgive me guys but this game is not just about punters and turnover.
[VVV] I don't neccessarily disagree with that...but you try telling the TAB & the various State Adminstrative bodies the same.
Personally I think we're WAY too TAB focussed especially so in terms of Clubs not going forward with races that have less than 8 noms etc.
I don't expect them to do it with every class but for classes that from time to time or generally tend to struggle...such early season 2yos, fillies & mares races etc...they need to get their individual & collective heads out of their arses and look at the greater, longer term good rather than taking their leads from some bean counting TAB wanker sitting in an office in Ultimo/Pyrmont.

Someone needs to feed the bloody horses and if that means we have to re-educate punters (and trainers/drivers/horses) to sustain owners who are the lifeblood of the game then so be it.
[VVV] I've absolutely no doubt whatsoever that off-course betting is directly responsible for a general dumbing down of the Punters, no doubt about that at all.
Back in the days when you had to be on-course to bet the Punters generally knew more about racing than they know these days.

I remember many years ago the move to mostly mobile racing, we were all told how the yanks were paying so much prizemoney cos they had all mobile racing. What a load of crap!!
[VVV] You must be well older than me (& I'm 43) because I've been around these bay, brown, black, sometimes chesnut & occasionally grey things since I first learned to walk & in all that time never heard anyone suggest such a thing.

look at the US now, can't run a track without the support of "slot machines" cos the punters are bloody bored to death and have been punting on numbers for years!
[VVV] Two completely different industry models & so that's a very long bow to draw. The only thing that we have in common is that both use Standardbreds.

Mobile racing in this country has been pushed by the commercial breeders to falsely enhance the value of stock in order to enhance their own returns, just like mammoth prizemeoney for juvenile racing.
[VVV] Pound for pound that's one of the more ridiculous statements I've read in quite a while. If you can, could you supply me with the name of just 1 of these fat cat Australian commercial breeders? I'd be most appreciative because I'd like to ring them and find out what their business model is. I've got a pretty wide range of friends & contacts throughout the Industry and on the Breeder side, let me tell you...virtually nobody is making any $$$.
Some are keeping their heads just above water but the vast majority are losing money.

ie; look at what the major yearling sale "providor" did to their own series recently, carved it up to further promote two year old racing ( I like to call it two year old ruining... the more you push the babies the more you wreck).
[VVV] You need to do your Homework before shooting from the hip.
Way back at its inception the APG was a 2yo Pacing Colts, Geldings & Fillies Series ONLY.
The man who was the driving force behind it all, George Aiken, only recently passed away.
I attened the 1st APG sale ever and the following year sold a yearling in the 2nd APG Sale held. I've seen it every single step of the way. A 2yo Pacing Series was all it was ever meant to be and it is all that it should ever have been.
The 3yo series, Trotters & so on was added much later on down the track & upon being judged as largely unsuccessful those additions were dropped.
As for ruining 2yos, again...do your homework.
Statistical analysis of a huge number of Australian Standardbreds with regard to wastage in fact revealed the EXACT OPPOSITE to that which you claim above.
Not only was there no appreciable wastage occurring as a result of horses beginning to race as 2yos but in fact there was an indication that horses who started early had more starts lifetime & earned more $ throughout their career than those who started at 3yrs & beyond. Did it occurr to you that despite falling foaling numbers in both Australia and NZ over the past decade or more...we are running pretty much the same number of races in 2011 as we did in the mid to late 1990's...with close on half the number of foals per year?
The Australian Standardbred of today is starting its career earlier, having more starts per year and it is racing for more years than any of its predecessors.


God save the owners who, for as long as I can remember, have been getting the rough end of the pineapple due to the selfishness of a number a noisy groups.
[VVV] Again, you need to do your homework.A recent industry wide HRA survey revealed the vast majority of Breeders (nearly 80%) are also Racing Owners.

Rgds

Jaimie

[Danno]

Rgds

Jaimie

Forgive me Jamie for having an opinion that is not entirely in line with your own, yes I have been around a bit longer than you, but only by a decade.

your full of cheek aren't you? telling me I shoot from the hip about subjects that were debated long before your were on "hard tucker".
I do my "homework" at the university of life in harness racing, not sitting at an armchair with some piss in my hand.

As for ruining 2yos, again...do your homework.
Statistical analysis of a huge number of Australian Standardbreds with regard to wastage in fact revealed the EXACT OPPOSITE to that which you claim above.

Show me your "statistical analysis" and I will dismantle it, if indeed you possess some crap purported to be such.


Mobile racing in this country has been pushed by the commercial breeders to falsely enhance the value of stock in order to enhance their own returns, just like mammoth prizemeoney for juvenile racing.
[VVV] Pound for pound that's one of the more ridiculous statements I've read in quite a while.

I was engaged in the debate when NSW was moving from predominantly Stand racing to mobiles and our commercial breeders ( none of whom I would describe as "fat cats" ,your words not mine) were openly stating this can only increase the value of our yearlings.


look at the US now, can't run a track without the support of "slot machines" cos the punters are bloody bored to death and have been punting on numbers for years!
[VVV] Two completely different industry models & so that's a very long bow to draw. The only thing that we have in common is that both use Standardbreds.

you really are a genius aren't you? F..k me if you can't see the way we have copied the US business model you really have got your head stuck up your arse!


God save the owners who, for as long as I can remember, have been getting the rough end of the pineapple due to the selfishness of a number a noisy groups.
[VVV] Again, you need to do your homework.A recent industry wide HRA survey revealed the vast majority of Breeders (nearly 80%) are also Racing Owners.

Jamie, I was one of the many participants in these workshops and surveys. Guess what!! The data gathered reinforced what many people ( none obviously as wise as you.) have been saying for decades.... the commercial breeders have had more influence than they are rightly entitled to for decades!!!.


Cheers Jamie,
but do your own bloody home work before you try your half baked bluff tactics on people you don'y know.

dan

[triplev123]

G'day Dan,

There's a very big difference between a half-baked bluffing of someone as you're suggesting I am trying to do...and making a reply to them citing facts that attempt to refute their statements.
Of the 7 points of reply that I made, you've also gone and zero'd in on those 5 where I didn't agree with you and skipped over the 2 points you made where I totally agreed with you (the game not being just about punters & turnover) and (re-educating the punters). Perhaps in your haste to tell me I had my head up my arse... you missed those ?

The statistical analysis I referenced was an official study specifically into wastage and the effect that 2yo racing was having on the racing population, one that was commissioned by National & State bodies and one that notably essentially set out with the assumptions you've made, that 2yo racing was somehow bad for the sport.
To their significant surprise it showed the exact opposite to that which they thought would be the case and that which you claim above of 2yo racing.
It not only showed that there was no evidence that 2yo racing had a negative effect on racing longevity but that those horses who had started earlier tended to have more starts per year and race to a more advanced age. It was a study that was very widely known of at the time & it was also widely distributed. I am sure there is a copy lying around somewhere. Someone would have it filed away. I will do my absolute utmost to get hold of it and then reproduce it here on this forum for your perusal.

The facts are that here in Australia whilst annually we are breeding fewer foals than ever before, more of them are getting to the track than ever before, more of them start as 2yos than ever before & once having made the track & a start those horses have more starts per horse per year and per career than ever before. The above cited study came to exactly those conclusions.

Now even if you still don't believe me, just ask yourself how it is that we as an Industry manage to conduct just as many races as we did 10-15-20 years ago with almost half the number of foals produced per year.
There's no escaping the fact that today's Standardbred is a more precocious, sounder, better gaited horse than those of 10-15-20 years ago and the assertion that 2yo racing has a negative effect on racing longevity is a complete and utter furphy.
The main reason for the above is without doubt the vastly increased quality & quantity of the sires that are now available to Breeders in Australia...& coupled with that, while there has been a large reduction in the total number of broodmares being bred to those sires, the results have been greatly enhanced by the hugely improved quality of those active mares.

As for the respective business models of US Harness Racing and Australian Harness Racing, what I said was right.
The revenue streams of AUS & US Harness Racing flow from two entirely different sources.
US Harness Racing does not operate on a TAB turnover basis like we do here. None of the racetracks in this country are similarly reliant upon and so rise or fall on the back of money which flows from a % of Poker Machine revenues legislated to be carved off from the turnover of an associated Casino.
So...no, forgive me but I can't see how we have copied the US business model. 2yo futurity racing over the mile from a mobile start is not a business model.

Moving right along...

You keep banging on about this (influence wise) allegedly over represented group of Commercial Breeders who's wants & needs you believe come at the expense of the Industry.

Ok. So now I'm interested to know what your definition of a Commercial Breeder is?

Is it someone who derives part or all of their income from their breeding activities?

Is it someone who simply breeds to sell either at a sale or as a going concern?

Is it perhaps the Studs and Stallion owners that you're dark on?

To some extent one of those 3 groups has, IMO, a little too much input in the Industry decision making processes & directions.
As an example, I cite the absurd assertion in that HRA Report that here in Australia "we need to breed more horses"....... while at the same time largely ignoring the fact that we need to provide reasonable racing opportunities for 50% of the foals we breed each year...Fillies & Mares.
If that "we need to breed more horses" conclusion did not have significant active Stud & Stallion owner support then I'm Mother Theresa.

There is a HUGE amount of wastage in the Australian Harness Racing Industry but it comes not in the form of broken down horses resulting from excessive 2yo racing.
Rather it comes in the form of fillies & mares that are never tried and so never make the racetrack because having considered their earning potential, their breeders/owners decide they are not viable racing propositions.
That HRA report stated that around 30% of the currently active broodmare population did not race & of those that did make the track, 30% of them did not win a race.
If you want to get angry about something get angry about the disgraceful official resistance there is throughout the entire country to backing enhanced racing opportunities for fillies and mares.

Regards

Jaimie

[Danno]

G'day Jamie,

I would love to see that statisitical analysis you are " referencing". It would be an interesting read and yes I reckon I could pull it to pieces, whilst there is doubt in the world we are getting higher percentages of horses to the races and they are continuing to earn for longer, it's a bit of a stretch to claim that's because they raced at two.

Couldn't agree more about the fillies and mares more racing is required, but gee there is a lot of the little darlings just don't want to be race horses too!

The breed has been improving all the time during my 40+ years of involvement and I believe because of selective breeding more than any thing else. When we were breaking in youngsters in the 60s/70s it would often take weeks to get them pacing.. not now! Bloody things are pacing around the paddock now before they even have a bridle sat on their heads.
But I still see a lot of horses ruined and thrown on the scrap heap because of the lure of, in my opinion, the excessive prizemoney that's available for 2YO racing compared to 3YO and up. Be interesting to do a study on total available prizemoney per starter for each group (2YOs/3YOs/4YO and up) and in each season from 1950 to say 2000. I have no doubt whatsoever a definitive trend would appear.

I am not "dark on" any particular group of commercial breeders, just people who put their own interests in front of the game, and you'd be mug not to acknowledge their existence.

Cheers,

taking the missus into "the tents" tonight do you reckon they can run it with all this rain?

[triplev123]

I'll do my utmost to get hold of a copy of the report for you Dan.
I don't know if you know Alan Briggs at all? He's from up Newcastle way and I know for a fact that he has seen the report. He might even have a copy. I'll probably see him tonight at Menangle. If you know him or get a chance to locate him, ask him about it.
Contrary to the expectations of many at the time the statistics within it certainly do indicate that those horses who started racing at 2yrs tended to have longer & more successful careers than those who did not start racing at 2yrs. There are solid & reasonable physiological explanations for this & a lot of it centres around properly stressing the bones, joints, tendons & muscles during the growing/developing phase of the young horse...essentially molding the horse, training it sound.
Some people will laugh at you when you suggest this but I am a great believer in it.
If it were both financially and time wise a practical option I would even go so far as to have weanling foals on a treadmill/walker exercise program.
That's essentially where the because they raced at two years comes into play. Young horses that are properly conditioned and cared for have no greater or lesser chance of breaking down than horses at any other age group. The issue, if there is one, with 2yo racing is not 2yo racing per se but rather that some people obviously don't know how to get the best from them without busting them. That to my mind is more a trainer issue and not a 2yo racing issue.