Originally Posted by
Old Frank
Harvey and Daryl,
Harvey - Is that the case in NSW? I know there is a 'lift/drop back' for mares in VIC but is it the case up here? You nominate and see race conditions a lot more so yes I could be wrong, a long time since I've read the race programming section of the Gazette or online!
My sentiments for a 'lift/drop back' pertain to all mares, irrespective of the race. It could be a C6 mare dropping back and becoming eligible for a C4 race with junior.
The industry needs mares winning, putting times down and winning good money in order to sustain the breeding industry which fundamentally is on it's knees.
It doesn't matter that you might have a 'half sister' to this great mare, or whatever, if she only put's $20,000 next to her name (or worse), with really no performance, she won't, nor will her stock become commercially viable, and yes there would be the occassional exception to the rule however you know where I'm coming from.
I have been involved with great stables in the past who had exceptional mares but they had too, and were subsquently burnt out by racing the boys week in-week out. They all got to the M3/M4/M5 class (did super jobs), but it was done over 100 races and were quite simply knackered at the end of it, hence I'm adamant that this effects their breeding capabilities (None have turned out a really good horse as yet)
If you could retire a mare after her 4 or 5 yr old season with 50 starts next to her name and $50,000 - $100,000 dependant on her success, a.) you wouldn't have a tired mare who then your asking to carry a foal which is a heave in itself, but b.) your giving yourself and the breeding industry an injection of quality, measured performance and the buyers will rhave confidence in the product (yearling) being put forward and respond with purchase.
You also have the ability by your mare winning good money to afford a bank to start breeding her properly and not face a black hole or bottomless pit of money awaiting trying to breed a mare who won nothing, yet your trying to aim to jag a $30,000 foal out of her, yeh good luck with that!
Daryl,
I'm sorry mate, but as awful as this sounds, I couldn't give a shit about C0 racing. If I was an industry leader and I was having to look at adjustments/clauses reconfiguration for C0 racing, fundamentally, I am rewarding mediocrity.
They may be the 'bread and butter' as you put it and yes, I know the perspective your coming from, however all owners should, and in this case more importantly, administrators be aspiring to better the class and standard of metro racing as without successful metro class racing, you won't have a product to sell to the masses/TAB in the future. It's as simple as that.
A vast majority of horses currently racing as C0's/C1's aren't worth two bob and in my opinion again, it's a disgrace that they get punched around lingering on the hope to their trainer and owners that they'll win a race - somewhere, anywhere.
It costs the same to feed a bad one as it does a good one and to a large degree, the better the horse, the cheaper it is to train and you can give it less starts in better class races, thus racing for and earning better prizemoney, promoting satisfaction to all whilst the overall product is better.
You don't see Bill Gates or the late Steve Jobs aspire to improve a class of the computer industry that everyone has done/is doing, keeping the 'bread and butter' happy, they implement product that betters the overall industry, time and again, taking their innovation and quality of product higher and higher, thus the marketplace is drawn to their success and their industries power ahead constantly.