Originally Posted by
danno
i don't think the drop back clause is altogether crook,i just reckon it needs a bit of a tweek here and there.
[vvv] tweaked right out of existence and replaced by a full version of that which it currently masquerades as would be better still.
personally speaking if we were to return to conditioned racing i reckon that'd be a backwould step, we had a form of it years ago and it was a dead set shambles, if you had a half decent 3yo he would be handicapped for it for the rest of his life.
[vvv] that was not conditoned racing. It was something else.
i know the type of conditioned racing being proposed is not a carbon copy of that which we had,
[vvv] nothing even remotely like it.
but i don't like the thought of nominating my horse ( my horse, that i have put an enormous amount of time,energy, money etc into ) for a meeting and some half educated dimwit decides which race it's going around in, what barrier draw it's likley to get etc.
[vvv] ???????? To my knowledge that is not on the table dan.
this is a proposed handicapping change, not a move for owners & trainers to hand over all control over the placement of their horses to race secretary and or handicapper.
geez, if a half educated dimwit is going to make that decision about my horse then that half educated dimwit is going to be me!!
[vvv] as it should be and should always remain.
my apologies to no-one on this one....full bore, god help us, conditioned racing is for people who don't give much of a rats arse about their horses as far as i'm concerned.
[vvv] conditioned racing is for people who don't give much of a rats arse about their horses?????? jesus dan. That's one hell of a charge, one that makes me wonder if you really have a full appreciation of the principles and implications of conditioned racing. Is it better that we remain as it, handicap them on historical form and ultimately force them out through the top and either to export or to an early retirement?
cheers,
dan