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

[triplev123]

CONDITIONED STANDING START EVENTS AT PENRITH

Wednesday 16 November 2011

Stakeholders please note in January 2012 the PenrithHarness Racing Club have programmed Conditioned Standing Start races at each oftheir Tier 2 meetings.

Each race caters for horses assessed no better than C2that have not won more than $2,000 in their last three starts (catering forapprox. 75% of the horse population).

The handicap marks in these events are based on dollarswon in a horses’ last three race starts and not class, with the ranges asfollows; FT $0-$500, 10m $501- $1,000, 20m $1,001-$1,500, 30m $1,501-$2,000.

For example; a C2 that has won $250 in its last threestarts will be off the FT, while a C1 that has won $1,200 in its last threestarts will be off 20m.

The conditions of the race provide alternatives forconnections of out of form or out of luck horses with the chance to compete offthe front row, while better performed horses will start off marks; they alsoprovide an alternative for horses struggling in mobile start events that may beable to find a more forward position in running from behind the strands.

With the first event programmed for Thursday, 5 January2012 and nominations closing on Friday, 30 December, it is imperative that yourhorse is qualified from a Standing Start during the month of December.

----------

In saying the above (thread title) Standing Starts are for the Dinosaurs.
I realise that they'll allow for ease of Handicapping etc. but geeze, why not focus on the mobile events with more race condition writing ala the Bulli @ Menangle meetings, Bankstown etc? They're not the be all end all either but they're a big step in the right direction.
The earnings last X number of starts aspect to the above really appeals to me, that's how ALL of our bread & butter daily racing should be...but the Standing Start aspect of does not. I say that especially so from the point of view that the push is always on for quick wagering/turnover of races...and these are events that are probably going to take 3 mins+ each on average.

[The Rainmaker]

In saying the above (thread title) Standing Starts are for the Dinosaurs.
I realise that they'll allow for ease of Handicapping etc. but geeze, why not focus on the mobile events with more race condition writing ala the Bulli @ Menangle meetings, Bankstown etc? They're not the be all end all either but they're a big step in the right direction.
The earnings last X number of starts aspect to the above really appeals to me, that's how ALL of our bread & butter daily racing should be...but the Standing Start aspect of does not. I say that especially so from the point of view that the push is always on for quick wagering/turnover of races...and these are events that are probably going to take 3 mins+ each on average.


Many punters are hesitant to bet on standing start races as it, even in standing start Group 1 races at Melton or standing start Saturday night metro fixtures at Menangle. So who the hell is going to bet on lowly assessed, out of form horses around a track as tight as Penrith? The pools would be terrible, who thinks up these things?

[triplev123]

You're right. Hadn't thought of the $ held aspect of it Eric. Probably should have. I was more interested in the Conditioned Racing aspect of it. I don't like Standing Starts. They're a Harness Racing anachronism. I have a bet from time to time and can't remember the last SS race where I put my $ down.
In saying that, it is worth noting this is being run at Penrith and as far as Standing Starts go I am sure Don Clough will be over the moon that the clock has been turned back to the 1950's.
If we could resurrect the NSW Sires Stakes program in all of its gorey glory, halve the Finals prizemoney available to 2yo & 3yo Fillies, bring back stallion book limits & ban the use of semen transport... I suspect he would think all his Christmas' had come at once. :p

[ringman]

I love the idea they are a layers dream bring them back ;) and the turnovers will be awful no doubt as most punters hate the ss races.

[admin]

Peter Cook, who is the secretary of the NZ Trainers and Drivers Association said this on Harnesslink:


Perhaps he should consider why turnovers in the South, where there is a mixture of standing and mobile starts, is almost always far higher than in the Auckland area where mobiles are the norm. Also if he was to research the facts, as have officials at Addington Raceway recently, he may discover that there is no discernible difference between turnovers on standing and mobile starts, at least at that venue.

I don't like them either, but if the above is true maybe more punters should vote with their wallets.

[David Summers]

I don't like them either, but if the above is true maybe more punters should vote with their wallets.

Absolutely guarantee these standing starts will have the lowest turnover of the meeting.

Almost every time you see a standing start , half the field is usually side on or gallop away when the strands are released . They are nothing more than a "dog's breakfast" and should be assigned to harness racing history. They have no place these days. I would not invest 10 cents on any standing start.

[G-Mac]

I love the idea they are a layers dream bring them back ;) and the turnovers will be awful no doubt as most punters hate the ss races.

I agree. Some are absolute camels from the SS but will be sent out short because of strong mobile form; others love the SS but walk off the mobile arm and will be sent out overs because of average mobile form. I enjoy the mix of SS and MS races but if punters vote with their wallets and SS turnover is as low as people are saying then I guess they will be gone.

[Don Corleone]

Half the problem in standing starts lies with the trainers/drivers as I have stated before in this forum, most of them haven't got the skill to get horses away from stands. Trainers don't spend the time teaching horses to leave the wire quick.

[triplev123]

Half the problem in standing starts lies with the trainers/drivers as I have stated before in this forum, most of them haven't got the skill to get horses away from stands. Trainers don't spend the time teaching horses to leave the wire quick.

[VVV] Have to agree with that Don C. I had a crack at it myself once and it's not as easy as it looks. Your stands are a lot different to ours though. You guys seem to walk up and then go whereas over here they seem to want them all standing like they've been cast in bronze before the tapes release. I still don't like stands but your point is well made.

[Don Corleone]

I guess I am bit old school with stands in that I love seeing a field ping off the mark and I love handicap races. I have had my share of sloppy beginners but its was at the workouts/trials and on the training track that they were ironed out not left to chance on race day like so many seem to. My old boss when I was a boy, would give them plenty of practice. As a young impatient lad I would moan to myself about all the mucking around he would do but certainly saw the rewards that were gained when it became second nature. I am happy to say that all my racehorses were good beginners.

[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.

[A BIT DUSTY]

hI jamie

I read with great interest your little differance of opinion with Old Danno.

Now Iv'e always been of the opinion that if you get them up and running as 2yr olds than you shouldn't expect to be still sending them around as older horses ,so I was a little surprised when you jumped on Old Danno when he suggested the same. Well my 53yr old eyes sure popped when I read your statements about the so callled survey or statistics on standerdbreds saying we were both wrong and I was sure looking forward to reading this report .Well I waited a couple of day's and when you didn't produce it I thought I'll have a go at a little survey of my own.


So I went back to 2003 to look at 2yr olds that would now be 10yr olds,and what better race to look at than the Bathurst Gold Crown and Tiara heats.

I wanted to see what age these babies raced too, after being set for this series, the results are as follows

There were 78 2yr olds drawn to race in 8 races. The age they last raced .


2yr 3yr 4yr 5yr 6yr 7yr 8yr 9yr 10yr

12 18 14 10 3 10 4 3 4

15% 23% 18% 12% 4% 12% 5% 4% 5%


Now if my maths are right and I'm sure they are, that is a staggering 68% that DID NOT RACE PAST 5YR OLD. and only 14% that raced after turning 7yr.

After looking at these figures I was already thinking you had been on the turps or smoking funny ciggarets when you made the claim about it being the complete opposite to what Danno and myself had always believed, But I thought well why not have a look at the present day horses to compare the ones that raced at 2yr and the others that delayed there careers till they turned at least 3yr.

So I grabbed this weeks Trotguide and went through every horse drawn to race at Menangle on Miracle Mile night that was 6yrs and older, excluding the Yankee horses as I couldn't find their U.S.A form and seperated those that raced at 2yr to those that waited till they turned 3yr or older, the results are as follows.


6yr 7yr 8yr 9yr 10yr 11yr
1 only
2yr - 3yr/ovr 2yr - 3yr/ovr 2yr -3yr/ovr 2yr-3yr/ovr 2yr-3yr/ovr 3yr/over

10 13 5 14 4 4 1 7 0 2 1


Now Jamie you don't have to be a rocket scientist to see there is a pattern here.

Even at 6yr there is a higher % of horses who did not race at 2yr than those that did,but take a gander at 7yr when horses should be at their peak. I'll concede that it is even at 8yr but from then on it is 10 to 1 in favour of those that started racing later in life.


I don't know who wrote or commisioned your mystery statistics but as Old Danno suspects it was probably someone with a vested interest i.e Breeding Industry or someone similar.

There is an old saying you can't have your cake and eat it too, and the same aplies to these horses if you go for them early don't winge if their not going around later on.

So Jamie just inclosing I'll give you a little tip, DON'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ ask someone with a little more knowledge than yourself SOMEONE LIKE OLD DANNO.

[A BIT DUSTY]

The numbers for the Menangle meeting have bunched so I'll see if I can set them out better those raced at 2yr are on the left and the horses that did not start till 3yr and older are on the right

6yr 7yr 8yr 9yr 10yr 11yr
2yr 3/ovr 2yr 3/ovr 2yr 3/ovr 2yr 3/ovr 2yr 3/ovr 2yr 3/ovr

10 13 5 14 4 4 1 7 0 2 0 1

[A BIT DUSTY]

Buggered if I know what I'm doing with these bloody numbers I'll have a go at writing the bloody things


THE BATHURST FIGURES ARE AS FOLLOWS

OF THE 78 12 LAST RACED AT 2YR 15%

18 LAST RACED AT 3YR 23%

14 LAST RACED AT 4YR 18%

10 LAST RACED AT 5YR 12%

3 LAST RACED AT 6YR 4%

10 LAST RACED AT 7YR 12%

4 LAST RACED AT 8YR 5%

3 LAST RACED AT 9YR 4%

4 LAST RACED AT 10YR 5%



THE FIGURES FOR THE MIRACLE MILE NIGHT ARE AS FOLLOWS


OFF ALL 6YR OLDS 10 RACED AT 2YRS 13 DID NOT RACE TILL THEY TURNED 3YR OR OLDER


OFF ALL 7YR OLDS 5 RACED AT 2YRS 14 DID NOT RACE TILL THEY TURNED 3YR OR OLDER

OFF ALL 8YR OLDS 4 RACED AT 2YRS 4 DID NOT RACE TILL THEY TURNED 3YR OR OLDER

OF ALL 9YR OLDS 1 RACED AT 2YRS 7 DID NOT RACE TILL THEY TURNED 3YR OR OLDER

OF ALL 10 OLDS 0 RACED AT 2YRS 2 DID NOT START TILL THEY TURNED 3YR OR OLDER


AND THE ONLY 11YR KARLOO MICK DID NOT START RACING TILL HE TURNED 3YR OR OLDER

[aussiebreno]

Buggered if I know what I'm doing with these bloody numbers I'll have a go at writing the bloody things


THE BATHURST FIGURES ARE AS FOLLOWS

OF THE 78 12 LAST RACED AT 2YR 15%

18 LAST RACED AT 3YR 23%

14 LAST RACED AT 4YR 18%

10 LAST RACED AT 5YR 12%

3 LAST RACED AT 6YR 4%

10 LAST RACED AT 7YR 12%

4 LAST RACED AT 8YR 5%

3 LAST RACED AT 9YR 4%

4 LAST RACED AT 10YR 5%



THE FIGURES FOR THE MIRACLE MILE NIGHT ARE AS FOLLOWS


OFF ALL 6YR OLDS 10 RACED AT 2YRS 13 DID NOT RACE TILL THEY TURNED 3YR OR OLDER So here of 23 horses 10 races at 6. Thats about 45%. Bathurst 2yos to reach 6 were 24%.


OFF ALL 7YR OLDS 5 RACED AT 2YRS 14 DID NOT RACE TILL THEY TURNED 3YR OR OLDER 18% of 2yo Bathurst reached 7. Here that figure is about 25%.

OFF ALL 8YR OLDS 4 RACED AT 2YRS 4 DID NOT RACE TILL THEY TURNED 3YR OR OLDER 50% strikerate here but about 9% at Bathurst.

OF ALL 9YR OLDS 1 RACED AT 2YRS 7 DID NOT RACE TILL THEY TURNED 3YR OR OLDER 12.5% here and about 10% at Bathurst. So pretty close on this one.

OF ALL 10 OLDS 0 RACED AT 2YRS 2 DID NOT START TILL THEY TURNED 3YR OR OLDER 0% compared to 10% Bathurst.


AND THE ONLY 11YR KARLOO MICK DID NOT START RACING TILL HE TURNED 3YR OR OLDER
And you had the hide to suggest VVVs study was impartial?
Your stats from such a small, small cross-section of horses are skewed from one set of horses to the next.
Of course the best open age horses are going to race longer. Now go to a bread and butter meeting and do the same research - and do it for 100 meetings not 1. Remember most of the Bathurst horses only end up being bread and butter horses anyway.

[aussiebreno]

Not to mention a 6yo who started at 2 has had 5 racing years while a 6yo who didn't has only had 4 racing years so you;d probably be better off comparing 6yos who started at two to 7yos who didnt start at two.

[triplev123]

Denny, seriously...before you go sounding off, take a look at your own parameters.
You've used a very small sample of 78 horses that competed at one Carnival. How could you honestly place any credence whatsoever in the numbers extrapolated from that...as opposed to a State & National wastage study that was carried out across numerous foal crops?

[2minuteman]

Statistically, a batch of 30 will give a valid result.

[Greg Hando]

Did you stop to think some of the 2yo,s that raced weren't good enough to maybe even win a co so most probably would have been disposed of in some way, shape or form probably after their 4yo year perhaps

[aussiebreno]

Statistically, a batch of 30 will give a valid result.
How come two batches of 60 - 100 give a very different result then. And its all relative. A batch of 30 from 60total is different to a batch of 100 from a 100,000 total.

[2minuteman]

Hi Brendan,
I do not want this to be a "what if" exercise and only make this brief comment.If we are measuring batches of Widgets " two batches of 60 - 100 give a very different result". No they will not.

Check http://www.daa.com.au/analytical-ideas/sample-size/

Back to the original argument of 2 year olds lasting etc. We all know the old saying about statistics but they are only valid if all data is constant.

[aussiebreno]

Hi Brendan,
I do not want this to be a "what if" exercise and only make this brief comment.If we are measuring batches of Widgets " two batches of 60 - 100 give a very different result". No they will not. yes they did. The bathurst 2yos V menangle. See my blue writing above on ABitDustys post where the % of horses at ages who started at two are very different.

Check http://www.daa.com.au/analytical-ideas/sample-size/

Back to the original argument of 2 year olds lasting etc. We all know the old saying about statistics but they are only valid if all data is constant.and of course ABitDustys stats weren't exactly constant but the above re skewed still stands
Thanks Ron ;)

[2minuteman]

We will agree to disagree?

[aussiebreno]

We will agree to disagree?
If it helps you sleep at night.

[2minuteman]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[triplev123]

Hey, no fair. You're stealing my material Ron. :rolleyes:

[A BIT DUSTY]

Hi Boy's sorry I haven't replied to your threads earlier but I was having trouble logging on.


Now aussiebrenno you seem to have confused the 2 test I conducted they are separate sets of stats but you somehow have combined them .
You surely don't mean that the Bathurst Crown and Tiara horses are bread and butter horses , the reason I chose that series was to get the best result for Jamie's theory as these babies would be the cream of the crop trained by the best trainers in the land ,I thought that the best bred and trained would be better to look at than those of lesser breed and trained.
Also I chose the better class horses at Menangle for the same reasons . You have a go at me for questioning Jamie's beliefs but he has not produced one piece of evidence to back it up at least I have attempted to get some FACTS.

Jamie you challenge the validity of my test because it was on one carnival, But it was on 78 of the cream of the crop as far as breeding and training is concerned, Remember owners have paid upwards of 7 or 8 hundred dollars so were not talking rubbish horses with no ability.

Now do not have the breeding stats for 2001 foals but I would seriously doubt that their were 780 individual 2yr old starters in N.S.W in 2003 so if I;m correct the 78 would represent 10% of starters which is a very BIG sample in terms of surveys.
The same applies to the better class horses ,I doubt you would find another 6 hundred horses of this class in the country so you are talking of a high percentage once again.

To all you critics REMEMBER FACTS AND FIGURES DON'T LIE BUT PEOPLE DO .

As a hobby owner, breeder, trainer, and self confessed bad driver,I would be the happiest bloke around if I was wrong about this. It would save the usual yearly quandary of should I KEEP THEM GOING FOR BATHURST OR TIP THEM OUT .

At the end of the day you really can only go on what you have learned and have been told over many years and go with your own beliefs.

I would love to see a qeuestionair on the subject with the view of all the older trainers I think I know what their response would be.

[Danno]

And you had the hide to suggest VVVs study was impartial?
Your stats from such a small, small cross-section of horses are skewed from one set of horses to the next.
Of course the best open age horses are going to race longer. Now go to a bread and butter meeting and do the same research - and do it for 100 meetings not 1. Remember most of the Bathurst horses only end up being bread and butter horses anyway.

Steady on Brendan, nobody has seen VVV's stats yet let alone have the opportunity to study them.

Loved your bit " most of the Bathurst horses only end up being bread abd butter horses anyway" I think that might be actually backing up the point abitdusty and myself were trying to make.

Cheers,

Dan

[aussiebreno]

Hi Boy's sorry I haven't replied to your threads earlier but I was having trouble logging on.


Now aussiebrenno you seem to have confused the 2 test I conducted they are separate sets of stats but you somehow have combined them .
You surely don't mean that the Bathurst Crown and Tiara horses are bread and butter horses , the reason I chose that series was to get the best result for Jamie's theory as these babies would be the cream of the crop trained by the best trainers in the land ,I thought that the best bred and trained would be better to look at than those of lesser breed and trained.
Also I chose the better class horses at Menangle for the same reasons . You have a go at me for questioning Jamie's beliefs but he has not produced one piece of evidence to back it up at least I have attempted to get some FACTS.

Jamie you challenge the validity of my test because it was on one carnival, But it was on 78 of the cream of the crop as far as breeding and training is concerned, Remember owners have paid upwards of 7 or 8 hundred dollars so were not talking rubbish horses with no ability.

Now do not have the breeding stats for 2001 foals but I would seriously doubt that their were 780 individual 2yr old starters in N.S.W in 2003 so if I;m correct the 78 would represent 10% of starters which is a very BIG sample in terms of surveys.
The same applies to the better class horses ,I doubt you would find another 6 hundred horses of this class in the country so you are talking of a high percentage once again.

To all you critics REMEMBER FACTS AND FIGURES DON'T LIE BUT PEOPLE DO .

As a hobby owner, breeder, trainer, and self confessed bad driver,I would be the happiest bloke around if I was wrong about this. It would save the usual yearly quandary of should I KEEP THEM GOING FOR BATHURST OR TIP THEM OUT .

At the end of the day you really can only go on what you have learned and have been told over many years and go with your own beliefs.

I would love to see a qeuestionair on the subject with the view of all the older trainers I think I know what their response would be.
Bathurst the best yearling sale and horses go to the best in the land? Bathurst is a nice sale but I think you've got it confused with the APG Premium sales. A stable I'm connected with usually take 1 or 2 or more to Bathurst and usually gets one into a final or at the very least a consolation. Yet the trips to the city are few and far between. Remember 80% of the horses at Bathurst are losers who don't make it to the finals. Those who run in the Silver Consolations for $5K are a lot different to a $25K Menangle race or a $50,000 Bohemia Crystal.

[aussiebreno]

Steady on Brendan, nobody has seen VVV's stats yet let alone have the opportunity to study them.

Loved your bit " most of the Bathurst horses only end up being bread abd butter horses anyway" I think that might be actually backing up the point abitdusty and myself were trying to make.

Cheers,

Dan
First start or two or twenty they were only every going to be bread and butter horses. 80% of the 2yos who head to Bathurst end up in a 5K silver consolation...

[triplev123]

I'm going to have to respectfully bow out here Dan because much of any reply that I might make to the above would be very, very likely to offend someone, somewhere...not yourself of course, I'm not talking about giving that sort of offence, as in saying something offensive or whatever. Rather I believe there are a number of assumptions you've made above that in reality are simply not factual & in endeavouring to debunk them I'll open up a Hornet's Nest.
Let's leave it at that shall we...and in the interim I will pull out all stops to track down that study & to post the conclusions here asap & from there...you can interpret them as you see fit.
Btw, be sure to keep putting your 2yos away for another day, the fewer there are around the fewer there are to beat. :p

[A BIT DUSTY]

Brendan am i talking in chinese or something , i have never mentioned the bathurst sales if you took the time to read my thread you will see i am talking about the bloody gold crown and tiara heats . Surely you don't class these horses as sub standard.

[Danno]

[ Remember 80% of the horses at Bathurst are losers who don't make it to the finals. Those who run in the Silver Consolations for $5K are a lot different to a $25K Menangle race or a $50,000 Bohemia Crystal.[/QUOTE]

Your intimate knowledge is on full display brendan

[2minuteman]

Hey, no fair. You're stealing my material Ron. :rolleyes:
All yours

[triplev123]

Btw...I can't help myself, just one point I'll comment on...
[ It would save the usual yearly quandary of should I KEEP THEM GOING FOR BATHURST OR TIP THEM OUT ]
With all due respect Dan, that's zeroing in on being ridiculous. Keep them going for Bathurst???? That's your quandry???
The Bathurst Carnival's usually conducted towards the last week in March...I think the 2012 edition kicks off around the 20th and the Finals are on Saturday night, 31st March. That I do know. Now this is where your keep them going dilema starts to look a bit shakey. The first of the reasonable $$$ 2yo events here in NSW is The Linden Huntely and it doesn't come on line until Feb. In 2012 it will be conducted somewhere in the 1st week of Feb. Only 7-8 weeks or so later are the Gold Crown/Tiara Finals. Maybe you've got different appreciations of time than myself but from my perspective that's hardly what I'd refer to as an arduous campaign. If you'd started up in January and were wondering about the Breeders Crown Finals in late August then sure, couldn't agree more...but given that few if any 2yos will do anything of any note at all prior to the Huntley and given that Bathurst is never much more than 7-8 weeks after that...I can't see the quandry unless of course a horse was never going to make a 2yo to begin with.
Am I reading it wrong? Please tell me if I am.

[aussiebreno]

Brendan am i talking in chinese or something , i have never mentioned the bathurst sales if you took the time to read my thread you will see i am talking about the bloody gold crown and tiara heats . Surely you don't class these horses as sub standard.
Yeah my bad. I thought horses who started at Bathurst crown and tiara had to come through the Bathurst Sales. What a shocking statement by me.


[ Remember 80% of the horses at Bathurst are losers who don't make it to the finals. Those who run in the Silver Consolations for $5K are a lot different to a $25K Menangle race or a $50,000 Bohemia Crystal.


Your intimate knowledge is on full display brendan[/QUOTE]
Which part? My 80% figure or not bothering to look up th actual Bohemia Crystal prizemoney? Or perhaps those M0 and M1-M2 finals weren't 25K. How dare I get the prizemoney wrong.
On the 80% figure. I might have overstated it a little bit but normally there are about 7 heats (7x10=70). 10 in final plus 10 in consolation = 20. So 50 are left in the consolations. 50/70 is what 70%. I'll do better to make sure my % or stakesmoney is spot on next time.

[A BIT DUSTY]

Well Jamie for a start YOU are the one that is confused because your last 2 replies to me you have called me DAN, so let's get it right I'm denny as in A BIT DUSTY not DAN as in DANNO.

Jamie for you to have made that last thread has reinforced the view that I have been getting about you over the last couple of days.

You obviously have no idea what so ever about training horses you must be just a MUG PUNTER or some armchair expert because it is clear you have NEVER EVER SAT YOUR ARSE IN A CART.

Anyone who has half an idea would know that preparing babies is a day to day task . They can be going gun busters today and tomorrow their telling you they need a break .

So I sincerely apologise for taking up your time .I'll let you get back to your armchair.

[triplev123]

Well, I tried to be nice about it. You want to make it personal. It ends here. Thanks for your time.

[A BIT DUSTY]

Sorry jamie for any offence, but once again i was just stating facts

[A BIT DUSTY]

Well seeing some genius brought up The Linden Huntley I thought I might as well have a look at the 2003 series to see were they all are now.

There were 60 runners in the heats , of those 9 last raced at 2yrs , 10 last raced at 3yrs , 9 last raced at 4yrs, 13 last raced at 5yrs, 9 last raced at 6yrs, 3 last raced at 7yrs, 3 last raced at 8yrs,

3 last raced at 9yrs, 1 last raced at 10. That is 42 or 70% that did not race past 5yrs even worse stats then the Bathurst series just 2 months later. Which one would conclude that the earlier
you start them the less time they race. That is why in my yearly quandary that I referred to earlier was about Bathurst and not Bulli as I would never be even thinking about pushing my 2yr olds to race in jan or feb

[Danno]

Your intimate knowledge is on full display brendan[/QUOTE]
Which part? My 80% figure or not bothering to look up th actual Bohemia Crystal prizemoney? Or perhaps those M0 and M1-M2 finals weren't 25K. How dare I get the prizemoney wrong.
On the 80% figure. I might have overstated it a little bit but normally there are about 7 heats (7x10=70). 10 in final plus 10 in consolation = 20. So 50 are left in the consolations. 50/70 is what 70%. I'll do better to make sure my % or stakesmoney is spot on next time.[/QUOTE]

Sorry Brendan,
been away for a while, just not sure about the point you were trying to make lining up Bathurst non finalists with the Bohemia Chrystal?

Honestly this all seems to have gotten out of hand a bit, my initial comment on this thread was about giving trainers the opportunity to better place horses in order for the long suffering owners to get a return.

I happened to mention my opinion on 2YO racing and where the impetus came from for ever increasing prizemoney for babies and it has gone from there to this, which, to be honest, everyone will have an opinion which they are gunna find hard to prove.

the one thing that I have enjoyed about this site (in my limited exposure) is the passion that the folks have.. whether we agree or not.

I'm sure we will all learn a bit from each other a long the way and learning is,in my opinion one of the great things in life..you never stop doing it until you stop breathing.

Cheers,

Dan

[aussiebreno]

Your intimate knowledge is on full display brendan
Which part? My 80% figure or not bothering to look up th actual Bohemia Crystal prizemoney? Or perhaps those M0 and M1-M2 finals weren't 25K. How dare I get the prizemoney wrong.
On the 80% figure. I might have overstated it a little bit but normally there are about 7 heats (7x10=70). 10 in final plus 10 in consolation = 20. So 50 are left in the consolations. 50/70 is what 70%. I'll do better to make sure my % or stakesmoney is spot on next time.[/QUOTE]

Sorry Brendan,
been away for a while, just not sure about the point you were trying to make lining up Bathurst non finalists with the Bohemia Chrystal? That the better horses in the Bohemia Crystal are bound to race longer as they are still winning races and very competitive whereas horses in the Bathurst Consolations are non-competitive so it stands to reason they won't keep racing. That has nothing to do with when the horse first started.

Honestly this all seems to have gotten out of hand a bit, my initial comment on this thread was about giving trainers the opportunity to better place horses in order for the long suffering owners to get a return.

I happened to mention my opinion on 2YO racing and where the impetus came from for ever increasing prizemoney for babies and it has gone from there to this, which, to be honest, everyone will have an opinion which they are gunna find hard to prove.
The prizemoney isn't out of scale. There are a lot less 2yo races overall than open age racing - 2yos only race 9 months of the year and make up one race on a card when they do.

the one thing that I have enjoyed about this site (in my limited exposure) is the passion that the folks have.. whether we agree or not. Agree

I'm sure we will all learn a bit from each other a long the way and learning is,in my opinion one of the great things in life..you never stop doing it until you stop breathing.

Cheers,

Dan[/QUOTE]
Thanks Dan.

[Danno]

Which part? My 80% figure or not bothering to look up th actual Bohemia Crystal prizemoney? Or perhaps those M0 and M1-M2 finals weren't 25K. How dare I get the prizemoney wrong.
On the 80% figure. I might have overstated it a little bit but normally there are about 7 heats (7x10=70). 10 in final plus 10 in consolation = 20. So 50 are left in the consolations. 50/70 is what 70%. I'll do better to make sure my % or stakesmoney is spot on next time.

Sorry Brendan,
been away for a while, just not sure about the point you were trying to make lining up Bathurst non finalists with the Bohemia Chrystal? That the better horses in the Bohemia Crystal are bound to race longer as they are still winning races and very competitive whereas horses in the Bathurst Consolations are non-competitive so it stands to reason they won't keep racing. That has nothing to do with when the horse first started.

I think we've gone off context here, the original comment made was about 2YO racing not necessarily being a good thing for a lot of 2YO's. I know a bit dusty used some figures to establish some evidence but he was, far as i know, was trying to use horses from two different pools ( Bathurst Gold Crown 2003 and horses racing at Menangle on miracle mile night 2011) of samples to do just that create some evidence that 2YO racing is not always a good thing.

Honestly this all seems to have gotten out of hand a bit, my initial comment on this thread was about giving trainers the opportunity to better place horses in order for the long suffering owners to get a return.

I happened to mention my opinion on 2YO racing and where the impetus came from for ever increasing prizemoney for babies and it has gone from there to this, which, to be honest, everyone will have an opinion which they are gunna find hard to prove.
The prizemoney isn't out of scale. There are a lot less 2yo races overall than open age racing - 2yos only race 9 months of the year and make up one race on a card when they do.

The prizemoney is WAY out of scale ( glad you chose that word as it fits perfectly). The amount of total prizemoney available each year PER STARTER is heavily biased towards 2YO's when compared to 3YO's and aged horses.

the one thing that I have enjoyed about this site (in my limited exposure) is the passion that the folks have.. whether we agree or not. Agree

I'm sure we will all learn a bit from each other a long the way and learning is,in my opinion one of the great things in life..you never stop doing it until you stop breathing.

Cheers,

Dan[/QUOTE]
Thanks Dan.[/QUOTE]

[aussiebreno]

Sorry Brendan,
been away for a while, just not sure about the point you were trying to make lining up Bathurst non finalists with the Bohemia Chrystal? That the better horses in the Bohemia Crystal are bound to race longer as they are still winning races and very competitive whereas horses in the Bathurst Consolations are non-competitive so it stands to reason they won't keep racing. That has nothing to do with when the horse first started.

I think we've gone off context here, the original comment made was about 2YO racing not necessarily being a good thing for a lot of 2YO's. I know a bit dusty used some figures to establish some evidence but he was, far as i know, was trying to use horses from two different pools ( Bathurst Gold Crown 2003 and horses racing at Menangle on miracle mile night 2011) of samples to do just that create some evidence that 2YO racing is not always a good thing.

Honestly this all seems to have gotten out of hand a bit, my initial comment on this thread was about giving trainers the opportunity to better place horses in order for the long suffering owners to get a return.

I happened to mention my opinion on 2YO racing and where the impetus came from for ever increasing prizemoney for babies and it has gone from there to this, which, to be honest, everyone will have an opinion which they are gunna find hard to prove.
The prizemoney isn't out of scale. There are a lot less 2yo races overall than open age racing - 2yos only race 9 months of the year and make up one race on a card when they do.

The prizemoney is WAY out of scale ( glad you chose that word as it fits perfectly). The amount of total prizemoney available each year PER STARTER is heavily biased towards 2YO's when compared to 3YO's and aged horses.

the one thing that I have enjoyed about this site (in my limited exposure) is the passion that the folks have.. whether we agree or not. Agree

I'm sure we will all learn a bit from each other a long the way and learning is,in my opinion one of the great things in life..you never stop doing it until you stop breathing.

Cheers,

Dan
Thanks Dan.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
I don't think its out of scale at all.
One race, if any, on a program of 8 races for 9 months of the year is not out of scale.
There's probably what 10-12 Group 1s 2yo races. There is more for 3yos whilst admittedly the grand circuit is thin; but thats better than being thick and having 2nd rate horses running eg Treuer Memorial.
A handful of big Gp1 prizemoney doesn't make up for the thousands of C front races and M front races for 4yo+ horses.

[Greg Hando]

Brendan am i talking in chinese or something , i have never mentioned the bathurst sales if you took the time to read my thread you will see i am talking about the bloody gold crown and tiara heats . Surely you don't class these horses as sub standard.
I'm afraid a lot of these horse's are substandard and shouldn't be there to compete but hey it's keep's the game going

[Daryl New]

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
Jaimie you have not taken into account the major increase in the import of NZ bred horses to supplement homebreds. As far as sectional interests, the proliferation of Stakes races based on the hope a yearling will make it, contributes places undue stress on young horses to perform before they are ready. Eligibilty for multiple State Bred races as well as these stakes races places more stress on young horses as well as reducing the number of owners who can benefit. But lets look at the bane of your life STANDING START racing. All mobile is boring, plain and simple. SS racing alows those horses without brilliant gate speed but good manners to compete and hopefully pay their way. If there is a problem it lies in education of the horses, drivers and officials as well as the public. The horses only have to front for 1 trial and do everything right and then race. If the driver ha snot been educated to the finesse required then we have problems that may not be the fault of the horse.Officials need to look at the numbers on each line so that interference, both accidental or deliberate is reduced along with appropriate protocols at the start. some horses are just not suitable for SS racing and when identified by officials or hopefully by the trainer, should be bared from SS racing. Jaimie I am an unashamedly fan about SS racing. Give me mile and a half or 2 mile stands on Menangle and then you will see racing. And from left field Bring Back the NSW Sires Stakes as it was.

[triplev123]

Geeze Daryl, I'm not a fan of SS as you know HOWEVER you were sounding quite reasonable right up until you went & stated [And from left field Bring Back the NSW Sires Stakes as it was.] That's where you lost me. All the NSWSS System ever achieved the creation of financial crutch that supported and perpetuated equine mediocrity. I noticed that Cloughy was out there on Saturday night. Are you sure he wasn't in your ear about that?:p

[Daryl New]

Jaimie the question is should I expose a novice 2yo to the stresses and strains of the cauldron of Bulli long after its used by date has expired for the off chance that it survives the first turn let alone the rest, or should look after my horse and wait for the Gold Crown and again pressure it to survive the first turn at bathurst and the risks associated with green and immature horses chasing $s before they are ready.Common horsesense goes out the window at the thought of the $s on these two questionable tracks for two year olds

[Daryl New]

Out comes your commercial breeder side. That crutch you referred to kept a lot of participants in the game. The only problem as I see it is that the Stallion importers didnt offer the quality of stallion at that time. No I havent discussed this with Don but quite oten D J Heath and I discuss the inadequacies of the Alabar series and the positives of the NSWSS. We cant all own Bettors or Machs etc. remember if all the Daryls leave NO harness racing. Another elephant in the room. Prizemoney breakdown.As it stands the winner takes 70%, leaving 30% for the rest. Geez sounds like the TAB distribution doesnt it. Any way with this new money how doe you feel witha revised breakdown to say 50% for the winner( 22,000 metro race ) = 11,500 and say 4,300 for 2nd, and 2300 for 3rd,1200 for 4th and 700 for 5thand 400 each 6th to 10th.More money across the board, more incentive to keep horses racing, more incentive to reinvest in horses etc. The same to apply to the improved provincial prizemoney scales. after all the horse that ran second beaten by a nose in 1.55 possibly led up, ensured the winner is credited with a fast time and may/probably worked harder. Afterall if you go to a show at the theatre ( and they keep telling me we are in the entertainment industry) even the stage hand behind the scenes gets paid. Our stagehands are those 6th to 10th (Bulli 5th to 10th) only get $55 and $40 of that goes to the driver (whether they deserve it or not) Hang on what does the trainer get for having to be there2 hours before the race Nothing oops another elephant in the room. ps just because you dont like the NSWSS model doesnt mean it wasnt the right one

[aussiebreno]

Out comes your commercial breeder side. That crutch you referred to kept a lot of participants in the game. The only problem as I see it is that the Stallion importers didnt offer the quality of stallion at that time. No I havent discussed this with Don but quite oten D J Heath and I discuss the inadequacies of the Alabar series and the positives of the NSWSS. We cant all own Bettors or Machs etc. remember if all the Daryls leave NO harness racing. Another elephant in the room. Prizemoney breakdown.As it stands the winner takes 70%, leaving 30% for the rest. Geez sounds like the TAB distribution doesnt it. Any way with this new money how doe you feel witha revised breakdown to say 50% for the winner( 22,000 metro race ) = 11,500 and say 4,300 for 2nd, and 2300 for 3rd,1200 for 4th and 700 for 5thand 400 each 6th to 10th.More money across the board, more incentive to keep horses racing, more incentive to reinvest in horses etc. The same to apply to the improved provincial prizemoney scales. after all the horse that ran second beaten by a nose in 1.55 possibly led up, ensured the winner is credited with a fast time and may/probably worked harder. Afterall if you go to a show at the theatre ( and they keep telling me we are in the entertainment industry) even the stage hand behind the scenes gets paid. Our stagehands are those 6th to 10th (Bulli 5th to 10th) only get $55 and $40 of that goes to the driver (whether they deserve it or not) Hang on what does the trainer get for having to be there2 hours before the race Nothing oops another elephant in the room. ps just because you dont like the NSWSS model doesnt mean it wasnt the right one
It's a competition. HRNSW is not an employer of trainers or owners.
The takeout for 1st isn't at 70% either; more like 60%; and a wee bit higher at Menangle Saturday night.
The what if scenarios are silly. What if first sits three wide the trip why should he only $2000 of $4000 grand total while last place sat leaders back beaten 40m and gets $100. See what stupid hypotheticals acheive? Nothing.

[A BIT DUSTY]

Brendan you obviously don't own a calculator Penrith as example prizemoney $5,500 ist 3,713 that's as close to 70% as you can get. You should check your facts before mouthing off.

[David Summers]

Brendan you obviously don't own a calculator Penrith as example prizemoney $5,500 ist 3,713 that's as close to 70% as you can get. You should check your facts before mouthing off.

Check Brendan's stated occupation :cool:

[Danno]

It's a competition. HRNSW is not an employer of trainers or owners.
The takeout for 1st isn't at 70% either; more like 60%; and a wee bit higher at Menangle Saturday night.
The what if scenarios are silly. What if first sits three wide the trip why should he only $2000 of $4000 grand total while last place sat leaders back beaten 40m and gets $100. See what stupid hypotheticals acheive? Nothing.

Brendan, sometimes it helps to empathise with others. Daryl is a horseman speaking from an owner/trainers/horseman perspective.

I don't know you Brendan but I'm beginning to get the impression that you haven't been around quite as long as some others.

When you've been around for 30 or 40 years and experienced just about every different racing scenario you tend to look at the bigger picture and evaluate things from a wider perspective, which was where Daryl was coming from.

I know we don't always agree with one another but it's good practice to al least listen to and way up other points of view. None of us are right all the time.

Cheers, Dan

[aussiebreno]

Brendan you obviously don't own a calculator Penrith as example prizemoney $5,500 ist 3,713 that's as close to 70% as you can get. You should check your facts before mouthing off.
I looked up a Menangle Midweeker and a Wagga friday.
Goes to show some races/meetings do look after the also rans - even if is just $50 or so. Some restricted meetings around the Riverina offer fuel vouchers for also rans.


Check Brendan's stated occupation :cool:
Nice pick up!


Brendan, sometimes it helps to empathise with others. Daryl is a horseman speaking from an owner/trainers/horseman perspective.

I don't know you Brendan but I'm beginning to get the impression that you haven't been around quite as long as some others.

When you've been around for 30 or 40 years and experienced just about every different racing scenario you tend to look at the bigger picture and evaluate things from a wider perspective, which was where Daryl was coming from.

I know we don't always agree with one another but it's good practice to al least listen to and way up other points of view. None of us are right all the time.

Cheers, Dan
Yes you are right I am younger.
If total prizemoney allowed it I'd have no problem with giving also rans $1000. I get the point but I think you have to reward the guy that won with more than 50% prizemoney - remembering they also have to take a class penalty.
I accept when people disagree with my point of view so not sure what you are getting at there...it wouldn't be much of a forum if one poster stated his views then others either posted saying here here and the ones that disagreed weren't allowed to reply...I think as it is most people agree on things, or agree to a certain extent, on things anyway.

[Danno]

See what stupid hypotheticals acheive? Nothing.

Brendan,
I think I've not explained myself very well. If it wasn't for " hypotheticals" ie; people kicking ideas around... we would still all be living in natural shelters breaking rocks into some form we can use to kill our dinner mate!

Cheers,

Dan

[aussiebreno]

See what stupid hypotheticals acheive? Nothing.

Brendan,
I think I've not explained myself very well. If it wasn't for " hypotheticals" ie; people kicking ideas around... we would still all be living in natural shelters breaking rocks into some form we can use to kill our dinner mate!

Cheers,

Dan
You are correct in what you are saying but it's out of context. Using hypotheticals in the manner that poster did for the split of prize-money is silly - there are so many different things that can happen race to race that to govern prizemoney split up by one hypothetical situation is silly. And to the user who made that comment I know it wasn't really the basis of your post and you had other points.

[triplev123]

Jaimie the question is should I expose a novice 2yo to the stresses and strains of the cauldron of Bulli long after its used by date has expired for the off chance that it survives the first turn let alone the rest, or should look after my horse and wait for the Gold Crown and again pressure it to survive the first turn at bathurst and the risks associated with green and immature horses chasing $s before they are ready.Common horsesense goes out the window at the thought of the $s on these two questionable tracks for two year olds

[VVV] That's all just a tad on the emotive side as opposed to the realistic side don't you think?
If the truth be known I'm not & never have been an overly big fan of half miles tracks in general Daryl. History aside, I wasn't exactly broken hearted when HP was sold & Menangle became the standard. A great leap forward there if ever there was one.

That being said, if I had what I thought was the right horse and if I thought said horse was ready to go at that time then I would almost certainly still take a shot at both races. I'd love it if both were conducted on a track of Menangle proportions/quality however that's not going to happen. Also, the fact is that many horses are all they'll ever be at 2 & 3 and some are all they'll ever be at 2yrs & do not improve so much as an inch nor a second on their 2yo form.

There also seems to me to be a fair bit of 'Nanny State' involved in your view of 2yo racing.
From that perspective I think it's yet another example of one of the fastest growing Industries in Australia...that of people being outraged on behalf of others.
The fact is that, just like yourself & your own horses, people will make their decisions & do whatever they want to do with their own horses...be they ready or not and in your eyes be that right or be that wrong....& that's where it begins & it ends. It is also a fact that 2yo racing per se is not and it never has been of itself responsible for young horses falling by the wayside.
Rather, exactly as you probably quite rightly bemoan the fact that some drivers can't get their charges away from a stand, I've no doubt that some trainers simply can't train juveniles. Maybe they're too hard on them, maybe they're not hard enough, maybe they don't read the go ahead signs or back off signs well...God only knows the reasons why.
If I knew that I'd be living in Monaco next door to Mick Doohan.
There's no shame in any of that either by the way. I know of horsemen/women who are excellent at their profession as far as older horses are concerned but for whatever reason they can't get 2yos up and going.
On the other hand there are those out there who will come up with a handy 2yo year after year.
By and large it has long been my experience that those who seek to bag 2yo racing the most are also those who'd secretly like to be in it but either they don't have the horseflesh required or if they do then they can't ever seem to get them going early enough.

Here's a related thought.
Given the current state of play as far as fillies & mares racing is concerned, anyone who owns a 2yo filly should be leaving no stone unturned in their efforts to get them to the track. I say this because once they've past 3yrs, the pickings are getting pretty damned slim & continue to get slimmer for the females. Try regularly starting in 4yo+ mares only races. If you give up on a filly's 2yo season then you've effectively given up 50% of her racing career and as much if not an even greater % of her earning capacity.

[2minuteman]

Hi Trip V,were you moonlighting on 2ue this afternoon with G Hughes talking about Arthur Beetson? If not there are 2 Triple V's around.Lordy, Lordy.

[triplev123]

Out comes your commercial breeder side.
[VVV] Aspiring to be a commercial breeder is bad because........? You make that comment as though it is something I should be ashamed of and that identifying with their ranks somehow engenders a lack of objectivity in this discussion. You've always been a big one for the old 'US vs THEM routine so maybe this is another manifestation thereof? The fact is 80% of the Breeders in Australia breed to race. We used to breed to race but having found it hard to have your cake and eat it as well, now we mainly breed to sell and occasionally we'll race one.
I freely admit that I do dream of the day we could be full-time commercial breeders but alas, right now like the vast majority of the 20% remaining, we're part-timers doing our absolute level best to knock out quality horses that'll go on & race & win for their owners. So far so good.


That crutch you referred to kept a lot of participants in the game.
[VVV] Incorrect. That crutch I referred to was that which presided over and made financially viable the raft of mediocre sires that used to make their homes here in NSW. One only need to review the resultant progeny of the last 10 years of NSWSS operation and then make note of their regularly repeated inability to make a dent on the National stage when in against the progeny of VIC, NZ and at the time QLD bases sired to see how far below par the NSW product had gotten.

The only problem as I see it is that the Stallion importers didnt offer the quality of stallion at that time.
[VVV]...and unless the NSWSS was abandoned & eligibilities were altered by way of the addition of a mares based component, nothing would have changed. NSW owned & domiciled mares were making HUGE contributions to the VIC product at the time.

No I havent discussed this with Don but quite oten D J Heath and I discuss the inadequacies of the Alabar series and the positives of the NSWSS.
[VVV] John's a good bloke, always good to have a chat with him.
Obviously you are very much for a protectionist view of the NSW Breeding Industry then Daryl, that being the very same thing that saw it slowly but surely wither & die on the vine as the quality of horse produced during its tenure dropped through the floor.
When we got to the stage where we had 3rd rate sires serving the daughters of 3rd rate sires who were themselves the daughters of mares by 3rd rate sires then it was finally time to call it quits. Thankfully someone saw the PRESS IN AN EMERGENCY button and jammed their digit into it....ending the nightmare once and for all.

We cant all own Bettors or Machs etc.
[VVV] They don't win all the races either. Look at Menangle on Saturday night.
Nuke Of Earl, Mach Three, Washington VC, Courage Under Fire, Bettor's Delight, Badlands Hanover, Sundon, Tinted Cloud, Art Major and a US bred who's sire isn't available here & even so isn't exactly a big ticket item anway. 6 of those aren't big $ fees. Harness Racing's one of the most egalitarian sports there is in that respect.

remember if all the Daryls leave NO harness racing.
[VVV] With all due respect, nobody's asking anyone to stay. Not you, not me, not Breno or David or Greg or Dallas or Harvey or Trev or anyone. I could throw a wobbly and walk tomorrow & that's my decision. I'm not going to of course, I'll stick even if they're racing for ribbons. Its a moot point anyway. We're entering an era of unprecedented prizemoney and so prosperity and if people can't make some sort of a go of it now then they never will.
Continuing from the previous point, the beauty of Harness Racing is that you don't neccessarily need to be a big spending owner/breeder to get the best horse. Thankfully it has always been that way & it will always be that way.


Another elephant in the room. Prizemoney breakdown.As it stands the winner takes 70%, leaving 30% for the rest. Geez sounds like the TAB distribution doesnt it.
Any way with this new money how doe you feel witha revised breakdown to say 50% for the winner( 22,000 metro race ) = 11,500 and say 4,300 for 2nd, and 2300 for 3rd,1200 for 4th and 700 for 5thand 400 each 6th to 10th.More money across the board, more incentive to keep horses racing, more incentive to reinvest in horses etc. The same to apply to the improved provincial prizemoney scales. after all the horse that ran second beaten by a nose in 1.55 possibly led up, ensured the winner is credited with a fast time and may/probably worked harder. Afterall if you go to a show at the theatre ( and they keep telling me we are in the entertainment industry) even the stage hand behind the scenes gets paid. Our stagehands are those 6th to 10th (Bulli 5th to 10th) only get $55 and $40 of that goes to the driver (whether they deserve it or not) Hang on what does the trainer get for having to be there2 hours before the race Nothing oops another elephant in the room. ps just because you dont like the NSWSS model doesnt mean it wasnt the right one
[VVV] I agree that the purse breakdown should be changed however there's simply no point changing it unless it goes hand in hand with full on Conditioned Racing. Cherry picking and then grafting various bits & pieces of the US system onto our framework is madnes.

Regards

Jaimie

[Danno]

"It is also a fact that 2yo racing per se is not and it never has been of itself responsible for young horses falling by the wayside."

With all due respect to you Jamie, you are consistently referring to your opinions as FACT, when " in fact" it's simply your opinion.
I realise you are most likley doing this on "auto pilot" but it's probably about time to be fair in debate.

2yo racing is complicit in the early demise of many young horses.. certainly there are many other factors like the existence of bloated prizemoney, the lure of a "quick buck" and trainers who, for one reason or another, have no luck in getting the young ones going but to claim it a fact that 2YO racing plays no part is just hot air mate. Albeit it sounds convincing but thats about where it ends.

I mean how can you on the one hand say "we have 2YO racing" and then claim it's a fact that the racing ( let alone the preparation) plays no part in horses falling by the wayside???

Cheers,

Dan

[triplev123]

G'day Dan,

I think you're making the mistake of taking the old 'guns kill people' argument and applying the same line of thought to 2yo racing. Guns are a factor BUT they are neither complicit nor responsible. Same applies to 2yo racing. It doesn't cause horses to fall by the wayside. People do that. You're at once both blaming juvenile racing itself for any negative outcomes and giving absolution to the owners & trainers who've succumbed to the 'lure' (your word) of big early $. That my friend is every free born citizen's own decision to make. Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything. Free will Brother, free will. We were all born with it. It is ours and ours alone to exercise.

Regards

Jaimie

[Danno]

G'day Dan,

I think you're making the mistake of taking the old 'guns kill people' argument and applying the same line of thought to 2yo racing. Guns are a factor BUT they are neither complicit nor responsible. Same applies to 2yo racing. It doesn't cause horses to fall by the wayside. People do that. You're at once both blaming juvenile racing itself for any negative outcomes and giving absolution to the owners & trainers who've succumbed to the 'lure' (your word) of big early $. That my friend is every free born citizen's own decision to make. Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything. Free will Brother, free will. We were all born with it. It is ours and ours alone to exercise.

Regards

Jaimie

Got no problems with people making their own bed Jamie, just people who try to win debates telling porkies, you are still claiming 2YO racing has nothing to do with the some young horses falling by the wayside?

you are either a lot dumber that I thought you were or you just refuse to acknowledge that your incorrect!

I did not and have not ever said 2YO racing is evil and is soley responsible for the ruination of babies, I have said it is a factor, along with excessive prizemoney and a host of other reasons.

They banned the gun in NSW and it has greatly reduced the number of people shooting each other. To say the gun was solely responsible would be wrong, but to deny it's a factor would be equally so.

Dan

[triplev123]

Got no problems with people making their own bed Jamie, just people who try to win debates telling porkies, you are still claiming 2YO racing has nothing to do with the some young horses falling by the wayside?

you are either a lot dumber that I thought you were or you just refuse to acknowledge that your incorrect!

I did not and have not ever said 2YO racing is evil and is soley responsible for the ruination of babies, I have said it is a factor, along with excessive prizemoney and a host of other reasons.

They banned the gun in NSW and it has greatly reduced the number of people shooting each other. To say the gun was solely responsible would be wrong, but to deny it's a factor would be equally so.

Dan

[VVV] Ok Dan, now that you've got accusing me of both telling lies & being dumb out of your system can we continue?...or do you wish to keep on with more of this schoolyard stuff? If that's the case then we may as well leave it at that.
Seems to me that you're moving the goalposts on me as we go. Your position has gone & shifted slightly. Instead of 2yo racing being the Antichrist...now you're saying that 2yo racing is not solely to blame for young horses breaking down...but that it is a factor along with excessive prizemoney & a host of other reasons. A host of other reasons...such as?
Do me a favour and read that reply of mine to Daryl in its entirety & place the statement you picked out within the context of that which preceeded and that which followed it.

Regards

Jaimie

[2minuteman]

Out behind the dunnies and sort it out at little lunch you blokes!! (joke Joyce)

[aussiebreno]

Let's not race horses at all in case they break down ! :o

I like what VVV said a few posts back, words that basically sent the message that it shouldn't bother me what someone does with their horse. After all they own/train it and its their decision.

Of course if the prizemoney was different then the decision may be different. But the biggest reason the prizemoney is there is from state sires series' and yearling sales which I believe are a BIG positive for the industry.
Only a handful of horses win that prizemoney anyway.
The rest can also get up to 4 (?) wins before it affects their class as a 3yo and beyond. So two horses of equal ability could win 6 races (1win at 2yo, 2win at 3yo and 3wins at 4yo+) and only be a C3 whereas a horse who starts later on in life will only ever have 3 wins and reach a C3. There are a whole lot of what ifs and positives and negatives but as VVV said what somebody chooses shouldnt bother others.

[David Summers]

Out behind the dunnies and sort it out at little lunch you blokes!! (joke Joyce)

Fight ! Fight ! Fight ! [munching popcorn ;) ]

[A BIT DUSTY]

Here's a related thought.
Given the current state of play as far as fillies & mares racing is concerned, anyone who owns a 2yo filly should be leaving no stone unturned in their efforts to get them to the track. I say this because once they've past 3yrs, the pickings are getting pretty damned slim & continue to get slimmer for the females. Try regularly starting in 4yo+ mares only races. If you give up on a filly's 2yo season then you've effectively given up 50% of her racing career and as much if not an even greater % of her earning capacity.


Jamie I think you have made a couple of references now to this subject. The last two horses I have purchased have been 4yr old mares. I'll let you into a little secret, Mares get a huge leg up regarding handicapping in N.S.W . Mares drop a class when nominated for a mixed sex race , so a C2 mare can race in a C1 race etc. and once they become a C4 they can drop back 2 classes with concession driver.I know that there are only a few feature races for them, but have you taken any notice to the mares M0/M1 's that are on at almost ever metro meeting at menangle. With the use of driver concessions a mare can WIN 3 metro class races easily eg: Mandy Rambo recently, also once a month there is a C1-C2 mares only series with heats of $5,000 in the country, provincial track,s with a $7,500 final at Menangle once again with clever placement a mare can win 2 of these series. So as you can see Jamie it is not such a bad thing after all ,certainly not that bad that you have to burn 2yr old babies before throwing them on the scrap heap.

[aussiebreno]

Here's a related thought.
Given the current state of play as far as fillies & mares racing is concerned, anyone who owns a 2yo filly should be leaving no stone unturned in their efforts to get them to the track. I say this because once they've past 3yrs, the pickings are getting pretty damned slim & continue to get slimmer for the females. Try regularly starting in 4yo+ mares only races. If you give up on a filly's 2yo season then you've effectively given up 50% of her racing career and as much if not an even greater % of her earning capacity.


Jamie I think you have made a couple of references now to this subject. The last two horses I have purchased have been 4yr old mares. I'll let you into a little secret, Mares get a huge leg up regarding handicapping in N.S.W . Mares drop a class when nominated for a mixed sex race Thats only accounts for one win they may not have got otherwise. , so a C2 mare can race in a C1 race etc . and once they become a C4 they can drop back 2 classes with concession driver. moot point because so can boysI know that there are only a few feature races for them, but have you taken any notice to the mares M0/M1 's that are on at almost ever metro meeting at menangle. With the use of driver concessions a mare can WIN 3 metro class races easily Got to get their first eg: Mandy Rambo recently, also once a month there is a C1-C2 mares only series with heats of $5,000 in the country, once a month. Why not more?provincial track,s with a $7,500 final at Menangle once again with clever placement a mare can win 2 of these series. So that's 12 mares. What about the other 200 (?) here in NSW So as you can see Jamie it is not such a bad thing after all ,certainly not that bad that you have to burn 2yr old babies before throwing them on the scrap heap.That wasn't what he was implying and just because you race at 2 doesn't mean you won't go on. We're doing circlework here lol
By the way to VVV aren't you quite friendly with B P Hancock?

[David Summers]

Kudos to all sides in this thread for having the stamina to continue the argument on and on and .........on, but don't you think that you should just shake hands and call it a draw.

No-one will change the other's mind about this , so let's call it even and move on :cool:

[admin]

116

[aussiebreno]

116
So much lolz even if it is partly in my direction. I walk away from the computer thinking the same things sometimes but it always gets the better of me.

[A BIT DUSTY]

Brendan can you please show me were Danno or anyone else mentioned what others did with their 2yr olds ,The topic was the merits of racing 2yr old and the effects on their future racing.

Your example of the horse that starts later in life only ever being a C3 is a Stupid analogy as how do you know it isn't another Be Good Johnny ( didn't race till 5 or 6 ) that goes on to win 2 Miracle Miles

[aussiebreno]

Brendan can you please show me were Danno or anyone else mentioned what others did with their 2yr olds ,The topic was the merits of racing 2yr old and the effects on their future racing.

Your example of the horse that starts later in life only ever being a C3 is a Stupid analogy as how do you know it isn't another Be Good Johnny ( didn't race till 5 or 6 ) that goes on to win 2 Miracle Miles
You are correct; Danno didn't mention it. I didn't mention it directly at Danno towards anything he had said. It was about trying to find middle ground; one set of people can race at two and be happy with it while another set of people can race later and be happy with it. The point was there is so many positives and negatives and many based on opinion rather than fact that as David Summers and Admin alluded to its tiring!

And my analogy of the C3 isn't stupid...I said two horses of EQUAL ability eg they reach the same class. If Be Good Johnny did start at two who is to say he wouldnt have been capable of winning a QBred and still going on to win 2 Miracle miles anyway? Do you know why he didn't start until later? He started at 4 FWIW.

[triplev123]

Hi Trip V,were you moonlighting on 2ue this afternoon with G Hughes talking about Arthur Beetson? If not there are 2 Triple V's around.Lordy, Lordy.

[VVV] Nah, not me mate. I've made the odd irate call to 2GB & Ray Hadley and I was once fortunate enough to have been a studio guest with Macca on the ABC on Sunday mornings but no, I haven't made my way to 2UE. Btw, Macca is a really great bloke. One of the best experiences of my life. He genuinely loves this country and its people.

[A BIT DUSTY]

My apology Brendan you did say of equal ability must have missed that in my hast to jump on you , a bad habit of mine. And you are probably right about Be Good Johnny as I was too lazy to check but was sure he was a late starter. I, like everyone else is tired of this merry go round , so we'll all agree to disagree .

CHEERS DENNY

[triplev123]

I've forgotten what we were arguing about Breno. What was it again? :rolleyes:

[Danno]

I've forgotten what we were arguing about Breno. What was it again? :rolleyes:

Damn! I just get back and you blokes have all thrown the sponge in...looks like I win!!:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Jamie, the porkies shot was wrong, my blue and yes I'm sure we are not going to change one anothers opinions, not on this forum anyway but I reckon you oughta read some of the stuff you write ( eg response to Daryl New) and read it as if you were the one receiving it. Your style is a bit confronting and provocative in my opinion.

thats why people chuck bombs back at you:rolleyes:

cheers for now

Dan

[aussiebreno]

Damn! I just get back and you blokes have all thrown the sponge in...looks like I win!!:rolleyes: :rolleyes:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf97cGBDDSU

Skip to 2.02.

[triplev123]

Damn! I just get back and you blokes have all thrown the sponge in...looks like I win!!:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Jamie, the porkies shot was wrong, my blue and yes I'm sure we are not going to change one anothers opinions, not on this forum anyway but I reckon you oughta read some of the stuff you write ( eg response to Daryl New) and read it as if you were the one receiving it. Your style is a bit confronting and provocative in my opinion.

thats why people chuck bombs back at you:rolleyes:

cheers for now

Dan

[VVV] Confronting and provocative is Ok. I'll take that as a compliment. People tend to chuck bombs when they run out of ideas. I've done it myself but try very hard these days not to.

[Danno]

[VVV] Confronting and provocative is Ok. I'll take that as a compliment. People tend to chuck bombs when they run out of ideas. I've done it myself but try very hard these days not to.

My experience is that people chuck bombs BACK at you when you've been doing more than your share of the chucking. So can you respectfully take that as whilst you may be trying very hard so far it's not a complete success. No one has run out of ideas here sport.. like it's been said we ain't gunna change each other's minds in this space.

[triplev123]

G'day Dan,

For whatever reason, people being outraged on behalf of others is without doubt the fastest growing Industry in Australia at the present time. I know Daryl. Daryl knows me. We've spoken on a few occasions over the years just as I have with John Heath. I knew and much admired John's Uncle, the late Charlie Parsons. That's how far back it goes. I always enjoy talking to John also. He's a wonderful walking encyclopedia of the Industry. We agree on some things, disagree on others. I tend to think that a large slice of nostalgia rather than the cold hard facts of the present colour quite a bit of what Daryl and John think about some aspects of the Industry but it did with Charlie as well and I am guilty of much the same as far as other Industry issues are concerned. Ultimately we're all basically the sum of our experiences, be they good, bad or indifferent. The one thing that Daryl, John, yourself and myself all have, as does virtually everyone else who spends time & effort on this forum...is a great & burning passion to see Harness Racing not only succeed but flourish. That's the one peice of common ground we all share. Onwards & upwards. I'm off to help a mate do some fencing.

Regards

Jaimie

[2minuteman]

[VVV] Nah, not me mate. I've made the odd irate call to 2GB & Ray Hadley and I was once fortunate enough to have been a studio guest with Macca on the ABC on Sunday mornings but no, I haven't made my way to 2UE. Btw, Macca is a really great bloke. One of the best experiences of my life. He genuinely loves this country and its people.
Just caught the sign off of a phone call and G hughes said the caller was Triple V.

[Starship Captain]

"I was once fortunate enough to have been a studio guest with Macca on the ABC on Sunday mornings but no, I haven't made my way to 2UE. Btw, Macca is a really great bloke. One of the best experiences of my life." arghhhhh

I suffered many years of having to listen to those fucking magpies.

[2minuteman]

What was wrong with the "OFF" button?

[triplev123]

"I was once fortunate enough to have been a studio guest with Macca on the ABC on Sunday mornings but no, I haven't made my way to 2UE. Btw, Macca is a really great bloke. One of the best experiences of my life." arghhhhh

I suffered many years of having to listen to those fucking magpies.

[VVV] For mine it's one of life's great mysteries why either Cable or the Free to Air TV hasn't picked Macca up to do his own series/show. It would be an instant success. Maybe they have made overtures and he's knocked them back. Great bloke.