Let's try something different.

[2minuteman]

What is one of the most annoying features of harness racing? With some exceptions,(last nights Truer as an example),it is boredom.
Sort out the field positions before the first turn,get out the pipe and teapot until the home turn and try to gather in leaders that have been ambling along at their leisure.
Distance points and dollars aside, consider this for ordinary meetings,
Mile races: First to the winning post first time,$500.
First to the 400 mark,$1000.

or, First to the winning post first time,$500.
First to the 600 mark,$500.
Coming from further back than fifth (min 8 strs) at the turn,$500.

Longer races,
First to the first turn,$500.
First to the mile peg,$500.
First to the 600 mark,$500.
Coming from further back than fifth (min 8 strs) at the turn,$1000.
Discuss.

[Danno]

G'day Ron,
I reckon you're spot on about our racing being boring sometimes, with all the knowledge available to the punters ( and opposition) about gate speed, winning barrier draw stats at each venue,form which includes where each horse was in the run at every 400 metre peg at all recent starts, slow sectional rules, a greater percentage of races over shorter distances, a lower number of trainers with horses in their yards, all mobile starts................................the list goes on mate, we are striving to placate the punters with better and more consistant information and some of that is great, but some of it makes our racing more predictable which, inturn makes it,

a) more boring.

b)more predictable.

c) as a result of a) and b) more short favourites and hence smaller pools.


I have been saying this for thirty f...ing years! and guess what! I must be an idiot because no one has heard it and our game keeps on shrinking, year after year after bloody year.

[Mitch]

My comments here will no doubt be met with plenty of criticism but I am willing to take the heat! The biggest issue in harness racing is one of the purest features that has defined the sport until this point. For the sport to re-establish itself it must make some serious decisions to delineate between hobbyist non professional trainers & drivers & professional trainers and drivers.

I am not suggesting that we get rid of the hobbyists, I am however in support of a licensing & race programming model that provides exclusivity for both and some opportunity for both to co-participate at certain events. I would investigate the viability of making non tab events exclusive to hobbyists and country meetings open to all trainers and a minimum graded driver. Metro meetings should be open to professional drivers only (all trainers). I would also make the licensing process more stringent particularly for the various driver classes.

Secondly the governing bodies in each state need to make the call on closing down venues which no longer meet the required standard. A prime example of this is Bankstown in NSW. I attended a Monday meeting there a couple of weeks ago and walked away questioning a lot of things. Furthermore a lot of work needs to be done on venue management, in particular restricted access to race day stalls. At Bankstown it was come and go as you please for anyone????

There is a lot more detail that goes with my two suggestions above.

Given that the future of the sport relies heavily on wagering, making decisions that entice the punter to invest more should be prioritised. The above 2 points are a good place to start in my opinion.

[mary]

My comments here will no doubt be met with plenty of criticism but I am willing to take the heat! The biggest issue in harness racing is one of the purest features that has defined the sport until this point. For the sport to re-establish itself it must make some serious decisions to delineate between hobbyist non professional trainers & drivers & professional trainers and drivers.

I am not suggesting that we get rid of the hobbyists, I am however in support of a licensing & race programming model that provides exclusivity for both and some opportunity for both to co-participate at certain events. I would investigate the viability of making non tab events exclusive to hobbyists and country meetings open to all trainers and a minimum graded driver. Metro meetings should be open to professional drivers only (all trainers). I would also make the licensing process more stringent particularly for the various driver classes.

Secondly the governing bodies in each state need to make the call on closing down venues which no longer meet the required standard. A prime example of this is Bankstown in NSW. I attended a Monday meeting there a couple of weeks ago and walked away questioning a lot of things. Furthermore a lot of work needs to be done on venue management, in particular restricted access to race day stalls. At Bankstown it was come and go as you please for anyone????

There is a lot more detail that goes with my two suggestions above.

Given that the future of the sport relies heavily on wagering, making decisions that entice the punter to invest more should be prioritised. The above 2 points are a good place to start in my opinion.


Mitch.
The fact that harness racing is first & foremost a family sport will never allow for the hobby persons not to drive their own horses.
In saying that I watch in disbelief at the way a huge amount of horses are driven by them & cringe. I also wonder how they got a licence in the first place. Scary stuff!
Most don't give a bugger about other peoples horses & do not care about taking horses out....they get 21 days , big woop, means nothing. Meanwhile the poor bugger whos horse has been taken out gets 12mths in the paddock with a bowed tendion. I had one who came down years ago ( died 2 days later) by an incompetent driver & that person still can not drive!!!
I agree that Menangle should have the professional drivers drive there on Metro nights & all big $ races elsewhere.
Agree re Bankstown too.

I went to Maitland years ago & watched the drivers invitation races....brillant stuff, they drove within inches of each other without one bit of interference. Top driving.

But also one has to be realistic & honestly where is this sport headed?????
How many professionals can make a living in this game???
4 maybe 5, thats about it. If that.
Stats....last year
Mccarthys.......$4,624,971.00 (metro trainer)
Fitzpatrick.......$1,208,515.00 (metro trainer)
Turnbull..........$864,369.00 (Bathurst way)
Russo..............$742,909.00 (Bathurst way)
Tritton ............$504,573.99 (newcastle way)

Most others eating pain off the walls!

This season so far.
Mccarthy.....$1,031,208.00
Turnbull.......$186,328.00
Tritton........$129,088.00
Neil Day......$98,000.00

The rest so far ...eating paint off the walls!
These stats ARE a huge concern to harness racing. IMO.

[aussiebreno]

Mitch.
The fact that harness racing is first & foremost a family sport will never allow for the hobby persons not to drive their own horses.
In saying that I watch in disbelief at the way a huge amount of horses are driven by them & cringe. I also wonder how they got a licence in the first place. Scary stuff!
Most don't give a bugger about other peoples horses & do not care about taking horses out....they get 21 days , big woop, means nothing. Meanwhile the poor bugger whos horse has been taken out gets 12mths in the paddock with a bowed tendion. I had one who came down years ago ( died 2 days later) by an incompetent driver & that person still can not drive!!!
I agree that Menangle should have the professional drivers drive there on Metro nights & all big $ races elsewhere.
Agree re Bankstown too.

I went to Maitland years ago & watched the drivers invitation races....brillant stuff, they drove within inches of each other without one bit of interference. Top driving.

But also one has to be realistic & honestly where is this sport headed?????
How many professionals can make a living in this game???
4 maybe 5, thats about it. If that.
Stats....last year
Mccarthys.......$4,624,971.00 (metro trainer)
Fitzpatrick.......$1,208,515.00 (metro trainer)
Turnbull..........$864,369.00 (Bathurst way)
Russo..............$742,909.00 (Bathurst way)
Tritton ............$504,573.99 (newcastle way)

Most others eating pain off the walls!

This season so far.
Mccarthy.....$1,031,208.00
Turnbull.......$186,328.00
Tritton........$129,088.00
Neil Day......$98,000.00

The rest so far ...eating paint off the walls!
These stats ARE a huge concern to harness racing. IMO.
I'd have thought trainers would also have a vast amount of trainers fees though.

[mary]

I'd have thought trainers would also have a vast amount of trainers fees though.


Most trainers that I have spoken too in the Sydney/Newcastle areas, have lost a large percentage of their horses to elsewhere or their owners are downsizing.
Also you wouldn't believe how many trainers are forced to do deals to attract horses to their stables & these deals include zero training fees.
These owners have no intention of replacing horses.
A lot of trainers are on the cusp of collapse but trying to hang in there.
Its a tough game for many trainers!

[Mitch]

I'd have thought trainers would also have a vast amount of trainers fees though.

If they are charging full tote they only get between $30-$40 a day and a lot end up training on % share of prize money. This makes it tough if you're not winning a lot of races.

Even the most successful of harness trainers, like the McCarthys, wouldn't make anywhere near as much money as some middle of the rung gallops trainer. It doesn't seem fair!

[aussiebreno]

Yeah, I definetly wasn't saying trainers have it easy, just pointing out something. Everyone involved in the harness game could certaintly use some help!

[mary]

On the vine is the story that 4 Mccarthys will be training over 100 horses by the end of 2013.

[Danno]

[

QUOTE=Mitch;24132]If they are charging full tote they only get between $30-$40 a day and a lot end up training on % share of prize money. This makes it tough if you're not winning a lot of races.

Even the most successful of harness trainers, like the McCarthys, wouldn't make anywhere near as much money as some middle of the rung gallops trainer. It doesn't seem fair![/QUOTE]

"Doesn't seem fair" is pretty much my opinion as well Mitch, as you can see from other peoples posts, the number of trainers, ( professional or otherwise) in the game are dwindling all the time, the number of owners paying up for horses are also dwindling, the prices at our yearling sales have been gut wrenching for the people who breed to sell.........and I will continue to bang on that we continue to shoot ourselves in the foot with our "falling over ourselves " approach to making our product more appealing to the betting public.

This game had it's uniqueness once, and yes it was a few years ago, but it wasn't in the "old days" either, it was before we allowed the loud minority ( they being our commercial breeders) to influence our prizemoney distribution to encourage the chasing of the "big bucks" for 2YO racing..................why would commercial breeders do this? they would tell you that the big money for 2YO racing encourages new owners into the sport, but the truth is very few 2YO's "make the grade" as 2yo's, approximately 6% across the board, when all up around winners to foals regardless of age are about 19%....lets think about that for a moment 6% verus 19%.. so in one hand you are trying to lure new owners into our game on wildly false expectations, and coupled with that there are a great number of babies getting cooked because of the expectation of a quick return on investment, and many new owners are going out the back door because the industry as a whole has "over promised and under delivered"

So mate in reference to original point of your post, do you really think our game is at a point where we can confidently promote " exclusiveness" at the expense of inclusiveness??

cheers,
Dan

[mightymo]

Which "commercial breeders" influenced the decision making???

[Mitch]

Dan,

I don't confess to having all the answers and your point is a very good one which I don't disagree with.
The 2 points I raised are certainly not the only solutions I believe exist in improving the sport, just the 2 I am most passionate about.
Why I think my suggestion has merit is due to the current appeal harness racing has to the general punting public. There is little or no appeal for people to attend the races and still too many races are run and won in a predictable manner. Bookies are rare as the risk is too great and many trainers in NSW are happy to race for second behind Team McCarthy.
By implementing a model that creates a more competitive alignment of the talent pool it should in turn increase competition over time. With this should come increased wagering revenue and hopefully increases in other forms of revenue due to a better product being delivered. That is a simplistic explanation but hopefully you get my drift. I get that there will be winners & losers as part of this however if its for the greater good of the sport I am ok with it. It would also require a significant amount of research and testing to get it right.
To your point improving the distribution of prize money across juvenile & open age racing could well compliment the above or be just as effective in its own right.

There is probably another 20 things that could or should be done that haven't even been raised.

NSW is in the best financial position to try some of these things and I do genuinely have faith that Sam Nati has the right intentions regarding the future. Whether he has the capability to convince the board to make some of the harder decisions quickly and then execute them well remains to be seen...

[Danno]

G'day Harvey,
I don't know how long you have been involved with the game in Australia, but I can tell you I have been an active participant for over forty years in NSW and a keen student of the game Australia wide during this time.
Prior to the development of "Sires Stakes" racing here in NSW and Victoria in the early eighties we had a select number of 2yo feature races with nice prizemoney ( eg NSW Sapling Stakes) and a couple of others.

A successful push came for a "Sires Stakes" program similar to systems operating in North America. I was personally involved with some of the debate about the value of these proposals, and being a part time horse trainer, breeder, owner,farrier,administrator and driver (among other things) voiced my concerns about the overall welfare of young horses if the incentive to push them too early became too great.
Every time I raised this concern the people who bred to sell at that time kept saying this would help to sell their yearlings.

So in answer to your question Harvey, every person I spoke to that bred to sell.

Cheers,
Dan

[Mitch]

Ron,

To your original idea the biggest challenge I see in implementing a model like that is how you protect the punter. How would stewards enforce many of the rules of racing given that not everyone in the race would be racing against a common outcome? Some would be there to win the race overall whereas others would use their horses as sacrificial lambs just to get some type of cheque. I'm not sure punters would support this and like it or not we need 1 of 2 things to happen 1. Increased investment by existing punters or 2. Recruit new/lost punters back to the sport.

[mary]

and many trainers in NSW are happy to race for second behind Team McCarthy.


Mitch, with respect, but I found this line strange.

Why would ANYONE be happy to run 2nd behind Mccarthys ????
Unless its Mccarthys.
You can not make a living out of running 2nd.

[2minuteman]

Ron,

To your original idea the biggest challenge I see in implementing a model like that is how you protect the punter. How would stewards enforce many of the rules of racing given that not everyone in the race would be racing against a common outcome? Some would be there to win the race overall whereas others would use their horses as sacrificial lambs just to get some type of cheque. I'm not sure punters would support this and like it or not we need 1 of 2 things to happen 1. Increased investment by existing punters or 2. Recruit new/lost punters back to the sport.
Good points Mitch and I had thought of them as well but the post was to start discussion not to push any particular barrow.
The most disheartening thing is that the powers that be are not open to ideas outside of their own.

[dizzy]

My comments here will no doubt be met with plenty of criticism but I am willing to take the heat! The biggest issue in harness racing is one of the purest features that has defined the sport until this point. For the sport to re-establish itself it must make some serious decisions to delineate between hobbyist non professional trainers & drivers & professional trainers and drivers.

I am not suggesting that we get rid of the hobbyists, I am however in support of a licensing & race programming model that provides exclusivity for both and some opportunity for both to co-participate at certain events. I would investigate the viability of making non tab events exclusive to hobbyists and country meetings open to all trainers and a minimum graded driver. Metro meetings should be open to professional drivers only (all trainers). I would also make the licensing process more stringent particularly for the various driver classes.

Secondly the governing bodies in each state need to make the call on closing down venues which no longer meet the required standard. A prime example of this is Bankstown in NSW. I attended a Monday meeting there a couple of weeks ago and walked away questioning a lot of things. Furthermore a lot of work needs to be done on venue management, in particular restricted access to race day stalls. At Bankstown it was come and go as you please for anyone????

There is a lot more detail that goes with my two suggestions above.

Given that the future of the sport relies heavily on wagering, making decisions that entice the punter to invest more should be prioritised. The above 2 points are a good place to start in my opinion.

Well I've enjoyed my sabbatical but there are some points in this thread that cant go unanswered. Mitch your certainly entitled to your opinion but it seems you were unable to take on board much of what has been raised here previously.

At this point in time there are not the number of participants available to deliniate between hobbyist and professional as you propose even if it were a good idea. Most non tab meetings would not stand up if the pro stables did not attend, and why would hobby trainer/drivers nominate for metro meetings if you are going to deny them the opportunity /thrill of driving their horses plus the cost recovery opportunity from driving fees or running in the money without offering them compensation for their lost returns?

Don't get me wrong I do think that lower grade meetings should be structured to provide better opportunity for lesser trainers/driver/stock and that driver compatancies at all level meetings should be looked at, but straight out legislation preventing hobbyists from metro meetings is not the way. Do you think Colin McDowell would have invested another $150 odd thousand in the industry at the ready to run sale on Sunday if your going to tell him he cant drive them at Menangle in the 2yo races he's sponsoring in a couple of months time?

Mitch your certainly tenacious on the issue of shutting down Bankstown but what is the "required standard" and certainly it should apply to all tracks equally. What were your unanswered questions with regard to Bankstown and perhaps they can be answered if you direct your enquiries to the right people. Perhaps you should have attended Treur night instead of a Monday meeting.

If the required standard is restricted access to raceday stalls then Bankstown is not the only track in the state in breech. Of course to close any track for that would be ridiculous. Obviously the "required standard" if there was one should be along the lines of returns to the industry from the TAB distribution made available to them but you may not like that one as it may not show your prefered track in a very good light. Individual tracks are not shown but HRNSW data from their annual reports for the last 2 years show metropolitan club (there is only one of those) turnover down around 6% each year whilst country, provincial and carnival of cups turnover continues to grow. So Mitch just what is the required standard? A business that has a large cash reserve from extraneous sources is obviously in a better position then one without, but is not neccesarily a good business.


In a latter post Mitch you made the comment that some trainers are happy to run second to the McCarthys. Are you for real? In my 35 years of racing and compeditive equestrian sport I have yet to meet someone who was happy to run second. Sure rationally second is as good or indeed much better then most can expect on many occasions but emotionally everyone is out there to "live the dream" and that means winning not running second.

Mary posted some interesting and damming stats regarding prizemoney distribution and rightly said professionals cant live off running second. Just this week I have heard of another 2 professional trainers quitting the industry and another on the brink, and another who is not going on past the end of this season. As Mark pointed out many times previously harness racing turnover is largely driven by the connections of various stables, how do you think we will go for turnover when there is less then a handful of stables left?

Clearly the renaissance of NSW harness racing from the sale of Harold Park is not happening.

[dizzy]

Ron on your original question of lets try something different how about this- Instead of trying to imitate something else like we did with the flying k why not utilise the differences in harness racing from the other two codes and capitalise on our unique position. Most of the criticism has been around harness racing being too boring and harness races take too long for the TAB liking, hence the flying K concept, which might have been the only concept available in 1999 when it was put to the world trotting conference but in 2012 and beyond with the technology available now why don't we make harness racing more interactive for the punter?

By that I mean why aren't we looking at a "Bet till the Bell" concept? Harness races typically take place over a 2 to 2 and a half minute time frame, with a number of "landmarks" on the course, which with todays technology should be ample to use all but say the last minute to continue betting. Presently betting closes just before the race begins but as the TAB is now offering fixed and tote odds why cant the tote pool remain open until the bell with the exception of cancelling bets from the same time the fixed odds would close? This would mean punters could continue to bet as the race unfolds, those who backed a breaking favourite at the start would have a chance to back something else in the race. Those who thought something could win but only if it led could further invest on their choice if it got the lead. I'm sure those of you who punt get the gist so feel free to discuss further as I don't punt so may have missed something. Maybe it needs to be a separate tote pool to that before the race. I'm sure being a more interactive betting medium would change punters opinions about harness racing being boring.

[aussiebreno]

Ron on your original question of lets try something different how about this- Instead of trying to imitate something else like we did with the flying k why not utilise the differences in harness racing from the other two codes and capitalise on our unique position. Most of the criticism has been around harness racing being too boring and harness races take too long for the TAB liking, hence the flying K concept, which might have been the only concept available in 1999 when it was put to the world trotting conference but in 2012 and beyond with the technology available now why don't we make harness racing more interactive for the punter?

By that I mean why aren't we looking at a "Bet till the Bell" concept? Harness races typically take place over a 2 to 2 and a half minute time frame, with a number of "landmarks" on the course, which with todays technology should be ample to use all but say the last minute to continue betting. Presently betting closes just before the race begins but as the TAB is now offering fixed and tote odds why cant the tote pool remain open until the bell with the exception of cancelling bets from the same time the fixed odds would close? This would mean punters could continue to bet as the race unfolds, those who backed a breaking favourite at the start would have a chance to back something else in the race. Those who thought something could win but only if it led could further invest on their choice if it got the lead. I'm sure those of you who punt get the gist so feel free to discuss further as I don't punt so may have missed something. Maybe it needs to be a separate tote pool to that before the race. I'm sure being a more interactive betting medium would change punters opinions about harness racing being boring.
That would seriously alienate most punters, the quantity of punters would severely decrease.

[Mitch]

Dot,

As you said I am entitled to my opinion and as I have stated in my post there is a lot more detail to be investigated in regards to the economics and practicality of my suggestions. They may well be unrealistic, unsuitable or in fact unfair.

I will respond to a couple of points to elaborate on what I have previously stated:

- People happy to run 2nd to the McCarthys - I believe they are, if not why do so many hand up and let him dictate races? I don't watch every race at every track but a lot of the races that I do watch I am amazed at how easily he is afforded the lead. I interpret that as them conceding that they can't beat him and are therefore happy to take the sit and race for 2nd. Right or wrong that is my interpretation.

Bankstown - The facilities and racing surface are below what I determine to be a reasonable standard. If the club or HRNSW want to invest the required money to get them up to standard then I am happy for it to stay in operation. Furthermore I believe we only need 1 half mile track in metro Sydney and Penrith is the better option in my opinion.

Restricted Access - I believe all tracks should have restricted access to the stabling enclosure for trainers, drivers, stable hands and owners that have been granted access once they present themselves to the race day office. This should be a given from both an integrity and safety perspective.

Feel free to put forward any ideas yourself Dot. I think forums like this are great place to debate rationally.

[dizzy]

Dot,

As you said I am entitled to my opinion and as I have stated in my post there is a lot more detail to be investigated in regards to the economics and practicality of my suggestions. They may well be unrealistic, unsuitable or in fact unfair.

I will respond to a couple of points to elaborate on what I have previously stated:

- People happy to run 2nd to the McCarthys - I believe they are, if not why do so many hand up and let him dictate races? I don't watch every race at every track but a lot of the races that I do watch I am amazed at how easily he is afforded the lead. I interpret that as them conceding that they can't beat him and are therefore happy to take the sit and race for 2nd. Right or wrong that is my interpretation.

Bankstown - The facilities and racing surface are below what I determine to be a reasonable standard. If the club or HRNSW want to invest the required money to get them up to standard then I am happy for it to stay in operation. Furthermore I believe we only need 1 half mile track in metro Sydney and Penrith is the better option in my opinion.

Restricted Access - I believe all tracks should have restricted access to the stabling enclosure for trainers, drivers, stable hands and owners that have been granted access once they present themselves to the race day office. This should be a given from both an integrity and safety perspective.

Feel free to put forward any ideas yourself Dot. I think forums like this are great place to debate rationally.

Mitch I'd say there is a whole lot of difference between happy to run second and resigned to ensuring the best possibility of running second. As an owner Mitch when Gamechanger is back out there what would your instructions to your driver be?

Bankstowns stabling area could do with some attention certainly Mitch, as to the racing surface I guess you know the track record was broken several time on Treur night so I guess the track cant be too bad. You should know though that as a trainer there I am regularly at a committee man to keep the track regularly ripped and watered. The new water truck apparently promised by HRNSW hasn't shown up yet. Perhaps some new carpet in the lounge wouldn't go astray, I'm happy to chip in a little for that Mitch if it comes to it, how about you?

I don't actually believe we need any half mile tracks in Sydney, but in the long term Penrith is viable and could remain and that Bankstown will go. I do believe that if Harness Racing is going to survive in Sydney then we need an approximately 1000m track and assosciated club and entertainment/gambling facilities in a multi user commercial facility located in a densely populated region within easy reach of the CBD and wealthy areas to the east and north of the city.

I understand your rational for restricted access and it is very valid. The downside is that by increasing the isolation of the participants from the public we lose an opportunity to garner new owners and participants. Perhaps Dan can comment further, having been involved much longer, but in my time in harnes racing, around 15 years, it seems to me that the near total demise of show racing has hurt us as far as gathering interest and involvment in our sport from people otherwise interested in horsey pursuits. My understanding was from the days of the old Sydney Showground and Royal Show is that the Rodeo followed by Harness Racing and then Showjumping were the most popular ring events, I can imagine why quite easily!

Plenty of ideas and action is needed Mitch not just yours and mine. The dogs have been doing more then barking this week about the agreement that sees their turnover subsidise us

[Mitch]

Dot,

100% in agreement with your 1000m track and entertainment proposal. Not so long ago I thought getting rid of all half mile tracks was the way to go however some horses do excel on them and it can provide some exciting racing and tests driver skill and tactic. So I have changed my view and support Sydney metro retaining 1 half mile track.

In regards to your question my instructions to Joel every time Gamechanger raced was if you can find the front take it and once you get it don't give it up. I gave similar instructions to Michael Muscat when he drove Gameface at his only start. If you can't lead then sit outside them and and make them earn it. He did that, we galloped on the turn - that's racing. I will be giving the same instructions to David Thorn if Gamechanger returns, use his speed off the arm and post whoever comes up outside you. If they're good enough to beat us doing in the breeze so be it!

[broncobrad]

Dot, when you come back from a spell, you sure come out firing...still 'Dizzy' taking in your comments. From a purely biased opinion, half mile tracks have no peer in regard to providing entertainment for spectators and one has to look no further than last Saturday night at your track. From go to whoa the racing was competitive, unpredictable, tight (especially the monte going into one of those corners) and the public are at fairly close quarters to the action (BTW I was not actually there). Mitch, I take your point about security of the stabling area, but checking the horses out between races is something I loved to do as a young bloke, getting a look at them up close, seeing who was there, talking to people. I hate the over-protective atmosphere of removing general racegoers right away from the stabling areas.

That big track at Menangle is a heartbeat away from being an American track, all 1600m trips, racing in single file with small fields and boring, boring boring, not to mention two suburbs away when watching them down the back. For me the half mile track, (with water truck in working order) will do me EVERYDAY.

Somewhere along the line there has got to be some balance between the two.

[Danno]

I understand your rational for restricted access and it is very valid. The downside is that by increasing the isolation of the participants from the public we lose an opportunity to garner new owners and participants. Perhaps Dan can comment further, having been involved much longer, but in my time in harnes racing, around 15 years, it seems to me that the near total demise of show racing has hurt us as far as gathering interest and involvment in our sport from people otherwise interested in horsey pursuits. My understanding was from the days of the old Sydney Showground and Royal Show is that the Rodeo followed by Harness Racing and then Showjumping were the most popular ring events, I can imagine why quite easily!


G'day Dot,
good to hear from you, with regards to why our game is shrinking ( participant wise), my opinion is that there are several tiers to the issue, not least of all technological changes in our society over the last 30 years or so....people get fewer and fewer opportunities to physically interact with horse these days and that has been gradually happening for about a hundred years in the work environment, but in the recreational/social world it has accelerated VERY rapidly over the last twenty years, which just happens to co-incide with some other factors, like the "Americanisation" of our game which really took a foothold around the same time, so personaaly I think we have been shooting ourselves in the foot on two major fronts for about 25/30 years, one is,

a) disenfranchise the public by reducing their opportunity to "smell and feel" horse racing on wheels.

the other is,

b) copy a really dumb idea ( all mobile racing, all shortdistance, on bigger tracks) from someone else ( North America) who is already stuggling to make their product attractive to punters.

AND as you suggested, when show racing was abolished, that really was just another nail in the coffin.. that racing was the catalyst of many participants involvement in this silly game we play and anyone running a successful, growing enterprise will tell you that is where you need to concentrate your efforts..at your established growth points.


cheers,
Dan

[mary]

Welcome back Dot.

[dizzy]

Mitch I hope Gamechanger returns in the form required to allow you to keep "living the dream" driving in the fashion that you propose, but if he doesn't what then? A change of tactics? trainer? retirement? I know from another thread you are realistic about his prospects on return but does that realism include that you too may be handing up to the McCarthy's?

On you original points earlier in the thread race programming at restricted meetings does already slant them towards hobby trainers in that the conditions imposed often restrict them too lessor performed horses, and if I could so bold as to say towards those usually found, but not exclusively so, in hobbyists stables. Driver standards are a different issue and I'd like to see greater competancies required for all level meetings. I don't think straight professional/hobby definitions is the way to go but perhaps some recent and offence free driving criteria could be introduced, along the lines of participation in a certain number of country or lessor front races in a defined period prior to driving at a metro meeting as opposed to an "A" license that last forever.


Brad I hope to be able to hold my form too! I couldn't agree more on the difference in favour of a small track over the large one for harness racing as a spectator spectacle, and I was at Bankstown and it was a very good night. But for me the balance today you speak of is a 1000m track. Not quite as in your face for spectators as the half but not that different either and "framed" right still spectacular. Of course getting people to the races is only part of the equation for success
and I think 1000m (designed right) allows for a competitive 12 horse field which benefits the turnover side of the equation. That is what the Vic's have at Melton, and the TAB told them to do in QLD but it appears that we don't listen to our business big brother in NSW because the new track at Bathurst will be ten across the front. For me I see most of the mistakes of Menangle being repeated at Bathurst.

Dan with a background in equestrian sport I have often wondered about the wisdom of those in administration of harness racing who saw fit to align our sport solely with gallops racing instead of keeping a seat at the campfire with the horse sports people. At the gallops we are only ever the poor cousin, who is occasionally on the nose, whereas amongst horse sport people we would actually be the friend with the greatest benefits!

Thank you Mary

[Mitch]

Dot,

Re: driving tactics - I'm not sure what your point is?? My instructions to my trainers are not really relevant to my original topic of discussion anyway.

Re: My choice of words re professional and hobbyists, I don't necessarily mean it as literally as I have written. I try to be succinct and clear in my posts, the danger being it can be interpreted too literally. Let me be clear in saying again that I do not want to exclude any current participant from participating in the future. I am proposing that the type of involvement and at what level may have to change for some if the sport is to remain an attractive product for wagering consumers. And yes that may mean the some who currently invest a lot of money may not be able to drive their horses at Metro meetings.

The AFL, as an example, have made many contentious and unpopular (at the time) decisions in the last 25 years and without them they wouldn't be anywhere near as successful as they are.

[Alcyone]

Dear All,

There has been some encouraging debate in this thread.

As such, I'd like to make the NSW Forum Members aware of the upcoming HRNSW Strategic Plan Focus Groups.

Information concerning them can be found at the following link:

http://www.harness.org.au/news-article.cfm?news_id=19338

Should anyone wish to be involved in a relevant Focus Group please contact me via email at afairley@hrnsw.com.au.

Regards,

Adam Fairley

[dizzy]

Dot,

Re: driving tactics - I'm not sure what your point is?? My instructions to my trainers are not really relevant to my original topic of discussion anyway.

Re: My choice of words re professional and hobbyists, I don't necessarily mean it as literally as I have written. I try to be succinct and clear in my posts, the danger being it can be interpreted too literally. Let me be clear in saying again that I do not want to exclude any current participant from participating in the future. I am proposing that the type of involvement and at what level may have to change for some if the sport is to remain an attractive product for wagering consumers. And yes that may mean the some who currently invest a lot of money may not be able to drive their horses at Metro meetings.

The AFL, as an example, have made many contentious and unpopular (at the time) decisions in the last 25 years and without them they wouldn't be anywhere near as successful as they are.

Oh but Mitch they are. You did say Mitch that your interpretation of handing up to McCarthy's was trainers happy to run second. If your horse was inferior or, performing inferiorly to a superior McCarthy runner challenging would you still instruct your driver to hold the lead or would you be happpy to run second? If your going to instruct your driver to hold the lead in these circumstances and your horse is "gone" in the run home would your driver have displayed the professionalism you have called for to drive at metro meetings?

Perusing tonights Menangle meeting I would say that perhaps only two drivers could be considered "hobbyists", leaving the rest obviously to be considered "profesionals" who would easily jump any proficiency and currency bar set. Must say my concerns are more with R meetings at Bankstown which at times have races that resemble a hybrid version of polocrosse and dodgem cars. But that would be our inferior track I guess Mitch. There is a new Licensing Policy on the harness.org site that interested people here might like to read.

Yes Mitch I believe the AFL has a long term plan and I'll take your word for it that the decisions they made were both contentious and unpopular. Fortunately for me I not in the position were I actually have to make any decisions popular or not, but I would like to ask some contentious questions with regard to decisions made and to be made.

In 2008 when the vote was being made to sell HP and move to Menangle John Dumnesy stated that there would be 4000 new houses in Menangle Park by 2013. To the best of my knowledge there are none at this time and 2013 starts next month. In 2010 I looked at purchasing property in Menangle Park and spoke to the planning department of Campbelltown Council who advised there would be no building approvals given for Menangle Park until Sydney Water had connected it to the sewer. I spoke to Sydney Water who advised they had no plans in the forseable future to connect Menangle Park to the sewer. I didn't buy. If this is still the status quo and there in no threat to existing stabling facilities in Menangle Park for the forseeable future is a $10million investment by HRNSW in a 400 horse stabling complex at Menangle warranted at this time, or could the money be better spent else where?

Like put towards a 1000m track in Sydney or Tamworth or another regional centre for example? From what I have seen of the plans for the new track at Bathurst it is, like Menangle, being sited in a relatively remote (apart from during the Bathurst car race, where are we putting the horses then?) poorly accessed area with a 10 across the front configuration and a "grandstand facility" being set well back from the track, and has an onsite training facility to be included. Is this really the best configuration for the long term future of harness racing?

The two most prevalent issues facing harness racing are turnover and participation rates, so does the current Bathurst Proposal best address these issues? In light of what has been written in earlier posts wouldn't a track closer to town, or on the main arterial road in and out of Bathurst to Sydney serve us better. Does a training centre really need to be co located? Why was a decision made in building a brand new facility to site the "grandstand" well back from the track, and make the track 10 horses wide thus putting specators further back from the action then they need to be. Hmmmm Menangle mini me perhaps. Some of you may wish to google Skyboxes and Spruce Meadows, ok its a different horse sport but I think you'll get the drift.

On the turn over side why are we persisting with a field size limiting 10 across the front configuration instead of a second row and 12 runners. I guess they only do that at Melton to give the participants a 1 in 12 instead of a 1 in 10 shot of winning. Oh wait wasn't there a press release from Albion Park saying that the betting agencies said 12 horse fields would increase your turnover? Not to mention its actually a less expensive option to build and maintain.

Of course if we just don't believe what the betting agencies say heres a novel idea, lets try it! Newcastle is being shut down next month for renovation how about we reopen it with a new configuration, 12 horse fields and a sprint lane! The project manager is Graeme Maher from Victoria I'm sure it would be a cinch for him to do it. Plenty of historical turnover data available from 10 across the front for comparison, and well perhaps its a little tight but at least some time before we say lock it in Eddie, or I guess that would be Graeme, when it comes to track configuration for the new tracks we're building.

Just some thoughts folks, Ron did title this thread lets try something different,

Thanks for the information Adam but somehow i think "the boss" might veto my invitation. However if by rare chance anyone actually likes some of the ideas I've posted on this forum I'm quite happy if they want to pick them up and run with them.

[Mitch]

Dot,

If my horse was inferior it wouldn't be in the race. I'll repeat it for you one last time my approach is pretty simple if one of my horses is best suited to racing in front and it finds the front, without the driver having to do anything stupid, I would instruct him to hold the front. If my horse is not suited to racing on the speed it would be appropriately positioned somewhere else. At all times I would instruct my driver to use common sense. (Race 1 at Menangle tonight was a great example of a particular driver not using common sense, thats 2 weeks in a row now - surely the stewards will act?)

If you want to go & twist the above to create further debate knock yourself out. I think we are going in circles on this particular point.

[dizzy]

Dot,

If my horse was inferior it wouldn't be in the race. I'll repeat it for you one last time my approach is pretty simple if one of my horses is best suited to racing in front and it finds the front, without the driver having to do anything stupid, I would instruct him to hold the front. If my horse is not suited to racing on the speed it would be appropriately positioned somewhere else. At all times I would instruct my driver to use common sense. (Race 1 at Menangle tonight was a great example of a particular driver not using common sense, thats 2 weeks in a row now - surely the stewards will act?)

If you want to go & twist the above to create further debate knock yourself out. I think we are going in circles on this particular point.

Mitch I guess your superior horses will start favourite in every race then, and I hope you have the house on for the sake of harness racing.

Good to see you can peer around your blockeyes and see the big picture in my post (sic)

[Mitch]

Mitch I guess your superior horses will start favourite in every race then, and I hope you have the house on for the sake of harness racing.

Good to see you can peer around your blockeyes and see the big picture in my post (sic)

Hi Dot,

I have already said I agree with your suggestion for a 1000m track. I also support barrier configs of 12 with a second row instead of 10 off the front.
I haven't seen any of the plans for Bathurst so I wont comment on that.
I have heard many different rumours re Menangle and the proposed re-zoning & town centre development. I don't know enough about it so wont comment further...

Feel free to fill me in on your big picture? I didn't pick up on it.

Mitch.

[Daryl New]

Dot, the plans for the rezoning and development of Menangle Park will be put on display this week or next, and will be on display for comment till the end of January 2013. After this date submissions will be considered prior to gazettal. John was right re 4000 houses for Menangle Park, but not by 2013.

[dizzy]

Thanks Daryl, I guess that makes John 50% right, still he can improve to 75% if there are 8000 new houses by 2018 which he also said. Does the plan include a timetable for the development, or is that subject to the whims of market demand? Curious then that the club off loaded a considerable number of their poker machine licenses if a population explosion is imminent in MP. Realisticly how long before these new residents are likely to have the disposable discretionary income to significantly contribute to harness racing?

Mitch my big picture is that the future of harness racing in NSW is far from assured, and we have a limited time whilst we have funds available to put it in a position where we are assured. The return from the moneys invested from HP appear to be around 6 million dollars or around 6%, setting aside the % required to add to the capital to balance out inflation doesn't leave terribly much to service the facility or prizemoney promised.

The TAB distribution whilst currently guaranteed by law is far from safe. Anyone remember VOR chastising me for suggesting that it was? Politicians make laws and politicians change them. The minister has said he won't intervene, anyone remember a certain red headed politician saying there wont be a carbon tax under the government I lead? The greyhound people are hard at work to have the intracode agreement changed to a commercial agreement that distributes returns comensurate with the proportion generated. Does anyone really thing that they won't in time succeed? How long do we think it will take? And what does that do for our income then?

The race fields legislation requires the corporate bookies to pay a fee for the use of our "product", it doesn't require them however to use our product. Put simply if we don't produce a product that suits their business they aren't obligated to use it and can offer markets on other products instead. And what does that do to our income?

So Mitch I can see a time when the cash that is around now drys up, or at least significantly reduces, if we haven't structured our facilities around maximising income streams both for individual clubs from better use of their premises and from wagering from putting on a better product. Moving out of towns allows bigger tracks but is that the answer? If so why isn't Bathurst going to be 1400m too? And a track in the riverina, and up north the same? At least giving the participants an opportunity to hone their skills on a level playing field before heading to Menangle. And the punters a chance to marry up the form.

Sure we need change and twenty twenty cricket is often put up as the example to be followed. But whilst cricket evolved to allow a different form of the game, first 50/50 now T/20 they didn't move the game away from the people. They aren't playing their feature games in the suburbs. Maybe there is something in that for us? Look at harness racing in South Australia, is there anyone who doesn't think it is pretty much a basket case? And when did the rot set in, when they moved out of town to Globe Derby Park. And Melton their turnover and attendances have also dropped off since they moved out of Moonee Valley. And Menangle?

Is there a successful harness racing venue anywhere in the world that has achieved long term gains by moving away from the people? The Meadowlands is central to 5 million people, only 10 miles from Grand Central Station New York City, but its operator Jeff Gural has said on the public record it can not survive without revenue from slot machines. The losses from the Meadowlands were around 9 million dollars last year. Can Menangle some 68k from the Sy CBD, with a projected population of 16,000 adults in the near vicinity survive?

As Brad said earlier there has to be a balance somewhere. Do I know exactly what that is then no, but I'm quite certain we haven't found it yet.

[Mitch]

Hi Dot,

Well said!

The correlation re location of new tracks and reduction in participation is inconclusive but it certainly impacts on crowd attendance which in turn probably reduces wagering investment. Although that being said I think we have to accept that with technology and the ease of placing a bet via a mobile device we may need to think of other ways to interact with punters and get them to invest more from the couch, bar, park.. Wherever they may be.
My sample of 1 (me) actually punts more when I am at home with access to multiple form sources, replays, online betting software etc. then when I go to the races where I spend too much time talking to people and admiring the horse flesh!

You have made some very good points in your post and I agree that the current hierarchy have it all to do in regards to protecting the money made from the sale of HP and race fields legislation. This is somewhat cliche but all states in harness racing just need to continue to focus on getting the basics right - that in itself is a big enough challenge for some states.
Your meadowlands example is an interesting one, right next to meadowlands is MetLife Stadium & the IZOD center - neither of those venue suffer from attendance declines (trust me I was there in October). So there has to be more to it right?
Personally I think it's a combination of location, integrity, competition, poor strategy and ignorance that has put harness racing in the position it is in today.

Whilst there are still many challenges that lie ahead l am encouraged by the news that the Interdom & Chariots will be on free to air. I would think dependant on its success a tentative deal has already been done to show the Miracle Mile??? I also think the current crop of 4yos & 5yos give us a great platform to showcase the sport over the coming years with some classic grand circuit racing.

Anyway good talk Dot, what's your tip for the Vic Cup?

[Greg Hando]

If the power's that be opened a free to air tv channel to cater for harness racing only Aus wide i think it would draw more punter's and maybe more participants to our sport in the long run as not everyone can afford to have Pay tv in their homes.

[aussiebreno]

If the power's that be opened a free to air tv channel to cater for harness racing only Aus wide i think it would draw more punter's and maybe more participants to our sport in the long run as not everyone can afford to have Pay tv in their homes.
Gee mate, Ten is going broke I'm not sure how a dedicated harness station would go.

[dizzy]

Hi Mitch

I think the reduction in crowd attendance not only impacts on wagering but on participation levels in a hands on capacity as trainer/driver or owner as well. Whilst its certainly true that we are very much a screen based medium these days particularly for punters and as you say they may actually wager more in this environment it is important that we continue to court owners and other hands on involvment as well. With your owners hat on Mitch is punting and what you experience at home enough to continue your investment as an owner or is it the horse flesh and people that you experience first hand at the track that fuels your interest as an owner. Certainly there has to be a balance between the two, or better yet a synergy that maximises the outcomes for harness racing from both.

No doubt there have been multiple events that have contributed to harness racings decline inpopularity but IMO the major one has been our inability to expand our market. when the going got tough at Harold Park and we couldn't attract enough anymore of the existing market rather then find new markets for our sport we sold out and moved away, albeit with a hefty sum in the bank.

Whilst protecting the money in the short term is an obvious strategy the question in my mind is, is this the best strategy in the long term or should we be using the money in another way to ensure a viable long term future for harness racing?

The NSW state government has just released its Chins Tourist Strategy 2012-20, and IMO it makes very interesting reading for any supporter of harness racing. Chinese visitors are forecast to contribute $17.6 billion to the NSW economy by 2020. In 2020 the forecast is for over 620,000 Chinese visitors to visit NSW contributing $2.1billion dollars over 19.6 million visitor nights. And what does Destination NSW say the Chinese Visitors want? A unique experience, gambling and an opportunity to spend their money. And how is harness racing currently positioned to take advantage of this? Well not at all if it's intended that the only tracks in Sydney (loosely speaking) will be Menangle and possibly Penrith, both right at Sydneys extremities or beyond.

Doesn't harness racing fit perfectly that description of a unique experience, particularly on a track fdesigned to enhance the visual specatacle as well as fair racing? And gambling, we have gambling opportunities and even more so if a new track could be located with a significant gaming venue. And spending money, how about limousine transfers, fine dining and fashions on the field, along with opportunities for our guests to buy or bid for the opportunity to be an "owner" for the night, all of which could be pre booked and paid for before they arrive. Not to mention all the sundry merchandising and photo opportunities. And the Chinesee are looking for "soft adventure" activities too, sounds like a double seater sullky or mobile barrier ride to me.

So how do we get on board? Well take a look at the Minister resposible for ensuring the forecasts in the strategy are met, its our Minister, the Minister for, amongst othr things, Racing, the Honourable George Souris. So why wouldn't he and the government move to help us if we could show them that harness racing is an ideal activity to help then achieve and perhaps even exceed their forecasts of revenue from Chinese tourists.

With the governments help maybe it is still possible to establish a harness racing venue at Sydney Olympic Park. The P5 parking lot is mainly used for truck and float parking during the show and underutilised the rest of the year. An elevated track like we had at Harold Park along with underground parking in an entertainment/gaming complex would pretty much maintain the status quo for parking. And we would be in the middle of the city with relatively easy acess for participants and visitors alike. Perhaps we would need a corporate partner as well. With some serious capital we could suspend the track over the brick pit (it cant be built on but perhaps it could be built over) and what an out of this world racing experience that would be!

OK so maybe we need to set our sights a little lower. Fairfield whilst not as convieniant to the city is already under our industry's control (sort of) but we would need support from both the government and council to utilise it to it fullest. And it comes with plenty of real estate that may allow for additionall developments, a large Asian speaking population and a golf course next door, another activity Destination NSW says is high on the Chinese visitors agenda.

And may be there are other options, the Shell refinery near Parramatta is closings so perhaps there is a suitable site there. Parramattas population is also forecast to grow rapidly in the next few years and whilst we would be targeting the Chinese it doesn't have to be to the exclusion of the locals or other visitors.

So what about Menangle I hear people say? All the money we have spent out there or have we? The minimum sale price for Harold Park was to be $150million but a sale price of $187million was realised so taking away the capital spent at Menangle and the amount repaid to HRNSW we still have around the amount we would have if only the minimum price had been achieved. So surely there must still be some room for further capital expenditure? And what do we do with Menangle? Well we if we have an assured future then we will need a training centre and the carnival of cups concept has been a winner for us so Menangle could be used regularly to stage Cof C type meetings. And if we weere looking to increase our available capital how about a deal with Racing NSW to use Menangle as a joint racing/training/pretraining facility? The 1400m track is converted to a synthetic gallops track and a new harness track built inside for training. As John Dumesny said sometime ago we could scrape the top of the synthetic 1400m track and use it for harness racing, and with all the infrastructure in place Racing NSW could transfer gallops meetings there in the event of a possible wash out of a grass track in prolonged rain. After all whilst the intracode agreement remains in place the loss of a gallops meeting hurts our bottomline as well.

So what is my Christmas wish? That Rex and John and Sam and their respective boards would read over the China Tourist Strategy 2012-20 during Christmas and see the possibilities in it for harness racing. And then in the new year open a dialogue with Sandra Chipchase the CEO of Destination NSW and the Minister or his representatives and get them also to see the opportunities for harness racing in their strategy. And then before all else commision a feasibility study to find out for sure if the dawn of the "Asian Century" can ensure a long term future for harness racing in NSW

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous New Year to all.

[Greg Hando]

WELL SAID Dot.But,we had the chance to go to Homebush but alas we stayed at HP, it was sold now we go to Menangle, it is that far out no-one goes because of the distance,Fairfield was mooted to be upgraded but was closed for racing except for COC day's,it is being hinted that there be less country meeting's. I don't think HRNSW want to try and improve our sport sometimes with the ideas they come up with it seem's all they worry about is Menangle. When the Miracle Mile wasn't able to be run at MP why didn't they run it at Newcastle, good enough for Inter Heat so why not the MM ? Dot you shouldn't think forward like that you might get a bad name of being a dreamer.But like you we can only hope and dream.
And a Merry Christmas and New Year to yourself as well Dot.

[clumsy]

I know that we must keep trying to improve our sport, but I don't think we are going as bad as a lot of people in the industry think. My opinion is based on country meetings, we now have a lot more meetings to race at with better prize money than ever before. Meetings used to close down for the winter months so we had to put the horses out to spell, you could not be professional under those conditions. Now we have one or two meetings every week, one with min.$5000 and the other $3000 and occasionally $1500 but it at least gives you a chance to make a living from the sport. This week at Young min. $6000 with a couple of races $7000, then we have the country heats of $10000 with a $22000 final at Menangle. As for new people coming into the sport I think that there are plenty of pub punters who are willing to form syndicates and buy a pacer as they are a lot cheaper than a racehorse to get into. As for young people coming into the sport have a look at your states top twenty trainers and I think you will be surprised to see some names that are new to the sport and some trainers under 40 years old. I know that we must keep thinking ahead to keep our sport in the market place and continue to seek new ideas, Dot has had the thinking cap on and came up with a lot of concepts to give some thought to, perhaps we should have packages for all tourist.

[dizzy]

Yes Greg H I'm not privvy to the resons why the sport did not take advantage of the opportunity to move to Homebush previously but IMO on face value it seems to have been a very short sighted choice, and for some reason unknown to me there is a total ability to ignore the potential of the Fairfield site. I'd agree the sport certaibly has it block eyes on and cant seem to be able to see anything other then Menangle. I too wonder about the marketing of the sport, I've spent just about every morning of the holiday period listening on the radio to the CEO's of various gallops venues located close to the coast talk about how they have the best attendances of the year at their meetings during this period. We too have a track on the coast located at Bulli, and fair enough it's not Kaikora but it is 1 kilometre (yes thats one "Flying K") from the beach at Bulli and 1 and a 1/2 kilometres from the camping grounds at the Beach. Not to mention all the other visitors that pack the other beachs in the region during the holiday period. Yet the Bulli track lies idle and as we are about to breach the lease with council by having no meetings there this year likely to be lost to the industry. Very curious indeed I think, especially as only 3 years ago the independant report into harness racing in Sydney found the Bulli club to be in a sound finacial position. Of course if the people running any club have interests elsewhere and no interest in the club then of course it's demise is assured.

Greg S I'm happy that your experiences of country racing are positive but I'm sure you'd agree that it all boils down to money. If we have the income streams to continue to provide the prizemoney you refer to then you will continue to view things positively but if we don't, as I have alluded to previously and the prizemoney drops then no doubt your views will change. I hope your right about Pub punters willingness to buy a pacer and perhaps more country clubs could form syndicates and the like to do exactly that as we need to increase interest in our sport from all directions. Without meaning to be critical of the hard working committes running country clubs a little time on google shows that there is room to improve the marketing of country (and probably all venues) racing in this digital age. A quick perusal of Wikipedia for example for regional centres such as Bathurst, Young, Parkes, Wagga and Tamworth makes little if any reference to harness racing occurring in these centres. Yet in Bathurst at least it is a weekly occurance with a major carnival once a year.

Greg I welcome anyone to harness racing but the reason for targeting the Chinese is that they have been identified as going to be the most prolific visitors to our shores and their propensity for spending once they are here blows every other group out of the water. Of course dealing with people from a different culture that don't for the most part speak the same language presents challenges for us that we haven't faced before. But the changing world and especially betting trends (my survey of my colleagues at work betting habbits show that 33% of then are regular small punters but alas all on sports betting and multis, only one bets on the gallops very occassionally and none on harness racing but two would if I had a runner I thought was a chance.) means that we need to adapt what we do if we are going to survive, much less prosper.

Time to take the block eyes of and look to expand our opportunies, it may be linking with other tourist attractions or sports to increase our audience. Those that bought tickets to the Mariners game (soccer) also got admission to Gosford races type things. Perhaps for the long term its time to look at forming an alliance (no not merger like the GHRRA, more like code sharing that the airlines do) with the greyhounds to develop better utilised joint venues. Afterall at present we have the spare cash and a fair chunk of the greyhounds cashflow, if we wait too long then the greyhounds are likely to have all the cash flow and we will no longer have a cash reserve.


Happy New Year to All