Odds On Pops and Other Effects on Market Share

[Messenger]

A while back it was suggested that we have odds on pops beaten at the trots quite often and compared to when it happens at the gallopers, no one seems to bat an eye.

So this month I have started keeping stats on it for Victorian TAB meetings and will keep you posted.

Tonight at Melton there was an incredible 7 odds on pops in the 9 races and only 3 won.

[Messenger]

4 out of 4 ODDS ON pops lost at Yarra Glen today (plus an Evens fav). Victoria's June total stands at 10 odds on WINNERS - 12 odds on LOSERS

[Danno]

NSW Tamworth today 5 odds on all won plus an even money favourite won as well, from 8 races, the two $3 fav's both got beat.

Smarter punters in NSW no doubt!!!!

[Danno]

4 out of 4 ODDS ON pops lost at Yarra Glen today (plus an Evens fav). Victoria's June total stands at 10 odds on WINNERS - 12 odds on LOSERS

with those stats Kev, it looks like odds on favouites are odds on to get beat!!

Dumber punters in Victoria no doubt!!!

[Messenger]

with those stats Kev, it looks like odds on favouites are odds on to get beat!!

Dumber punters in Victoria no doubt!!!

I can't .... because you're not ..... :eek:

[Njcstables]

NSW Tamworth today 5 odds on all won plus an even money favourite won as well, from 8 races, the two $3 fav's both got beat.

Smarter punters in NSW no doubt!!!!

Maybe they all just knew the result before they went out Danno!

[brent_L]

NSW Tamworth today 5 odds on all won plus an even money favourite won as well, from 8 races, the two $3 fav's both got beat.

Smarter punters in NSW no doubt!!!!
Not out Penrith way......3 straight shorties have just bitten the dust. 1.90, 1.40 & 1.50

[Messenger]

Not out Penrith way......3 straight shorties have just bitten the dust. 1.90, 1.40 & 1.50

Thanks Brent. I hope Danno read that

Trying to be scientific about this - I am wondering whether there could be a correlation with what water catchment area the punters come from ;)

[brent_L]

Thanks Brent. I hope Danno read that

Trying to be scientific about this - I am wondering whether there could be a correlation with what water catchment area the punters come from ;)
Ah ha, knew I was doing something wrong this past 15 years......I boil my drinking water!

[Danno]

Maybe they all just knew the result before they went out Danno!

I prefer to think it's because the better drivers are in the Northern part of NSW Nathan.:D:rolleyes:

[Danno]

Thanks Brent. I hope Danno read that

Trying to be scientific about this - I am wondering whether there could be a correlation with what water catchment area the punters come from ;)

Yes Kev, I read that, my scientific explanation is in the post above.....pretty hard to argue with hey?:confused::p

[Messenger]

Shayne Cramp had 4 winners at Mildura today AND YET had 3 odds on pops beaten in other races

[Messenger]

May have the answer to Odds On betting after Melton tonight - stick to the trotters. 3 out of 3 trots races won by Odds On pops. 5/6 Odds On pops got up on the night. Vic tally for June now stands at 19 odds on pops winning, 18 odds on pops losing.

[aussiebreno]

May have the answer to Odds On betting after Melton tonight - stick to the trotters. 3 out of 3 trots races won by Odds On pops. 5/6 Odds On pops got up on the night. Vic tally for June now stands at 19 odds on pops winning, 18 odds on pops losing.
Wait till you back an odds on trotter and it gallops!

[Richard prior]

From a personal point of view, I avoid the odds on pops and the trotters in particular for this very reason Breno. If I do have a punt in a race with a shorty, It's usually an exotic if I like another at decent odds to fill a place or a Quinella, Exacta or Trifecta.

[Messenger]

Thanks Adam, impressive stuff - with that % of odds on winners it would not seem profitable to back all odds on horses.

[HaroldParker]

Heavily supported "Odds On" Favourites at Gloucester Park on a Friday night = a near perfect strike rate and when you have Kim Prentice on the second elect drawn the pole = 100% : )

I love the racing @ Gloucester Park but when you get a Cheerleader like Wes Cameron pointing out the obvious before races you know something is on the nose.

It's Gloucester Park, if a "Live" chance draws the pole the lead is not relinquished. When a horse drawn outside what appears to be the likely leader (that likely leader often opens equal Fav or marginally longer) is backed as if unbeatable, as Wes says "the money tells me that this horse will be finding the front". The fact is, unless these horses are "guaranteed" the front, you couldn't substantiate the volume of support for them.

Friday night, Soho Highroller in the 5th, the tote SP was $1.60. TAB fixed, Betfair and the corporates had it much shorter.

The two big goes on Friday night however were My Hard Copy and Selkie. Both opened marginally in the black and by post time were $1.25 across the board. A week earlier, My Hard Copy drawn the pole, gifted the lead the Slick Chapel, there was an avalanche of support for the latter. On Friday night, My Hard Copy was drawn outside a stablemate that opened a close second elect and who was expected to hold up, well until the support for My Hard Copy said otherwise. Less said about Selkie's race the better, where it didn't go to plan for a furlong or so before the Punters Best Friend KP worked his magic.

Let's just say, Friday night would of been a good night for Crown Perth. I have a buy rating on the stock, CWN for the mugs at home : )

[HaroldParker]

It's already very difficult to get on. If you only handicap Harness Racing like myself, the corporates will close your account ASAP and unfortunately even the TAB is becoming very restrictive.

I know a couple of guys who work for corporate bookmakers. It won't be long until it's nearly impossible to get a decent bet on Harness Racing. Bookmakers (see the above examples) have little confidence in the policing of the sport. I know I bang on about it all time but the Stewards are doing an awful job. It's too difficult for them and they need to get form experts / someone with "real" punting knowledge on board to clean up the obvious, which is currently being ignored.

The ramifications re betting turnover not passing through to the industry is massive and peeps need to get their head out of the sand.

If you want to see what could become of the industry take a good look at racing in the UK and magnify that tenfold for Harness Racing here.

[Messenger]

I have never followed WA but you made me take a look.
We have an 800m track with no sprint lane
9/10 winners were the leader
KP twice leads from 1 easily but hands up the lead to the Odds On Fav both times
Runs second both times
Hmm.

[Messenger]

2/2 odds on pops beaten at Hamilton today and it took until the last for a fave to get up

[HaroldParker]

I have never followed WA but you made me take a look.
We have an 800m track with no sprint lane
9/10 winners were the leader
KP twice leads from 1 easily but hands up the lead to the Odds On Fav both times
Runs second both times
Hmm.

It isn't just last Friday mate. I could give you a list as long as your arm and they're not discreet about it.

The integrity of the sport is at stake and the Sheriffs are too busy drink kool aid.

[Viv Strangman]

It isn't just last Friday mate. I could give you a list as long as your arm and they're not discreet about it.

The integrity of the sport is at stake and the Sheriffs are too busy drink kool aid.
Having spent six months in Perth last year based at Byford, you are only scratching the surface believe me.

[Messenger]

A bad afternoon for Odds On pops today at Maryborough. Only 2/5 successful and the 3 beaten were all LONG Odds On pops (< $1.55)
After this arvos meet we have now had 30 out of 57 odds on pops beaten in June in Vic with 8 of the 30 being long odds on.

[Messenger]

I don't think too many odds on pops is good for attracting punters and if I am right then after 13 days of June I think we in VIC have too many odds on favs

In the 13 days of June so far Vic have had 155 TAB races and there have been 77 odds on pops = as close to 50% of races as you are going to get.

Maybe we need to market that there is value to be found in races with an odds on fave as only 41 out of 77 have won ie only 53%

ps I backed Hawthorn at $1.24 tonight and I can tell you that backing odds on pops is not good for the heart

[Richard prior]

Blues gave the Hawks a shake Kev. I've followed the Trots for a lot of years and have always thought there was more value with the Trots than what you get with the Thoroughbreds or Greyhounds, It's a very interesting stat and definitley a bit of value for the punter.

[brent_L]

I don't think too many odds on pops is good for attracting punters and if I am right then after 13 days of June I think we in VIC have too many odds on favs

In the 13 days of June so far Vic have had 155 TAB races and there have been 77 odds on pops = as close to 50% of races as you are going to get.

Maybe we need to market that there is value to be found in races with an odds on fave as only 41 out of 77 have won ie only 53%

ps I backed Hawthorn at $1.24 tonight and I can tell you that backing odds on pops is not good for the heart
Kev, I assume your stats are from the VIC tote?? They would change rather markedly when done on Betfair prices (which I believe is the only true indicator of a horses correct price). My figures over the years show that whether u were to back or lay (for equal stakes of course) each and every fav under $2 u come out pretty much square....paying the commission on winning bets then results in a loss.
ps I hear u re the footy.....that's 2 straight weeks Carlton have scared the begeesus out of me!

[Messenger]

All 4 Odds On pops LOST at Cranbourne tonight. Vic TAB June tally stands at 42/84 (winners or losers does not matter :D)

[doncht]

Thanks for that. Good number on pops. https://imagicon.info/cat/10-3/smile4.png

[Messenger]

Only 2/6 got up at Shep this arvo. A day of contrasts with two $1.10 winners and two $52+ winners. Running tally for the month is now more losing odds on pops than winners 47-48.

[Messenger]

What a diff a couple of days makes. Winning Odds On pops now leading 59 winners to 52 losers.
If I was a punter I would like it lot clearer however

[Richard prior]

Certainly should be a greater ratio of odds on pops winning Kev but it just goes to show, There's certainly a bit of value for punters with the Trots.

[Messenger]

Not a great day for Odds On pops at Cobram and Terang with only 4 out of 10 getting up. 4 of the beaten ones were long odds on (<$1.50)
At Cobram 2 complete outsiders of the field got up.
In a field of six Paul Land got up in race 4 at $36.20
In a field of twelve Mark Attack got up in the last at $62.70
Our own NJC did not have a lot of luck in the 2nd at Terang.

June Odds On stats for Vic stand at 72 winners to 63 losers (with 22 of the losers being long odds on)

[Richard prior]

Oops!! Wrong thread.

[Messenger]

Well my month of surveying Odds On pops in Vic finished with a bang at Stawell today.
3 out of 3 odds on faves got up this afternoon.
The grand totals for the month come in at
82 odds on Winners
75 odds on Losers (of which 26 were shorter than $1.55 on the tote)

It would seem to me that Odds On pops lose just about as often as they win so I would recommend looking for value in races where there is an odds on pop. Cheers

[Messenger]

I might have to do this survey again.
Four $1.50 or less Odds On faves successful at Charlton today

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=CH220115&ms=vic

[doncht]

Just a series of bad luck for me these past few days, I think I'll pass for now. https://imagicon.info/cat/10-3/1.gif

[waggamick]

My first post on The Forum and this topic really interests me.
I'm coming from a punting perspective and I find it hard to believe that Harness Racing has a viable future as a punting proposition when it dishes up so many odds on favourites at any given meeting.
I'm not talking SP here...just have a look at any Daily publication Form Guide and its not unusual to see five or six races on an eight race programme with pre-post Odds On favourites listed.
This is a major turn off to the casual punter and threatens the financial life blood of the industry.
I have contacted Harness Racing Authorities and Pundits alike without one reply.
A mate of mine who bets on anything..and I mean anything..Women's Tennis...had $100 on Adore Me in the Hunter Cup..."never again!" was his comment after she broke and was tailed off.
I've been following Harness Racing for 50 years and all I could do was sadly nod my head at his frustration.
I can see the arguments for STANDING STARTS...helps to handicap a relatively small pool of horses...and I can see the arguments against....more relatively event free starts and quicker times for breeding purposes.
I have suggested that Harness Racing authorities take a step into the 21st. Century and make a bold technologically based move in this the 50th anniversary of their last technological advance..the introduction of the Mobile Barrier at Harold Park on 21st May, 1965. I think 50 years is long enough.
The Singapore Turf Club (and Racing Victoria sometime this year) use the TRAKUS system to monitor horse positions and times in races.
http://www.turfclub.com.sg/Racing/AnalyticalTools/Pages/TrakusChart.aspx
My suggestion is that Harness Racing employs such a system(or a GPS based system) to Handicap horses at all levels. By doing so it could introduce STAGGERED MOBILE STARTS.
Rather than just TWO LINES of starters you could have MULTIPLE LINES. This would give you the the ability to start horses off 60. 70, 80 metres under Mobile conditions. The best of both worlds.
The starter could monitor horse positions via a Lap Top.
The drivers could monitor the gaps via miniature apparatus attached to the horse's head gear.
There would be acceptable margins of error and of course discretionary handicapping would play a much bigger role at all levels.
Other data provided would assist in Stewards monitoring of a race.

[waggamick]

This has been a pet peeve of mine for a few years now.
The current Handicapping System is a disaster.
TAB Turnover is the life blood of all codes of racing.

Most punters get their information straight from the TAB screens or from newspapers.
A lot of my mates refuse to bet on Harness Racing in that they don't see backing Odds On pops or betting against them as viable propositions.
Throw in the prospect of getting trapped behind runners on tracks without Sprint Lanes or caught in the pack and you can see why they'll throw the odd $5 on a dog race instead.

I did a little research using the RESULTS sections of HARNESS.Org and THEDOGS.com and looked at the SP for TAB race meetings over the last few days.
There were 37 Harness Racing meetings in the last 7 days.
There were 27 Dog meetings over the last 4 days.
HARNESS RACING
37 meetings 289 races 126 Odds On Faves (44%) of which 72 won (57%)
DOG RACING
27 Meetings 265 races 71 Odds On Faves (27%) of which 43 won (61%)

18 of the 37 Harness racing meetings had more than half the program with Odds On faves.
4 of the 27 Dog meetings had more than half the program with Odds On Faves.

13 /37 harness meetings had 2 or less odds on pops at the meeting...35%.
15/27 dog meetings had 2 or less odds on pops at the meeting....56%.

My experience is that the Pre-Post odds quoted in the morning newspapers tend to be even more conservative than the eventual Staring Prices.
The perception out there is that there are too many poor value betting races at the Trots.

Any ideas on addressing the situation?

[aussiebreno]

This has been a pet peeve of mine for a few years now.
The current Handicapping System is a disaster.
TAB Turnover is the life blood of all codes of racing.

Most punters get their information straight from the TAB screens or from newspapers.
A lot of my mates refuse to bet on Harness Racing in that they don't see backing Odds On pops or betting against them as viable propositions.
Throw in the prospect of getting trapped behind runners on tracks without Sprint Lanes or caught in the pack and you can see why they'll throw the odd $5 on a dog race instead.

I did a little research using the RESULTS sections of HARNESS.Org and THEDOGS.com and looked at the SP for TAB race meetings over the last few days.
There were 37 Harness Racing meetings in the last 7 days.
There were 27 Dog meetings over the last 4 days.
HARNESS RACING
37 meetings 289 races 126 Odds On Faves (44%) of which 72 won (57%)
DOG RACING
27 Meetings 265 races 71 Odds On Faves (27%) of which 43 won (61%)

18 of the 37 Harness racing meetings had more than half the program with Odds On faves.
4 of the 27 Dog meetings had more than half the program with Odds On Faves.

13 /37 harness meetings had 2 or less odds on pops at the meeting...35%.
15/27 dog meetings had 2 or less odds on pops at the meeting....56%.

My experience is that the Pre-Post odds quoted in the morning newspapers tend to be even more conservative than the eventual Staring Prices.
The perception out there is that there are too many poor value betting races at the Trots.

Any ideas on addressing the situation?
Staggered mobile :cool:

[arlington]

Staggered mobile :cool:


Might have to go to Noel for this one, was there a proto type built to suit Moonee Valley? Might be down in the bowels of Bendigo. Not sure if it was fixed angled arms but, anyway, the outside horses were set back.

[arlington]

This has been a pet peeve of mine for a few years now.
The current Handicapping System is a disaster.
TAB Turnover is the life blood of all codes of racing.

Most punters get their information straight from the TAB screens or from newspapers.
A lot of my mates refuse to bet on Harness Racing in that they don't see backing Odds On pops or betting against them as viable propositions.
Throw in the prospect of getting trapped behind runners on tracks without Sprint Lanes or caught in the pack and you can see why they'll throw the odd $5 on a dog race instead.

I did a little research using the RESULTS sections of HARNESS.Org and THEDOGS.com and looked at the SP for TAB race meetings over the last few days.
There were 37 Harness Racing meetings in the last 7 days.
There were 27 Dog meetings over the last 4 days.
HARNESS RACING
37 meetings 289 races 126 Odds On Faves (44%) of which 72 won (57%)
DOG RACING
27 Meetings 265 races 71 Odds On Faves (27%) of which 43 won (61%)

18 of the 37 Harness racing meetings had more than half the program with Odds On faves.
4 of the 27 Dog meetings had more than half the program with Odds On Faves.

13 /37 harness meetings had 2 or less odds on pops at the meeting...35%.
15/27 dog meetings had 2 or less odds on pops at the meeting....56%.

My experience is that the Pre-Post odds quoted in the morning newspapers tend to be even more conservative than the eventual Staring Prices.
The perception out there is that there are too many poor value betting races at the Trots.

Any ideas on addressing the situation?


That's something I commented on in a similar thread a while ago. The conservative prices quoted in the papers and the ultra conservative opening quotes. For some reason we're getting a rough deal with the betting agency assessors. I used to go to the greyhounds now and then, years ago with a fairly successful trainer/punter. I wasn't that interested in punting but his rule was if it's over 4/1 forget about it. Seemed like a lot of odds on pops won. Not sure if they weighed the dogs then...the old bowl of milk to stop them. Would be interesting if the stats on short priced dogs changed once the greyhounds got fair dinkum on drugs. Eg, even as recent as G Bate being outed. Food for thought considering cobalt/Harness penalties as I did hear one corporate on RSN radio answering a similar risk factor for them (whether real or not's another thing) on thoroughbreds re closing of winning betting accounts. The cheat risk for them.

[Messenger]

My experience is that the Pre-Post odds quoted in the morning newspapers tend to be even more conservative than the eventual Staring Prices.
The perception out there is that there are too many poor value betting races at the Trots.

Any ideas on addressing the situation?

Your 'odds on' harness figures concur with my own survey a while back Mick (posted on here)
Maybe promote the newspaper odds as ratings and therefore punters can then consider whether the odds on offer are overs or unders. (There is of course also the question of how relevant the papers are nowadays).
The other approach that I think I suggested after doing my survey is to have a 'Shop for Value' campaign. Spell it out that nearly half the odds on pops lose (so if you bet on them all you WILL lose) so bet against them for great value :D

[Danno]

Staggered mobile :cool:

Best tongue in cheek I've seen on here for a while, Brenno you know I will never stop banging that drum!

[waggamick]

Best tongue in cheek I've seen on here for a while, Brenno you know I will never stop banging that drum!

Oh yeah...the STAGGERED MOBILE.
Its 50 years since Harness Racing employed new technology on the track...first use of the Mobile Start was 21st. May 1965.
Okay..new carts, wheel shields,etc...low tech.
Look at Singapore Racing and their use of TRAKUS....the Victorian Thouroughbred industry is looking at introducing it this year as well.
http://www.turfclub.com.sg/Racing/AnalyticalTools/Pages/TrakusChart.aspx

It would take a little thinking and some experimentation but I propose that horses be handicapped in 10 metre increments (a la the traditional Standing Start) and that through the use of TRAKUS (or a like GPS system) and transponders attached to each horse's headgear (or cart) that the starter can monitor the handicap position of each starter(with a sensible margin of error) as each driver using a red light/green light from the transponder keeps his/her horse at the appropriate handicap behind the moving Mobile.
The best of both worlds.
A broader handicapping base with the consistency of the Mobile Start.
Better handicapped races with less Odds On chances.
I've relayed the above thoughts to Harness Racing authorities and pundits but am yet to get a reply.
50 years is long enough between the empl;oyment of one technical ionnovation and another.

[brent_L]

Like your thinking Mick but wouldn't it be simpler to have a single file mobile start? At least that way there wouldn't be horses starting in pockets that they can't manouvre out of.

[Toohard]

Might have to go to Noel for this one, was there a proto type built to suit Moonee Valley? Might be down in the bowels of Bendigo. Not sure if it was fixed angled arms but, anyway, the outside horses were set back.


Reckon it was used at Moonee Valley for a while. Outside horse was about a length back from pole marker.

[Adaptor]

One of the current Victorian mobiles ( the Hygain one I think) has the cabin and arms mounted on a turntable.
It was at Bendigo the other day having the countdown clock fixed so I was able to have the setup explained to me.
It has the capacity to have the arms at an angle. I think the Meadowlands mobile does the same.
In theory the outside horse is approx 2 metres in front of the pole horse, with the rest staggered accordingly.
It works well with all off the front...but ours have trailers as well.
Not sure when they used this last for a staggered start.
Does anyone know?

[Njcstables]

Reckon it was used at Moonee Valley for a while. Outside horse was about a length back from pole marker.

Yeah your right Paul it was definitely used a m valley for a short time but the mobile was angled so the outside horses were about a length in front of inside. It was supposed to encourage horses out wide to go forward and have a crack at the lead. Not sure why it didn't last but I don't think the trainers and drivers took to it too well.

[arlington]

One of the current Victorian mobiles ( the Hygain one I think) has the cabin and arms mounted on a turntable.
It was at Bendigo the other day having the countdown clock fixed so I was able to have the setup explained to me.
It has the capacity to have the arms at an angle. I think the Meadowlands mobile does the same.
In theory the outside horse is approx 2 metres in front of the pole horse, with the rest staggered accordingly.
It works well with all off the front...but ours have trailers as well.
Not sure when they used this last for a staggered start.
Does anyone know?


Thanks for that Noel, you're a wealth of information. Did they interview you for the role of the new Indiana Jones?
You've refreshed my memory a bit, was developed for the mile(?) races to even out the start. Field size limited to all off the front. As to when last used, not sure. Don't think it was still used before harness racing left the Valley.

[waggamick]

Like your thinking Mick but wouldn't it be simpler to have a single file mobile start? At least that way there wouldn't be horses starting in pockets that they can't manouvre out of.

If I understand the idea of single file as one long line then without some form of electronic monitoring you would end up with limitations on the handicap spread and a fanning out process after the start that would see banks of horses going into first turns..particularly on smaller tracks.

[Messenger]

Like your thinking Mick but wouldn't it be simpler to have a single file mobile start? At least that way there wouldn't be horses starting in pockets that they can't manouvre out of.

Could have potential esp for small field size handicap

[waggamick]

I've seen the SLANTED MOBILES while watching US Harness racing on SKY.
Trouble is that they still only have a restricted handicapping spread and given our handicapping from the inside out at the moment it would mean the higher grade horses would get a start off the gate with the added advantage of track camber to slingshot them into the race.
I think my idea of a monitored start with responding devices on the horse's head or in the cart would give you an unlimited handicapping spread and hopefully better betting races and an increased turnover..
As far as cost is concerned there may be a portability between clubs.
At the moment you get an odds on pop in a race and even if they are off the Second Line its Ground Hog Day when after 500 metres the hotpot whips around the field to take the lead and set the pace.
Once he's there it means that only one or two other horses are usually a chance so that a 10 horse race becomes a 3 horse race.

[waggamick]

http://www.racing.com/news/2014-10-21/trakus-set-for-victorian-launch

[Messenger]

I've seen the SLANTED MOBILES while watching US Harness racing on SKY.
Trouble is that they still only have a restricted handicapping spread and given our handicapping from the inside out at the moment it would mean the higher grade horses would get a start off the gate with the added advantage of track camber to slingshot them into the race.
I think my idea of a monitored start with responding devices on the horse's head or in the cart would give you an unlimited handicapping spread and hopefully better betting races and an increased turnover..
As far as cost is concerned there may be a portability between clubs.
At the moment you get an odds on pop in a race and even if they are off the Second Line its Ground Hog Day when after 500 metres the hotpot whips around the field to take the lead and set the pace.
Once he's there it means that only one or two other horses are usually a chance so that a 10 horse race becomes a 3 horse race.

It would clearly require a lot of concentration by the drivers and overall I can see it resulting in a lot of false starts and races being shafted to Sky2
Trakus should come after Hi Def pics - racing looks bloody ordinary compared to Hi Def sport. The gallops still seem to produce a better pic - I suppose because w/o carts their fields are often a lot less spread and they do use the zoom and pan more than our cameramen

[squaregaiter]

Outside TAB/SKY, the biggest single thing that needs to grow our sport is genuine handicapping and grading ( without going into integrity issues). This is why we have so many odds on horses. Can you imagine how quickly the gallops would go down the gurgler if they had as many $1.10 -$1.60 favorites a week as the harness, maybe it would do Betfair well but that is where it would stop. As mentioned elsewhere, when a horse can rip around them and stack up a field and turn it into a 3 horse race SO OFTEN ( not once a week or twice a week but DAILY ) you have to ask how/why is that horse in that field, if the field was made up of 4-6 with the same ability then you would have several ripping around the field, not to mention a decent betting race,the answer is simply, it shouldnt be, as in the gallops, you win and you go to the top of the handicapping in the next grade and you do not come down until you lose or you go to the city against proven and consistent performers in that grade, if you place then you get a further handicapped ( I am speaking in general racing terms not WFA) further, mobiles would be made more even and simpler if again you were racing against YOUR CLASS not simply luck or the SBD system of the draw / conditions of the mobile as used in Victoria anyway, it only exaggerate the basic problem yet again. It is not rocket science, it is for those that make the rules and conditions to understand they are not doing any favors in growing our sport as they stand now.

[Mark Croatto]

It would clearly require a lot of concentration by the drivers and overall I can see it resulting in a lot of false starts and races being shafted to Sky2
Trakus should come after Hi Def pics - racing looks bloody ordinary compared to Hi Def sport. The gallops still seem to produce a better pic - I suppose because w/o carts their fields are often a lot less spread and they do use the zoom and pan more than our cameramen

Hi Kevin

Why would it result in false starts? A mobile handicap can be achieved quite easily, the problem area is maintaining the handicapped horse at their distance. With modern radio and GPS technology I can see it being done quite easily. In fact Catapult Sports in Melbourne are exploring this very issue for me as I type. Hope that as a sport we are able to make this happen.

Regards
Mark

[Messenger]

Hi Kevin

Why would it result in false starts? A mobile handicap can be achieved quite easily, the problem area is maintaining the handicapped horse at their distance. With modern radio and GPS technology I can see it being done quite easily. In fact Catapult Sports in Melbourne are exploring this very issue for me as I type. Hope that as a sport we are able to make this happen.

Regards
Mark

I was thinking that the ability of the drivers to be in posn (the way Mick was suggesting - possibly responding to a green/red light on a transponder) will be a big factor in whether it can work
I was imaging false starts if a horse over corrects (esp at the last moment) and is too far in fr of his handicap when told to move up or is too far behind his handicap when told to ease off (and possibly interferes with a trailing row)
I imagine you would need at least 3 light colours for move up, correct, ease off
I guess I do not see it as that easy as the horses brains are not necessarily in sync with the drivers brain

[Mark Croatto]

I was thinking that the ability of the drivers to be in posn (the way Mick was suggesting - possibly responding to a green/red light on a transponder) will be a big factor in whether it can work
I was imaging false starts if a horse over corrects (esp at the last moment) and is too far in fr of his handicap when told to move up or is too far behind his handicap when told to ease off (and possibly interferes with a trailing row)
I imagine you would need at least 3 light colours for move up, correct, ease off
I guess I do not see it as that easy as the horses brains are not necessarily in sync with the drivers brain

Hi Kevin

The most likely way to ensure a horse is on its correct handicap mark would be by the drivers wearing an ear piece through which the driver is constantly told how many metres behind the mobile their horse is; think Navman lady. This would continue until the start where it would then switch off.

I accept that not all horses would be suited, but I see it no different to the fact that not all horses are suited by standing starts. I would imagine there would be a need to qualify a horse to start in such races.

Personally I think it would open up quite extensively the options for programming races. I'm not at all a fan of the R/C/M gradings, and whilst I accept it is a straight forward and easy way to grade horses, it does very little to ensure horse of similar ability are racing each other. I would far prefer a rating system which is incorporated with a mobile handicap. NSW has been trialling a conditioned approach and yet we still end up with clearly superior horses dominating races and completely stifling betting. If those same horses however were handicapped to give a 10, 15 or 20 metre start the betting would be completely different.

As I said earlier, it's something being explored at the moment and I personally hope it comes to fruition.

Regards

Mark

[Amlin]

On a slightly related matter, we hear how much of an increase greyhounds have had to their turnover in recent years as opposed to harness.

While they promote their sport very well, the following must also be considered.

While the amount of trotting staged per week has remained largely constant, there would be something like nine extra dog meets on the TAB in Vic each week now compared to 10 years ago.

Naturally their share is going to increase. It probably should be up more than it is.

[arlington]

On a slightly related matter, we hear how much of an increase greyhounds have had to their turnover in recent years as opposed to harness.

While they promote their sport very well, the following must also be considered.

While the amount of trotting staged per week has remained largely constant, there would be something like nine extra dog meets on the TAB in Vic each week now compared to 10 years ago.

Naturally their share is going to increase. It probably should be up more than it is.


GRV appear to have a very active participation program. Not sure if it's as involved as our two training centres, which are excellent, but seems to be a promo program more so than a structured training course. I'm only assuming the GRV program is still running where interested people head to The Meadows to discover/have an intro to Owning/training. Obviously participation rates are crucial to their increased race numbers and would imagine quite a few punters would go along.


Going back to the Showgrounds era we did have something similar. Too young to go myself but people would head into the Showgrounds of an evening where a trainer, driver and I think steward would give a run through. Pretty popular I think and remember someone I knew took his wife along to record in short hand! Food for thought?

[waggamick]

Great post by Jason and he is definitely right about perceptionThe casual punter should be the focus of Harness Racing administrators as simpler betting options abound.
I can get $1.90 in a soccer bet..that's a two horse race (three to be precise with the Draw on a straight bet)...why take $1.40 in a 10 horse race?
Just a random observation from consecutive provincial races last night:
Lismore Dogs Race 3 Maiden 7 starters Fave $2.60 Total of 3 TAB WIN Pools at SKY fade out to start $23000 (NSW TAB $9887.55 Win $1572 Place $6900 Exotics)
Swan Hill Trots Race 1* 3YO Pace 10 starters Fave $1.80 Total of 3 TAB WIN pools at SKY fade out $25000 (NSW TAB $9827.00 Win $2950 Place $8700 Exotics)

Not a lot of difference at first sight but one has to appreciate the better Place pool for the Trots reflects the awarding of a Third Place Dividend whereas the dogs had NTD for 7 starters.
Looks pretty close BUT..and I know this is fraught with statistical error..just imagine(and I know its not the case) that the Total Tab Win Pool was distributed to the Sport on a per runner basis..that's $3285 per dog and $2500 per Pacer.
Lets call that the INTEREST FACTOR and I know its on a couple of random races but it confirms my general observation (and that of Jason) that Harness races are not attractive betting propositions, relatively speaking.
One line starts definitely give the perception that every horse has an even chance but those in the know realise that this isn't the case...but those in the know don't throw in the casual punting dollar.
Unless there is a total change in the Class system and rather than a strict snakes and ladders handicapping system a total discretionary handicapping system(probably based on ratings) comes into play then the One Line Mobile concept will be loaded with Odds On chance races.
It appears to me (and I may be mistaken) that Harness Racing administrators can't see that elephant in the room as they play their fiddles and wonder what's burning? (apologies for mixing idioms)

* Just as an aside..what a run by MURRANJI TRACK to storm home for second in that Swan Hill race in close to record time!
And that's how you have to speak as you see the punting dollar carved up.

[waggamick]

Mark..a fellow traveller!
My thoughts also involved the traditional 10 metre steps whereas it could be 15 metre with 3 metre margins..depending on Trials using the technology.
I would suspect that the starter would have much wider discretion.

[arlington]

Just a random observation from consecutive provincial races last night:
Lismore Dogs Race 3 Maiden 7 starters Fave $2.60 Total of 3 TAB WIN Pools at SKY fade out to start $23000 (NSW TAB $9887.55 Win $1572 Place $6900 Exotics)
Swan Hill Trots Race 1* 3YO Pace 10 starters Fave $1.80 Total of 3 TAB WIN pools at SKY fade out $25000 (NSW TAB $9827.00 Win $2950 Place $8700 Exotics)


Did the favourites win Mick?

[waggamick]

Lismore Dogs Favourite GO AHEAD PUNK WON $2.60 $1.60
Swan Hill Trots Favourite MORIAR INVICTUS Unplaced $1.80..winner awsd the very impressive RILEY JAMES..2nd Fave at $2.60

[Messenger]

Hi Kevin

The most likely way to ensure a horse is on its correct handicap mark would be by the drivers wearing an ear piece through which the driver is constantly told how many metres behind the mobile their horse is; think Navman lady. This would continue until the start where it would then switch off.

I accept that not all horses would be suited, but I see it no different to the fact that not all horses are suited by standing starts. I would imagine there would be a need to qualify a horse to start in such races.

Personally I think it would open up quite extensively the options for programming races. I'm not at all a fan of the R/C/M gradings, and whilst I accept it is a straight forward and easy way to grade horses, it does very little to ensure horse of similar ability are racing each other. I would far prefer a rating system which is incorporated with a mobile handicap. NSW has been trialling a conditioned approach and yet we still end up with clearly superior horses dominating races and completely stifling betting. If those same horses however were handicapped to give a 10, 15 or 20 metre start the betting would be completely different.

As I said earlier, it's something being explored at the moment and I personally hope it comes to fruition.

Regards

Mark

Now I am on your wavelength (excuse the pun)

I still believe Jason's point (in the stand start thread) about the perception of fairness in the eyes of the casual punter when every starter is off the front row, a la gallops and dogs, bears thinking about.
Devotees know that on many tracks you would much rather be inside the second row than outside fr row but devotees are already hooked
I see longer races as a catalyst for more action/mid race moves but the broadcasters want shorter races thus the popularity of the dogs

How do we get more even fields/even races = less odds on WITH an all fr start?
Preferential barriers is a start because as much as anyone perceives that all front allows you to determine you positon, any fool knows that the wider you are the more difficult this is
The gallopers have weight as their great leveller. I am not sure how much the casual punter takes it into account but it is what creates the evenness of their races and betting
They also have more racing and better class horses quite often don't waste their legs (gallopers tend to have far fewer races in them) in lower grade races for less $ compared to the way we tend to take them through their classes. It probably has to do with the way they are assessed to - I know even less about gallopers than I do about harness

I very much doubt weight is the answer and do not know how it was used in the past.
We certainly need to ensure star juveniles are not demolishing weaker class fields
More prize-money won restrictions/conditions of entry?

At the same time we have to remember that horses and therefore owners are just as much the lifeblood of our industry as punters and we have to give them a fair chance of return

ps Danno I take your point (elsewhere) about whether All Front racing in the past coincides with better turnover but if I was designing a future racing product to sell it has a beautiful purity in the eyes of the beholder

[waggamick]

Kevin
Even the gallopers are having their problems with handicapping.
The compressed weight range they use now due to the minimum weight being 54Kg(I think) sees trainers still baulking at racing their horses at 60Kg or more and as a result a lower class horse might come to town in the old days on 48 KG and get 11 Kg from the 59KG topweight, the 'best' horse in the race, the best they can get now is 5Kg and as a result the fields in Metro races particularly in Sydney are becoming smaller and smaller.
Finding jockeys that can ride long term at the lower weights has forced the rise in minimum weights and explains the growth in numbers of female and Asian jockeys in Australia.
Gallopers use Ratings and or Bench Mark Handicapping:
BPaH differs in a number of important ways from the
systems of other Australian States, which generally
operate Ratings based handicapping models.
Benchmark handicapping makes a merit assessment of
individual race performances, mathematically analysing
numerous race variables to form a fact-based view on the
current racing ability of each horse. In contrast Ratings
rely on traditional handicapping without the benefit of
independent analyst data.
Benchmark racing opens the top of the weight scale to
include more horses by allowing the nomination of horses
‘above the Benchmark’, while Ratings races restrict entry
only to horses assessed below the standard set.
Across NSW, Benchmark races are programmed in 5-point
graduations (Benchmark 45, Benchmark 50, Benchmark
55, Benchmark 60, Benchmark 65 and so on), effectively
sorting the NSW racing population into well-handicapped
contests that are 2.5kg apart in merit.
The Benchmark assigned to each horse is set on a single
line scale with each benchmark point equating to 0.5kg in
handicap weight.

Sorry about breaking up the post but the next bit is important:
Once published by
Racing NSW
, a horse’s Benchmark
indicates the weight it will carry at its next start relative to
every other NSW horse.
The 3 Stage BPaH Process
The 3 stage merit based Benchmark assessment process
begins with a mathematical (computer-based) calculation
from proprietary software developed by Racing & Sports
Pty Ltd under contract to
Racing NSW
.
The computation takes into account an exhaustive list
of relevant factors such as population averages over
multiple years, race quality, recent and historical individual
performances, age and sex allowances, head-to-head
comparisons, form cycle, track grading and race conditions.
The computer ranking is then internally reviewed by
experienced Racing & Sports form analysts who then
provide
Racing NSW
a recommendation within 48 hours of
each horse running.
Finally, the Racing NSW Handicapping Panel reviews
the background to the recommendation, the race film
and other race data then determines and publishes the
updated Benchmark figure for each horse.
The movement of a horse’s published Benchmark openly
shows industry participants the handicappers’ assessment
of performance merit from one race start to the next.

The whole document is 26 pages and is an interesting read:http://www.racingnsw.com.au/site/_content/document/00000791-source.pdf

[Messenger]

5/5 odds on faves at Kilmore so far this arvo and all have won

[arlington]

5/5 odds on faves at Kilmore so far this arvo and all have won


I did notice the programme is an R meeting, have heard a few races but not looked at the fields or any conditions, so hard to comment on today Kev. But something does need to be done with a lot of these programmes. E.g. quite a lot of the time quality horses are running instead of trialling and the number of times the better performed horse gains a run as emergency with a good draw....I guess HRV might think if the emergency is given the worst draw they'd scratch?


HRV have run a very small number of R races for trainer's with a B licence, assuming this might encourage increased participation. This could be explored further, even limited to B grade drivers.

[waggamick]

Are there any Bookmakers left at the trots?
One fields at Canberra Trots...the same One that does the Canberra dogs.

[Adaptor]

Bendigo had 2 bookmakers on Cup night.

[waggamick]

I guess the closest you can get to pure handicapping is in CLAIMERS.
Put too much on your horse and suffer in the draw.
Don't put enough on and risk losing the horse.

[waggamick]

Was only a mtter of time given Mobile Phone Apps with Centre Bet, Bet365, etc.

[the_racing_wiz]

I guess the closest you can get to pure handicapping is in CLAIMERS.
Put too much on your horse and suffer in the draw.
Don't put enough on and risk losing the horse.

I think you are spot on, and I know of others that share the same opinion. Its self handicapping essentially. The other extreme is for the handicapper to manually put the draw together(im not fully across the nsw system, but does he just put the fields together from the noms, or barrier draws also?) with the sole aim of making the race as competitive as possible.


I accept Dans points with regard to turnover on tracks with 1 line V 2 lines. As I mentioned, it was just a 'punters perception theory' I had but if it doesnt have an effect I accept that, although I am surprised.

[Messenger]

I think you are spot on, and I know of others that share the same opinion. Its self handicapping essentially. The other extreme is for the handicapper to manually put the draw together(im not fully across the nsw system, but does he just put the fields together from the noms, or barrier draws also?) with the sole aim of making the race as competitive as possible.


I accept Dans points with regard to turnover on tracks with 1 line V 2 lines. As I mentioned, it was just a 'punters perception theory' I had but if it doesnt have an effect I accept that, although I am surprised.

If it has not shown up that could still be because the tracks that have all front are part of a some do some dont industry. By that I mean - if it is off-putting to new punters they are not likely to embrace the sport at Menangle but not at Melton. You either bet on a sport or you don't

[arlington]

So back to sprint lanes and punter perception. E.g. Gloucester Park racing v sprint lanes...punter perception with sprint lanes v favourites which end up odds on when it's a given they'll roll to the front without being worked by the leader?

[waggamick]

My observation is that WA has always had a different racing style..not sure why.
On the relatively small Gloucester Park track..compared to newer tracks elsewhere..WA drivers have always seemed to be happy getting out into a third line as far back as entering the home straight with a lap to go.
Often makes the otherwise prized one out one back position a trap.
Seems to make for competitive racing with the lead all the way hotpot (unless they are an out and out champion) less an occurrence than in many Eastern State venues.

[waggamick]

When having a bet the average punter (well nearly all punters) looks at a race expecting a fair chance. Integrity and trust play a big part in their decision making.
What do you think of this?
A theoretical:
A horse's latest form: 57977565 spell 652
Look at the betting in its last 5 starts..all at the same track:
2CO-2C1 $145
2CO-2C1 $60.00
Spell
3CO $189
3CO-3C1 $51.00
CO $3.00 Favourite..ran a close placing.

I can't find a Stewards Report for the meeting.

[aussiebreno]

When having a bet the average punter (well nearly all punters) looks at a race expecting a fair chance. Integrity and trust play a big part in their decision making.
What do you think of this?
A theoretical:
A horse's latest form: 57977565 spell 652
Look at the betting in its last 5 starts..all at the same track:
2CO-2C1 $145
2CO-2C1 $60.00
Spell
3CO $189
3CO-3C1 $51.00
CO $3.00 Favourite..ran a close placing.

I can't find a Stewards Report for the meeting.
Googled the form and found the horse but it would be a hell of a lot easier for people to comment if you start naming specifics Mick!

At first glance it would seem improved run and under the odds.

But must remember that C0 field had about 225 starts between them for 1 win. And that 1 win came at a time 8 months ago against a field of horses that had had about 150 odd starts for 0 wins between them. Not that the 2 and 3yos it's been racing against are stars.

FWIW I don't think it should have been $3. Punters got it wrong and it was only lucky it ran 2nd with the way the race was run. Run the race 30, 32.5, 30.5, 30 like it's usual races are and it runs midfield again imho. It's just a slow horse who obviously can't make ground in back to back 30 quarters but got lucky they didn't run those times here.


RACE 3 – DARREN MILNE PACE (C0) 1780m MS
PLACINGS: LOMBO HAPPY HOUR, EMM THREE ELL, BUKTHSYSTEM, CONFESSIONOFICEMAN
SECTIONALS: Mile Rate: 2.02.9 Lead Time: 11.8
First Quarter: 30.8 Second Quarter: 31.6 Third Quarter: 30.7 Fourth Quarter: 31.0
A pre race blood sample was taken from JUNABEE LANNER.
LOMBO HAPPY HOUR (A Sanderson) raced four wide in the early stages before crossing to obtain a trailing position in the back straight on the first occasion.
BUNDYS BEST (J Pascoe) raced three wide early before obtaining a position leading the one wide line.
Stewards inquired into an incident rounding the final turn into the back straight where RICE BURNER (S Storie) broke gait whilst racing to the inside of BUNDYS BEST. It was established after taking evidence from the drivers concerned that BUNDYS BEST when crossing from a three wide position down to a one wide position was insufficiently clear of the legs of RICE BURNER and caused interference to that gelding in that he contacted the front legs causing that horse to break gait. This resulted in JUNABEE LANNER (N Coy) being checked and was obliged to race wide for a distance and inconvenienced BUKTHESYSTEM (P Chappenden). Subsequently J Pascoe was charged and pleaded guilty pursuant to Rule 163 (1) (a) and after hearing submissions on penalty his driver’s licence was suspended for a period of two weeks.
LOMBO HAPPY HOUR raced three wide without cover from the 900m.

[Messenger]

So back to sprint lanes and punter perception. E.g. Gloucester Park racing v sprint lanes...punter perception with sprint lanes v favourites which end up odds on when it's a given they'll roll to the front without being worked by the leader?

Good point Wayne - one that probably never entered the administrators heads when they gave sprint lanes the green light

[Messenger]

My observation is that WA has always had a different racing style..not sure why.
On the relatively small Gloucester Park track..compared to newer tracks elsewhere..WA drivers have always seemed to be happy getting out into a third line as far back as entering the home straight with a lap to go.
Often makes the otherwise prized one out one back position a trap.
Seems to make for competitive racing with the lead all the way hotpot (unless they are an out and out champion) less an occurrence than in many Eastern State venues.

We had this at Moonee Valley with the Mannings often making a 3rd line but it tends to occur later now at Melton as you cannot be doing that much work and expect to beat a half decent horse who has not spent a penny and is waiting for the sprint lane

[waggamick]

Brendan
I'm used to Forums where the only name showing is your USERNAME and on here they display your real name...just being careful for remote litigation reasons.
Thanks for the research which raises an interesting point...how big is the gap, ability wise, between the 3YO's at Redcliffe and the CO population in South Eastern Queensland?
Might be an argument for abandoning the category of 3YO's altogether and let them race in the general population...might make for more competitive racing all up and begs the question of how do owners stay in the game when a full field of horses has only 1 win in 250 starts...surely that's an indictment on the handicapping methods when those horses have had so many runs between them and have racked up only one win.
Re the Stewards Report...I would like to see Stewards at least comment on the fact that they noticed that a poorly performed horse that has started at cricket score odds and been belted start after start comes out in its next race (admittedly no hopers) and starts a 2 to 1 favourite. Your explanation is excellent but just for the sake of transparency, good governance and establishing trust (in a sport that suffers from a poor image...my mates still call it the red hots and a bloke I was talking to at the dogs the other night was telling his mate why the bookie wouldn't get to the dogs until the 3rd race and he told them that he was still at the 'Cheats on Seats).

[the_racing_wiz]

My observation is that WA has always had a different racing style..not sure why.
On the relatively small Gloucester Park track..compared to newer tracks elsewhere..WA drivers have always seemed to be happy getting out into a third line as far back as entering the home straight with a lap to go.
Often makes the otherwise prized one out one back position a trap.
Seems to make for competitive racing with the lead all the way hotpot (unless they are an out and out champion) less an occurrence than in many Eastern State venues.

The reason for that is the ease out rule is interpreted differently here to other states. Once they get to the ease out pole in the back straight here, they just come out under you so you have to get going early to get around or you risk being put 4/5 wide up the back. If the bloke inside you has an advantage he can ease you out and you are obliged to move with the shift.

I think you will find there are just as many LAW hotpots here as anywhere. Slight diff being that thankfully there is no sprint lane, so they dont just hand over carte blanche.

[Messenger]

Sure he won but was Vee Rock entitled to be $1.10 in that field
Some people risk so much to gain so little

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=ML250215&ms=vic#MLC25021502

[Messenger]

Bendigo tonight.
7/8 faves winning sounds good but is it when 5 of them were < $1.50
7/8 leaders also won - another reason to dislike mile racing

[waggamick]

And race callers inevitably say that "the punters are doing well tonight" when the favourites win 7 out of 8 races but with so many of them odds on it isn't the average TAB punter..they aren't going to throw their $10 on a $1.40 shot.....it may be bigger punters and/or corporates laying off but five favourites under $1.50 isn't going to grow betting on the sport from the casual and opportunistic punter realm.

[Messenger]

Will Beautide's odds hurt the Inter Final betting?

[Messenger]

We need to race more often at Ararat - just look at the price of the winners (only Melita Bromac ruined things :D)

$22, $7, $5, $5, ($1), $19, $19, $5

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=AR030315&ms=vic

[Messenger]

6/8 faves got up at Charlton today
but 5/6 < $1.50 Just like Bendigo (see post 84)
It really could be time for me to do more Odds On research as far more than 50% seem to be winning of late. You would want that to be the case but last time I did the survey it was not so.
The problem however is the number of odds on pops and how this affects turnover

[Richard prior]

Cranbourne last night Kev, 3 Fav's saluted but only 1 Odds on Pop amongst these from 9 races.

[Mister JayKO]

We need to race more often at Ararat - just look at the price of the winners (only Melita Bromac ruined things :D)

$22, $7, $5, $5, ($1), $19, $19, $5

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=AR030315&ms=vic

I thought Little Lyn and Johnny Redcoat where both good things, the form assessment by Blake Redden was poor and I'm being nice. You don't expect the form experts to get it right all the time, but Little Lyn was always going to lead and around Ararat (one of the last of the old school tracks) that's who you wanted to be on. Didn't even rate a mention in the discussion.

[Messenger]

I thought Little Lyn and Johnny Redcoat where both good things, the form assessment by Blake Redden was poor and I'm being nice. You don't expect the form experts to get it right all the time, but Little Lyn was always going to lead and around Ararat (one of the last of the old school tracks) that's who you wanted to be on. Didn't even rate a mention in the discussion.

Please stop torturing me Stu - I was going to go (the time I am most likely to bet) but something came up and I thought Little Lyn was an EW special and could not believe the results/odds when I read them. I would have had to have had something on the first $22 pop too after doing a big write up on it here after its previous win and then reading in the local how the trainer/owner/breeder expected it to win much better races

[Messenger]

Going on tonight's Melton program it would seem that trotters are not the answer to the odds on problem
7/9 Odds on Faves, the other two $2 and $2.10

[Maorisidol]

Going on tonight's Melton program it would seem that trotters are not the answer to the odds on problem
7/9 Odds on Faves, the other two $2 and $2.10

Correction, Kevin...
6/11 odds on, the other 5 were, $4.90, $26.10, $3.10, $2.10, $3.60.
Doesnt seem so bad now hey!
6/11 pretty much backs your stats of approx 50% win/loss ratio for odds onners!

[Messenger]

Correction, Kevin...
6/11 odds on, the other 5 were, $4.90, $26.10, $3.10, $2.10, $3.60.
Doesnt seem so bad now hey!
6/11 pretty much backs your stats of approx 50% win/loss ratio for odds onners!

Correction Ash
9/11 odds on faves
http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=MX070315&ms=vic

Not talking about how many won Ash - how many there were

[Maorisidol]

Correction Ash
9/11 odds on faves
http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=MX070315&ms=vic

Not talking about how many won Ash - how many there were

Sorry Kev, i get ya now...however,
See the 50% rule...
We just need to expand that experiment or actually go over results for the last 12 months to get a 100% statistic on that...

[Messenger]

The opposite end of the spectrum here. I cannot remember seeing a favourite as long as $4.90 for some time

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=GE190315&ms=vic#GEC19031506

[Messenger]

Equal faves at $5.20 is great to see IMO

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=KI240315&ms=vic#KIC24031503

[Richard prior]

[QUOTE=Messenger;42004]Equal faves at $5.20 is great to see IMO

Really makes the race worthwhile for having a punt Kev.

[Messenger]

7/8 faves got up at Shep tonight but 5 were odds on with 4 of them < $1.60

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=SP150415&ms=vic

[Messenger]

6 winners < $1.60 at GP tonight cannot be good for their turnover either

[aussiebreno]

6 winners < $1.60 at GP tonight cannot be good for their turnover either

Damn. I thought to myself Thurs night you would post about the Penrith meeting aand when I seen you post here I was certain.
G Hall did get one winner at $20 and even tipped his $4 shot to roll his odds on fave in one race.

[Messenger]

LOL me posting about anything out of Vic should be double digit odds Brenno. So what do you think - 6/9 odds on at Penrith, good for turnover? ;)

[Messenger]

Surely the reason we have so many super short odds on pops has got to be people getting caught out betting into the TAB pool. Nobody in their right mind backs Lovelist anywhere near the $1.10 it started tonight

[the_racing_wiz]

Clearly the rebate punters are the reason for so many $1.04 - $1.10 shots. They are just loading up to get 4-10% of their stake and then the rebate provides the extra juice.

[codywinnell]

Jason Bonnington has penned an article in Harness Racer (due out 1 June) re short-priced favourites.

Quick stat, if you'd had $10 on the nose on all of them over past 12 months I understand you'd be about $1500 down. Backing them straight out probably not the best way to play them. Bonners knows his stuff and once the article is published in Harness Racer I'll publish it online and link up to it via this thread.

[Messenger]

My odds on survey (see post 34) clearly suggested that backing all odds on faves had to be a losing proposition

[codywinnell]

My odds on survey (see post 34) clearly suggested that backing all odds on faves had to be a losing proposition

The stats I've seen certainly confirm such an assertion.

At the same time I've never known any respected punter who simply backs horses that are odds-on because they're odds-on, so it's no great surprise to me that one would do their dough playing such a foolish system...

[Messenger]

From Bendigo last night. I want you to match the following horses records to the odds that they started

37-10-4-8 _________ 27-0-3-3

$29.90 ___________ $1.20

Thinking time music


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/78/FHM-Orchestra-mk2006-03.jpg


The order for matching records to odds is: leave them exactly as they are

Yeah, I know you all got it right because it had to be a trick question and I was probably being a bit tricky picking horses from 2 different races

The horses were

R8 winner No Tomorrow and R9 winner Dawson Street

and yes I know NZ import Oh Jonny B Good caused No Tomorrow to be those odds but how does Dawson Street justify his odds? Probably simply barrier 1 in that field and he DID win

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=BN060615&ms=vic

[Messenger]

17 races in Victoria today.
We had 10 races with the Fav ≤ $1.70

[Messenger]

A meeting with a difference tonight at Terang. There was only one favourite that won and there was only one odds on favourite for the night and he was not the winner

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=TE230615&ms=vic

A great night for Michael Bellman - drove 3 winners and trained another

[Adaptor]

That makes 98 driving winners for the season for Michael Bellman. ( HRA site yet to be updated I think) .

[Messenger]

A meeting with a difference tonight at Terang. There was only one favourite that won and there was only one odds on favourite for the night and he was not the winner

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=TE230615&ms=vic

A great night for Michael Bellman - drove 3 winners and trained another

Geelong certainly reversed this brief trend today
7/8 favourites winning with plenty odds on including two at $1.04

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=GE240615&ms=vic

I'm sorry to see recently disqualified Dean Braun starting to appear regularly in the winners stall

[Messenger]

I was thinking about how ridiculous it seemed that a 2yo having only its 2nd start could start $1.04 at Shep tonight
I pondered why we never see such a thing in the gallops and when I thought about it I realized it basically comes down to the difference between the 2 breeds
A thoroughbred has less than half as many potential starts in its legs
Only a really good horse is going to start those odds in the gallops
If you have a good one you are not going to waste those legs with starts in minor races and I guess you do not have to because
The gallops have a greater sprinkling of big money races and the quality of fields they attract is not going to see horses go around at $1.04
Overall I suppose the competition is more even too
Sorry, just thinking out loud

[Messenger]

7/8 favourites successful at Maryborough today.
With none of them longer than $2.50 I wonder whether it was good for turnover

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=MH191015&ms=vic

[Messenger]

All the value winners at Melton yesterday made me look a little closer
Only one odds on fav for the 8 race program (which lost)
Maybe Restricted class meetings produce more even fields.
Of course it could be a one off and I must admit to not paying Restricted meetings enough attention to really know

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=MX161115&ms=vic

[codywinnell]

All the value winners at Melton yesterday made me look a little closer
Only one odds on fav for the 8 race program (which lost)
Maybe Restricted class meetings produce more even fields.
Of course it could be a one off and I must admit to not paying Restricted meetings enough attention to really know

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=MX161115&ms=vic


Interesting figures released in today's From the CEO's desk @ HRV.

"For 145 races up to 16 November 2014 there were 54% which had odds on favourites. For the same period in 2015 that figure has reduced to 36%."

http://www.hrv.org.au/general/from-the-ceos-desk/

Only halfway through the PBD trial of course, but these are the results so far.

[codywinnell]

Thought this excerpt from a piece I'm writing for Leader Newspapers might be of interest.

Friday night at Tabcorp Park Melton proved the $5 each-way punter is very much looked after in the trots with winners at odds of $36.10, $65.10, $6.10, $11.20 and $33.10.

If you’d played field into field in Races 1 and 2 – both open races on paper – into One Yankee Hall ($1.20) – considered by most to be night’s “moral” – into Hellovaway ($4.40) and Mistressofillusion ($2.80) – the clear second favourites in Race 4 – in a $50 flexi early quaddie, you would walked away with almost $9000 in your pocket.

The EQ paid $38,431.80 overall and the $50 ticket would have had you on for 22.72 per cent of the dividend.

But of course, how easy is everything in hindsight!?

[Messenger]

You have to seize the opportunity to write such pieces Cody - I reckon it has been a long time since Melton had three winners over $30 and no doubt why it got a mention in the Melton Review thread. I think the reduction in the number of odds on favourites might be worth publicising too

[Messenger]

It was hard to work out where the fave was until they turned for home Wayne as the call was oh so forgettable but Almost El Eagle's finishing burst was memorable for the 2nd time in 8 days - the new Cups king

[codywinnell]

You have to seize the opportunity to write such pieces Cody - I reckon it has been a long time since Melton had three winners over $30 and no doubt why it got a mention in the Melton Review thread. I think the reduction in the number of odds on favourites might be worth publicising too

Quick look at the last 3 Melton meetings, Kev, and some of the prices of the winners.

Monday 17th
41.40
15.60
27.80
8.20

Friday 13th
29.90
11.80
8.20

November 6
47.60
14.10

Fair few long-shots among that lot. You don't want every single race to be won by a long-shot I wouldn't think. Doesn't need to become a lottery! But it's good to see the $5 ew punter getting their chance every time there's a meeting.

[Toohard]

You have to seize the opportunity to write such pieces Cody - I reckon it has been a long time since Melton had three winners over $30 and no doubt why it got a mention in the Melton Review thread. I think the reduction in the number of odds on favourites might be worth publicising too


Don't know if interesting or not but said to Luke on the way home from the track 5 weeks ago "Number 1 didn't win a race tonight".


And could have said same at the next 4 meetings as number 1 hasn't won at Melton at the last 5 Friday\Saturday night meetings. Number 8 (1) on second line has won only 3 times and one of them was Lennytheshark the other week. Given that the 1 and 8 will usually end up on the pegs somewhere after the start and there's a sprint lane operating, surprising they haven't won more times.


Winningest numbers last 5 meetings are 4 and 7 (outside the front) with 10 each. The rest 'evenly' spread.

[Messenger]

Paul, when I first read that I thought WOW but knowing that I had once done some barrier stats, I thought I would dig them out - see post 2

http://www.harnessracingforum.com/showthread.php?7475-Melton-Bell-Position-Stats&highlight=Melton

They are just a small sample too but also dismiss 1 & 8 as having any advantage

[Messenger]

Hi Wayne, you would imagine that the stats are available to rank SS manners eg. 2 GO from 5 attempts, especially seeing as though there are so few of them.
I agree that reasonable odds faves winning are more likely to attract punters than $65 blowouts

[Bomber Bill]

In relation to the November barrier conditions for races,I understood the purpose was to increase Wagering Revenue,the assertion that we have now less odds on favourites winning,is a tick for the change,is not the real fact.Have we increased the Wagering revenue?l think for transparency we should have the Wagering Revenue for the like weeks in November 2014 with the achieved revenue in the same weeks in 2015,Cody could provide us with this,to see the real evidence .
I hold real concerns that " good horses" that bring industry participants to meetings & professional punters back @ odds on will be handicapped unfairly,especially @ Metro Class.
I nominate a comparison to the Greyhounds with "Fernando Bale", they did not penalise him,they allowed him to help promote the sport,whether he was $1.10 .We need to be careful that barriers are not used to destroy natural talent!
It will take a large number of $5 punters to match the outlays of professional punters on odds on favourites,I see the need for some change ,but not the degree used in Novembers Race Programming.

[Messenger]

A belated welcome to Bill - the above post should have come up a couple of weeks ago

[arlington]

As has been alluded to here previously Bill, one would imagine the wagering results will be made public especially if the experiment was successful in it's objective of higher turn over. I wouldn't think we'd go to all PBD race programming even if the data shows a positive effect on turn over. The month of November was used as there were no 2yo's and a reduced number of 3yo races...more lower grade C class races, and also to congest the period needed to gather sizeable data? The black type races were left untouched?


One would have thought HRV ran it by the high volume (professional?) punters they met with prior to the experiment?


From the CEO's desk August 2015
Wagering Consultation
On the subject of consultation, HRV met with a number of high volume harness racing punters recently to discuss a variety of matters with respect to wagering on harness racing. Tabcorp Executives were also in attendance and it was a very useful exchange of views and ideas. I am sure the punters who attended are more informed of issues facing HRV and equally we are more aware of matters of interest to the punting sector.
More of these sessions are contemplated in the future.

Are we able to deduce anything from the PBD third round Inter heats? Quality drawcard horses but with the issue of favoured runners having already qualified.


The 'handicapping', via PBD, of the male horse is likely to continue in some respects with PBD for mares. We all know, and agree with, the objectives there? However, those quality males, and females, will have access to free for all conditions during their juvenile years in the Group/futurity, showcase, races.

Not wanting to deviate from your post Bill, but in line with the thread, HRV has reduced sectional times further, state wide. I was aware of the conversation re Melton leader bias and the possibility of reduced sectionals at Melton, so now I'm assuming the thought behind the state wide reduction is related to odds on numbers?

Considering Bill's thoughts on the 'Fernando Bale' aspect and the above, might an alternative to PBD's be the use of personal times to program some races? Worth an experiment with lower class, C0,C1 etc. horses? The personal times for each horse are available on Harnessweb, i.e. 'my mile rate', avg mile rate last 10,6...starts. Not sure how readily accessible, or how useful all this info is to the punter at present, but for programming purposes?
As an aside, may also help in maintaining/increasing the horse racing population and ease the pressure on initiatives such as HERO.
In recent times Albury used to, although they may have been non TAB meetings. Was only made redundant with the advent of current HRNSW programming guidelines and funding agreements with HRNSW?
The negatives are?

[Messenger]

When you consider we are talking Metro meetings it is amazing to see consecutive $1.04 faves at Menangle tonight and FOUR long odds on faves at Melton $1.20, $1.30, $1.40, $1.70 (gallops followers would not accept that a $1.20 and a $1.40 fav could both get beat at the same meet)

[Messenger]

Melton last night saw 8 out of 8 Odds On favourites (last 6 won)

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=JX080216&ms=vic

[Messenger]

Five odds on or even money favourites beaten at Cranbourne tonight. I reckon we are the only code where you would see that

[Messenger]

Favourites in first 6 races at Stawell today

$1.80 $1.40 $1.50 $1.10 $1.70 $1.30

Only one of them won

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=SW160216&ms=vic

[Messenger]

Today I noticed that the favourites in the Trotters races do not offer much value - except that they have a pretty good success rate.
I did not want to spend too much time on checking this observation so I only researched the Vic trots races this month
So far we have had 28 trots races in May
The longest price favourites have been $3.40 and $3.20
There have been 13 Odds On faves, so this gait may need some careful consideration by HRV in their efforts to reduce Odds On pops
17 out of 28 faves have won

[Messenger]

I have been noticing how short Emma Stewart's go around so to substantiate it I thought I would list their starting odds here.
I am only going to do it for her home state Vic and whenever she has 2 or more runners in a race, I will only be listing the shortest one.
To keep everything in one place, I will come back and edit this post each day she has runners - I will use a new line for each day.

June 1: $1.10, $1.30, $1.10 - 2/3 wins
June 3: $3.10, $11.20, $2.30 2/3 wins (Metro)
June 4: $2.90, $1.60, $1.90, $1.40, $2.30 3/5 wins
June 7: $2.40, $1.20 1/2 wins

June 9: $1.04, $1.70, $3.60, $1.70, $2.40 3.5/5 wins
June 10: $4.30, $3.50, $3.60, $5.00, $2.40 3/5 wins (Metro) [1 winner was not her shortest runner]
June 11: $1.60, $5.70, $1.80, $13.00, $1.50, $4.10, $8.60 2/7 wins

June 15: $2.90, $1.30, $3.30, $1.20 2/4 wins
June 16: $8.80, $8.90, $3.20 0/3 wins
June 17: $4.60, $1.80, $1.10, $1.90, $1.90, $9.00, $1.40 3/7 wins
June 18: $2.00, $1.40, $1.10 3/3 wins (Metro)

June 24: $16.30, $1.50, $1.50, $26.80, $86.50, $2.90, $4.60, $3.10, $3.90, $1.40, $2.60, $14.00 5/12 wins (Metro)

July 2: $3.90, $5.30, $2.00, $1.80, $1.50, 3/5 (Metro Gp1s)

[Messenger]

So the Stewart stable summary for week 1 is :

8 wins from 13 races
7 odds on faves
Longest price runner $11.20 (stable pet Jadahson)
2nd longest $2.90

[Messenger]

So the Stewart stats update at the half month point is:

18.5 wins from 34 races contested
15 odds on faves (not all of these were winners)
There have now been 2 of her runners start over $10
Her number of odds on faves dropped considerably in the second week
At the end of the month we will calculate the average starting price of her preferred runner
(I say 'preferred' runner as we are only taking stats on her shortest starter when she has more than one in a race)

[Messenger]

I will conclude my Stewart Stable stats after last night which I included as she had no other runners for the last week of June
Her stats for a month were:

34½ wins from 64 races (16 Metro wins!)
27 odds on faves (42% of the races, I would not be surprised if this was below her average as we had some classy metro races this month)



(details see Post 134 which I updated after each meet)

[Messenger]

It will be interesting to see how much difference Tiered Racing makes in the new season
Tonight at Ballarat 8/9 races Odds On favs

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=BA260716&ms=vic

[Danno]

Can anyone tell me if the starting prices are correct for the 6th at Bankstown yesterday??? 8 starters, 4 of which are odds on and the longest priced starter under $8???


Results - Race 6 BANKSTOWN 1 August 2016 http://www.harness.org.au/images/Camera.png (http://www.harness.org.au/photofinish/BK010816/BKC01081605.jpg) http://www.harness.org.au/images/video-trotstv-2.gif (http://www.trotstv.com.au/?mc=BK010816&rn=6)
[/URL]CANTERBURY BANKSTOWN CITY COUNCIL CUP 25TH OF AUGUST PACE Race code: BKC01081605 Stakes: $3,500 Gait: PACERS Class: R2 To R3. 1,740 METRES MOBILE STARTPl HorsePrize-
money Row &
BrTAB
# Trainer Driver
( C = Concession )Mgn
(m)Starting
oddsStewards'
Comments

[URL="http://www.harness.org.au/stewards-comments-explain.cfm?stateName=NSW"]Expln (http://www.trotstv.com.au/?mc=BK010816&rn=6)1WARNER (http://www.harness.org.au/racing/horse-search/?horseId=761162) http://www.harness.org.au/images/bb_icon.gif (http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=BK010816&ms=nsw#void) Fr11W P DimechJ E Trainor (C,cl)$ 1.30 fav GS L SWAB BAY GELDING 6 by ART MAJOR USA (http://www.harness.org.au/ausbreed/reports/hraonline.htm) out of JADES DREAM (http://www.harness.org.au/ausbreed/reports/hraonline.htm)
Owner(s): W P (Wayne) Dimech
Breeder(s): J H (Jeremy) Trevor-Jones 2MORTENSON (http://www.harness.org.au/racing/horse-search/?horseId=767517) http://www.harness.org.au/images/bb_icon.gif (http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=BK010816&ms=nsw#void) Sr28H A JamesH A James 3.40 $ 1.90 PRBT 3RODNEY STRIDES (http://www.harness.org.au/racing/horse-search/?horseId=774832) http://www.harness.org.au/images/bb_icon.gif (http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=BK010816&ms=nsw#void) Fr22K J HayesC Geary (C,cl) 10.50 $ 1.30 fav 4THOMAS DYLAN (http://www.harness.org.au/racing/horse-search/?horseId=633525) http://www.harness.org.au/images/bb_icon.gif (http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=BK010816&ms=nsw#void) Fr33P J HansonT P McCarthy 12.00 $ 1.80 PRBT GS 5UNDERDOG (http://www.harness.org.au/racing/horse-search/?horseId=745792) http://www.harness.org.au/images/bb_icon.gif (http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=BK010816&ms=nsw#void) Sr17S WadeT McCracken (C,cl) 15.10 $ 5.80 D/R LOC 6FEARLESS LORD (http://www.harness.org.au/racing/horse-search/?horseId=770622) http://www.harness.org.au/images/bb_icon.gif (http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=BK010816&ms=nsw#void) Fr66R ErrichielloD R Morris 17.40 $ 2.40 RAS 7WUNDER RANGER (http://www.harness.org.au/racing/horse-search/?horseId=537596) http://www.harness.org.au/images/bb_icon.gif (http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=BK010816&ms=nsw#void) Fr44J J MuscatJ J Muscat 17.90 $ 7.50 PRBT D/F$200 UW 8KINGS AND GLORY (http://www.harness.org.au/racing/horse-search/?horseId=759473) http://www.harness.org.au/images/bb_icon.gif (http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=BK010816&ms=nsw#void) Fr55D J FarrugiaN S Xuereb (C,cl) 22.30 $ 4.30 PRBT RAS G SD1T ScratchingsAll startedTrack Rating: GOODGross Time: 2:09:5Mile Rate: 1:59:8Lead Time: 9.0First Quarter: 30.7Second Quarter: 31.0Third Quarter: 29.0Fourth Quarter: 29.8Margins: 3.4m x 7.0m

Go to races in this meeting: 1 (http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=BK010816&ms=nsw#BKC01081602) 2 (http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=BK010816&ms=nsw#BKC01081604) 3 (http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=BK010816&ms=nsw#BKC01081601) 4 (http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=BK010816&ms=nsw#BKC01081603) 5 (http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=BK010816&ms=nsw#BKC01081608) 6 (http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=BK010816&ms=nsw#BKC01081605)

[Messenger]

If you look at this link Dan you will see that the winner Warner was the only Odds On runner

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=BK010816&ms=nsw#BKC01081605

[Danno]

That has changed during the morning Kev, as that page you supplied the link from was the same page I copied and pasted earlier..........

[Messenger]

8 races at Melton tonight but only 3 of them had sufficient runners to pay 3 place divvies - this has to be a worry. Race 3 ended up with only 4 runners and I am not sure there was even a single place dividend looking at the TAB (but there was a massive $120 in the place pool)

https://www.tab.com.au/racing/2016-08-05/MELTON/MLT/H/3

That race was a turnover killer and Emma Stewart's $1.04 faves do not help - maybe we need to schedule her shorties to be Races 1&2 as these early races have easily the best turnover (even with a $1.20 fav in the first)

[Messenger]

It was incredible to see Ample Power start $1.04 favorite in R3 at Kilmore
This was only his 3rd start and at his last start about 6mths ago he was defeated when $1.30
With questions surrounding his tractability those who were on him must have felt sick when he initially refused to score up
It was never in doubt they will tell you as he won by a street

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=KI100816&ms=vic#KIC10081604

[Messenger]

Are heats part of our Odds On problem?
The Trotters don't usually have as many in the Red but for the Breeders Crown at Maryborough today all 6 heats had Odds On faves with 4 deep in the red

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=MH170816&ms=vic

[Messenger]

This morning's markets for the Crown finals have the favourite at the following odds

$1.35
$2.50
$1.75
$1.10
$1.50
$1.55
$1.70
$1.35
$2.60
$1.35

There is no way that turnover is going to justify the prizemoney on offer. Even without all the shorties it was not going to happen but of course there are all the entry fees but I wonder how close all the payments get to the payouts?
Mind you a showcase event can justify supplementation for the good of the industry but I wonder how many 'unconverted' will attend Melton today or view it in their homes
I have been residing in a bit of a media dead spot the last couple of weeks but it seems to me that Crown day is going need a lot more promotion to the general public if in a few decades time it is to become Harness's equivalent of the gallops Slipper, Derby or Cup day (although I am told the Hunter Cup is to be our cup)

[Messenger]

Three of the odds-on pops beaten at $1.50, $1.60, $1.60
Would/could never happen at the gallops? When I asked a pro gallops assessor he said we cannot be very good assessors/punters

[Messenger]

Well I suppose I was right about the turnover not justifying the prizemoney but I found a few surprises
I compared last Friday nights Melton meet with todays
I looked at the Vic TAB pools for each race esp. the 4 main ones - win, place, tri, first 4
There was very little difference in the totals for each race except for one race. Much bigger First 4 pools on Friday was what allowed them to match today's Crown turnover
So much for odds o look on - BY FAR THE BIGGEST TURNOVER RACE of the 18 races was the one with the shortest fav : Our Waikiki Beach's race today thanks to a much, much bigger Win pool of $52k which was double some of the other win pools
The other interesting point of difference was that today's Quaddie pool was a massive $262k compared to Friday's $66k

[arlington]

Well I suppose I was right about the turnover not justifying the prizemoney but I found a few surprises
I compared last Friday nights Melton meet with todays
I looked at the Vic TAB pools for each race esp. the 4 main ones - win, place, tri, first 4
There was very little difference in the totals for each race except for one race. Much bigger First 4 pools on Friday was what allowed them to match today's Crown turnover
So much for odds o look on - BY FAR THE BIGGEST TURNOVER RACE of the 18 races was the one with the shortest fav : Our Waikiki Beach's race today thanks to a much, much bigger Win pool of $52k which was double some of the other win pools
The other interesting point of difference was that today's Quaddie pool was a massive $262k compared to Friday's $66k


The Waikiki Beach win pool may have been bolstered by industry funding itself. A fair guess is the winner of the $10000.00 Breeders Crown TAB voucher plonked on the nose.
I guess, at least, it will be a tax deduction.

[Messenger]

The Waikiki Beach win pool may have been bolstered by industry funding itself. A fair guess is the winner of the $10000.00 Breeders Crown TAB voucher plonked on the nose.
I guess, at least, it will be a tax deduction.

Thanks Wayne, that would be it - mind you without that bet, the races Win pool was still more than $10k bigger than any other

[Messenger]

Once again I am thinking that long Odds On pops do not hurt turnover

Mildura tonight:

R1 C1 with 9 starters and a $3.00 fav the pools added up to $49k ish
R2 C0 with 8 starters and a $1.10 pop the pools added up to $62k ish
R3 C0 with 6 starters and a $2.50 fav the pools added up to $25k ish
R4 3YO with 7 starters and a $1.04 pop the pools added up to $50k ish
R5 C3 with 10 starters and a $3.20 fav the pools added up to $34k ish

[Amlin]

81 noms for Kilmore Sun. 63 of them between the C0 and C1 events.

[Toohard]

81 noms for Kilmore Sun. 63 of them between the C0 and C1 events.



Have you seen the field for the Caulfield Stakes on Saturday? $27,000 for 4th and they could only get a field of 3 ?

[p plater]

Speaking of noms. Have you seen the field for the Melton election. In particular "Coburn", the industry's own Lance Justice running for Council.
Go Lance

[Messenger]

It worries me that he is the president of the Trainers Association and they never meet

[Messenger]

Checking the TAB pools for Yarra Valley today to make sure they are not as bad as they were on Cup day, I noticed how much lower the Trots race pools were compared to the Pacing races around them. Is this always the case?

[aussiebreno]

Checking the TAB pools for Yarra Valley today to make sure they are not as bad as they were on Cup day, I noticed how much lower the Trots race pools were compared to the Pacing races around them. Is this always the case?

Yes.

[Messenger]

So trotting is only our future with the French on board

[Fan of Jate]

Four odds on favourite's won at GP last night and three were beaten. Drawing the pole almost guarantees favouritism if the horse has any ability at all at GP, those were the three beaten favourites. I rarely back a horse at $1:40 even when I owned a few winners back in the day I would only back them lightly. I have heard the old saying "odds on-look on"


Ballarat had 6 odds on favourites win and win well last night, they were nearly all picked in the Sun newspaper yesterday so obviously they were seen as the better horses well before the race and heavy punters were already on board and would have cleaned up

[Messenger]

Hi Pat, for the first 2 months of the season in Vic 60% of Odds On won or 40% lost, depending how you like to look at it. From previous surveys I have done, that is pretty much the norm. You certainly would not want to be backing all the Odds On favs or else you would be behind. I think the value is finding the ones who do not deserve to be but I haven't enough enthusiasm to follow the form closely enough nowadays

[Messenger]

For the whole 37 races of the Flemington carnival only 5 favourites saluted with only one odds on at $1.70 (out of 3 odds on pops for the carnival)
I don't think it hurt them although I guess there may have been less winners and thus less reinvesting which could have an effect on turnover

[Fan of Jate]

Hello Kevin,The gallops are a lot more competitive and there were also a lot of winners paying around the $10 mark which IMO the normal punter and race goer loves, as previously stated the odds on favourite tends to put people off. Another factor for gallops is the carnival/festive type racing they do at this time of year, this attracts a lot of extra people with money and they all have a flutter which increases turnover. You wont hear anybody complaining about it, that's for sure. The feedback is generally that this type of event is world class. The inters can be like that but will take a lot of forethought and very good management.

[Messenger]

You dont get Odds On pops much shorter than in the last at Melton tonight
To illustrate the second favourite won and paid $15.80 ($23 fixed)
Admittedly it was ridiculous odds about Cant Refuse as he had actually only won 2/17
Once again it will not even cause a ripple - harness punters really are mugs

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=MX031216&ms=vic#MXM03121605

[Fan of Jate]

The winners form line wasn't too shabby either, so would have been worth a good each way bet

[Messenger]

Some VERY short ones at Geelong tonight but it is hard to compare the pools of the races to see if it affected turnover as ALL of the last 5 races had favs < $1.60

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=GE190117&ms=vic

[Messenger]

Not a lot of value at Maryborough today

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=MH200217&ms=vic

Three $1.10 pops for starters

[Fan of Jate]

6 odds on winners at Maryborough, the other favourite won paying $2.60. Remind me not to go there unless I own one of the favourites.:). I would have lost a shedfull if I had of been punting there.

[Messenger]

It never ceases to amaze me how crazy harness punters are

R2 just run at Horsham
Longtan Cassanova = Long Odds On fav
Lisandros = $33 winner

Have a look at their form and try and work it out - some may say that Long was entitled to be favourite but deep in the red?!

https://www.harness.org.au/fields.cfm?mc=HS030817&fromstate=vic#2

[Messenger]

Todays Quaddie pool for the Breeders Crown of $258k was $20k more than the Win pools of all 10 races combined

[Messenger]

Great value to be had at Echuca tonight - 6 odds on favourites beaten

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=EC130917&ms=vic

[Fan of Jate]

Some very nice prices there for those who back long shots.

[Amlin]

Great value to be had at Echuca tonight - 6 odds on favourites beaten

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-results.cfm?mc=EC130917&ms=vic

Making up for the night before?

[Messenger]

If Wednesday meets have been given the scrubo as they were our worst turnover meets (competing with Metro gallops)
Wouldn't it follow that tonight's Melton meet would have been better on Saturday instead of competing with tonight's MV gallops

Odds on pops are rarer at the gallops (and more rarely beaten) - I think too many long odds-on pops beaten contributes to some of our unwanted 'terms of endearment'

[Messenger]

https://www.harness.org.au/racing/fields/race-fields/?mc=MX121017&ms=vic

Plenty of Odds On pops at minor Melton meet tonight but most have been beaten

[Messenger]

If we are seeking to raise our profile, I cannot help but feel having the Vic Cup tonight is a terrible clash with everything that is happening in the gallops today :(

[Fan of Jate]

There is no footy on Kev and no cricket either,the working week is over and the "Everest is in Sydney so they wont get a bigger opportunity to showcase the cup. The Guineas day is huge and they cant be expected to compete with that. The only other day is Sunday at say a twilight meeting. At the lovely risk of having the site fence sitters jump all over me, this is not the strongest field going around for the showpiece of Victorian harness racing, you have Lenny , then lennny, then you have Lenny. If he does get beat so be it, but he is the only star in this field by a long way. There are a couple of up and comers and a few that have won group 3 races worth $18k each.

The prizemoney doesn't jump out at you when you compare it to other events inc the gallops. From afar IMO it needs a big lift before they can start increasing customer satisfaction and turnover. There wont be any rain either so I hope it is a big success.

[Messenger]

7 of the 8 favourites were Odds On at Melton tonight with their av price being $1.50

http://www.harness.org.au/racing/fields/race-fields/?mc=MX201017&fromstate=vic

[Fan of Jate]

The racing is good at Melton at the minute, the MO's are very competitive and good times are being run and there always seems to be an up and coming star competing.The betting is good as well.

[Messenger]

Emma Stewart had 2 first starters at Horsham today win at $1.04 - this would never ever have happened in the gallops world

She had a third winner for the day in one of those ridiculous 1200m races

http://www.harness.org.au/racing/fields/race-fields/?mc=HS301017&ms=vic

[Amlin]

Those favourites, they were short at Cranbourne last night

[Messenger]

Another three long odds-on winners for the Stewart stable at Bendigo tonight ($1.30, $1.10, $1.30). It would not surprise me if their average winning price in career/country class races is $1.50 or less. When they are the leading stable, it raises the question - are they bad for the industry (Controversial Kev tonight)

[Fan of Jate]

I dont think so Kev, the horses are obviously very good especially Konan so the money goes on them. As they move up in grade they drop back to the field. And they weren't international horses either.

[Messenger]

A day meeting at Kilmore today is a bit of a surprise as I thought we had given them the flick.
With Mildura on tonight, maybe it was thrown in as an extra or maybe with the gallops at Sale not metro, it is seen as an opportunity/experiment

[Messenger]

52mm (2") of rain at Mildura this afternoon/tonight made scheduling Kilmore a masterstroke

[Messenger]

Just as much as we need to enthuse the surrounds of Cranbourne about harness racing, we may have to enthuse the industry's trainers - apart from R1 poor fields for the metro meet

http://www.harness.org.au/racing/fields/race-fields/?mc=CR021217&fromstate=vic

Not flash for the C class meet at Melton tonight either

(Stawell is the meet of the weekend! The first lot of rain has only produced 21mm)