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

[aussiebreno]

Your intimate knowledge is on full display brendan

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cheers,

Dan[/QUOTE]
Thanks Dan.

[Danno]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cheers,

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

[aussiebreno]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cheers,

Dan

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

[Greg Hando]

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

I'm afraid a lot of these horse's are substandard and shouldn't be there to compete but hey it's keep's the game going

[Daryl New]

G'day Dan,

There's a very big difference between a half-baked bluffing of someone as you're suggesting I am trying to do...and making a reply to them citing facts that attempt to refute their statements.
Of the 7 points of reply that I made, you've also gone and zero'd in on those 5 where I didn't agree with you and skipped over the 2 points you made where I totally agreed with you (the game not being just about punters & turnover) and (re-educating the punters). Perhaps in your haste to tell me I had my head up my arse... you missed those ?

The statistical analysis I referenced was an official study specifically into wastage and the effect that 2yo racing was having on the racing population, one that was commissioned by National & State bodies and one that notably essentially set out with the assumptions you've made, that 2yo racing was somehow bad for the sport.
To their significant surprise it showed the exact opposite to that which they thought would be the case and that which you claim above of 2yo racing.
It not only showed that there was no evidence that 2yo racing had a negative effect on racing longevity but that those horses who had started earlier tended to have more starts per year and race to a more advanced age. It was a study that was very widely known of at the time & it was also widely distributed. I am sure there is a copy lying around somewhere. Someone would have it filed away. I will do my absolute utmost to get hold of it and then reproduce it here on this forum for your perusal.

The facts are that here in Australia whilst annually we are breeding fewer foals than ever before, more of them are getting to the track than ever before, more of them start as 2yos than ever before & once having made the track & a start those horses have more starts per horse per year and per career than ever before. The above cited study came to exactly those conclusions.

Now even if you still don't believe me, just ask yourself how it is that we as an Industry manage to conduct just as many races as we did 10-15-20 years ago with almost half the number of foals produced per year.
There's no escaping the fact that today's Standardbred is a more precocious, sounder, better gaited horse than those of 10-15-20 years ago and the assertion that 2yo racing has a negative effect on racing longevity is a complete and utter furphy.
The main reason for the above is without doubt the vastly increased quality & quantity of the sires that are now available to Breeders in Australia...& coupled with that, while there has been a large reduction in the total number of broodmares being bred to those sires, the results have been greatly enhanced by the hugely improved quality of those active mares.

As for the respective business models of US Harness Racing and Australian Harness Racing, what I said was right.
The revenue streams of AUS & US Harness Racing flow from two entirely different sources.
US Harness Racing does not operate on a TAB turnover basis like we do here. None of the racetracks in this country are similarly reliant upon and so rise or fall on the back of money which flows from a % of Poker Machine revenues legislated to be carved off from the turnover of an associated Casino.
So...no, forgive me but I can't see how we have copied the US business model. 2yo futurity racing over the mile from a mobile start is not a business model.

Moving right along...

You keep banging on about this (influence wise) allegedly over represented group of Commercial Breeders who's wants & needs you believe come at the expense of the Industry.

Ok. So now I'm interested to know what your definition of a Commercial Breeder is?

Is it someone who derives part or all of their income from their breeding activities?

Is it someone who simply breeds to sell either at a sale or as a going concern?

Is it perhaps the Studs and Stallion owners that you're dark on?

To some extent one of those 3 groups has, IMO, a little too much input in the Industry decision making processes & directions.
As an example, I cite the absurd assertion in that HRA Report that here in Australia "we need to breed more horses"....... while at the same time largely ignoring the fact that we need to provide reasonable racing opportunities for 50% of the foals we breed each year...Fillies & Mares.
If that "we need to breed more horses" conclusion did not have significant active Stud & Stallion owner support then I'm Mother Theresa.

There is a HUGE amount of wastage in the Australian Harness Racing Industry but it comes not in the form of broken down horses resulting from excessive 2yo racing.
Rather it comes in the form of fillies & mares that are never tried and so never make the racetrack because having considered their earning potential, their breeders/owners decide they are not viable racing propositions.
That HRA report stated that around 30% of the currently active broodmare population did not race & of those that did make the track, 30% of them did not win a race.
If you want to get angry about something get angry about the disgraceful official resistance there is throughout the entire country to backing enhanced racing opportunities for fillies and mares.

Regards

Jaimie

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

[triplev123]

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

[Daryl New]

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

[Daryl New]

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

[aussiebreno]

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

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

[A BIT DUSTY]

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