Group Racing

[Danno]

[

QUOTE]Of course money should be the criteria. Group races should be won by the best horses in the country.[QUOTE

G"day Grant,
I can see quite easily the point Ron is making and his opinion is that $$$$ should not be the ONLY criteria, and I whole heartedly agree, on the one hand you say Group races should be open to all horses and on the other it's about $$, so what is it?

The Australian Pacing Gold has group status, has big $$, but isn't open to all 2yo's , so should it be afforded group status??

The Maitland Intercity pace is open to all C2 to C4 horses, and is one of the biggest prizemoney races for this grade of horse in Austalia and attracts the elite horses in that grade year after year, sure it's not $100K and I can see the point that you, Triple and Harvey are making about some age classics having sub par prizemoney, but if the powers that be in that state haven't got the backing or cabbage to offer 100k plus should the people training/breeding and competing in their state get a double wammy by having their classics downgraded? I think it must be tough enough for our colleagues in SA as it is, so personaly I'd rather see them get some support to lift their prizemoney on these races from the other states than getting shafted.

and I wholeheartedly agree with Ron's sentiments about what has happened to the interdominion, its an unfortunate fact that our society has become more like the septics in regard to "whoever has the gold makes the rules", that was never a popular way to conduct ourselves years ago but unfortunately those days are gone the god almighty dollar holds sway and just don't try and get in it's way or you'll get trampled.

Cheers,
Dan

[Triple V]

Didn't miss the point at all.You have just made the same point again,that $$$ should be the only criteria for group status.
To apply that logic,the high bid for the Inter Dom should enhance the standing of that event.
Would (could) you agree that it has?

[VVV] No, you're still missing the point. That makes no sense at all...because the ID is & has & will always been an Open All Age race with prizemoney that well exceeds the (in recent times) 'traditional' 100k barrier for Gr.1 status. It has always been accepted as the pinacle of racing here in the Southern Hemisphere. The $$$ may vary on a year to year basis depending on who hosted the event... but it has always gone off for big $.
What I am crooked on is that, as it stands at present, for example...an above average 3yo filly can go & win a 25k 'Oaks' against moderate opposition and she will be accorded Gr.1/Black type status in a Sales catalogue, placing her up on the same level as a top shelf 3yo filly who wins a 100k+ Oaks against the best 3yo fillies in the Southern Hemisphere. If that's not a stone cold clear cut argument in support of giving Group Racing the rocket and switching to a Graded Stakes format I've never seen one.

[dizzy]

VVV wouldn't buyer due dilligence of the catalogue give the game away? Any filly who's sole claim to fame is a budget group race would have a correspondingly low dollar earnings beside her name as well wouldn't she? I do see your point but rather then hammering more nails into the coffin of the industry in poorer states shouldn't we be seeking ways to bolster and grow it?

Are the sales catalogues going to be ammended in the future to highlight those mares that took their mark on the 1400m track at Menangle? Doesn't the fast marks obtained by average mares in moderate company on the bigger track in an environment of higher prizemoney also corrupt the information contained in a sales catalogue?

[2minuteman]

[VVV] No, you're still missing the point. That makes no sense at all...because the ID is & has & will always been an Open All Age race with prizemoney that well exceeds the (in recent times) 'traditional' 100k barrier for Gr.1 status. It has always been accepted as the pinacle of racing here in the Southern Hemisphere. The $$$ may vary on a year to year basis depending on who hosted the event... but it has always gone off for big $.
What I am crooked on is that, as it stands at present, for example...an above average 3yo filly can go & win a 25k 'Oaks' against moderate opposition and she will be accorded Gr.1/Black type status in a Sales catalogue, placing her up on the same level as a top shelf 3yo filly who wins a 100k+ Oaks against the best 3yo fillies in the Southern Hemisphere. If that's not a stone cold clear cut argument in support of giving Group Racing the rocket and switching to a Graded Stakes format I've never seen one.

I don't miss the point at all,you moved it.This thread was about the Group 2 Maitland Inter City Pace and I made comment on that basis.
Your points about the status of Inter are correct but your reply did not answer the question re. the new format.

[broncobrad]

VVV wouldn't buyer due dilligence of the catalogue give the game away? Any filly who's sole claim to fame is a budget group race would have a correspondingly low dollar earnings beside her name as well wouldn't she? I do see your point but rather then hammering more nails into the coffin of the industry in poorer states shouldn't we be seeking ways to bolster and grow it?

Are the sales catalogues going to be ammended in the future to highlight those mares that took their mark on the 1400m track at Menangle? Doesn't the fast marks obtained by average mares in moderate company on the bigger track in an environment of higher prizemoney also corrupt the information contained in a sales catalogue?

As above. Any breeder or agent worth their salt should know what they are getting themselves into.

[2minuteman]

Ron you have missed the point. Of course money should be the criteria. Group races should be won by the best horses in the country. Birdsville Picnics gets a big crowd and has a dedicated group of volunteers that help run outback queenslands most famous race day, so by your logic it should be a group race. Ridiculous. Group races should be raced in by the best horses for the best money. I know myself when reading APG catalogue at this time of the year you will see progeny of a Group placed/winning mare and you ALWAYS have to check if it was the SA oaks where it was beaten 30m in 2.02.
Group races should be for our elite HORSES in any particular racing category. Not just because an event is well publicised, patronised and run by any club.

Money should be "the criteria".
Your comment,my emphasis.
Following that, today's Magic Millions 2 year old race should be Group 1?
I also ask you to define the $$$$ for Group 1,Group 2 etc.

[Triple V]

I don't miss the point at all,you moved it.This thread was about the Group 2 Maitland Inter City Pace and I made comment on that basis.
Your points about the status of Inter are correct but your reply did not answer the question re. the new format.

[VVV] ???? At the risk of being howled down Ron, I really don't follow the ID/Open Class horses that closely.
I watch them when they go around in a big $ race, I try to get to the Miracle Mile once a year but that's about the scope of it.
I much prefer 2yo & 3yo racing...largely because that's most likely where, as a breeder, I'll have some level of involvement via a starter that we've bred & sold or whatever.
If by chance one of them made it all the way through to ID Class then maybe I'd pay more attention to it. I couldn't tell you what the upcoming format was to be upfront. I know it has changed from previous editions, that's pretty much it.
I tend to believe comments for and against the format of the series are largely the domain of those who have a dog on the fight....the people with horses racing in it (owners & trainers) & those who are the big fans of ID Racing.

[Gtrain]

Money should be "the criteria".
Your comment,my emphasis.
Following that, today's Magic Millions 2 year old race should be Group 1?
I also ask you to define the $$$$ for Group 1,Group 2 etc.

50k is Group 2
100k is Group 1 I think.
My argument is not that these monetary goal posts should be shifted but that for an open age race to receive group 2 status but be restricted to horses c2-c4 seems absurd. Open age Group racing should be exactly that. Open. Regardless of crowd size. Nowhere in Australia do they gave a group 2 M0 or Group 2 c0. This race just seems absurdly graded as a group 2 in comparison to every other race on our open age group racing calendar.

[2minuteman]

Around and around,I'm hopping off.

[Danno]

50k is Group 2
100k is Group 1 I think.
My argument is not that these monetary goal posts should be shifted but that for an open age race to receive group 2 status but be restricted to horses c2-c4 seems absurd. Open age Group racing should be exactly that. Open. Regardless of crowd size. Nowhere in Australia do they gave a group 2 M0 or Group 2 c0. This race just seems absurdly graded as a group 2 in comparison to every other race on our open age group racing calendar.

Gee Grant, you really have completely missed Ron's point haven't you?

You have fairly consistently said on this thread that " of course money should be the criteria" but apparently now that's just for open age races?

Whilst you have have been pretty keen to point out Ron has missed YOUR point, ( if that could be clarified mate that would be good because you seem to keep on changing your tune).

And now you have made the claim that because "Nowhere in Australia do they gave a group 2 M0 or Group 2 c0" a restricted front race carrying group status is "absurd".

In an earlier response to your thread I asked you should the APG have group status, as it is not open to all 2yo's, so far you have not responded, do I take from that you have no opinion? or are you still forming one?

No wonder Ron has given up trying to make HIS point, you and Triple are like a couple of scratched vinyls, ie: making the point that nobody "gets your point" whilst completely ignoring the argument of others.

Listening is a skill.
Cheers,
Dan