Quote Originally Posted by Adaptor View Post
...Think there were something like 70 different trainers with entrants in th e 2yo heats at Bendigo last Saturday night
I'm not putting a knock on the new format and good luck to clubs like Bendigo but would there not have been a similar number of trainers represented, possibly more, with the old format Noel i.e. with heats distributed around the state? For example, in the case of the 4yo heats this year a number of eligible/paid up 4yo's weren't entered due to every likelihood of running into Menin Gate Ideal For Real TCBM and MW etc.

'Fortune favours the brave', more so, 'discretion is the better part of valour'...chivalrous(?) considering futurity payment's foregone. With the new format to be sure of maintaining eligibility for the Vicbred Super Series Silver and more particularly Bronze Paces, contesting a heat is the priority preference.

Was there any comment, on the night Noel, in regards to horses being knocked out of the series due to interference with no second chances now?
There's also been a number of horses SD1T, SD10D due to non competiveness. Quite possibly connections had considered the Silver/Bronze Pace eligibility conditions.

It does sound like I'm knocking the new format but it's more a case of "all that glitters is not gold". Sure, a good night for clubs that get to host heats, overall betting turn over comparisons will be interesting but so will analysis of crowd attendances when the decrease in numbers lost for those clubs that previously hosted are accounted for. Has there been better exposure of the product by centralising?

Showcasing the best horses, rejigging racing product is the go but I'd also be cautious of elitism sneaking into our programming on the whole.

Quote Originally Posted by Messenger View Post
My old fave Mr Wickham, or should I say Gavin Lang, upstaged TCB but Greg Sugars drive was one he would rather forget unless he was content to finish 2nd - very deserving of the QDT at the minimum. I do hope HRV have the same level of wagering monitoring that the gallops have
Maybe in accepting the new Heats format we should embrace, take advantage of, the opportunity for odds on favourites to get rolled Kev? I didn't notice any betting fluctuations that alluded to anything. Maybe TCB shouldn't have opened so short in the first place. The QDT, the odds on formality rather than suspicion of anything untoward...the lesser of two evils, to QDT or not...better to keep on side with some punters but risk the connotations, the negative image. TCB was driven similarly to recent tactics and C Alford on the 2nd favourite in the chair and your old mate MW not a cad...nice trifecta, $53 for risking $6!
Hadn't you previously kicked Greg off MW Kev? Poor Greg lol. One thing's for sure, Greg know's MW's ability and TCB was going to be up against it considering how most heats are run, and with the way the barrier draw panned out.
An intriguing question, let's say connections of both horses allow Greg to choose which horse to drive in the heat only (and he gets a hall pass ). Might he have chosen MW?

Quote Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
Noel, Yes it is fine to hold the heats in one location but hold them in a more central location (i.e. Ballarat). It is a long way from Terang to Shepparton.
Week in week out the Western District guys and girls don't get it too bad Terry. Shepparton to Melton's farther than Shepp to Moonee Valley.