Odds On Favourites under the VIC tiered system 2016-17

[Messenger]

It is over 6 weeks until that meet Kyle - maybe HRV can think of some incentive to encourage trainers. $1k to the leading trainer of the day?

[gutwagon]

Hi David and all contributors ,
I agree with Waynes point about 3.5K races at Melton. If they are meant to help the smaller struggling stables they need to be held in country areas, this would also keep the big stables away. And I don't mean changing all the country meetings to 3.5k races, I mean adding extra country meetings with just 3.5k races. With many big stables located close to Melton I think the cheap races should be kept away from Melton to let the smaller fish get more of the pie.
On another point you mentioned the decrease in the number of foals being bred each year. I currently don't see anything being done to encourage people to breed more horses. Do you have anything planned in this area ? I personally don't think the tiered prize money or slight increase as much of a reason for breeders to breed more foals.

[David Martin]

Thanks for your input Rick. As most people know from the public forums earlier this year, the industry benefits from almost every single $3500 race regardless of where they are run. Hence, without taking money away from the other prizemoney tiers, I'm an advocate for more $3500 races. I don't see that it's an argument as to if they should be at Melton or in the country. It should be (and needs to be) both. There are lower grade horses across the state, so if there are enough of them, we'll run more races. That's been our approach for splitting of $3500 races with strong nominations (wherever they are), and addition of supplementary races, etc. We continue to listen and adapt where opportunities arise, and one of those relates to the date previously occupied by the APTS sale (8 April). We have spoken with Bendigo with the intention that a meeting will be added, with predominantly (or totally) $3500 races. Hopefully that will help with the issue you have raised.


In regards to the decreasing number of foals, I agree that the increase to $40m in prizemoney on it's own is unlikely to stimulate an increase in breeding. There are some who have expressed the view that until recent changes, the future looked pretty bleak so they had held off breeding, but with an improvement in the Vic industry performance they are feeling more optimistic. We did talk to HBV about initiatives that we could afford, and made the decision to waive the $89 DNA fee. We also announced an increase in the quantum of VicBred races to better support this vital program. There's definitely more we would like to do (e.g. consider reducing foal registration costs, etc.), but unfortunately that wasn't possible in the current financial year. We are on track to achieve a significantly more profitable outcome in FY2017/18 and hopefully that enables us to do more in FY2018/19. I would welcome your views (and that of others) on any particular initiatives that we should be considering.


Cheers, David

[Messenger]

The last at Melton tonight is an example of what I had hoped the tiered system might reduce
A 4yo who won about $150k as a 2 & 3yo going around in a $3,500 race - they are figuring "why not win $1,750 instead of going around in a trial"

You don't see this as much in the gallops - is it because they figure a horse has only so many runs in its legs or is it that the weights/eligibility system does not create many 'gimmes'

http://www.harness.org.au/form.cfm?m...rc=MXC31121703

[Fan of Jate]

Good points there Kev. Won by a Half head. I believe that the horse did trial at Maryborough. The standardbred is definitely tougher than the galloper and can race a lot more, that is one reason. The gallopers dont have many gimme's and that is a fact. Harness racing has so many of these types of races where those running racing allow this "gimme" type of race to happen in just about every state and then come up with feeble excuses as to why it does happen. Good luck racing a horse in Victoria and picking up $490 for 2nd and then paying the bills with that.
I think it is common sense that if the horse is coming back after a spell and ready to race then race it for money instead of trialing it although it does not happen too often.

The bigger problem in my opinion is fast class horses being able to drop back into lower grade races mainly interstate and take home much bigger prizemoney than $3,500, same thing I suppose but on a much bigger scale. I have tackled authorities on this in 2 states and not one of then can give a valid reason why they allow this to happen. They fumble around quoting TAB odds, increased online betting, improved attendances & better racing. Most of these excuses dont stack up but senior figures in racing still keep praising their own work on a very consistent basis these days.

[David Martin]

Hi Pat,


I'd like to look into the issue you have raised (i.e. fast class horses being able to drop back into lower grade races mainly interstate). Can you please give me some more details, or even an example of a horse that has recently done this?


Thanks, David

[gutwagon]

Re the issue that Kevin has raised about a horse that has won $150k being in a $3.5k race. How about some restrictions in the 3.5k races, say no horses with $50k+ winnings allowed to enter. And the $5k races no horses with $100k+ allowed to enter. I thought the whole idea was to give horses that have not won much a chance to earn some money. Even keeping the 3yo's out of the R0 races would help. Once people see a $150k+ winner in the nominations they don't nominate their horse and you end up with a small field !

[David Martin]

Thanks Rick, in terms of the total prizemoney won, we have to be careful not to restrict older horses that we want to keep in the pool. There's a balance the Racing guys are always walking between conditioning races to avoid short priced favourites, whilst ensuring horses still have options for somewhere to race, particularly the older horses coming back down in grades. We don't want horses to 'meet their mark' and exit the State or racing altogether. That said, we'll definitely review that Race 9 at Melton. Cheers, David

[Messenger]

I was partly 'blaming' the durability of the standardbred too Pat - the horse that ran 2nd has already raced 19 times in the 4 months of this season so far

[djgood]

Re the issue that Kevin has raised about a horse that has won $150k being in a $3.5k race. How about some restrictions in the 3.5k races, say no horses with $50k+ winnings allowed to enter. And the $5k races no horses with $100k+ allowed to enter. I thought the whole idea was to give horses that have not won much a chance to earn some money. Even keeping the 3yo's out of the R0 races would help. Once people see a $150k+ winner in the nominations they don't nominate their horse and you end up with a small field !

restricted races should all be reverse handicapped lowest points to highest Preferential draw to lowest points , inform horses have plenty of races to chose from and to put them for a easy kill and stifles the betting,