Drop back system a joke

[Trixton 0]

Is this an english essay

What you said right then was about how we need more opportunities for horses that are not competeitve that has nothing to do with the drop back system i agree how there needs to be more races to suit to keep horses in the country but this drop back system has defiently kept horses in the country i don't here other trainers coming up to me and saying we are going to move on our horses because horses are dropping back and by the way your right it makes no difference if your a punter or not but id rather listen to what other trainers have to say about it rather than some people on race cafe just saying.

[Guest]

Trixton.

Ask trainers if they think the current system is right.

The ones I have spoken to think it needs amending.

At the end of the day we want a system that works,and is fair.

This system is flawed, and needs altering

 

[Trixton 0]

Tell me its flaws i know there is some but tell me them 

[Trixton 0]

And i talk to trainers every day as i work for a top stable

 

[Guest]

Trixton.

Well done working in a top stable.

Hope it works out well for you.

I have already said why I think it is flawed.

Does Oz have a dropback system?

[JOHNRYAN 62]

Funny Brodie. I don't know who you are but I'd gamble that I see and talk to a lot more trainers than you do and I haven't heard any complain about the drop back.

And I say the drop back is the best thing HRNZ has done in years.

[JOHNRYAN 62]

Brodie you're a big punter so you must make a fortune from backing the drop back horses. So why dislike it as a punter?

[what a post 811]

 John ryan,I thought it was a commonly held thought  prior to the introduction of this rule that the 1 win grade was congested with too many horses who were winners  of multiple races ,achieved by racing as 2 & 3 year old.  It was I thought agreed by most that  there was no incentive to carry on training the average  1 win horse because of this.  I also thought that it was common    thinking that with the exception of the top trainers, that the average trainer(the majority) saw little point in breeding because the system benefits  some at their expense.    Correct me if I'm wrong, but  is it not obvious that less horses are progressing up the grades, thus resulting in smaller fields. The drop back system simply puts more multiple winners in the 1 win grade.  In my opinion for every horse it helps, it hinders another.  For the leading trainers it makes no difference as they do not expect their owners to pay for a horse who can not win in 10 starts.                 To me the answer has always been simple. Introduce systems that lead to greater participation, in other words cater to the majority. And that means catering for what some would call the average horse.  Then programme races that provide contests of horses with similar credentials. Alter stakes to reward the best, but still leave enough crumbs so the rest can a least get a feed.   Still ,no point holding your breath, waiting for this to happen.                 Personally I still think the average trainer views the  use of performance enhancers as the biggest turn off in the sport.  

[Guest]

John Ryan. I didn't say that the dropback system didn't have some merit, but it is flawed and I don't believe it is doing what it is designed to do.

As What a Post says there are far too many c1 horses and trainers are racing just to get the dropback and get a free win at the detriment to others.stakes based I believe along with other measures could be a better answer like they do in U.S.A.

John, I don't consider myself a big punter due to being severely restricted by the TAB.

Yes I am a very successful punter as the TAB would very much agree with, and If allowed I would invest larger sums, but they won't allow.

Even at the agencies I am restricted to $2k net profit most of the time like others in the country.

I am wondering if many others are being hamstrung by the TAB betting wise.

[dkc 181]

Nobody has said the dropback system is wrong. As brodie has said its flawed. Horses winning stakes ie 2nd 3rd and 4th should not get the benefit of drop backs bring this in and it will take care of trainer only running places so that they can get the drop back. As I have said a horse should have to run 10 unplaced runs (not in a row) before it drops back. In theory a horse can run 10 placings in a row at the moment Win its next start and the continue running places. Its wrong!

[Trixton 0]

I don't know how you can say horses that are unable to win in its grade shouldn't drop back yes there getting money but what's wrong with that would you rather it not earn any money and be sold or saked wether you like it or not this drop back system is keeping horses in the country top horses who are getting drop backed to c1-3 aren't top horses and obviously isn't competive yes there is a lot of c1s but there's tons of races for them 

[dkc 181]

I give up.

Its better to be thought an idiot, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt

 

[JOHNRYAN 62]

dkc you're only giving your opinion. Just like me and anyone else here. Don't lose the plot simply because we differ on something. Well you can of you like I guess. It's up to you.

[JOHNRYAN 62]

How you guys can compare a drop back horse with say Mark Purdon's horses that are highly unlikely to go 10 starts without a win but cash in big time on all the free 2 and 3 year old wins is beyond understanding.

It is easily fixed as has been mentioned by others on this board. That the clubs should have different conditioned races where the good young horses and the drop back horses have to race one another and the battlers have their own race. This is even better for turnover by having similar horses race one another in even fields.  

But this has been done in Canterbury last year. It was the points system which was great but the leading stables didn't like it because they ended up with all their C1s in the same race but they want to spread them out and to try and win all the C1s on the night.  

[dkc 181]

Costa Del Magnifico last 10 starts 2222726224 = $9768 already had a penalty free win as a 3 year old. Was supposed to start at Addington over cup week but was a late scratching because of a hoof problem

Drops back to C1 and is starting in a penalty free junior drivers race at Invercargill on Friday. So if it wins its still a C1. The system as it is isn't keeping this horse in NZ.

Good on them for making the most of the rules as they are. But is it fair on other owners with horses in this grade?

[Happy Sunrise 554]

1 hour ago, dkc said:

Costa Del Magnifico last 10 starts 2222726224 = $9768 already had a penalty free win as a 3 year old. Was supposed to start at Addington over cup week but was a late scratching because of a hoof problem

Drops back to C1 and is starting in a penalty free junior drivers race at Invercargill on Friday. So if it wins its still a C1. The system as it is isn't keeping this horse in NZ.

Good on them for making the most of the rules as they are. But is it fair on other owners with horses in this grade?

Is it fair? Certainly not. Seconds to ....wait for it.............Titan Banner, Statham, Bettor's Brigadier, Repeat After Me, Shak'n Cullen, Cyclone Kiwi AND Pulp Fiction!

Now it will be lining up against the likes of Tactical VC which has had 3 career starts and ran 4th in a 9 nine horse C1 field at Forbury last time out. With the fullest of respect to this horse's owners, it cannot win. The intention would have been to support a junior driver and get a penalty free win but have been ambushed by the drop back system. I am sure if they had known this was coming they would have put it in the C1 Mares race. Now they will be going to the races knowing they will be battling to even run a place, whereas, they could have snuck a place in the C1.

Costa Del Magnifico should be in the C2-C6 race later on. The race it is in now is a crap betting affair so the turnover may be limited beacuse the TAB will open him at 1.20. Who wins apart the owners of Costa?

Is it right? Yes it is, because that is the system. Work it to the best of owner's advantage I say. Should be a key component of training to identify this sort of thing.

dkc and others have made valid points in previous posts about how to tweak the drop back system. No system should be fixed in concrete, certainly not one that hasn't been changed since its introduction. (is that a correct statement?)

Just like the standing start issue, they should sit down with the knowledgeable people and sort it as it is in the best interests of the majority.

 

[dkc 181]

thank you Happy Sunrise.

[JOHNRYAN 62]

3 hours ago, dkc said:

Costa Del Magnifico last 10 starts 2222726224 = $9768 already had a penalty free win as a 3 year old. Was supposed to start at Addington over cup week but was a late scratching because of a hoof problem

Drops back to C1 and is starting in a penalty free junior drivers race at Invercargill on Friday. So if it wins its still a C1. The system as it is isn't keeping this horse in NZ.

Good on them for making the most of the rules as they are. But is it fair on other owners with horses in this grade?

Na you're right there dkc. The owners did a round the world trip on the $4000 left over after expenses.

[JOHNRYAN 62]

1 hour ago, Happy Sunrise said:

Is it fair? Certainly not. Seconds to ....wait for it.............Titan Banner, Statham, Bettor's Brigadier, Repeat After Me, Shak'n Cullen, Cyclone Kiwi AND Pulp Fiction!

Now it will be lining up against the likes of Tactical VC which has had 3 career starts and ran 4th in a 9 nine horse C1 field at Forbury last time out. With the fullest of respect to this horse's owners, it cannot win. The intention would have been to support a junior driver and get a penalty free win but have been ambushed by the drop back system. I am sure if they had known this was coming they would have put it in the C1 Mares race. Now they will be going to the races knowing they will be battling to even run a place, whereas, they could have snuck a place in the C1.

Costa Del Magnifico should be in the C2-C6 race later on. The race it is in now is a crap betting affair so the turnover may be limited beacuse the TAB will open him at 1.20. Who wins apart the owners of Costa?

Is it right? Yes it is, because that is the system. Work it to the best of owner's advantage I say. Should be a key component of training to identify this sort of thing.

dkc and others have made valid points in previous posts about how to tweak the drop back system. No system should be fixed in concrete, certainly not one that hasn't been changed since its introduction. (is that a correct statement?)

Just like the standing start issue, they should sit down with the knowledgeable people and sort it as it is in the best interests of the majority.

 

No you're right there mate. They actually retired on the $4000 after expenses.

[Happy Sunrise 554]

6 minutes ago, JOHNRYAN said:

No you're right there mate. They actually retired on the $4000 after expenses.

A one sided view with sarcasm! Full Blinds on this week JR!

What do you say to the owners of Tactical VC? That will reveal a lot.

I would be rapt to own a horse like Coasta D. Be cool. Knowing that my horse could compete against really good types each time it races and pay a few bills,. Feel a bit for the likes of Tactical VC owners though. Imagine if they were new owners to the games and the trainer said the truth about its chances this week! 

On 28/11/2015, 23:35:21, JOHNRYAN said:

How you guys can compare a drop back horse with say Mark Purdon's horses that are highly unlikely to go 10 starts without a win but cash in big time on all the free 2 and 3 year old wins is beyond understanding.

It is easily fixed as has been mentioned by others on this board. That the clubs should have different conditioned races where the good young horses and the drop back horses have to race one another and the battlers have their own race. This is even better for turnover by having similar horses race one another in even fields.  

But this has been done in Canterbury last year. It was the points system which was great but the leading stables didn't like it because they ended up with all their C1s in the same race but they want to spread them out and to try and win all the C1s on the night.  

I also suggest you read your second paragraph and comment on the Costa D situation this week.

Your points in previous posts have merit but the system, while adding a lot, does have flaws. 

[JOHNRYAN 62]

Hate to point out a thing or two Happy BUT

The connections didn't have a gun held to their heads and made to go in the junior drivers race ACTUALLY by the way trying to get a free win there for trying to work the system themselves.

Why didn't they go in the other C1 race?

Conclusion. I don't feel one little bit sorry for them.

[dkc 181]

On ‎28‎/‎11‎/‎2015‎ ‎11‎:‎35‎:‎21‎, JOHNRYAN said:

How you guys can compare a drop back horse with say Mark Purdon's horses that are highly unlikely to go 10 starts without a win but cash in big time on all the free 2 and 3 year old wins is beyond understanding.

  

This scenario no longer exists as it was unfair and has now been rectified. You don't seem to be up with the play.

I would like to think the same will be done with the drop back system. All it needs is some changes made, not completely canned. That has never been suggested on here. how do you think it is in the best interest of harness racing to encourage good horse getting close to drop back to stop trying to win. . Oh only 2 starts to go till a drop back where is the incentive to try. I haven't seen any reports from our stipes on horse close to drop back. These should be analysed every time it happens go back and look at some of the drives on horses close to a drop back. Sorry John Ryan its encouraging cheating and needs to be looked at much much closer 

[Happy Sunrise 554]

7 hours ago, JOHNRYAN said:

Hate to point out a thing or two Happy BUT

The connections didn't have a gun held to their heads and made to go in the junior drivers race ACTUALLY by the way trying to get a free win there for trying to work the system themselves.

Why didn't they go in the other C1 race?

Conclusion. I don't feel one little bit sorry for them.

Fair enough points. I agree with you because that is the system. You just fail to see the other side of the situation. I can't then understand why you suggested 'it is easily fixed...' because it isn't broken in your mind.

 

[dkc 181]

Another point. Costa Del Magnifico at his last start (remember his 10th start since he last won) Went out 1/1 in the betting.

Was this notified to punters. No! Why not? Because that would mean the powers that be are actually admitting punters be wary, This horse might actually not be trying to win! So who backed it to win? And how should they feel that that were potentially giving a donation. A form analyst might have picked up on this but not your joe average punter.

But I guess John Ryan you will say that its the way it is. Its not a problem.

I think it is a huge problem and is damaging our industry

[WhoKnows 791]

That's my biggest problem with the drop back system, how many horses have been on the verge of dropping back and ever actually won, I would say close to zero.

and you can't blame the trainers or drivers for wanting to give them a 'quiet run' so they drop back, but when the punter doesn't know and gets shafted, and later learns that the horse has now dropped a grade, well the money they punted on the horse was always going down the gurgler.

I won't back a lot of harness races now because of this, you are never too sure when they are trying to win or not, at least with the Purdons their horses might not pay much but at least it looks like they are out there to win.