Contentious

Avondale fields

Recommended Posts

Yes waiting to see if your horse got in is painful enough especially when there are over 30 nominations for one race, but then finding they have split a different race and your horse once again misses out is criminal. When other courses are having poor nominations wouldn't you think they would run a popular meeting with maximum numbers of races to clear the backlog. Makes it difficult for owners to keep the faith month after month and difficult for trainers to convince the owners to stick with it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Los Lobos said:

Yes waiting to see if your horse got in is painful enough especially when there are over 30 nominations for one race, but then finding they have split a different race and your horse once again misses out is criminal. When other courses are having poor nominations wouldn't you think they would run a popular meeting with maximum numbers of races to clear the backlog. Makes it difficult for owners to keep the faith month after month and difficult for trainers to convince the owners to stick with it. 

I did point out exactly the same thing about Timaru last week. I hate to think how many horses have been eliminated and ballotted at Te Rapa and Avondale this week. There is obviously a very determined poilcy not to run more than eight races. Obviously all of the costings have been done and the turnover from an extra race, no matter how good, is never going to fund the $10,000 cost to run it. So the attitude is pretty much f..k the owners and trainers, if you haven't got a decent horse we don't give a stuff about you.

I notice that there is never any imput from anyone in authority (don't laugh, they think they are in authority) to come on here and try to explain instances of apparent incompetence like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could it not work where on midweek/Sunday(all low grade days)  that the is just a more simple system of open entry races with the set distances for the day and then fields are grouped according to ratings once nominations close.  This way nothing will miss out getting a run, might need to have to have a bit more spread in the weights though.

With the exception being Maiden races.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at it from the club point of view as well.  The racebook costs, the catering the staff costs the advertising(if any) the St John and the raceday services, the TAB costs - all are the same or virtually the same  whether eight races or twelve but those chappies at NZTR say 'no you can only have eight or whatever'

It is not just the owners and Trainers that find it frustrating I can assure you

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TOM(the other Molloy) said:

Look at it from the club point of view as well.  The racebook costs, the catering the staff costs the advertising(if any) the St John and the raceday services, the TAB costs - all are the same or virtually the same  whether eight races or twelve but those chappies at NZTR say 'no you can only have eight or whatever'

It is not just the owners and Trainers that find it frustrating I can assure you

 

 

That is the bit that gets me as well Tom. All of the fixed costs are already in place, so why not run an extra race or two to give horses starts. They call them industry meetings, but industry well being is the last thing they are interested in.

A lot of the programming is incompetent as well so you get tiny fields in some races and total log jams in others.

Can you put a name to any individual who is pushing this policy Tom? There must be one or two industry "employees" who ultimately make these decisions. And do the clubs have any say at all in programming and race numbers?

I have never really been a conspiracy theorist, largely because I think you need to be fairly bright to implement such things, but at times it does make you wonder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TOM(the other Molloy) said:

Look at it from the club point of view as well.  The racebook costs, the catering the staff costs the advertising(if any) the St John and the raceday services, the TAB costs - all are the same or virtually the same  whether eight races or twelve but those chappies at NZTR say 'no you can only have eight or whatever'

It is not just the owners and Trainers that find it frustrating I can assure you

 

 

I think you'll find it will depend on which club the races are at that decides whether races are split. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, We're Doomed said:

That is the bit that gets me as well Tom. All of the fixed costs are already in place, so why not run an extra race or two to give horses starts. They call them industry meetings, but industry well being is the last thing they are interested in.

A lot of the programming is incompetent as well so you get tiny fields in some races and total log jams in others.

Can you put a name to any individual who is pushing this policy Tom? There must be one or two industry "employees" who ultimately make these decisions. And do the clubs have any say at all in programming and race numbers?

I have never really been a conspiracy theorist, largely because I think you need to be fairly bright to implement such things, but at times it does make you wonder.

The clubs have a say , but that depends on which club it is of course. 

You'd think they'd realise that more races on an industry day over a prolonged period means more horses graduating to Saturday class races meaning more turnover. But I doubt it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Huey said:

The clubs have a say , but that depends on which club it is of course. 

You'd think they'd realise that more races on an industry day over a prolonged period means more horses graduating to Saturday class races meaning more turnover. But I doubt it.

Yes, and they desperately need to get horses out of the 65 class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Huey said:

The clubs have a say , but that depends on which club it is of course. 

You'd think they'd realise that more races on an industry day over a prolonged period means more horses graduating to Saturday class races meaning more turnover. But I doubt it.

I am well aware that the Clubs have a say but the bureau has the final say.  I mean why would Timaru or Avondale eliminate that many horses if they could run an extra race?

And if they could programme more in the first place then there might be more suitable opportunities as well but no only 8 allowed to be programmed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, TOM(the other Molloy) said:

I am well aware that the Clubs have a say but the bureau has the final say.  I mean why would Timaru or Avondale eliminate that many horses if they could run an extra race?

And if they could programme more in the first place then there might be more suitable opportunities as well but no only 8 allowed to be programmed.

Couldn't agree with you more, but I doubt both the clubs you mentioned would have been offered the  opportunity to add races or split fields.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, TOM(the other Molloy) said:

 

And if they could programme more in the first place then there might be more suitable opportunities as well but no only 8 allowed to be programmed.

7 seems to be the norm these days Tom. Garanteed to get horses eliminated and heaps of horses not  getting their preferred class or distance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have taken notice over the last few months of the income generated through the tab. What is very obvious to me is the better the track conditions the more confidence the punters have. Most sth island meetings I would say run at loses. The other most notable trend is people don't open there wallets till around 2pm. So I had a thought where you run two meetings of 6 races starting as late as possible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Chris Wood said:

I can't work out and I have brought it up numerous times, why are we so set on the rating bands?

What would be wrong with a rating 60, 70, and 80 race. Why are we so set on 65, 75 and 85? 

 

Because the handicappers and puppet controllers at NZTR don't understand handicapping or the respective build up of horses in certain rating ranges, otherwise they'd have ditched the fucked up handicapping model they're using years ago, and then ditched the staff who don't know how to apply it.

Mediocrity, and as I keep saying racing is getting what it deserves and deserves what it's getting because most participants lack the intelligence to see what's happening, or the guts to do something about it.

I had a delightful story told to me yesterday about one of NZ's top three trainers who got a low six figure result on a horse sale and told his partners it was " life changing " for him because he makes no money otherwise.....and he's a transtasman top class G1 trainer based at your track Woodsie.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎06‎/‎2017 at 3:47 PM, Aaron Bidlake said:

Could it not work where on midweek/Sunday(all low grade days)  that the is just a more simple system of open entry races with the set distances for the day and then fields are grouped according to ratings once nominations close.  This way nothing will miss out getting a run, might need to have to have a bit more spread in the weights though.

With the exception being Maiden races.  

That pretty much goes with Chris'   suggestion of more flexible ratings options..and yes, I agree with both takes on that.

I'm pretty sure Blenheim had an open entry option a while ago,  I thoiught it was great and certainly did what you suggest,  namely avoid the glut of horses in some bands while allowing more even field sizes.

It wasn't well received by some trainers however - no idea why - and the practice was discontinued.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SMD is rife said:

Are  you saying ditch 65 75 and 85 and replace with 60 70 and 80 or are you saying lets have 6 different classes?

They aren't really classes as such, they are ratings and the whole idea is to use them to ensure competitive, attractive full fields, but they have never been used that way, probably, sadly to say, because of administrative incompetence. They should provide more flexibilty than the various class systems we have had over the years, but instead they have become too rigid as Chris suggests. And the current obsession with programming only seven races is making things even worse.

I feel sorrry for the poor buggers who try and race 2yos in the SI. No chance whatsoever for them to find their level and be competitive.

As I have said many times. it is a failure to get the basics right, or an inability to get the basics right, which is pretty bloody sad really. Two reasonably competent chaps shut away in a room together for an afternoon could fix most of the current programming, handicapping problems. What do some of the highly paid NZRB and NZTR people do all day?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.