We're Doomed

Splitting Races

31 posts in this topic

I have a bit of an obsession about making the best use of our horse population. Largely by efficient programming of meetings, getting dates right etc. My major bugbear is that while owners have to put up with generally low stakes at least they should get a chance to send their horses to the races.

I noted last week that at Wanganui they split 17 maiden milers into two fields to create eight races; something that to the best of my knowledge has never been done in the SI. I thought this might be the dawning of a new age and a sign of respect for owners. Then at Rotorua this coming week, once again 23 maiden stayers split to create 8 races. They may be only $10,000 races, but at least everyone is getting an opportunity I thought. Not that it is all that important in those two regions of course as those same horses always have an opportunity just down the road in a few days time.

Imagine my surprise then when I check out the fields for Hokitika at Omoto on Tuesday. I knew there had been heaps of noms and I was wondering how many fields they would split in this new age. Lo and behold, only seven races to be seen. On closer inspection, ballots in every race, horses eliminated altogether. The maiden 1,500m and rating 65 1,500m both with 20 in the field including 8 ballots; god knows how many eliminated from each race. 

My question. How come they split 17 horses at Wanganui to create 8 races, but they won't split over 20 horses at Omoto to create an extra race?  These are horses that have come on a circuit with the intention of getting a race on Tuesday. Why are the rules different at different clubs. This is a club that has graciously accepted NZTR's theory that their track is no longer needed and the whole industry would be better off if they raced elsewhere. They have also put additional money into stakes, with two $20,000 races; not many other low key clubs bother to do that anymore. A hell of a way to show the club that their gesture is really appreciated. It must make some other clubs wonder what will happen when they stop racing at their own track.

Wouldn't it be nice if someone from NZTR was to come on here and explain what the rules and guidelines are regarding the splitting of races. Perhaps they don't read this site. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/11/2020 at 12:10 PM, We're Doomed said:

I have a bit of an obsession about making the best use of our horse population. Largely by efficient programming of meetings, getting dates right etc. My major bugbear is that while owners have to put up with generally low stakes at least they should get a chance to send their horses to the races.

I noted last week that at Wanganui they split 17 maiden milers into two fields to create eight races; something that to the best of my knowledge has never been done in the SI. I thought this might be the dawning of a new age and a sign of respect for owners. Then at Rotorua this coming week, once again 23 maiden stayers split to create 8 races. They may be only $10,000 races, but at least everyone is getting an opportunity I thought. Not that it is all that important in those two regions of course as those same horses always have an opportunity just down the road in a few days time.

Imagine my surprise then when I check out the fields for Hokitika at Omoto on Tuesday. I knew there had been heaps of noms and I was wondering how many fields they would split in this new age. Lo and behold, only seven races to be seen. On closer inspection, ballots in every race, horses eliminated altogether. The maiden 1,500m and rating 65 1,500m both with 20 in the field including 8 ballots; god knows how many eliminated from each race. 

My question. How come they split 17 horses at Wanganui to create 8 races, but they won't split over 20 horses at Omoto to create an extra race?  These are horses that have come on a circuit with the intention of getting a race on Tuesday. Why are the rules different at different clubs. This is a club that has graciously accepted NZTR's theory that their track is no longer needed and the whole industry would be better off if they raced elsewhere. They have also put additional money into stakes, with two $20,000 races; not many other low key clubs bother to do that anymore. A hell of a way to show the club that their gesture is really appreciated. It must make some other clubs wonder what will happen when they stop racing at their own track.

Wouldn't it be nice if someone from NZTR was to come on here and explain what the rules and guidelines are regarding the splitting of races. Perhaps they don't read this site. 

There's enough there for 8 races Tuesday , split the 1500 rating 65 . Gives jocks another ride . Probably get 2 x 10 runners , both would be decent betting races .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Red Rum said:

There's enough there for 8 races Tuesday , split the 1500 rating 65 . Gives jocks another ride . Probably get 2 x 10 runners , both would be decent betting races .

I am pleased to see someone was interested in this. Thank you Red Rum.  I think it is a serious question and the lack of clarification or explanation from anyone in the know shows the lack of transparency in the industry. I also think it shows an inherent bias against the SI.

Surely there must be an explanation as to why over 22 noms for a rating 65 1,500m on the coast, at a track that starts 12 horses, doesn't justify splitting the race to create 8 races on the day, whereas 17 noms for a maiden stayers at Wanganui was enough to split the race into two to create 8 races, and at a track that starts at least 14 per race. Incidentally, the 8 ballots all still await a start at Omoto. And all the races in question were worth $10,000, so it is pretty much comparing apples with apples. I also note they had no trouble running four races at Ellerslie on Sunday with 6 or 7 starters; and we are talking $35,000 and $40,000 races there.

And just to clarify, I'm not actually a fan of splitting races. I think they should get the programming right in the first place so that there is a race over a suitable class and distance for most horses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pam Robson said:

Maybe  there is the notion that if the day is poorly attended wrt horses and public, the club will take its bat and ball and give up,  thereby justifying the decision to disallow racing on its own track.

 

Surely that assumes that the people running the industry are clever enough to have cunning plans?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Huey said:

Let's be honest, the answer is simple. If you're in the club you can split races if you're not then you can't , Id be surprised if you got a common sense explanation.

I don't think anyone from NZTR has ever come on here and given any explanation to anything. Often there might be a common sense easily explained answer to most things. Rita seems to be making an effort to interact with interested parties, but NZTR doesn't seem to have grasped the reality of modern day social media. Do they know this place exists?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Basil brush said:

Pros and Cons on the old division races?

Division races used to exist when the tote could only cope with nine races, I think, and if there were heaps of noms for a race they used to create a division race. They used to be quite common. I think I can recall Spy Force winning one at Riccarton once.  They probably ended early 80s at a guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were never more than 8 races when I was a little fella marking the results in the Turf Digest aka the "Pink Book" if I remember correctly.

1949 was the 50th Jubilee Year for the Reefton Trotting Club so they gave a start to every horse nominated. They ended up with 6 races divided in two and two races divided into 3.

The 8-race card became 18 in all.

It was a big day!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Patiti said:

As this was before the TAB what betting facilities were there and a lot of brackets????

NZ was the first country in the world to have a TAB, so there was certainly a TAB when we had division races. Generally numbers 1,2,3,4 or so you would only get one horse and then 5, 5a, 6, 6a etc They ran them as two separate races but one set of results. I think only two place divis in each division.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very few scratchings besides ballots today, lots of unhappy owners and trainers. NZTR could easily have split races[ more egg on their faces] Good on Westland Racing for offering a travelling subsidy for trainers to race there, looks a great day hope the people turn up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, bob dobalino said:

Very few scratchings besides ballots today, lots of unhappy owners and trainers. NZTR could easily have split races[ more egg on their faces] Good on Westland Racing for offering a travelling subsidy for trainers to race there, looks a great day hope the people turn up.

I think it is an absolute disgrace. Every ballot scratched in the last race, which is the one that should definitely have been split, and probably one other as well. How do they explain the different treatment for Omoto and Wanganui? Does the trainers assoc complain about this level of incompetence and possibly corruption? Surely Rita should be asking questions of NZTR about the way they treat their participants. And the arrogance of not even attempting to explain their decision making. And we trust these people to spend millions on AWTs and make decisions about closing down tracks. God save us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bob dobalino said:

Very few scratchings besides ballots today, lots of unhappy owners and trainers. NZTR could easily have split races[ more egg on their faces] Good on Westland Racing for offering a travelling subsidy for trainers to race there, looks a great day hope the people turn up.

Hope so too.   Westland have been treated very poorly, wouldn't be a payback by any chance?

Share this post


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

I am pleased to see someone was interested in this. Thank you Red Rum.  I think it is a serious question and the lack of clarification or explanation from anyone in the know shows the lack of transparency in the industry. I also think it shows an inherent bias against the SI.

 

I think it would have to be about bulk funding . You couldn’t foresee the year ahead to fund each days Racing if 40 or  50 meetings decided to run extra races whether it two or three division races or just extra races.

 

 

23 hours ago, We're Doomed said:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolute disgrace that an extra race for the R65 1500m was not carded. I have a share in a horse that is having her fourth start today on the West Coast Circuit. She was a Maiden going into the circuit. If she had been a R65 she would have been lucky to get two runs. Eight race cards should be the norm if only to prevent overlapping of the two quaddies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Whyisit said:

I think it would have to be about bulk funding . You couldn’t foresee the year ahead to fund each days Racing if 40 or  50 meetings decided to run extra races whether it two or three division races or just extra races.

 

 

 

So,  NZTR budgeted for 8-9 races for the other days and just seven for Westland..?    really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Whyisit said:

I think it would have to be about bulk funding . You couldn’t foresee the year ahead to fund each days Racing if 40 or  50 meetings decided to run extra races whether it two or three division races or just extra races.

 

 

 

Two points there obviously. Why was Wanganui able to split 17 horses to create an eight race, and why wasn't Omoto able to split over 22 horses to create an eight race. And if an extra $10,000 race isn't viable and self funding then why don't we all just give up altogether?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, We're Doomed said:

Two points there obviously. Why was Wanganui able to split 17 horses to create an eight race, and why wasn't Omoto able to split over 22 horses to create an eight race. And if an extra $10,000 race isn't viable and self funding then why don't we all just give up altogether?

Hardly any, if any, 10k races are self-funding. They are just sometimes a lot closer to that than the 200k ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now