RaceCafe..#1...Tipsters Thread.... Share Your Fancies For Fun...Lets See Who The Best Tipsters Here Are.
We're Doomed

Alternative Stakes Structure

Recommended Posts

I have just suggested elsewhere that we tend to use our stakes money inefficiently, with small fields going around for decent stakes and, often, quite good fields going around for poor stakes.

I thought I would show how simple it would be to restructure things slightly and give much fairer stakes all round at no extra cost to the industry. I don't necessarily agree with the whole tiered concept, and I certainly don't agree with the ratings bands used, but to keep it simple I will stick with them. I would treat industry meetings and the typical Saturday meetings as follows.

                                                  Industry             Saturday

Md                                            $10,000             $12,000

65                                             $12,000             $20,000

72                                             $14,000             $24,000

82                                             $16,000             $28,000

Opn                                          $18,000             $32,000

I have made the open class races $32,000 as that means the winner still gets $20,000, which is only about $1,800 less than current. No one would even notice. Why 65s were ever listed at $22,500 is beyond me, everyone would have been happy with $20,000.

Currently we often have the same horses racing for $30,000 one week and $10,000 the next week, so why not accept that and rationalise the structure.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, We're Doomed said:

I have just suggested elsewhere that we tend to use our stakes money inefficiently, with small fields going around for decent stakes and, often, quite good fields going around for poor stakes.

I thought I would show how simple it would be to restructure things slightly and give much fairer stakes all round at no extra cost to the industry. I don't necessarily agree with the whole tiered concept, and I certainly don't agree with the ratings bands used, but to keep it simple I will stick with them. I would treat industry meetings and the typical Saturday meetings as follows.

                                                  Industry             Saturday

Md                                            $10,000             $12,000

65                                             $12,000             $20,000

72                                             $14,000             $24,000

82                                             $16,000             $28,000

Opn                                          $18,000             $32,000

I have made the open class races $32,000 as that means the winner still gets $20,000, which is only about $1,800 less than current. No one would even notice. Why 65s were ever listed at $22,500 is beyond me, everyone would have been happy with $20,000.

Currently we often have the same horses racing for $30,000 one week and $10,000 the next week, so why not accept that and rationalise the structure.

 

How many horses do you own???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Huey said:

Are you suggesting this wouldn't work?

No not at all...I am an owner and I dont want any of the stakes lowered only increased so I wanted to see where they were coming from.Its been to easy for too long for people with no vested interest in racing to make the so called good decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least you've had a go....but, personally,  I would have the lesser stakes attached to the industry meetings with lower grades races.

To me, it makes no sense having maidens racing for such a differential.   A maiden is still a maiden 

Keep the lower grades at industry days and let the better sorts run for better money...IMO.

But I know its not that simple, hence the hotch-potch we have now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO any increase in stakes has to incorporate a rebate for unplaced runners . This will keep more lesser horses in work if the owners feel their getting something out of the game instead of always digging in their pockets . Every horse that races is a value to NZ racing no matter their level . Works great in Aus , and whilst we're not Aus a lot of their smallest meetings pay back past 5th . I know some of mine might have been kept going longer if i was getting some incentive to keep them in work .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Pam Robson said:

At least you've had a go....but, personally,  I would have the lesser stakes attached to the industry meetings with lower grades races.

To me, it makes no sense having maidens racing for such a differential.   A maiden is still a maiden 

Keep the lower grades at industry days and let the better sorts run for better money...IMO.

But I know its not that simple, hence the hotch-potch we have now.

Agree , i tend to think we should'nt have maidens on Saturdays , plenty of midweek racing to break your duck . Saturday should be where the big money and better horses are aimed and if you have a horse with Saturday form and want to race midweek then you are weighted appropriately , then we might get some form of tiered racing . Give people the incentive to race on Saturdays or stay where they are better placed midweek .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Pam Robson said:

Yes, agree.

But then to weight appropriately we would have to have handicapping and ratings adjustments to reflect the different status of the race.....which matter has been addressed before by some very well informed observers. 

Too hard basket, apparently. 

I'm sure there are enough smart minds within racing to sort it out , and i don't mean the suits of the industry . There are plenty of knowledgeable people within racing to come up with a workable solution . The Australian system seems to work where horses can move between country/provincial and provincial/city racing . Saying that i think there was an issue a few years back with country horses not going to the city regarding the way horses were rated , maybe not , or maybe it was sorted . Has to be sorted , putting it in the too hard basket isn't an option anymore .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nomates said:

IMO any increase in stakes has to incorporate a rebate for unplaced runners . This will keep more lesser horses in work if the owners feel their getting something out of the game instead of always digging in their pockets . Every horse that races is a value to NZ racing no matter their level . Works great in Aus , and whilst we're not Aus a lot of their smallest meetings pay back past 5th . I know some of mine might have been kept going longer if i was getting some incentive to keep them in work 

Those horses you had in work you sacked though must have been deemed to have some ability to win at some point  if you could offset costs , you wouldn't bother with a plodder just for appearance fee would you ? . It's a shame when a horse with a bit of ability has to go through costs .30 start maidens though unless placing regularly need another career .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, nomates said:

I'm sure there are enough smart minds within racing to sort it out , and i don't mean the suits of the industry . There are plenty of knowledgeable people within racing to come up with a workable solution . The Australian system seems to work where horses can move between country/provincial and provincial/city racing . Saying that i think there was an issue a few years back with country horses not going to the city regarding the way horses were rated , maybe not , or maybe it was sorted . Has to be sorted , putting it in the too hard basket isn't an option anymore .

There are smart minds,  that's just the point,  but they dont get listened to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Red Rum said:

Those horses you had in work you sacked though must have been deemed to have some ability to win at some point  if you could offset costs , you wouldn't bother with a plodder just for appearance fee would you ? . It's a shame when a horse with a bit of ability has to go through costs .30 start maidens though unless placing regularly need another career .

Sometimes , often probably , our horses were persevered with for the fun but to answer your question , iv'e had plenty sacked after 1/2/3 starts because clearly lacked any ability . But i have many that whilst i knew were no champions and would never make open class were honest horses that actually enjoyed racing and we kept racing because we along with partners enjoyed going to the races for the fun . I also trained many for ourselves and was fortunate enough to make some healthy sales which allowed us to enjoy our (my) passion and we enjoyed the early mornings and people we shared the sport with . So usually we continued to race the ones that didn't have huge ability and we knew the liability but you understand with these horses you need everything in your favor to get a result . But you get to a stage where you also know your helping provide a product and it would be nice to be recognized for this instead always having to dig into your pocket . So to answer you question , with these types of horses you know your going to the races and chances are you won't get a cheque , a bit of fun but nada $$$ wise , but if i had got say , full free racing , which we did for a while , and then a starters bonus which could offset some of the transport costs say , well suddenly instead of $1500 for a 10 race prep with a couple of placings you get another $400 for 6 of those starts giving you $2400 on top then you only have training costs to worry about , well suddenly your not feeling like your always shelling out . Ok i know no one is holding a gun to my head but i know a lot of people who race horses feel the same and i know of a lot of horses over the years which would have been put back into work if what i am suggesting had been in place , also a lot of those owners have been lost to the industry . Paying starters bonus's is in place all major racing jurisdictions around the world why not here . Overall this would not be a huge cost to the industry but the returns in terms of starter numbers therefore betting turnover , they reckon each starter is worth 13k in turnover , and retaining owners  would make a worthwhile strategy . But as some would say what do i know .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an example for the above , i follow particular horses that are from families i have had . So this horse is a 3yo started out with Kris Lees , transferred after a couple of starts to the country . This horse had first start  in Sept , has since then had 8 starts  running one 2nd and one 3rd one 4th earning 2.5k for those to placings . Other 5 starts consisted of 9th , 6th , 8th , 7th , 8th , earning another 2.5k . Now obviously no champion , Mr Lees worked that out quickly , but 2.5k for those 5 starts certainly makes you feel better about the game , i know i would and the horse would get another prep as i would know i'm a chance of winning a race but i'm also going to get something back just for turning up . Everyone's a winner .

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.