Doomed

With that sized crowd at Trentham you do have to wonder why the meeting wasn't transferred to Woodville. They would have almost certainly been able to do just as much turnover with much less cost to the industry and shorter travelling distances for almost all concerned. And it is the old Woodville date anyhow. Perhaps there could be a prize draw for every member of the public who attends every Trentham meeting this month. There would only be about 10 of them. You could gather them all together in the birdcage on Cup Day and one lucky (hardy) soul could win a car or something, or life membership of the Wgtn RC, their choice.

$35,000! That is beyond embarrassing. And yet there is never any mention about concern for on course performances at some of our bigger tracks. Is it of no concern to NZTR? 30 odd years ago the club would have been getting a letter from NZTR asking them to please explain. At $100 per head that is about 350 people on course. Half of them would have come from Marton one presumes, so only about 175 people from all of Wgtn. 83 horses raced at the meeting, if each of them had one owner present that means not much over 200 of the general public in attendance, and that assumes no trainers betting. The worst thing about that is the total lack of atmosphere on course. If someone had travelled a couple of hours to get there, at some expense, they arrive and find no one else there. They must think what a fool am I , I won't be going to that trouble again.

I think most of us on here these days, if we are being honest, would have to agree we have no idea how to fix the current debacle. But then again none of us were responsible for creating the mess in the first place. All of those who created the mess have long since pissed off without a care in the world and quite probably a golden handshake. At the same time, while we may not have the perfect solution we can all see that the current lot have absolutely no idea.

I agree with your general sentiment, but I don't think the bais towards the Metropolitan clubs was quite that bad. Yes, they did get quite a lot of facilities built for them, largely because they were usually the bigger clubs in bigger population centres, but some smaller clubs also got stands built etc, such as new grandstands at Ashburton and Banks Peninsula. There was never a real desire to have everyone race at Omoto, as of course that isn't an ideal location being built in a riverbed. The proposal during the 80s, if I recall correctly, was to build a brand new, centrally located racetrack on the coast to service all three clubs. Unfortunately the clubs couldn't agree on the concept or a location so the money was reluctantly spent on Omoto instead. Given Kumara's current success perhaps it has it has worked out ok, but they still do need the other two clubs to form a viable circuit.

That's unbelievable really. No wonder they are trying to stop other clubs making Wgtn look bad. What were the respective on and off course turnovers at both clubs? It is a great pity they aren't available for all to see these days. I think the feeling is that clubs like Kumara might do well as an on course novelty, but to top Trentham off course as well is staggering. And Trentham had the advantage of being able to access the Wgtn market while also attracting thousands of people from Marton.

I think you have answered your own question. Reefton would fall at the first hurdle. Talentless is the number one criteria.

I think of the Race as a nice thing to have for an industry that is booming, but something quite bizarre for an industry struggling badly.

Looked like a good meeting at Cromwell today with good fields and a good sized crowd. Good to see Phil Williamson take out three of the trot races.

Surely it would be an absolute scandal if Kumara starts and has to be abandoned after one race with Greymouth only 15 minuutes down the road. There must be contingency plans to move the meeting swiftly if necessary, otherwise it is hard to imagine Myers being prepared to turn up next year.

I can certainly see that point. It did look more like the horse being urged to make a sudden sideways movement rather than anything to do with the track.

As I understand it the Reefton Cup is likely to be transferred to Karaka Millions day at Pukekohe. Yet to be confirmed.

Perhaps we should be sending them some of our administrators rather than our trainers to help them get through the tough times?

Surely not a NZ TAB do? Perhaps they were all spending their annual bonuses.

Ideally yes.

If off course turnover is such an important criteria surely you would hold as many meetings as possible at Timaru since it is the most suitable central track in the SI? Several of the winners on Boxing Day came from Timaru and Riccarton. There is no real point holding a meeting in a major City if it isn't to attract a large on course attendance. The Riccarton track isn't up to it and the locals in Dunedin aren't interested, so surely Timaru is the most strategically important track in the SI?

I was just reading an article about the scrapping of two feature races at the Cambridge trots. Apparently the club couldn't object because the HRNZ Chairman and CEO are both on holiday. At least if we need to find the Chairmen and CEOs of TAB and NZTR we know they will be at the Otaki races today.

A good move for Forsman, but probably the one trainer NZ Racing couldn't afford to lose.

I don't think they are dim at all. Everything is going exactly to plan. It's just a hopeless plan. I think a total management clean out is the only thing that can help NZ Racing. It won't save it as too much damage has already been done, but it might enable the industry to identify some sort of viable level.

Sadly that does not surprise me, but it still disgusts me. The stakes money being poured into Wingatui is unbelievable. It has always been an under-performing venue turnover wise. There are hardly even any trainers left there, but it seems to have been identified as the great white hope of SI racing.

Following on from my last post I notice the Marton Cup has an 87 top weight and just four horses rated over 81. The Kumara Cup has a 90 top weight with five horses rated over 82. So don't be surprised if next year the Nuggets is a listed race and the Marton Cup will be worth about $30,000. Isn't that the way things work?

As someone mentioned above, the policy seems to be if there isn't a horse in the 90s accepted for an open race it becomes whatever rating in the 80s the top weight is assessed at. Been going on for a while now. So there was no point calling it a benchmark race as the highest rated accepter was an 81. It was originally an open race. The exception seems to be a race like the Marton Cup, which is a listed race with an 87 top weight. I presume because it is a listed race it has to stay as an open race even if it does attract a lowly rated field. If it wasn't a listed race and needed to maintain the prestigious international standing of NZ racing I presume it would have become a rating 87 race.

Good to see Camino Rocoso get his second Greymouth Cup. I do like to see him ridden properly like that

I'm not sure if today's Matamata meeting was the Thames JC racing at Matamata or whether Thames has given up and it is a Matamata meeting and they just called a race the Thames Cup for old times sake. Whatever the case, I was a bit saddened by the virtually total lack of sponsors. It does show what happens when you move a meeting away from its home town, everyone tends to lose interest. I tend to judge the strength of racing in a particular area by the club's ability to attract sponsors. It is a worry when you can't attract sponsors for a prime date Waikato meeting. By contrast I just noticed a trot meeting at Cromwell in a few days with numerous sponsors, and numerous races. Perhaps taking the races to the people might not be a bad idea afterall. Does anyone know if NZTR has a policy of ringing up Matamata and saying "we notice you couldn't get any sponsors. Is that a sign of declining interst in your area?" I do worry where all the sponsors will come from as racing gets more and more centralised.

That is absolutely sensible, but a lot of people seem to miss that connection.

Its really a no win situation. If they cancel races with a couple of decent horses entered because of small fields, those few remaining decent horses might disappear off to Oz as Gammalight suggests. Also, if the horses just below that class see their aspirational races being cancelled they may decide they might as well piss off as well. At the same time, the industry can't afford to keep running $50,000 races with no betting. A decent sized field with a $1.20 fav for $200.000 is probably just as bad. Our strength used to be in the open class races with even fields of well known consistent horses. These days the big money seems to go to age group races with hot favs, which don't seem to have a lot of upside. You wonder whether the allocation of stakes money might need to be reconsidered. You only have to look back on some of the open class fields from 30 years ago to see the same horses racing against each other consistently year after year. Punters need horses they are familiar with. We seem to be miles away from that these days.