Doomed

Certainly one of the great races. Similar effort from Najmaty in the last at Eagle Farm a couple of weeks ago, but she didn't have to go through the field.

Gee, that Waverly track looks to be in good nick, really well presented. Aren't we lucky to have spare tracks sitting around ready for action in situations like this.

There never used to be a 2yo fillies race on Sapling Stakes day. They used to take their chance against the boys on the grass. I remember Melton Monarch winning one and other very good horses. Where did that fillies races come from? I see it is a group race, but they seem to hand them out in corn flakes packets in harness racing.

Having just posted that message above it made me think of the days when I used to go to Cup Week in Chch and Wgtn and most of the attendees were punters. These days it would be lucky if 10% were punters, the rest are just youngsters there for the piss up. How long can that sustain an industry.

I don't actually think it will become more fragmented, divided and directionless. I think those who have given up will just give up and drift off and not buy horses, not punt and not attend meetings, not that many will have a local meeting anymore anyhow. It will be left with just the little elite who think they know best and in 3 or 4 years thay will collectively say "bugger, we fucked that up didn't we."

Has Riccarton been paid out for the grandstand? If so, surely they will demolish it one day. Obviously the insurance wasn't enough to build a new one, but surely it was enough to demolish the old one. Its a terrible look.

Interesting piece, good to see it. From my amateur perspective there seemed to be four interesting aspects. When discussing the fact that turnovers were actually up on the AWT I presume he meant that 7 races at Cambridge did more turnover than 9 races would have done elsewhere in the Waikato. He wasn't totally clear on that. His revelation that next season's stakes increases would be all about "celebrating the big events" should be a worry for the majority of owners, trainers and tracks that aren't lucky enough to be involved with the big events. I found it interesting that the selling off of many tracks would create a revenue stream. I thought it would be more like a one off capital injection, that would be quickly pissed away based on previous history. Then we had some vague waffle about intergenerational involvement with tracks. I had no idea what that meant. Once a provincial track is sold off to fund big city needs I'm not sure how future generations will benefit. I'm not sure that future generations from Hokitika or Marlborough will look with pride on the Riccarton AWT and say I helped fund that.

It sounds like they live in a bit of a parallel universe. Do they actually comment on anything useful? For instance, do they advise trainers in Canterbury that there is only one maiden race in Canterbury in almost a four week period and that is restricted to fillies and mares over 1,200m, and on an AWT, and therefore perhaps trainers should turn any maiden that isn't a filly or mare sprinter out for a few weeks to save their owners some money.

Yes, almost impossible to get one's head around the logic of that decison.

I think Nelson just rent their track off the Agricultural people, at least that's how it used to be, much like Claudelands used to operate. The precedent will probably be Forbury. Once it is sold and the money is used to fund the latest grandiose idea in the NI the flood gates will open. Anything that isn't tied down will be sold off to fund some extra consultants and add a new management tier at head office.

Certainly a different approach to NZ. I wonder if they intend selling off Pakenham, Bendigo, Ballarat, Geelong and a few others to fund it?

But the powers that be do have the answer to this. I see in today's paper they want to close down Timaru and Geraldine as quickly as possible to boost Addington fields. Perhaps the other answer would be to kill off the Nelson Marlborough winter circuit, that would boost Addington fields surely. Oh hold on, they have already done that and it doesn't seem to have worked. Bugger, another theory shot down. Oh well, perhaps shut down Rangiora, surely that would work?

I think you miss the point. The original intention of the PGF was to fund projects outside the main centres. Hence the term provincial. There has only been one exception to that definition that I know of.

I think the Provincial Growth Fund still exists. I wonder if Ellerslie has put in a claim for their new track?

It is just the $40,000 races that have come back to $35,000. Probably a good idea too as many of the fields for that class are quite small. Trentham this weekend is a good example of the need to optimise stakes money. Five noms for a $60,000 race, four of whom would have been eligible for a rating 74. I'm sure the same five would have turned up for a $35,000 race. So $25,000 wasted really.

I watch with a sense of bemusement every few weeks when Kinane goes around in Australia. He must be the poster child for any owner thinking of turning down a good offer for a horse. For those who don't recall, his connections turned down a offer of around $3m after he won a weak 3yo race. Over more than two years since then the gelding has changed states, had about three different trainers and never run in the first three again. His latest effort tenth at Flemington on Saturday. All the time probably incurring about $150,000 in training costs. It got me thinking whether there are many instances of connections turning down multi million dollar offers and the horse going on to win heaps, especially a gelding. I'm sure there must be some but none spring readily to mind.

Good point there. I don't think I have ever seen so many horses eliminated in the North as at this Avondale meeting. They could very easily have run 15 races. And as you say, only a week or so after Cambridge could only manage 7 races and three of the maidens had only 5 and 7 starters from memory. It certainly does show the trainers preferences. There can only really be three reasons for this situation: 1. Some horses racing in the winter months are doing so because they need wet tracks. 2. Some horses don't handle the AWT. 3. Perhaps connections feel that the sale value of an AWT winner isn't as good as a grass track winner, even a wet grass track. There might even be more demand for wet track performers in NSW in years to come. Zed could become the go to stallion for NSW.

Interestingly, it has been Labour that has bailed out the industry each time, via Winston of course. I can't see Labour, or Winston, being involved next time, unless National somehow manage to lose the unloseable election.

Even if what you say about industry leaders is not correct, it is the perception that it could be correct that is the problem. They never come out and explain their decision making, always remain aloof and never respond to criticism. Sharrock's response to the RACE situation was appalling. Why not just come out and there is more to it than has been made public so far, instead of saying RACE can do what they like? I imagine that amongst their ever expanding, highly paid, head office staff there are numerous PR consultants. I hope they don't use their performances here as references for future positions.

Bloody hell...an AWT specialist, who would have thought it.

Don't worry, they will learn from this. Next year they will ban all grass track meetings within a 300 kilmetre radius for two weeks either side of the AWT meetings. Seems to have worked at Riccarton so they will do it for Cambridge and Awapuni next year.

For goodness sake, it's trentham in May....and you want someone to tell you the likely track conditions?

When did the RIU start? There never used to be one and the industry seemed to cope perfectly well through the 80s and 90s. It seems to be a multi million dollar organisation to satisfy a need that no one previously even realised existed.

I wasn't aware of the de Lore back story, but I do tend to agree with most of what he writes these days. Winston has been a shocker. I can recall thinking his first contribution to racing, the five $1m+ races, was a total waste of money, but others used to argue it was a great idea. Basically 15 races largely won by no name horses that has contributed nothing to the industry. The stakes for those races now range between 25% and 50% of what they were all those years ago. His latest effort used the provincial growth fund to shaft provincial and country clubs and produce three white elephants for the industry. The idea behind the Messara report may have been sound, but the execution was poor. You get the impression he was captured by a specific lobby group so the recommendations where largely corrupt and biased. His name will forever be associated with that poor effort, which is a pity when he really could have achieved something useful.

Quite a few double acceptors too, so three of those fields could end up with fewer than 8 starters. Probably not what the powers that be expected when they bet the future of the industry on those three AWTs. The tracks that were closed down to fund them and remove any alternative options would be rightly pissed off. The arrogance with which NZTR stay barricaded away and refuse to release any information about the financial results of their decisions is truly astounding. Someone should tell them the covid lock down is over and they are free to communicate with the industry that pays their handsome wages.