the galah

Today just another day where turnovers proved what i say above,is a guaranteed way of getting large pools. Just identify the races with the best timeslots for the day on sky racing,then combine that with the jackpotting money that has been set aside from the week prior as i suggested above,and then you get the bigger pools.Today had high class races added to the formula,which makes it even better,but while helpful,isn't essential. today,the races with the jackpots on tabcorp,which had good timeslots,saw a first 4 jump from $4,000 carry forward to become $15,000 and a trfifecta go from $882 jackpot to $6,000. Tabcoorp quaddie pools are next to nothing,so because they have nothing to jackpot,quaddies don't interest tabcorp punters.. The nz tab had the later quaddie with $8,000 jackpot, go to $58,000.It had a first 4 with a jackpot of $4562 become $25,836. The highest first 4 final pools were on different races for tabcorp and the nz tab,but both races had the essential high sky racing exposure element i talk about. Its a sure thing formula. Just do what i suggested in my original post. i believe it should be applied to just one such race each week with a starting jackpot of say $30,000 would become at the very least in the low hundreds of thousands each time if promoted properly and if run at a consistent appropriate timeslot each week.My guess would be it would incrase turnover around $10million a year on harness racing.Of course the returns to harness racing would be good as then tab and taborp % take out for exotic bets like first 4's and trifectas is one of the highest. Whether people are interested in what i'm saying,i don't know,possibly not,but i know from observing these pools that im right. And after all,isn't turnover supposed to be important.

I just had a look at the unhinged page and there was a segment on bounce n beyond winning. The first thing mr unhinged said was what a great job they do at the beach,obviously in reference to the horse going to auckland recently and losing form before coming back to the south island. then john dunns reply was,well we will look at going back to auckland as it was eligible for running in one of those $100,000 races that HRNZ have put all the money into for auckland. Doesn't it make you wonder,why should an owner have to send their horse to the other end of new zealand to do that. Why can't the area that generates the turnovers to fund that race in auckland, get the same support from HRNZ and run a similar race at addington.. is there not something wrong with that. Also,is it just me ,but wouldn't you have thought john dunn may have asked that question. Afterall it must cost the owners a lot to transport the horse all over the country.

slot ten thanks

that sums up whats currently happening. especially with hrnz. hrnz leadership decision making is based on the premise,try and plug the holes and delay the dam bursting for another 4 or 5 years. is that strategy wise or prudent when considering what happens after 4-5 years. certainly not. But i think a significant part of the consideration by some of the current decision makers is ,in 5-6 years time, when the shit hits the fan,they will have moved on to something else and won't have to deal with the consequences of their current decisions. i find the most puzzling thing about all this,is the cross section of industry stake holders who are happy to go with the short term gain,but long term pain strategy. Live for today,and instead of plan,substitute hope for the future. That should be hrnz's catch phrase ,whenever they make a new announcement. HRNZ would at least be being more honest, if they added that at the end of their press releases.

They used the same discretion when it came to that horse that started from the wrong position at cambridge a couple of years ago. Then every week you see many standing starts ,especially in auckland where horses on the u/r start between 20-50m behind where they could.Thats examples of horses starting from starting points which they should not be at. just last sunday at invercargill in their big race,most of the u/r horses off the front were behind all the horses off handicaps at the start. did the box seat mention that? the point being ,where do you start and where do you stop. all i think is,whoever is commenting and whoever is deciding these things,at least be consistent in what you are saying and ruling.If that happens then i would be happy either way.

i know your being tongue in cheek with that comment. i'm sure people in the south island want to see harness racing in the north prosper,but most feel HRNZ is over committing and being unrealistic,nor are HRNZ showing fiscal responsibilty.Southland harness racing,to me, is also struggling. people aren't stupid. Hrnz seem to think they are,but they are not. people know if you continue to run one part of your business at a loss it impacts on the bottom line of the whole business. The north island should be restructured and realistic,viable plans for its fututre should have already been made. Its imperative for those in the north island that this happens.Its in their interests. The failure of hrnz to address that is what worries people in the south island. In other words theres a lack of confidence in HRNZ leadership and decision making. You know,what gets me most, is when i was a young fella and a teenager,canterbury people were so one eyed and parochial about their sports teams and would do anything necessary to achieve and succeed. To me,canterbury people and in particular canterbury harness racing people have become too apathetic and don't make themselves heard,nor promte their importance and needs like they used to. In a lot of ways i think when it comes to the crunch in the not too distant future,and it will,you can see it coming,canterbury people will only have themselves to blame for how the canterbury scene will inevitably be impacted.

"obviously ask themselves" you say... so your saying you think it obvious methven have chosen to reduce the stakes paid to non win horses at the upcoming meeting because they think their club isn't well treated by the funding model. i didn't think it was obvious methven would penalise owners and trainers who regularly support them to make a point about funding. Maybe you are right,because its either methven or HRNZ.I would have thought it more likely to be a HRNZ directive,as we know who they prioritise and who they don't.But methven run the meeting so maybe it is them,as you think is obvious. the facts are,every year this meeting has non win races with stakes well below every other meeting the methven club run. i think it a very reasonable question to ask,why and who makes these decisions ? Whatever way you look at it,in my opinion the decision to run reduced non win stakes doesn't reflect what people who will support that meeting think should be happen. have you taken note of what is happening in victoria.Thats what will happen here,its only a matter of time.In my opinion its a very safe bet to predict. Give it 4 or 5 years,its not far away.

all good points to underline the north island contribution. the only thing is when you referred to 'put downs" you need to differentiate comments made on here about the fiscal sustainabilty of northern clubs, based on turnovers ,stakes paid and clubs financial circumstances.In other words,that is a very different subject than talking about people and horses as you just have.

that answer is a bit ambiguous to me. does that mean hrnz is funding you less for that meeting? The actual question i'm trying to ask is,are hrnz telling you to keep the stakes lower or is it the methven club who have made that decision? either way,theres the appearance of an element of unfairness in the stake levels for those who do race at your next meeting.Methven is a club that is seen as a leader in supporting the grass roots level participants,but in this case that isn't quite the case. if however its a hrnz directive, then people should know who is taking them for granted.

yes, seems you are right with it being at the top of the north canterbury region when i checked the map. canterbury provides most horses in the nelson/west coast regions as well,so the point i was making was there seems to be a deliberate policy to run lower stakes at methven on the date in question and it happens each year. So to me thats treating those who race at methven unfairly, as they will be the same people and horses who support that club throughout the year. Why should the stake for a non win race at a financially sound club like methven in november, be worth less $2000 less than winning a similar race at other country clubs. Methven will be receiving the appropriate funding to run the higher stake would they not. who is behind that decision. Methven or hrnz.if hrnz want it that way,then why can'tmethven stand up for the people and horses that support them regularly and say in the interests of fairness,we want to pay the appropriate stake.

I see that weekend the only canterbury club with a race meeting is Methven. I know its a meeting in which the highest rated horses starting will all be non win first start horses,given the rating system,but why do they run for only $10,000 stakes. Is it the methven clubs decision to pay out the smaller stakes ,knowing they have no compettion in canterbury and take advantage of that fact and save a few $ at the expense of the horses competing. Or is it a hrnz directive to take advantage of the owners lack of choice in canterbury? Aren't methven supposed to be funded more than that by hrnz for their stakes,so why run them for less. this isn't an attack on methven,clearly they are a very good club doing there best to cater for the cross section of industry participants. And that meetings stakes are low every year. Methven after all are supposed to be a well off club ,so should be able to at least be expected to support owners by paying what hrnz said they were funding clubs.

I've explained before why i think its obvious the most important factor in turnover,above all else on any nz harness race, is the timeslots allocated and the pre race coverage on the main australian sky racing channel. Last night yet again proved what i say to be accurate. Addington ran 13 races,but tabcorop,who control the sky racing coverage only had betting on the first 12. I'm not sure whether that is a software thing with them,that they can only go up to 12 races. But because they had no sky australian coverage of the last race,the betting on that race on tabcorp was obviously non existant race and the betting on the nz/entain pool,which of course included the australian states that commingled with the nz pools,well the nz tote pools on the last race were rather abysmal.. The aussies betting into the nz commingled pools wouldn't have even got to see the final leg of the quaddie/treble. now last night ,for some reason,1 addington race half way through the card had a larger gap of 5 minutes until it being next race to go,with the preceding race being an australian trot race starting 5 minutes before addington.And what happened because of the extra lead in time,well both the nz pools and the tabcorp pools were double what you get even on the normal 3 race minute gap. And 5 times the size of many of the races that had only a 1 minute timeslot gap,especially the aussie tabcorp pools. So what should HRNZ together with entain be doing to generate a big turnover race. doesn't it seem obvious? what is the other thing that attracts large scale betting pools.... answer jackpotting first 4's. So what i suggest they do is take 10% out of every first 4 that jackpots throughout the week on nz harness races and put that money each week into the race at addington with the best pre race coverage timeslot(generally occurs around the 4-6p.m. australian timeframe). It has to be primarily jackpotting first 4 funded,not guaranteed first 4,because its the jackpotting pools that ensure a better than normal % payout. Sure they can do a guaranteed pool,but the jackpotting part is important for punters returns. some weeks you may only get jackpotting pools of $10,000 being injected,but on a week like when methven had their big pools you could start off with a jackpotted pool of up to $50,000. The aussies love to bet into those jackpotting pools and just imagine what they would do on a race with decent pre race exposure time on sky racing. closing pools similar or higher to the hige methven pool wouid be generated. its all about the timeslot andcombining that with a pool that has good jackpotting money in it. It would only be a one off each and they would need to have the pool size on the trackside screen. Its a guaranteed way of increasing turnover. They could do the same on a firday night with one trifecta race at auckland on the race with their best timeslot.

a mistake for sure,but i think in reality if you were a punter you would be being unrealistic if you thought the small difference in starting distance should have meant they didn't confirm the result. In my opinion,the common sense decision was made when they confirmedit. No big deal in the whole scheme of things.

thanks gammalite. it always is a nice feeling tipping and backing a winner.

as expected benson dude given the perfect trip by olivia thornley and got the result expected. Amazingly paid $23 on the ff near the end. almost double what i backed it at when i thought i was getting overs. The driver change a big swing in its favour today,especially if you had been watching how it was driven recently. The only thing i found frustrating was all afternoon i couldn't have a bet on the junior drivers market as it was suspended.So didn't back her win or place on that, like i intended.still i'm happy.

who are people picking to win this. the tab did have a market open but they have suspended that at the moment. Maybe they are just waiting to see which horses are allocated to which driver for the final heat on friday at addington. looks a very even spread of chances at this stage. Maybe olivia thornley may be in with a chance. shes got no standout drives and actually has no drive at all in one race but she drives benson dude in the first heat tonight and hes drawn 1 which always helps. Its not been the horses fault its form looks just average. A better driver on tonight and should get a better result if it can keep a lead or leaders back position. The higher rated caufiled seems to have snuck into that race off the ballott but it seems an even field.

Night watch sold for $4,500. I guess williamson being honest and advising that the horse has bled in the past has meant the 5 year old mare sold for less. he did also state she was a competotive racehorse,so he must think she still will be just that and i'm sure if anyone rung him he would be totally honest with any questions asked. K tomlinson on trackside said she goes best with more than 1 week between races so i guess thats to do with the bleeding issue she has to be treated for,but this is a horse who has earned just under $40,000 this season. actually the bleeding thing is interesting. I read a lot of studies about it once.The data showed that it was to do with intense training and racing, how much a horse had had in its career. The studies also said it seemed to happen more in colder temparatures which makes sense and it was suspected air pollution may be a factor,but that was unproven. in my opinion,i've always believed its caused sometimes by drivers over extending their horses when they are beaten. In other words, they are tired with 400m to go because they have been overdriven early in a race,but because they are in with a chance occasionally you see drivers keep at them . I think some horses try so hard and they pay the price for an unnecessarily over taxing drive.I can name many examples of tha over the years. In fact theres a couple of horses going around at the moment i suspect have had that happen to them and you can see it in their form. thats why i say,the worst thing any driver can do is chase the field when they have lost too much ground at the start,to be any realistic chance of placing.

Invercargill sunday. who in their right mind is going to go to a race meeting when they have to sit around for so long just waiting in the car or sitting in the grandstand,waiting mostly 40 minutes for the next race.Imagine it on a day when it was clod. the gaps on sunday at invercargill are 25,25,31,41,40,40,40,42 and 29. If someone owns a horse they may turn up and watch their horse race and then go home,but who else apart from the trainers and drivers,who have no choice,is going to turn up. i find the gaps too long even sitting at home when i can fill in my time with doing something. i remember all the talk not that long ago abouthow everyone believed gaps of even 35 minutes were too long. Seems thats gone out the window. this week the gallops have no meetings on monday,tuesday or thursday. They have 2 sunday meetings for this week. Surely they must be thinking the same,as afterall the gallops have even less to look at between races. much of what happens in makes little sense these days.

just wondering when the canterbury clubs are going to be running the finals of their high stake races that HRNZ have given aucklnad the funds to run,like the above races. Why haven't they promoted the canterbury races? also,when are the penalty free finals for the horses than run at the low grade addington wednesday meetings,like cambridge had. maybe its all being kept a bit hush,hush as they dont want to stop all those canterbury horses, that are racing at auckland each week at the moment.Not that i can think of even 1 horse that has. Or is it the case,that hrnz only reward clubs and the provinces that provide a product that can generate losses? Surely canterbury trainers/owners,clubs can't be that apathetic. or maybe they are.

I'm sure over the years you've almost perfected the art of replies to others, which can be both nicely balanced with undermining yet complimentary words,to get your point across. I'm sure that skill has served you well. On this topic i've used your words to illustrate you got that balance wrong.You overdid the undermining thing,to the point it prompted a response from me pointing that out and i gave the reason why you got the balance wrong. You say you've complemented my posts in the past,as if that context is supposed to mean something to me. Thats a tad condescending,and you know that. Your doing the ....let me think i'm clever..thing again that i referred to earlier.i don't post anything looking for complements. As to me passing off opinions as facts. You need to read what i say. I would have thought when i say "in my opinion" over and over,you would take it to mean i'm expressing an opinion. I had thought that was very self explanatory.No hidden meaning there. enjoy your night out tonight. Maybe when you have a spare minute tonight,go count the number of people in the stand i referred to on the topic you said my comments gave you a laugh,if it still exists.Will there even be 1? let me know.And don't include yourself in the total.

Your words in this thread tell a different story. I just re read what you have said.here are some of your comments just to remind you. "Lay off him! knocking him(mr clark) every which way. contrary to what is spewed out on here . your quite prepared to join a thread that was only going to get more negative with derogatory comments about a good honest couple of grass root battlers. your like the rooster who thought the sun had risen to hear him crow(i did like that one) add fuel to mr galahs fire some of your posts are good for my insomnia,puts me out fast if the muppet pair were comparing your overall posts with steak,they would call them medium and not very well done. now that was funny( reference to my my expressing an opinion) The use of capitals,i assume because you were saying duh. LONGEVITY(3 times),WRONG" so thats what you have said. Now tabforever,you saying you weren't irritated by me isn't true. I know it and you know it. I don't know what the big deal is that you have to deny that to be the case.After all it is no big deal. You remind me of someone who most likely at some time has been in a position where you have been part of committes or perhaps in jobs where you were part of the decision making. And when someone comes up with an idea or someone makes a comment and you have been asked at a meeting or a staff meeting,what do you think tabforever,you would reply great idea ,thats something we shall give a lot of thought to,keep up the good work. Then when you walk out of the room,with your fellow committee members or management group,probably those in the same circle who you like to hang out with,one will say, did you really think that was a good idea tabforever. And you would reply,no the guys a twat,his ideas were stupid but best to let him think hes clever. So the person whos ideas you just degraded would in time come to realise he was just just given the brush off,that he wasn't being taken seriously and that he had been told just words for appearances sake. anyway,your assumptions that i have a lack of knowledge on whats been discussed in this current topic, well your way off the mark on this occassion.

If what i suggested didn't work, then why do all the australian gallops meetings that get 3 o4 minutes lead in time do it. australian gallops set the gold standard for lead in content in my opinion. For example i sometimes have a bet at the morphetville races on a saturday. The reason i do, is i listen to the 2 informative presenters and they are able to go through the whole field within a couple of minutes. they don't have the times to show each horse as its being commented on like say rosehill,but they also don't have their tv cameras focused just on a handful of horses and eventually you get to see them all,often when being loaded. The vast majority of casual punters bet in the last couple of minutes. Brodie,you may have made up your mind sometime beforehand,but your not a casual punter and its the casual punter,who if given pre race exposure,will make the difference between an average race turnover to a good race turnover. Thats obvious if you watchhow tote turnovers increase and prices fluctuate when a race is given pre race exposure in australia. You have to tick the boxes that encourage everyone to invest,not just those who have good knowledge of form. as to punters getting talked into something pre race. again,if you follow the money,they do. I posted a couple of years ago the impact matt cross had on tote and ff prices one sunday at rangiora,by giving his selections in the last minute. at that point the tab website had it so you could analyse the price fluctuations. That day at rangiora his selections prices dropped between 30-40% on average for the whole card, from when he gave his selections out. That was a day without a presenter on course. and i think everyone that presents a horse to race should get a least a brief mention as every horses connections have people viewing the race for that reason.

And of course i should have said a significant reason i post is i like to hear what other people are thinking on the topics i post on. Everyones opinions are interesting given the subject matter is something i have a keen interest in. i always think people are much more likely to say what they are thinking on a forum like this than they are to your face. too often people in real life will agree with someone when they don't in fact. I much prefer people expressing their real opinions.I'm someone who will always say what i think if asked so a forum like this with true opinions suits.

giving an opinion different to yours is not knocking someone,Its just having a different opinion. and you seem to be picking parts of some replies from people and inferring negativity is the overall tone of those replies,when thats not the case if you apply context. however,I did like when you compared me earlier,to a rooster who likes to hear himself crow when the sun shines. The reason i most liked that you made that comment about me ,was because it confirmed how i thought you perceived me.I don't know,that sort of amused me that you showed that,and it was a colourful way of you putting it as well. i can tell some of my replies agigtate you just a little. some of my posts seem to do that to people sometimes.i have the same effect on the chief sometimes. i think people who i aggitate with what i say, it gradually builds and then they just express what they think and let off a bit of steam when replying. I've seen the same pattern before on here. I have long before this thread,given thought to why i contribute to bit of a yarn,and wanting to hear my own voice is not significant,but would be a factor,but then again so is anyone who makes comments on any forum,including yourself. i believe its a mixture of having a lot of spare time,boredom,being a bit isolated and finding this a forum with people of similar interests that i don't get elsewhere,wishing to express opinions that i believe should be given some thought.the main one would be the having a lot of spare time. But tabforever,i would say you really don't know me if you think the rooster thing is what motivates my posting.But you may say,well i would say that,but i like to think if i say something its 100% what i'm thinking. anyway,maybe if you were to meet me one day we could swap alan clark stories.Hes an interesting fella and does things differently.

Is it not time that trackside changed the way they do their pre race coverage. Personally i much prefer the way the gallops do the pre race,over the way harness do theirs. I would much rather have the trackside people,all of whom are very knowledgable and polite,go through the field naming each horse and driver and having either or,or both presenters making short and succint 2 to 4 sentence comments about each runner(depending on time allowable given field size). And trackside should be able to show the runners as they do so. Each presenter/commentator should after that be able to quickly sum up their selections about 60-90 seconds before race start.Thats when the australian punters would be using that as a guide. There has to be a better way to acknowledge the contribution each runner and connections make,than currently occurs. Currently all we get are presenters/commentators going over their selections with unncessary long trackside shots of a favorite doing half a round warm up. and often the presenters and commentators are selecting the same horses so we get a doubling of the same content. All trackside presenters/commentators know how to say something in a way that is imformative and realistic without offending anyone about all runners. For first starters the likes of what craig rail says about breeding could be appropriate as well as trial form. to me our current trackside coverage dumbs down punters,doesn't recognise each runner and their connections contribution to each race and fails to punters a view of each horse that i believe is imprtant to see hoe the horse has presented and is acting pre race.