curious

That's what I'm saying exactly. Don't see any sign of it though.

If you look at the new funding model their solution to that is to reduce the rating bands so that R85s become R82s and the average rating horse in that race will be open class in future

And I think Saundry's suggestion is nuts. Any useful change needs strong leadership, not a wishy washy you go sort it out between you in your regions. And the idea of putting something in place that will last 50 years is a nonsense. That's partly how we got in the mess we are in operating on a 50 year old model. FFS, completely hopeless and I see no way forward here now.

Can't see the case for building a racecourse close to an airport. Needs to be close to the horses in training like Sydney and Melbourne. How many horses in training in Auckland again? Some bright spark once said "We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Seems like that's what you and Thommo and NZTR and Messara want to do. Need to lower industry costs and generate more wagering revenue if you ask me. Not going to happen racing in Auckland.

From your posts, you certainly don't suggest that you do. Try thinking.

I'd say one decent facility in the Waikato, scrap all the Auckland tracks. Racing, the odd carnival aside, is no longer about proximity to human population. Needs to be proximal to the horse population to mitigate costs, which is in the Waikato. Pointless having a track in or near Auckland with no horses there for mine.

Certainly not NZTR evidently.

Yeahh, it did sweat up a bit and applying the BP principles, over-raced early and was very unlucky in the straight, so with blinkers off, over a shorter trip might be the go next time, especially if down in class.

Yip. Working again now.

Absolutely, and if subsequent performances make that look like a one off and a competent handicapper is assessing on merit then why would they be stuck in high class for ages? That's mad. And why would trainers/owners go ballistic? I thought they were the ones wanting higher stakes and for that they need races generating more revenue. That's the whole point of a handicap system. Otherwise just run all races at SW and see how many horses are going round a year later.

ffs.... www.tab.co.nz uses an invalid security certificate. The certificate is not trusted because the issuer certificate is unknown. The server might not be sending the appropriate intermediate certificates. An additional root certificate may need to be imported. Error code: SEC_ERROR_UNKNOWN_ISSUER

Brilliant .... getting this at the mo ... Your connection is not secure The owner of www.tab.co.nz has configured their website improperly. To protect your information from being stolen, Firefox has not connected to this website.

That's the whole point of a handicapping system isn't it? To equalise chance and not to gift good horses a few easy wins in non-competitive and unattractive betting races on the way through. If Far Lap is that good and doesn't like his re-handicap, he can go straight to WFA races. We are trying to increase wagering revenue here, not reduce it.

lol...........

Useless information from a punting perspective as you say mardigras but surprise, surprise, the difference is almost exactly the same as when I looked at it using what is now 6-10 year old data except that I decided that .02 seconds was not significant and rounded it to a big fat ZERO. Any way it's about 1/100th of what Thommo dreamed up. It does however support the argument that there should be no tiered stakes differentials except by rating band/ class of race.

Masterclass! And I got a few bucks worth of the first four. Nice. Keep it up guys.

I think I'd be making a fortune laying the BP selections but it's very complicated figuring out which they are. Moving target.

Yep, that's just fundamental good business sense. It largely works in Oz but here they fund stakes randomly in no relationship to what revenue is generated, often in the reverse of that. Completely nuts. And we have people advocating to extend such nonsense. No wonder everyone's walking.

I think you'll find that all NZ metro tracks lose the industry a lot more money per meeting than regional tracks. The reverse is true in Oz where the metro tracks generate funding that assists the regional tracks.

Agree. Not emulating the failure of NZ metro tracks as Freda is pointing out.

NO!

Not bad. 2.90 FF place odds from the generous NZTAB.

It is a pipedream because they have no idea about how to fix the half a dozen key things that need to be fixed and are regularly mentioned here and elsewhere, most recently the rooted handicapping system and stakes structure. They have solid evidence that the handicapping system is munted as far as providing competitive racing attractive to punters goes. Never mind. Let's just find more idiots in a different age group to support it instead of fixing it as Mardi has recently suggested. Don't fix the ridiculous tiered stakes structure. Expand it. Sell our best assets and use the money to replace diminishing reserves until they are also squandered. Or use some of it to "fix" stuffed tracks that have not been refurbished for decades and do that with no sustainable business plan for funding those refurbishments. I'm with barryb here. I'd be staying on the sidelines while they exacerbate the damage and things continue to race towards an even bigger pile of s&^t than we have now, while the powers that be sit around with hands in pockets or elsewhere expecting the taxpayer or someone else to bale us out.

I agree barryb but unless they can start generating significantly more sustainable net revenue, nothing will change and as we can see from the NZRB annual report reserves will run out sooner rather than later.

What are you smoking? Can you send me some? Only hope is to borrow more money or steal it from the taxpayer.