mardigras

Outside of potential hospitality benefits, how is a winning punter valuable to NZRB?

The club can and should do what it likes. But NZRB should not pay rebates to a customer that doesn't lose money with them.

Because they don't take commission/takeout from your bet. They take it from the pool. It might seem the same thing, except it isn't.

As Freda said. It's one area that has easy solutions to improve race scheduling. Allowing less races to cater for the needs of the population of horses across the year.

Yep. It's like a buyer going to Harvey Norman and buying 1 million TVs for the same price Harvey Norman buy them at. Then giving that customer a rebate because of the volume (even though HN has made no money from them). And then increasing the price of the TVs to the rest of Harvey Norman's customers to recover the rebate.

I thought that was based on tote volume. Rebates should not be based on volume of turnover. If they are to have them, they should be based on volume of revenue as they generally are in other situations. The more you lose with us, we might consider giving some back to retain you as you are worth a lot to us. Volume of turnover has no relationship with revenue.

Apart from this all getting out of hand, the reality is that the NZ administration is very poor. In saying that, so is the Australian administration. Just because stakemoney etc is far better in Australia doesn't mean they actually administer racing any better. They do a lot of shit stuff there as well. Just look at V'Landys. Imagine how good NSW racing could be if he wasn't involved. Things are better there, largely because the culture of betting is greater there. NZ has for too long followed a path of thinking Australian racing is the magic elixir to help NZ racing. But it was fundamentally the absolute worst decision ever made. Embracing Australian racing to the level they did has effectively killed NZ racing Sure, NZ racing administration is abysmal. Over paid idiots. But NZ racing is in this position largely because of their inability to realise that the tracks and their consistency/quality is what punters require. And instead decided that an all out focus on Australian racing promotion would actually help NZ racing along with the totally effed idea that commingling could ever benefit NZ racing has led us to where we are. The idiots in suits are just a part of that. The policies of NZRB supported by NZTR are why we are where we are.

Could be. Outside the Goodwood, SA black type is pretty average.

It shouldn't be anywhere near that. I wonder if someone was paid, and if so, by whom?

To a degree. When moving horses was a lot more difficult, we generally retained our best. Couple that with very poor policy around managing our revenue streams and pushing off-shore racing down everyone's throat has changed that very quickly. Along with just ignoring things like tracks as if they can just carry on forever the way they were, whilst at the same time showing everyone what tracks should be like, which has just accelerated the demise.

I don't think there is any difference between Group racing in Tasmania and one here already. The 10+ years isn't required. We should have been seeking to be a nursery for good horses, not a jurisdiction of running top end races. That's my view. It's trying to present the façade that our racing is at a higher level than it is, and boosting stakemoney to support the facade, that has contributed to where we are now.

Only if it's information that punters seek out. Clearly they don't - in Oz or here.

Can you tell me what the relative penalty is for a maiden winner by a nose compared to the horse that ran second. Cheers. Is it 3kg? More? Less?

To (1), if it is a negative to the preparation of the horse. To (2), trainers discretion. I see no reasons why punters need or should know. If a trainer wants to submit that, fine, but there should be no investigation if it doesn't occur. Punter beware. On mares in foal, that should only be in relation to welfare around the rules of racing as to when a mare in foal can no longer race. I don't see any need for punters to know. So at jurisdiction discretion. On mares being served, again, discretionary is how it should be. On your last sentence, I expect the volume of shit a horse has dumped each of the last 7 days is important from a punting perspective. When would the requirements end?

I thought it about 8%. 1500 odd non NH events. Still, they would fall off if they weren't meeting the required level.

No, but then they don't consider handicap racing as being suitable for black type either. They may stupidly have one handicap listed race from memory, but would have to check.

I looked at Irish racing. Looked to be 127 from 2800 races. It is a little misleading as they also run NH. But there isn't a lot in it, and certainly no where near 15%. And from a quality perspective, I doubt we are anywhere near their level.

No BHA racing until February 13th at the earliest.

Fixed odds would be better, and betfair +30%. It's not conclusive. But they should be able to analyse betting on the events.

In answer to your question, it's impossible to say as it's all speculation. And even if it were occurring, you don't know on which horses that might be the case. However in saying that, given the population based statistics around horses with blinkers on first time, his win rate and ROI for those horses is well outside the 'norm'. For the years 2013 through mid 2017, his blinkers on first time winners were very successful and returned a positive ROI on TOTE prices. Something he managed to achieve with more horses meeting that criteria than any other trainer. Yet from an ROI performance, his other horses returned 80 cents in the dollar. I am not a behavioural scientist, but I refer to blinkers first time because as a layman, I felt benefits of such an approach would be greatest first time (since in that race, the horse will not actually experience the associated condition) And of course, his stats if taken out of the overall stats, make blinkers on first time look even worse 'from the population'. Who knew?

Yes, no doubt you saw that all races cancelled today. Hopefully horse movement restrictions helps contain things and that spread is minimal.

4 in a row, your best tipping yet, the first four - you finished yet?

They are experimenting with punters money a lot. Tweaking something in training, feed regime, location, beach work, swimming. 'with our f in money'. I think they should be applauded for trying different things. Some will go well for them, some won't. If punters make the assumption a horse races in a certain position and will do so again this race, more fool them.

And it will all cost more. Extra paid stewards to monitor and investigate 'information' that they don't have to do now. Every horse that has a notification, along with every horse that doesn't. More time questioning trainers/jockeys because 'information' didn't pan out. I hardly think NZ needs to spend money on 'information' that no one seems to want. Wake up.

It's no doubt why the stewards Twitter accounts have relatively so few followers. Such important information but no one wants it.