Freda

The AWT's have been funded [ partially ] by the taxpayer. It is wrong [ IMO ] to be continually bolstering up a business that can't run itself... and won't be happening again.

Nothing, as yet..because no asset has been realised, has it?

Absolutely. BUT - the money to fix the main centre tracks was to come from asset sales. There is no other source of funding to do that.

Aus has the gambling culture too.

As below...don't know what happened there...

As has been pointed out before, other jurisdictions [ UK,Aus ] have a larger pools of horses, some have shown that they cope with the allweather well, others don't. But those that do race on them regularly, will have their own following betting-wise, because there are enough of them to make a 'third' pool of horses - as opposed to here, where, generally, we are looking at firm-trackers or mudders, on turf, with a few who can dovetail between both options. There simply won't be enough horses to supply a consistent allweather 'product' going on current numbers....but, of course if permits are taken from provincial meetings to make it all work, there will be a pool of unfortunates who can't perform but have no other choice. IMO. As an aside - Sheikh Obeid will not allow any of his horses to race on an allweather. Strathayr, great, and overall the best option, but they are not internationally installed as training grounds, only racetracks.

The absolute bottom line in all this, is that to increase the fortunes of racing and its stakeholders, punting revenue [ punters' losses, to pinch a phrase from one more learned than moi ] must increase. Some punters won't touch allweather racing, others do...but statistically I don't think there is evidence that there is less betting overall, given similar status meetings, as a result of having these tracks. But neither is there proof that there is any more. That is the modus operandus of our management - same as the 'these tracks are costing us money ' wild statements and running with the result, without taking time to do proper analysis to correctly determine process. So, if punters' losses do not increase as a result, a complete and utter waste of time and money to install, as well as destroying the fabric of provincial racing as we know it.

Spoke to starter yesterday. Yes they do have a stipe at the start, but he doesn't have specific knowledge of the exact points. Apparently the markings for the relevant starting points were very indistinct. That has now been remedied. The usual tractor driver was absent ( and he would have known ) so the tractor was driven by the assistant starter. So there you have it.

Quite - but the prevailing thought is that consistent tracks [ i.e. synthetic ] will encourage more betting. Can't see it personally but that's their rationale.

..and RV has decided that two are sufficient in their state, given maintenance costs, etc. And we think we can manage three?

Yes, V'Landys won't hear of synthetic racing in NSW although there are some for training on....therein should tell the tale, looking at the relative bouyancy of the state regime.

Three - four counting the Chief.

Yep, good points. A Strathayr would be fantastic, agree wholeheartedly, but many trainers want an allweather because they will be have a better surface for winter training. That's a pretty short-sighted basis for supporting such expenditure, when, as said above, a bit of vision and go-forward could make such a difference.

The starter is also the crossing keeper..but he hasn't been on the last couple of days.

Dunno, T...I'll try and find out.

Don't you mean 'covet' ?

What about the hole that was 45 mill deep....how much of that is still outstanding, or doesn't that count..?

Yeah....the new Racing Bill got cross party support on its way into legislation, that staggered me, I never thought that could happen. So, ballot box notwithstanding, doesn't seem to be much light at the end of the tunnel.

I can't actually remember back that far, C....but yeah, exactly like that.

Pre-race ear covers are red, the black ones stay on for the race. Just to be nit-picky.....

Less of the Princess and more of accountability and things will be grand, Thommo.

In the three higher-rated races at Riccarton on Saturday, there are rating spreads of 19, 22, and 27 points respectively...and all on 54 kgs. How is that a 'handicap' in the spirit of the designation ? While racing was being re-introduced, there was a cap on ratings penalties to reflect this anomaly to a degree, but it can't be carried on, or the whole point of ratings is nullified.

You know perfectly well my thoughts on handicapping, we have discussed it often. The lack of a reasonable spread of weights has long been a problem IMO. I remember racing when there was a decent spread - good horses carried a good horse's weight, and the lightweights got a significant chance at the bottom. Not so now.

If there was a decent handicapping system, the disparity in ratings would, to a degree, be nullified by the weight differential. But they're not, and therein lies the frustration among trainers.

Yes, they certainly are. I was under the impression that the open-entry races were only to be persisted with during June/July...not going forward, in any case.