Rakapuka Ruler For Sale?

[hunterthepunter]

2 hours ago, With A Dream said:

That makes 3 then

if its sold be no mares in the mares racers

[With A Dream]

1 hour ago, the galah said:

Just proof of what brodie has said. One stables dominance is having negative consequences on harness racing,mostly at the top end. Trainers realise they are uncompetitve, they either sell or start taking steps which sees them sometimes ending up in court.Its a self perpetuating problem. That's just the way it is. Look at the facts.  

Don't really agree Galah.   I don't enjoy the AS domination at all but that is  not really the problem as I see it.

The problem is we have swapped the old  handicapping system for a new one  that has the same faults embedded in it.

Good horses are constantly promoted to a rating where they are not competitive and then take months to get back to where they should have been all the time. 

If Rakapuka Ruler and a host of others like him  were able to stay in a 75 - 85 rating where they were competitive many of them would not have been sold and there would be enough of them to make up good fields.

If HRNZ continues to ignore this problem it won't get any better.

It doesn't cost money to make changes to the system but the powers that be need to think outside the square as to how better retain good  horses.

Do we really need to persevere with a system where horses are re accessed every time they win regardless of their talent.

It has always been done that way and we have ample proof it doesn't work.

[Flagship uberalles]

5 minutes ago, With A Dream said:

Don't really agree Galah.   I don't enjoy the AS domination at all but that is  not really the problem as I see it.

The problem is we have swapped the old  handicapping system for a new one  that has the same faults embedded in it.

Good horses are constantly promoted to a rating where they are not competitive and then take months to get back to where they should have been all the time. 

If Rakapuka Ruler and a host of others like him  were able to stay in a 75 - 85 rating where they were competitive many of them would not have been sold and there would be enough of them to make up good fields.

If HRNZ continues to ignore this problem it won't get any better.

It doesn't cost money to make changes to the system but the powers that be need to think outside the square as to how better retain good  horses.

Do we really need to persevere with a system where horses are re accessed every time they win regardless of their talent.

It has always been done that way and we have ample proof it doesn't work.

It started before the new handicapping system came into play, although that hasn't helped the longevity of the lower tier horses in nz either. 

[Basil]

1 hour ago, the galah said:

Just proof of what brodie has said. One stables dominance is having negative consequences on harness racing,mostly at the top end. Trainers realise they are uncompetitve, they either sell or start taking steps which sees them sometimes ending up in court.Its a self perpetuating problem. That's just the way it is. Look at the facts.  

Let's consider the counter-factual. Suppose Dream About Me, Cruz Bromac, Thefixer, Spankem et al were all distributed across different stables. Would that make Rakapuka Ruler and Hail Christian any more competitive with them?

The competitiveness of any particular horse depends only on how fast it is relative to horses it's required to race against. Where its competitors are stabled makes exactly no difference — the horse in question neither knows nor cares.

[the galah]

6 minutes ago, Basil said:

Let's consider the counter-factual. Suppose Dream About Me, Cruz Bromac, Thefixer, Spankem et al were all distributed across different stables. Would that make Rakapuka Ruler and Hail Christian any more competitive with them?

The competitiveness of any particular horse depends only on how fast it is relative to horses it's required to race against. Where its competitors are stabled makes exactly no difference — the horse in question neither knows nor cares.

Actually completely disagree. The reason the above horses are trained at the all stars is in my opinion  pretty obvious. They perform much better from that stable than any other stable in the south island.   Plain and simple.  Just look at the results.   its not hard to work out.  

 

22 minutes ago, With A Dream said:

Don't really agree Galah.   I don't enjoy the AS domination at all but that is  not really the problem as I see it.

The problem is we have swapped the old  handicapping system for a new one  that has the same faults embedded in it.

Good horses are constantly promoted to a rating where they are not competitive and then take months to get back to where they should have been all the time. 

If Rakapuka Ruler and a host of others like him  were able to stay in a 75 - 85 rating where they were competitive many of them would not have been sold and there would be enough of them to make up good fields.

If HRNZ continues to ignore this problem it won't get any better.

It doesn't cost money to make changes to the system but the powers that be need to think outside the square as to how better retain good  horses.

Do we really need to persevere with a system where horses are re accessed every time they win regardless of their talent.

It has always been done that way and we have ample proof it doesn't work.

Also disagree with a  lot of your above statement as well.   Look at the fields. Horses in the 75 to 85 rating you quote have to run against the all stars horses.  Take cup day. Hail Christian and henry Hubert are rated in the range you quote and who did they run against and get dominated by.  The all stars. What happens then.  They moan that they cant go back and run in races where they get penalty free wins,and eventually end up sold or sent overseas..   

 Do you really want to return to a system where a 1 win horse will be penalized for winning a race,while the 6 win,4 win  and  3 win  3 year olds in the same race would get no penalty. That's what used to happen. How was that fair. We had a  1 win horse run in races like that.

Have the field sizes increased under the new handicapping system?? no system will please everyone,you just have to go with what is best for the industry as a whole. 

I think its a no brainer in stating the all star domination is a major factor for why some of the better horses are sold. Personally It doesn't effect  or worry me.

[Flagship uberalles]

7 minutes ago, Basil said:

Let's consider the counter-factual. Suppose Dream About Me, Cruz Bromac, Thefixer, Spankem et al were all distributed across different stables. Would that make Rakapuka Ruler and Hail Christian any more competitive with them?

The competitiveness of any particular horse depends only on how fast it is relative to horses it's required to race against. Where its competitors are stabled makes exactly no difference — the horse in question neither knows nor cares.

What I don't like is when one stable has  the top 3-4 horse's in the big races, it opens up all sorts of suggestions to team driving etc...the only thing that made the NZ cup this year as a watching spectacle was tiger Tara, otherwise major pacing races are just a procession now!!   the Big trotting races on the other hand generally have capacity fields and are so much more competitive and exciting now because one stable doesn't dominate.  

 

[hunterthepunter]

the rating of horses stinks in the cup at mot yesterday 12win horse starts off starts off front and 5win horse gets 30 metres all it is doing is keeping old donkeys racing

[Happy Sunrise]

1 hour ago, Basil said:

Suppose Dream About Me, Cruz Bromac, Thefixer, Spankem et al were all distributed across different stables. Would that make Rakapuka Ruler and Hail Christian any more competitive with them?

Good point but they aren't, Basil. If they were distributed across different stable then people would feel they have a chance of winning the big races.

The perception and feeling is if you are not in the All Stars juggernaut you are not going to win

[Basil]

12 hours ago, Happy Sunrise said:

Good point but they aren't, Basil. If they were distributed across different stable then people would feel they have a chance of winning the big races.

The perception and feeling is if you are not in the All Stars juggernaut you are not going to win

Would 'they' really feel any different though? Not unless the ownership of the top horses was also different, I'd suggest.

Anyway, the point I was making was just that Galah's argument defies basic logic — the temptation to sell a horse that's 'uncompetitive' is the same regardless of whether the horses it can't compete against are all in one stable or spread across a dozen. Blaming the All Stars for horses being sold makes as much sense as blaming me for the tide coming in.

[Rangatira]

12 hours ago, hunterthepunter said:

the rating of horses stinks in the cup at mot yesterday 12win horse starts off starts off front and 5win horse gets 30 metres all it is doing is keeping old donkeys racing

you present a shocking example for multiple reasons

[Basil]

14 hours ago, the galah said:

Actually completely disagree. The reason the above horses are trained at the all stars is in my opinion  pretty obvious. They perform much better from that stable than any other stable in the south island.   Plain and simple.  Just look at the results.   its not hard to work out.  

 

Do you really think that a horse's competitiveness is affected by whether its faster rivals are based in one stable or spread across many stables? If not (and I assume this is the case!), then there's nothing to disagree with...

If your point (now) is that a horse is less likely to be 'uncompetitive' when trained by the All Stars, then that very logic suggests you should actually want all horses to be trained by that stable! Since fewer will then be 'uncompetitive' and hence fewer will need to be sold.

I'm all for subjecting the All Stars to the same scrutiny as everybody else (in fact, given their success, more scrutiny), but please, let's keep it sensible. Blaming them for phenomena they can have nothing to do with starts to look like paranoia.

[Happy Sunrise]

3 hours ago, Basil said:

Would 'they' really feel any different though? Not unless the ownership of the top horses was also different, I'd suggest.

Basil, you are correct in what you say.

But put it this way. 

When I see the nominations or fields come out and I see a Purdon horse in the race 95% of the time I will simply skip that race as a betting proposition as I know they will mostly win and even if they don't it is not worth betting into it.

Is that a valid comparison? Not sure. But I know if I were a owner in in group races or higher assessed races I would feel the same. Can I win? Can I as an owner make money off my really good horse?

Answer is probably no.

Are the majority of harness racing owners meant to be paupers while a few become fat cats?

However, the only way a Joe Average can make money is to sell.

As flag points out. The trotting ranks seem so strong in the country at the moment. Why is that?

[the galah]

5 hours ago, Basil said:

Do you really think that a horse's competitiveness is affected by whether its faster rivals are based in one stable or spread across many stables? If not (and I assume this is the case!), then there's nothing to disagree with...

If your point (now) is that a horse is less likely to be 'uncompetitive' when trained by the All Stars, then that very logic suggests you should actually want all horses to be trained by that stable! Since fewer will then be 'uncompetitive' and hence fewer will need to be sold.

I'm all for subjecting the All Stars to the same scrutiny as everybody else (in fact, given their success, more scrutiny), but please, let's keep it sensible. Blaming them for phenomena they can have nothing to do with starts to look like paranoia.

If I start off by saying I agree this is only part of the puzzle as to why horses are sold overseas,but it is an important part at the top end.

The point I make is the very same horses that the all stars get to run faster,would not be as fast if trained other top trainers. I have given the reasons why I think that on another thread.

The problem is they are not only better,it is they are much better. They just run as fast as necessary to win. You must have noticed that when you watch the age group races or  races like the nz cup,in fact any race they are in, run in fast time-  Just watch the last 400m of any of those races  and you will see only all star horses going forward and the others all tired going back.   

How do you think that effects a horses body and mind to try your guts out and you run a creditable 5th in record time. It buggers them pure and simple. Their racing longevity is shortened,their owners and trainers see it and realise  selling is the best option.   If they do decide to back up and give them another run in the same week they know they probably have a tired horse while the all stars will still be as fresh as a daisy after their record runs.

Its all about the times they run and the long term effects on the horse. Best to sell before your valuable asset is too buggered and devalued.

Remember that story before the jewels about brent mangos"s major aussie owner who had 3 in the jewels. He said he was scaling back the horses he had trained here bigtime and having them sent to Australia because,like it or not,the all stars are simply too dominant to justify having his horses trained here.

Edited December 11, 2018 by the galah

[With A Dream]

21 hours ago, the galah said:

Actually completely disagree. The reason the above horses are trained at the all stars is in my opinion  pretty obvious. They perform much better from that stable than any other stable in the south island.   Plain and simple.  Just look at the results.   its not hard to work out.  

 

Also disagree with a  lot of your above statement as well.   Look at the fields. Horses in the 75 to 85 rating you quote have to run against the all stars horses.  Take cup day. Hail Christian and henry Hubert are rated in the range you quote and who did they run against and get dominated by.  The all stars. What happens then.  They moan that they cant go back and run in races where they get penalty free wins,and eventually end up sold or sent overseas..   

 Do you really want to return to a system where a 1 win horse will be penalized for winning a race,while the 6 win,4 win  and  3 win  3 year olds in the same race would get no penalty. That's what used to happen. How was that fair. We had a  1 win horse run in races like that.

Have the field sizes increased under the new handicapping system?? no system will please everyone,you just have to go with what is best for the industry as a whole. 

I think its a no brainer in stating the all star domination is a major factor for why some of the better horses are sold. Personally It doesn't effect  or worry me.

I certainly wasn't advocating for a return to the old system.  

My point is, regardless of how many wins a horse has had or how much money it has won, it should be racing horses with similar ability as much as possible.   

For instance,  Rukapuka Ruler won a GN Derby but was  not competitive against the top tier.  In a 75 - 85 rating he would be competitive,  I don't think he would dominate.  Other horses in that grade may be on the way up, others on the way down (in the case of older horses in particular) and others suited to stay there.

If horses are dominating in that grade (like the allstars as you mention) then they have to move up to the next level so that the 75 - 85 rating band remains competitive.

I admit I am not sure how to best construct a system that achieves that but I think that should be the aim of any improvements to the system.

You can't ask Mark to become less of a trainer but you should be able to make changes so horses have a place to race where they can remain competitive.   Surely that is what we all want.

[Harewood]

Rakapuka Ruler just won its first start in Aus today at Menangel and paid the incredible price of $6. Went 1.50.2. Now surely that time would have been competetive in NZ or has it grown another leg like a lot of horses do when they go to Aus.

[Newmarket]

1 minute ago, Harewood said:

Rakapuka Ruler just won its first start in Aus today at Menangel and paid the incredible price of $6. Went 1.50.2. Now surely that time would have been competetive in NZ or has it grown another leg like a lot of horses do when they go to Aus.

Thought same, speed duel early, sits parked, runs down hot fav?? Was weak field, but time and how it won suggests a good buy. 

[Newmarket]

On 6/11/2018 at 4:45 PM, Portfolio said:

Owners must be mad for selling horse for $80k, its not had many starts. They are stupid. 

If it is sold, new owners will be jumping up and down, some maidens are sold for $30k plus?

Will be racing for top money each week in aussie, i think it could win good races over there, making good money. Owners will regret this crazy move, thats for sure. 

Should have purchased horse porty

[Happy Sunrise]

17 minutes ago, Harewood said:

Went 1.50.2

Good lord.

And for a $9500 stake. Long way to $80 000 and costs.

[Flagship uberalles]

Nice that new owners quickly rewarded, I wonder if he will come back and bite us on the bum next NZ cup and interdoms!!

[Happy Sunrise]

7 minutes ago, Flagship uberalles said:

Nice that new owners quickly rewarded, I wonder if he will come back and bite us on the bum next NZ cup and interdoms!!

That will be great viewing for the previous owners.

[Newmarket]

18 minutes ago, Happy Sunrise said:

Good lord.

And for a $9500 stake. Long way to $80 000 and costs.

Only a tuesday meeting i suppose. Good confidence boost, must admit after early dig for lead, and couple of first 27s, was expecting him to fade. 

[Harewood]

19 minutes ago, Newmarket said:

Only a tuesday meeting i suppose. Good confidence boost, must admit after early dig for lead, and couple of first 27s, was expecting him to fade. 

The hot fav who led has had only five starts and not long out of maidens. RR last raced in NZ in the Kaikoura Cup so on that alone was a good bet and you would expect it to fight all the way to the line given its substantial class edge. Gods Sprit may be a very good animal but can you imagine a horse with five starts being fav in the KK cup. I think not. 

[Happy Sunrise]

5 minutes ago, Harewood said:

The hot fav who led has had only five starts and not long out of maidens. RR last raced in NZ in the Kaikoura Cup so on that alone was a good bet and you would expect it to fight all the way to the line given its substantial class edge. Gods Sprit may be a very good animal but can you imagine a horse with five starts being fav in the KK cup. I think not. 

Did you back RR?

Sounds like a great bet.

A Tuesday meeting at Menagle, who would have thought of the opportunity ?

[hunterthepunter]

another good one sold to usa bettors joy

[Newmarket]

Lets see how good rakapuka ruler is going, up against field marshall on sat.