And we thought our racing problems were third world!

[Chief Stipe]

Payne calls for ratings revamp

www.racing.com

Ballarat-based trainer Andrew Payne is concerned about the functionality of Racing Australia’s rating system in Victoria’s competitive racing environment.

The experienced horseman, who hails from one of the sport’s most famous families, firmly believes the current scale is slowly but surely forcing talented horses out of the state.

“We’ve got a system, where once the horse reaches its mark, it’s extremely hard to place them,” he said.

“No one wants to run them to drop their rating back down, so Racing Victoria will lose these horses to Queensland, NSW, wherever they’re getting sold to.”

But, having felt this way for a long time, Payne has worked to theorise practical solutions that may keep these horses around the jurisdiction.

Cultivated over years of discussion and personal insight, he has presented his ideas on how the process could be adjusted to give these gallopers and connections, a better chance of succeeding in Victoria.

Payne strongly advocates for a lower grade of race meet throughout the Victorian racing calendar, with lesser prizemoney equivalent to meetings in other states.

He used a recent Friday night Mount Gambier meeting as an example of why this could benefit the racing landscape.

“At the moment, we have $27k, $35k, $55k etcetera, and I think that’s all fine as it is,” he said.

“What we need to do is match Mount Gambier, have $20-$23k meetings … we saw how many Victorian trainers went there the other week just for slightly weaker races.”

Some of these were small trainers, who Payne said may be getting “fed up” by the current system in their home state, while some were slightly bigger operations from Ballarat and Warrnambool – all in search of slightly weaker races for their lower-rated gallopers.

But crucially, Payne points out, there were no goliath Melbourne stables sending an armada of potential short-price favourites over, and he believes this is due to the lesser prizemoney.

However, RV’s head handicapper David Hegan said finding the right balance to include such meetings is the key, especially if they required higher standard events to make way.

“The biggest challenge is always, what do we take out of the programme, and what opportunities are we taking from other horses and owners?” he said.

“There is a limit on how many races can be run … we currently average 9.9 starters per race and every new race we put on is another kind of race lost somewhere else.

“A very important data point to remember and juggle is that we have about twice as many horses as there are races in Victoria – wins are not easy to come by when field sizes need to remain healthy.”

But if there were a way to fit these meetings into the schedule, Payne believes they could fill a big void in the current programme.

“You could easily run these meetings once a week or so, there’s a definite demand for them,” he said.

“If the bigger stables were potentially less enticed by the lower prizemoney, it would give the little guys a better shot; the lifeblood of the racing industry.”

Conversely, Payne also sees the benefits for owners, who would get another chance to see their horse win before essentially being forced to sell it – especially if there are no non-TAB/picnic meetings on at the time.

“People want their horses running for premium prizemoney ($35k-$55k) first. Once they work out it’s not good enough, they go to the $27k races, no problem, but then what?” he said.

“These races would provide another chance for owners to break even, and I think people are happy to break even.

“And people will bet on them, too. If they didn’t bet on the Mt Gambier meetings, they wouldn’t keep running them.”

Payne outlined his personal belief on what keeps owners invested in racing, and by extension, what keeps them motivated to hold onto their horses instead of selling.

“From what I can understand of owners, they want two things in racing. First, the wish of having a champion, that possibly wins a stack of money for them,” he said.

“Secondly, excitement. If their horse wins a $22k race, it’ll lift their spirits from a possibly mundane job … they just want to see the horse race; it’s a hobby to them.

“But when they go to the races to see their horse run fifth, or six, over and over again, it’s just disheartening.”

In jest, Payne dubs these potential weekly meetings “Moderate Mondays”, or “Townsville in Victoria”, clearly referencing the lower prizemoney on offer.

Payne also believes there could be an inherent and advantageous link between these new prizemoney tiers and a potential reform of the abandoned class system.

In his eyes, the shift from the class to the numbered ratings was done to stop horses being sold to weaker jurisdictions, as there was no way for them to go back to a more suitable grade.

Payne's sketch of a class system under his proposed prizemoney structure.

The chart above shows how each class could be integrated into the new prizemoney tiers, providing different opportunities for horses who may be struggling to score as things are.

“I believe we got rid of the classes, because once horses reached the class 4, class 5, the top of their ability, they were sold straight away, to Townsville, Darwin, Tasmania – out of Victoria,” he said.

While Hegan agrees this was a contributing factor to the shift, he also said the ratings provide programming flexibility and transparency for connections, which didn’t exist under the class system.

“The ratings system was introduced, firstly, so trainers and owner could see how their horses were being handicapped and rated against the rest of the horse population … previously only the weights were published,” he said.

“The natural evolution of publishing the ratings was then to progress into ratings-based programming, so horses could effectively drop back in class where many had ‘outclassed themselves’.

“Particularly in country areas where, for example, a Class 4 horse was rated inferior to a Class 1 or 2 horse but couldn’t run against them.”

However, Payne argues that the current system has still left many horses in limbo, stuck running midfield between grades before connections choose to cut their losses.

“It’s so hard now to drop down and win races anyway … horses here are hitting Benchmark 64 or 70, then just treading water until they’re sold,” he said.

“It would be nice to have higher-rated country races for these horses. At the moment pretty much the only Benchmark 70 races are midweek, Friday night or Saturday, there’s hardly any Benchmark 70s at provincial and country level.”

This illustrates similarities between the rating and class system, but Payne’s argument for reforming the latter also benefits both young talented horses, as well as those running at the aforementioned lower-class meetings.

A specific issue this would address is the rating of first-start winners, who Payne feels are hard done by under the current rules.

“You have a nice first starter, who goes out and wins on debut; they’re pretty much forced to go to Benchmark 64 level,” he said.

“They are forced to race against the seasoned horses, who have multiple wins and much more experience.”

RV have contemplated a few ideas that could help increase opportunities for horses who are struggling to win, including:

RACES with eligibility based on time and/or level since last win (for both country and metropolitan meetings);

DISCOUNTS on weights for horses that haven’t won for a certain period;

A COMBINATION of class and rating (e.g., Class 3/Benchmark 58) races;

CLASS 1 races for horses with no metropolitan starts; and,

MORE reverse ballot maidens/Benchmark 52s

But Hegan said RV’s priorities are maximising opportunities and returns to participants, as well as healthy field sizes, which makes it tricky to keep everyone satisfied, especially those with horses at both ends of the rating scale.

“Trainers with horses rated in the 50s want more BM52s and 0-58s and we have incorporated these as well as reverse ballot races to help,” he said.

“But that can take away opportunities from horses rated further up the scale – it is a very fine balance.”

For example, Hegan points out that Class 1s (8.9) and country Benchmark 70s (9.0) average some of the lowest runner numbers of any events on the calendar.

Therefore, removing other races to schedule more of these events, let alone changing the entire system, could cause angst amongst participants.

But while Payne accepts some may turn their noses up at his ideas, he stands by the fact that Victoria consistently has far more horses sold via Inglis Digital than any other state, and plenty of them are now headed to other parts of Australia to continue racing.

[Doomed]

The interesting thing is that they are prepared to discuss such things. Can you imagine such proposals being openly discussed in NZ.

[Freda]

6 hours ago, Doomed said:

The interesting thing is that they are prepared to discuss such things. Can you imagine such proposals being openly discussed in NZ.

Not really, no.

There have, in the past, been good plans involving much work presented to NZTR but no discussion, and probably not even looked at in depth.

Was chatting to a northern based trainer yesterday, he thinks that once Auckland is up and running the major stables will set their sights on the regular and well-staked races there, leaving the outlying and provincial areas out in the cold.

I would like to have confidence in Head Office to keep a viable flow of races for the rest of the peasants but unfortunately, I don't.

In fairness Bruce Sharrock is always ready for a chat and is, in himself, very personable.  But that's his job.  Whether he gives a sh*t really is hard to ascertain.

As for the article about Andrew's thoughts - while I certainly get his concerns, at least there is still the opportunity to race the horse elsewhere.   What is wrong with hopping across the border for weaker company ?  It's still Australia!   Plenty of horses in NZ find their way down south when deemed uncompetitive in the north, that is in itself not a bad thing.  Keeps owners in the game with the opportunity to race a made and educated horse that may have shown quite a bit of ability, and can be purchased at generally very modest cost.    Owners, if they are still keen on a particular horse can keep their interest and just race it further afield.  There are also trainers who regularly race horses to drop their ratings to get them to a level where they can be competitive.  Done regularly in HK too, for example.

The thing that does concern me is the rush [esp. down south] to squeeze out smaller clubs and reduce opportunity away from major clubs - read Riccarton in our region.

That in itself does nothing to attract new clientele with the homogenised diet that then becomes the norm.  The point of difference that has been so attractive for years, of country/provincial racing offering opportunities for the less competitive horse, is steadily being removed.

While Auckland may 'future proof' racing in the northern region, I don't see Riccarton doing the same for the south.