What's the problem?

[Doomed]

That must surely be the worst Auckland Cup field I have ever seen. What an embarrassment.

But even more significant on the night. Surely the only thing worse than having to programme a maiden race on Cup night is to get only 7 acceptors for such race. 7 starters for $25,000. What on earth is the problem there? Imagine if Methven put up $25,000 for a maiden race. They would have to start three lines of 12.

[Slippery Slope]

And the Rowe Cup is an even bigger example of the reality of harness racing at Alexandra Park- not a single one of the 7 starters is trained in the north, and if it wasn't for the Hope family taking up all 3 of their team in the race we could have had an all time smallest field for our second biggest trotting event. The Wallis /Hackett team and Tony Herlihy have been the only northern trainers that have entered horses in all the 3 previous editions of this race. No excuses about time of the year it's run either- this race has been late April / May for many many years. When the very few trainers committed to trotters in the north call it quits what happens then? 

[Brodie]

It is all good, Entain have the answer to improve the racing, turnover and amount of horses racing, that no one else came up with!

It is just Brilliant!

Programme more races!!

Just has to work doesnt it?

[Gammalite]

2 hours ago, Doomed said:

That must surely be the worst Auckland Cup field I have ever seen. What an embarrassment.

What a whine Arse. Akuta and Copy That were the fav's last year but are out injured unfortunately. 

Merlin and Don't Stop Dreaming have had an excellent 6 months with quinella in the NZ Derby in December, both winning and picking up large cheques in Australia , then returning to NZ to quinella the Race by Grins and pick up a further $600,000 between them. They NEED a Break. 

So the Auckland Cup Looks a bit weaker without any of those 4 horses in it I spose, but they've won enough to please anyone.

But how Good for the others ? the next rung down of quality gets the chance for a BIG Group 1 win . excellent stuff.🏆💰👍

Self Assured has already won 2 Auckland Cups so your comment insults him as well unfortunately. He's won the last 2 NZ FFA's as well. Better Eclipse was 2nd in the Interdominion Grand Final , so not too shabby either.  

As for the Trot . Rowe Cup. you have 3 of the Greatest trotters currently in the Southern Hemisphere in it. (and in the top 20 ever probably)  What a Fantastic sight it will be !!!! unless the Mountain mucks it up like he did last year . The Aussie will be toooo good anyway.

The trotting Derby Group 1 choc full of great 3 year old trotters. a fantastic race.

and yet you 'd rather whinge and whine. Thought it was Poms that were whingers all the time.

Edited May 21 by Gammalite

[Doomed]

Not sure that listing all the horses that aren't there is the best way to talk up the quality of this year's field.

[Gammalite]

12 minutes ago, Doomed said:

Not sure that listing all the horses that aren't there is the best way to talk up the quality of this year's field.

So the best 4 horses are missing and you're crying about it. The owners of the 8 remaining runners are probably happy with the quality of their horses.

Mach Shard and American Me have been in good form lately . Self Assured a bona Fida champion, former NZ Cup winner.  Dual Auckland Cup winner. 

8 runners this year with 133 wins between them with over $6,000,000 in prize money won. Looks like EXCELLENT Quality to me. 

Only thing embarrassing is your comment about the field being embarrassing. 

the winner this year only gets a bit over $100,000 for the win ? now that's a bit embarrassing I spose for one of the feature Group 1 's of the Nz Harness racing season. 

How's that then ?? talking about the horses that are there instead of not . Hope that helps you like them a bit more instead of thinking you're doomed all the time. (like that bloke in dad's Army 🤣) 

[TAB For Ever]

The hope is that with the Stakes increases etc that the middle/intermediate horses will see a future for themselves to earn more here rather than be sold off to Aussie.

This remains to be seen !

But the way things were , just 3 wins could see you racing as cannon fodder for Cup horses. That ain't sustainable. 

But horses are very low in numbers in the North and it could be a long winter !

And hard to understand why more trainers not prepared to line up their maidens to race on Cup night.....hard to win a race there but place money OK and the experience invaluable.

 

[the galah]

10 hours ago, Gammalite said:

So the best 4 horses are missing and you're crying about it. The owners of the 8 remaining runners are probably happy with the quality of their horses.

Mach Shard and American Me have been in good form lately . Self Assured a bona Fida champion, former NZ Cup winner.  Dual Auckland Cup winner. 

8 runners this year with 133 wins between them with over $6,000,000 in prize money won. Looks like EXCELLENT Quality to me. 

Only thing embarrassing is your comment about the field being embarrassing. 

the winner this year only gets a bit over $100,000 for the win ? now that's a bit embarrassing I spose for one of the feature Group 1 's of the Nz Harness racing season. 

How's that then ?? talking about the horses that are there instead of not . Hope that helps you like them a bit more instead of thinking you're doomed all the time. (like that bloke in dad's Army 🤣) 

I think doomed was saying the number of starters was embarrssing,not the quality of the horses .

But you've obviously with an earlier post touched on part of the reason.

some of the horses we would have expected to line up have recently targeted and earned money in some high stake races here and in australia.they have had a lot of hard racing and some have been looking for a spell and have been given it by their astute trainers. 

so races like the grins seem to have taken away part of the focus of targeing the  auckland cup.

Edited May 21 by the galah

[Walt]

14 hours ago, Doomed said:

That must surely be the worst Auckland Cup field I have ever seen. What an embarrassment.

But even more significant on the night. Surely the only thing worse than having to programme a maiden race on Cup night is to get only 7 acceptors for such race. 7 starters for $25,000. What on earth is the problem there? Imagine if Methven put up $25,000 for a maiden race. They would have to start three lines of 12.

We lived in Auckland from 1983 to 2022.  I've attended virtually every Auckland and Rowe Cups during that time. The first being Armalight and the last Amazing Dream in 2020.

The field assembled for this years cup is the best available but not only is it down numerically on what you'd normally expect but it's obviously not a classic Auckland Cup field. I don't believe it's an embarrassment but more a disappointing reflection of circumstance. It's not a Cup field I would have attended.

The Rowe Cup is a small mixed bag. My first Rowe Cup was that of Sir Castleton. I've seen some beauties over the years. Once again numerically the numbers are obviously down on what you'd expect. 

Of the 7 horse field three would need something to go badly wrong with the others to be a genuine contender. Just Believe is a clear standout. Only bad luck beats him. 

Muscle Mountain has found his form at the right time but I don't believe he can work hard during his races and still beat the likes of Just Believe. If I know that Greg Sugars sure will know it.

Oscar Bonavena is a genuine winning chance but has been up a long time and understandably  looked to have lost his finishing spark recently. Can The All Stars find that for one more race? If anyone can it's them. If they do he's a chance to beat Just Believe but I'm lacking total conviction there.

Love N The Port is more a place contender than winning chance to my eye but respect him and his trainer. 

If I went it would be to see Just Believe as I admire great trotters but wouldn't make the effort to go to the track if still living in Auckland.

Alarm bells should be going off over these two time honoured great races. They need to be show pieces of Auckland Harness Racing in the way the NZ Cup and Dominion are @ Addington. Unfortunately, I don't feel they are this year. 

[Shad]

31 minutes ago, Walt said:

We lived in Auckland from 1983 to 2022.  I've attended virtually every Auckland and Rowe Cups during that time. The first being Armalight and the last Amazing Dream in 2020.

The field assembled for this years cup is the best available but not only is it down numerically on what you'd normally expect but it's obviously not a classic Auckland Cup field. I don't believe it's an embarrassment but more a disappointing reflection of circumstance. It's not a Cup field I would have attended.

The Rowe Cup is a small mixed bag. My first Rowe Cup was that of Sir Castleton. I've seen some beauties over the years. Once again numerically the numbers are obviously down on what you'd expect. 

Of the 7 horse field three would need something to go badly wrong with the others to be a genuine contender. Just Believe is a clear standout. Only bad luck beats him. 

Muscle Mountain has found his form at the right time but I don't believe he can work hard during his races and still beat the likes of Just Believe. If I know that Greg Sugars sure will know it.

Oscar Bonavena is a genuine winning chance but has been up a long time and understandably  looked to have lost his finishing spark recently. Can The All Stars find that for one more race? If anyone can it's them. If they do he's a chance to beat Just Believe but I'm lacking total conviction there.

Love N The Port is more a place contender than winning chance to my eye but respect him and his trainer. 

If I went it would be to see Just Believe as I admire great trotters but wouldn't make the effort to go to the track if still living in Auckland.

Alarm bells should be going off over these two time honoured great races. They need to be show pieces of Auckland Harness Racing in the way the NZ Cup and Dominion are @ Addington. Unfortunately, I don't feel they are this year. 

Interesting I'm sure armalight won her first race at Westport trots back in the day.

[mikeynz]

46 minutes ago, Walt said:

We lived in Auckland from 1983 to 2022.  I've attended virtually every Auckland and Rowe Cups during that time. The first being Armalight and the last Amazing Dream in 2020.

The field assembled for this years cup is the best available but not only is it down numerically on what you'd normally expect but it's obviously not a classic Auckland Cup field. I don't believe it's an embarrassment but more a disappointing reflection of circumstance. It's not a Cup field I would have attended.

The Rowe Cup is a small mixed bag. My first Rowe Cup was that of Sir Castleton. I've seen some beauties over the years. Once again numerically the numbers are obviously down on what you'd expect. 

Of the 7 horse field three would need something to go badly wrong with the others to be a genuine contender. Just Believe is a clear standout. Only bad luck beats him. 

Muscle Mountain has found his form at the right time but I don't believe he can work hard during his races and still beat the likes of Just Believe. If I know that Greg Sugars sure will know it.

Oscar Bonavena is a genuine winning chance but has been up a long time and understandably  looked to have lost his finishing spark recently. Can The All Stars find that for one more race? If anyone can it's them. If they do he's a chance to beat Just Believe but I'm lacking total conviction there.

Love N The Port is more a place contender than winning chance to my eye but respect him and his trainer. 

If I went it would be to see Just Believe as I admire great trotters but wouldn't make the effort to go to the track if still living in Auckland.

Alarm bells should be going off over these two time honoured great races. They need to be show pieces of Auckland Harness Racing in the way the NZ Cup and Dominion are @ Addington. Unfortunately, I don't feel they are this year. 

While numbers are limited maybe these races might just be a week or two later than they could be, 

[Doomed]

3 hours ago, Shad said:

Interesting I'm sure armalight won her first race at Westport trots back in the day.

And sat parked to win a NZ Cup if I remember correctly, which is not the normal way for NZ trained horses to win that race. In fact I can't recall another NZ trained horse that sat parked for a significant distance and won the race.

[the galah]

19 hours ago, Slippery Slope said:

And the Rowe Cup is an even bigger example of the reality of harness racing at Alexandra Park- not a single one of the 7 starters is trained in the north, and if it wasn't for the Hope family taking up all 3 of their team in the race we could have had an all time smallest field for our second biggest trotting event. The Wallis /Hackett team and Tony Herlihy have been the only northern trainers that have entered horses in all the 3 previous editions of this race. No excuses about time of the year it's run either- this race has been late April / May for many many years. When the very few trainers committed to trotters in the north call it quits what happens then? 

Only $3500 for an also ran just not enough to entice rachmaninov to Auckland. 

[Gammalite]

7 hours ago, the galah said:

I think doomed was saying the number of starters was embarrssing,not the quality of the horses .

But you've obviously with an earlier post touched on part of the reason.

some of the horses we would have expected to line up have recently targeted and earned money in some high stake races here and in australia.they have had a lot of hard racing and some have been looking for a spell and have been given it by their astute trainers. 

so races like the grins seem to have taken away part of the focus of targeing the  auckland cup.

Every race should have just 10 starters. then everyone gets a chance. 12 or more sees the slower ones start to get in the way a bit, and more incidents happen. Thankfully the GRINS race and assorted good races like that are limited to 10 . 

Addington tomorrow night having 2 fields of 6 horses for the 2 year olds. An excellent move. Makes sense as one making an error in the Big field of 12 could cause problems . Also you end up with 2 winners, 2 lots of happy connections , 2 lots of divvies , all good.

Last years Auckland Cup only had 8 1/2 in it  . Akuta putting paid to them easy enough. I was laughing at Butterworths/Greens horse 'The Big Lebowski' being tipped for the race as it wasn't even Open class taking on Akuta-Self Assured -Copy That. 😂. got beat that easy don't think it's raced again since lol.  I collected handsomely off the 5-1 of Akuta and the champion young Marky Boy (gave most back though when Swayzee beat him in the NZ Cup -bloody Aussies getting in the way 😅)

Dunn's 2 ended up going to Australia and doing average afterwards . 'Smithie Terror' and 'Bach'. why don't they have open class horses now ?  Is it just Heisenberg ? he 's not 'strong' enough to start I spose. 

[Brodie]

4 hours ago, the galah said:

Only $3500 for an also ran just not enough to entice rachmaninov to Auckland. 

Imperial Command?

Might need the run though, bit short of racing?

[Doomed]

2 hours ago, Gammalite said:

 

Addington tomorrow night having 2 fields of 6 horses for the 2 year olds. An excellent move. Makes sense as one making an error in the Big field of 12 could cause problems . Also you end up with 2 winners, 2 lots of happy connections , 2 lots of divvies , all good.

 

I'm not sure you understand exactly how the racing industry works Gamma. It is all about turnover. And the bigger the fields the bigger the turnover. Those two races you refer to would probably generate about $2,000 each to fund stakes, which leaves about $13,000 per race to come from somewhere else. Totally unsustainable, even in the short term let alone the long term.

[the galah]

3 hours ago, Gammalite said:

 

Addington tomorrow night having 2 fields of 6 horses for the 2 year olds. An excellent move. Makes sense as one making an error in the Big field of 12 could cause problems . Also you end up with 2 winners, 2 lots of happy connections , 2 lots of divvies , all good.

 

surely you jest?

Using that logic then why aren't they spliiting the other races with 12 or more starters.

To me,its like HRNZ are trying to get rid of as much money as they can before they turn out the lights.

hrnz's obsession with 2 year old racing is almost farcial in my opinion.

Harness races in nz in 5 years times will very likely be running for half the stakes they do now because of current leaderships policies.

I feel sorry for those who will still be in the sport in 5 years and who will be struggling income wise because of current decisions like running 2x 2 year old 6 horse fields. 

just watch this space.

 

Edited May 22 by the galah

[Shad]

7 hours ago, Doomed said:

And sat parked to win a NZ Cup if I remember correctly, which is not the normal way for NZ trained horses to win that race. In fact I can't recall another NZ trained horse that sat parked for a significant distance and won the race.

Very tough effort, and rarely seen over the extreme distance, as like many other good mares, never left any good progeny, from the broodmare paddock.

[Gammalite]

27 minutes ago, Doomed said:

I'm not sure you understand exactly how the racing industry works Gamma. It is all about turnover. And the bigger the fields the bigger the turnover. Those two races you refer to would probably generate about $2,000 each to fund stakes, which leaves about $13,000 per race to come from somewhere else. Totally unsustainable, even in the short term let alone the long term.

yeah you're probably right. I've seen a hundred thousand races, but have never known what the betting was on any of them ever or cared in the slightest. 

I guess I've always thought 2 winners was Way better than One (for owners, drivers and Trainers) so thought it would be for the punter too I guess. 

I do know you have a one in 6 chance of Actually Winning the race with 6 starters, and Only a slim 1 in 12 chance of winning the race with 12 starters. I can tell you which one I PREFER as an owner , trainer driver or Punter. The much easier to pick 6 -8 horse one. Akuta paid $5.90 in the 9 horse field Auckland Cup last year . Money for Jam. 

26 minutes ago, the galah said:

Harness races in nz in 5 years times will very likely be running for half the stakes they do now because of current leaderships policies.

We run 3 times at Albion every week and 2 at Redcliffe Every week. Stake money is mild . But a race is supplied for the 500 horses in training in the catchment Every week. Very important and makes it sustainable for the participants. I don't know what the betting is . could be a 1000 , could be 10,000 per Race who knows. But if you put the races on Consistantly for your participating owners and Trainers . they will turn up . You need races that You are able to Win though . NZ needs a Good handicapper to achieve similar.

You can Bag me All you like , but No , I wasn't jesting . I was impressed they split the 2 year olds at Addington to give 2 lots of owners a winner (very important to keep owners winning) and if people won't bet on it . Tough titties for them . I'm sure they're not looking at turnover. 

Dunn's will probably Win both 2 year old races at Addington anyway . The gutser s 🤣😂. 

[Doomed]

13 minutes ago, Gammalite said:

yeah you're probably right. I've seen a hundred thousand races, but have never known what the betting was on any of them ever or cared in the slightest. 

I guess I've always thought 2 winners was Way better than One (for owners, drivers and Trainers) so thought it would be for the punter too I guess. 

I do know you have a one in 6 chance of Actually Winning the race with 6 starters, and Only a slim 1 in 12 chance of winning the race with 12 starters. I can tell you which one I PREFER as an owner , trainer driver or Punter. The much easier to pick 6 -8 horse one. Akuta paid $5.90 in the 9 horse field Auckland Cup last year . Money for Jam. 

We run 3 times at Albion every week and 2 at Redcliffe Every week. Stake money is mild . But a race is supplied for the 500 horses in training in the catchment Every week. Very important and makes it sustainable for the participants. I don't know what the betting is . could be a 1000 , could be 10,000 per Race who knows. But if you put the races on Consistantly for your participating owners and Trainers . they will turn up . You need races that You are able to Win though . NZ needs a Good handicapper to achieve similar.

You can Bag me All you like , but No , I wasn't jesting . I was impressed they split the 2 year olds at Addington to give 2 lots of owners a winner (very important to keep owners winning) and if people won't bet on it . Tough titties for them . I'm sure they're not looking at turnover. 

Dunn's will probably Win both 2 year old races at Addington anyway . The gutser s 🤣😂. 

I'm sure no one was bagging you Gamma. A lot of people don't understand how the game works. Turnover is king. It basically takes 20 decent sized maiden races showing a profit on turnover commissions of $5,000 each, after funding their own races, to fund one $100,000 2yo race with 6 starters that generates very little betting. Harness racing the way it is structured currently in NZ is unsustainable.

Going back a few years, clubs used to make some money from people paying to get in the gate and from sponsors attaching their name to races. These days entry is usually free and hardly anyone attends anyhow, and there are very few sponsors. I don't follow harness much, but in the galloping game most big races are sponsored by Entain or the TAB, so no outside money coming in.

I recall one very enthusiastic poster on one of these racing forums once stating that he never bets. He obviously enjoys the non sustainable races, but he is contributing nothing to the industry.

As for your other comment that punters prefer 6 horse races. Turnovers certainly don't back up that view. $1.50 favourites don't allow much scope for most punters.

[Slippery Slope]

1 hour ago, Doomed said:

I'm sure no one was bagging you Gamma. A lot of people don't understand how the game works. Turnover is king. It basically takes 20 decent sized maiden races showing a profit on turnover commissions of $5,000 each, after funding their own races, to fund one $100,000 2yo race with 6 starters that generates very little betting. Harness racing the way it is structured currently in NZ is unsustainable.

Going back a few years, clubs used to make some money from people paying to get in the gate and from sponsors attaching their name to races. These days entry is usually free and hardly anyone attends anyhow, and there are very few sponsors. I don't follow harness much, but in the galloping game most big races are sponsored by Entain or the TAB, so no outside money coming in.

I recall one very enthusiastic poster on one of these racing forums once stating that he never bets. He obviously enjoys the non sustainable races, but he is contributing nothing to the industry.

As for your other comment that punters prefer 6 horse races. Turnovers certainly don't back up that view. $1.50 favourites don't allow much scope for most punters.

And just to build on this explanation for Gammalite, heres a simple comparison of how much Auckland is cross subsidised by all those maiden and lower class race meetings in Canterbury, that punters nationwide choose to bet on in preference to Alexandra Park,and which actually return surplus money to the industry every time they are held.

From the start of August last year to 3 March '24:

-Rangiora Trotting Club has raced 7 times. Their 72 races had average stakes of c. $11,750, 11.4 average starters per race, and those 72 races generated tunrover of $6.141m, >$85k per race, and after dividends payout they returned betting revenue of $1.334m to the industry (21.7% of turnover), $293k more than the stakes subsidy of $1.041m paid by HRNZ for those races. 

-Auckland Trotting Club raced 18 times in the same period. Their 162 races and average stakes of $20,800 were approximately double Rangiora, but HRNZ's subsidy of Auckland's stakes ($3.514m)was MORE THAN TRIPLE the subsidy to Rangiora ( double when measured on a per starter basis). That subsidy was given to a club that attracted an average of only 8.6 starters per race for those 162 races, and primarily because of those woeful horse numbers the turnover achieved ($12.409m),per race ($77k) which was less than Rangiora and after dividends payout they returned betting revenue of $2.224m to the industry (17.95% of turnover), $1.290m less than the stakes subsidy paid by HRNZ for those races.

Rangiora 821 starters in 72 races, HRNZ provides c.$1270 per starter in stakes subsidies, and punters give HRNZ back $1625 per starter in betting revenue. +$355 per starter

Auckland 1391 starters in 162 races, HRNZ provides c. $2525 per starter in stakes subsidies, and punters give HRNZ back $1600 per starter in betting revenue.-$925 per starter. 

There a number of posters on this forum who see that this current business model is nonsensical and unsustainable, and that Entain appear to only care about gross betting revenue, with wall to wall Australasian racing product for online / offcourse punters mattering to them above all else. So we continue to await HRNZ's next steps in handicapping and stakes subsidy structures from 1 August, which surely has to address this fundamental flaw in harness racing stakes distribution. Perhaps we should also be asking them to explain why they did not insist to Entain at the very least on scheduling some if not most of the new meetings from 1 August at venues like Rangiora instead of or even in parallel with the new North Island meetings? And is it too late to fix this?

    

     

 

[Brodie]

4 minutes ago, Slippery Slope said:

And just to build on this explanation for Gammalite, heres a simple comparison of how much Auckland is cross subsidised by all those maiden and lower class race meetings in Canterbury, that punters nationwide choose to bet on in preference to Alexandra Park,and which actually return surplus money to the industry every time they are held.

From the start of August last year to 3 March '24:

-Rangiora Trotting Club has raced 7 times. Their 72 races had average stakes of c. $11,750, 11.4 average starters per race, and those 72 races generated tunrover of $6.141m, >$85k per race, and after dividends payout they returned betting revenue of $1.334m to the industry (21.7% of turnover), $293k more than the stakes subsidy of $1.041m paid by HRNZ for those races. 

-Auckland Trotting Club raced 18 times in the same period. Their 162 races and average stakes of $20,800 were approximately double Rangiora, but HRNZ's subsidy of Auckland's stakes ($3.514m)was MORE THAN TRIPLE the subsidy to Rangiora ( double when measured on a per starter basis). That subsidy was given to a club that attracted an average of only 8.6 starters per race for those 162 races, and primarily because of those woeful horse numbers the turnover achieved ($12.409m),per race ($77k) which was less than Rangiora and after dividends payout they returned betting revenue of $2.224m to the industry (17.95% of turnover), $1.290m less than the stakes subsidy paid by HRNZ for those races.

Rangiora 821 starters in 72 races, HRNZ provides c.$1270 per starter in stakes subsidies, and punters give HRNZ back $1625 per starter in betting revenue. +$355 per starter

Auckland 1391 starters in 162 races, HRNZ provides c. $2525 per starter in stakes subsidies, and punters give HRNZ back $1600 per starter in betting revenue.-$925 per starter. 

There a number of posters on this forum who see that this current business model is nonsensical and unsustainable, and that Entain appear to only care about gross betting revenue, with wall to wall Australasian racing product for online / offcourse punters mattering to them above all else. So we continue to await HRNZ's next steps in handicapping and stakes subsidy structures from 1 August, which surely has to address this fundamental flaw in harness racing stakes distribution. Perhaps we should also be asking them to explain why they did not insist to Entain at the very least on scheduling some if not most of the new meetings from 1 August at venues like Rangiora instead of or even in parallel with the new North Island meetings? And is it too late to fix this?

    

     

 

Good post, and explains clearly why many of the posters on here are fearful for the future of harness racing in NZ!

There is absolutely no way on earth that this heavy subsidisation of money can continue to be given to North Island clubs that are under performing!

I highly doubt it can be turned around despite the North Island based presenters trying to suggest that things arent that bad, they are deluded!

Where is the interest going to come from all of a sudden to improve things?

Are we suddenly going to attract new owners, trainers and punters?

The TAB have certainly done a great job in putting off the punters with punter restrictions also adopting a ludicrously low AML limit that is not in line with the AML regulations for  racing!

It is interesting that we do not hear much at all from them, but then again why would we while they are getting paid?

That will be stopping in approx. 18 months and then they may well be squawking??

Brodie “on the money”💰 

[Doomed]

8 hours ago, Slippery Slope said:

And just to build on this explanation for Gammalite, heres a simple comparison of how much Auckland is cross subsidised by all those maiden and lower class race meetings in Canterbury, that punters nationwide choose to bet on in preference to Alexandra Park,and which actually return surplus money to the industry every time they are held.

From the start of August last year to 3 March '24:

-Rangiora Trotting Club has raced 7 times. Their 72 races had average stakes of c. $11,750, 11.4 average starters per race, and those 72 races generated tunrover of $6.141m, >$85k per race, and after dividends payout they returned betting revenue of $1.334m to the industry (21.7% of turnover), $293k more than the stakes subsidy of $1.041m paid by HRNZ for those races. 

-Auckland Trotting Club raced 18 times in the same period. Their 162 races and average stakes of $20,800 were approximately double Rangiora, but HRNZ's subsidy of Auckland's stakes ($3.514m)was MORE THAN TRIPLE the subsidy to Rangiora ( double when measured on a per starter basis). That subsidy was given to a club that attracted an average of only 8.6 starters per race for those 162 races, and primarily because of those woeful horse numbers the turnover achieved ($12.409m),per race ($77k) which was less than Rangiora and after dividends payout they returned betting revenue of $2.224m to the industry (17.95% of turnover), $1.290m less than the stakes subsidy paid by HRNZ for those races.

Rangiora 821 starters in 72 races, HRNZ provides c.$1270 per starter in stakes subsidies, and punters give HRNZ back $1625 per starter in betting revenue. +$355 per starter

Auckland 1391 starters in 162 races, HRNZ provides c. $2525 per starter in stakes subsidies, and punters give HRNZ back $1600 per starter in betting revenue.-$925 per starter. 

There a number of posters on this forum who see that this current business model is nonsensical and unsustainable, and that Entain appear to only care about gross betting revenue, with wall to wall Australasian racing product for online / offcourse punters mattering to them above all else. So we continue to await HRNZ's next steps in handicapping and stakes subsidy structures from 1 August, which surely has to address this fundamental flaw in harness racing stakes distribution. Perhaps we should also be asking them to explain why they did not insist to Entain at the very least on scheduling some if not most of the new meetings from 1 August at venues like Rangiora instead of or even in parallel with the new North Island meetings? And is it too late to fix this?

    

     

 

Very good points. Three quick comments.

You mentioned 21.7% of turnover for Rangiora in betting revenue and 17.95% for Auckland. Why the difference? And surely not all of that percentage is available for stakes? Quite a bit of it goes to various taxes and other levies. I am very out of touch with all the numbers.

You used Rangiora in your example. Because Rangiora has a few Sundays there must be a big worry that their turnovers will drop with the increased competition on Sundays. Sunday turnovers are always going to be be restricted naturally as people have lost so much money the day before. The last thing they need is more competition for the off course dollar. Also Sunday on course trot crowds are less likely to bet into the other meetings on the day.

Finally, you asked is it too late to fix this, referring to the imbalance of new meetings. I presume some of the new meetings will be abandoned if they prove unsustainable because of low numbers. Unfortunately I can't see them saying 'This week's Manawatu meeting has been abandoned because of low numbers so we have replaced it with an extra meeting at Rangiora."

[Slippery Slope]

2 hours ago, Doomed said:

Very good points. Three quick comments.

You mentioned 21.7% of turnover for Rangiora in betting revenue and 17.95% for Auckland. Why the difference? And surely not all of that percentage is available for stakes? Quite a bit of it goes to various taxes and other levies. I am very out of touch with all the numbers.

You used Rangiora in your example. Because Rangiora has a few Sundays there must be a big worry that their turnovers will drop with the increased competition on Sundays. Sunday turnovers are always going to be be restricted naturally as people have lost so much money the day before. The last thing they need is more competition for the off course dollar. Also Sunday on course trot crowds are less likely to bet into the other meetings on the day.

Finally, you asked is it too late to fix this, referring to the imbalance of new meetings. I presume some of the new meetings will be abandoned if they prove unsustainable because of low numbers. Unfortunately I can't see them saying 'This week's Manawatu meeting has been abandoned because of low numbers so we have replaced it with an extra meeting at Rangiora."

The $  and %'s come from HRNZ's own website- a section headed "Raceday Performances"  which details for every single meeting how much they paid out for stakes subsidies and how much the betting on that meeting gave back to them to use for industry funding. HRNZ deserve a lot of credit for making this information available to everyone in the industry, I don't think NZTR do the same.

The reasons Rangiora contributes more per race to harness racing funds than Auckland (a performance repeated by virtually every venue in the Crusaders catchment) will be a combination of the bigger fields giving bigger betting pools, resulting in both more attractive odds and more losses rather than wins for punters, so more $ come back to HRNZ rather than going into our TAB accounts.

I'd also argue, and this is just an opinion, that Canterbury harness racing generally has more customer interest nationally and even internationally. One absolute fact to support this is that you'll also find from that same Raceday Performance information that Auckland's export turnover (betting in Australia) is also very little different to Rangiora, despite the supposed way higher profile that Alexandra Park has across Australasia. If in the same 7 month period Rangiora's 7 lower class meetings can get $243k average export tunrover per meeting, vs Auckland $265k for their 18 and Addington $355k for their 22 excluding Cup Week, that surely tells you the venues offshore punters are choosing to follow as well.

You are right about the pressure on Sunday turnovers especially with the extra thoroughbred competition coming into that day. And if we keep shortchanging the clubs that provide the bulk of our Sunday income we will only make this competitive challenge even harder to overcome. And yes I wasn't expecting it to be possible to have a short response time to substituting meetings between Islands. I was only hoping HRNZ may now be looking ahead a few months, recognise the horse population won't support many of these meetings, and plan accordingly. "Hope" is still a good thing until proven otherwise!

 

 

 

  

(interest of punters,  

[the galah]

16 hours ago, Gammalite said:

I was impressed they split the 2 year olds at Addington to give 2 lots of owners a winner (very important to keep owners winning) and if people won't bet on it . Tough titties for them . I'm sure they're not looking at turnover. 

 

That last sentence.."i'm sure they're not looking at turnover".

you have to be right about that,because that is the reality.

But if the people in charge are knowingly implementing and pushing intentionally fiscally imprudent policies which are also clearly shortsighted,then they aren't the right people to be making the decisions.

So tonight they could have run a 9 horse fillies race and put the three 2 year old geldings into the last race for non winners that has 9 starters.

thats what they did at winton with the one 2 year old that was available to start in southland.(thats right only one 2 year old,since scratched, accepted for the highest stake race  programmed at winton).

Instead they split the 2 year old race tonight into 2 fields of 6.

If the current $1.65 favorite wins ,then j feiss gets an extra $8000 on top of the good stake. I'm sure that will keep her off poverty street for a bit.Its not j feiss fault that HRNZ want to throw money they can't afford at her.

16 hours ago, Gammalite said:

 

We run 3 times at Albion every week and 2 at Redcliffe Every week. Stake money is mild . But a race is supplied for the 500 horses in training in the catchment Every week. Very important and makes it sustainable for the participants. I don't know what the betting is . could be a 1000 , could be 10,000 per Race who knows. But if you put the races on Consistantly for your participating owners and Trainers . they will turn up . You need races that You are able to Win though . NZ needs a Good handicapper to achieve similar.

 

Dunn's will probably Win both 2 year old races at Addington anyway . The gutser s 🤣😂. 

Queensland is an interesting model.obviously you know a lot about that.

NZ is quite different,but their must be aspects of queenslands way of doing things that may be worth considering for nz.

My impression of queensland is they have worked out what works best for them. But it does have some negatives. They run so many races that it waters down the sense of achievement and the competiveness

Theres a mundane feeling to a lot of it and the punters feel that as well.

Its also interesting to see how popular gambling on harness is comparing it to greyhound racing.

In australia,in 2022 a study showed ,of regular gamblers,60% bet on greyhounds and 53% bet on harness racing Of those % the average betting per month per gambler was $40 on greyhounds and only $25 on harness.

so people seem more interested in the greyhounds than the harness horses in australia.

the opposite is currently the case here.

 

Edited May 23 by the galah