bonus payments to get starters

[the galah]

Well,the bonus payments take many forms.

You would think ,this would be a period in time,when every $ spent by HRNZ should be being evaluated for how effective,productive and the value of the returns on each dollar. 

So entain/HRNZ have had the $12,000 bonus payments for each 2 year old race.

the purpose of those payments was "to encourage more people to start their 2 year olds and to reward owners and breeders". That was according tom mauro barsi from hrnz.

Well,to me,i think its been a resounding failure. 

Why,well obviously anyone who follows harness racing has seen all the endless 5 and 6 horse races run throughout the season. Even now,when there should be plenty of 2 year olds running around,only canterbury can get a full field.

This week we have  6 2 year old races with numbers of 5,6(2),7,8,10,11 and other with  races with 2(2),3 2 year old starters.

So an f for fail on the encourage more people to start their 2 year olds .

so what about rewarding the owners so as to breed more horses.

Well ,silence is the answer there. So i'm guessing the anecdotol evidence will prove correct.Numbers being bred are down. 

Hey,but the big man from entain,hes got a pocketfull with the bonuses hes won,so at least he doesn't have to dip into his big piggy bank if he wants to breed a few this year.

Now,i'm not einstein,but the bonus 2 year old payments were never going to work because they were treating a symptom,never the cause.

people who said they thought they would work,well ,as i say often,did they really believe that or were they just in reality looking after a small % of breeders,mostly those in the same circles.

 

Now we have bonuses in other forms.

that is bonuses to encourage people to start their horses in races worth big stakes. 

Well duh,aren't the very same people telling us how clever this is,the very same people who said we need to up the purses of the group races ,because by doing so we will get better,bigger fields.

Well fellas,i'm confused,which one is it.

Look,if paying $20,000 to the first non group one placed horse,in a race already worth $200,000,gets you another couple of starters,well is that really getting value for money. Then they may also pay the connections another $10,000 to get them to start in the invercargill cup,if they can run a place.

Like i say,is that getting value for money spent. Will it even attract any new starters?

Why not just make it a preferrential barrier draw or say you will deduct 5 points off their rating if unplaced or whatever.something which allows you to invest that $20,000 or $30,000 in a way that encourages many more starters and gives oppportunities to many,not just 1,to earn more.

i'll give points for trying on the $20,000 chrsitain cullen bonus,but not many.

people can agree with me,or not.I just think their has to be wiser fiscal management than what we are seeing.

Edited November 28 by the galah

[Gammalite]

Queensland just pays a Bonus to a Qbred horses first race win . That seems to work well. Bloke winning the first race last Monday was quite delighted , and encouraged to breed on with his 2 Mares now. excellent. 

There is a NSW Bonus for $1,000,000 about to go to Swayzee. (after 3 more country NSW Cup wins to go)

  I was quite annoyed about this at first , as thought why does one horse already winning Victoria and NZ Cups need another million ???

but I  have changed tune now after seeing his 2nd Nz Cup win. . 1/ some people in little out-side town country trotting communities get to see the Star of the show. And the owner (Bootsey) will Buy up a lot more horses with the proceeds (probably from NZ supporting the breeding industry there) and placing them with about a dozen different Trainers about the place. Even supporting a couple of young lady trainers here in Queensland . So All good  😁 !!

Go Swayzee !!!   

[the galah]

If we dig deeper into how effective the two reasons HRNZ  gave,for justifying spending $750,000 on the 2 year old bonuses.

If you have bred any horse, good enough to win a 2 year old race this season,then there is a very high probability that you would breed the dam again this year.

It just makes sense that you would try and capitalise on the added value you may get from the dam having left a recent 2 year old winner.

So i'm pointing out,if HRNZ had any sense,they should have realised the first of the two reasons,to encourage the breeders of the 2 year old winners,was not targeting anyone who may be in two minds as to whether they were going to bred.

HRNZ,in effect,targeted those who would be breeding anyway.So the first of the 2 reasons hrnz gave,was in reality insignificant to those they target. 

Now to HRNZ's second stated reason. To reward breeders.

Look at who they have rewarded. 

as i've pointed out,HRNZ have rewarded the likes of dean shannon and breckon farms the most,because they have bred so many 2 year old winners.

They've rewarded the richest people,who are having sucess,the ones who would have the finances to breed there horses anyway.

And if the richest people are saying they feel they need more financial help,,then what about those,who are not wealthy and have been telling HRNZ the same thing,then why don't they count.

i'm in no way inferring anything that should diminsh the contribution of the likes of dean shannon or breckon farms or whoever the larger breeders may be.t  

I'm simply saying,i think HRNZ has spent $750,000 to achieve something,that was never going to get the results they said they would.

I think people should just read, who and what, is coming out of HRNZ.I feel theres a pattern there.

Edited November 29 by the galah

[Gammalite]

1 hour ago, the galah said:

And if the richest people are saying they feel they need more financial help,,then what about those,who are not wealthy and have been telling HRNZ the same thing,then why don't they count.

i'm in no way inferring anything that should diminsh the contribution of the likes of dean shannon or breckon farms or whoever the larger breeders may be.t

Well I would think a lot of the smaller folk (less wealthy) are likely to have a family broodmare and can choose to race or sell. Dean Shannon is a big supporter of the National yearling sales, and if he gets bonuses for the 6 or so horses he buys every year , that is good , as he continues to buy .

and even though he (Big Dean)   is getting lots of money from Merlin winning , he still has LARGE training fees for 17 horses and growing . He was the underbidder on Merlins half brother MAGICIAN who is racing in a few minutes. they paid around $200,000 for him so were hoping to get in the Derby for Dalgety's ( and win it like Merlin did last year) but he looks slightly 'Not trying Hard' or something. ?  something not quite right 🤔

[the galah]

3 hours ago, Gammalite said:

Well I would think a lot of the smaller folk (less wealthy) are likely to have a family broodmare and can choose to race or sell. Dean Shannon is a big supporter of the National yearling sales, and if he gets bonuses for the 6 or so horses he buys every year , that is good , as he continues to buy .

and even though he (Big Dean)   is getting lots of money from Merlin winning , he still has LARGE training fees for 17 horses and growing . He was the underbidder on Merlins half brother MAGICIAN who is racing in a few minutes. they paid around $200,000 for him so were hoping to get in the Derby for Dalgety's ( and win it like Merlin did last year) but he looks slightly 'Not trying Hard' or something. ?  something not quite right 🤔

yes.That seems to be the thinking of HRNZ decision makers as well.

he spends a lot of money in the sport,so lets reward him and other big spenders like him,by setting up a scheme that he will benefit from.

But that industry money is not for giving away for limited return,its supposed to be used to improve the sport,specifically breeding numbers.

Thats the point i'm making.

To get the best returns,it seems logical that every $ spent,  should be spent in a way that everyone can gets the opportunity to benefit from and gives everyone a reason to be encouraged and in a way that gets real value for money for the industry.

When you mention the small folk who are likely to breed their broodmare,well they are the mares you are seeing being sold or sadly,disposed of and they are the ones that you are seeing less of at the studs.

oh well,theres only so many times i can say i think some dumb decisions are being made. 

The only thing that working in nz's favour to a small degree, is some states of australia are doing poorly,so thats helping horse numbers here a little.

Edited November 29 by the galah

[the galah]

On 28/11/2024 at 6:45 PM, the galah said:

Now we have bonuses in other forms.

that is bonuses to encourage people to start their horses in races worth big stakes. 

Well duh,aren't the very same people telling us how clever this is,the very same people who said we need to up the purses of the group races ,because by doing so we will get better,bigger fields.

Well fellas,i'm confused,which one is it.

Look,if paying $20,000 to the first non group one placed horse,in a race already worth $200,000,gets you another couple of starters,well is that really getting value for money. Then they may also pay the connections another $10,000 to get them to start in the invercargill cup,if they can run a place.

Like i say,is that getting value for money spent. Will it even attract any new starters?

Why not just make it a preferrential barrier draw or say you will deduct 5 points off their rating if unplaced or whatever.something which allows you to invest that $20,000 or $30,000 in a way that encourages many more starters and gives oppportunities to many,not just 1,to earn more.

i'll give points for trying on the $20,000 chrsitain cullen bonus,but not many.

people can agree with me,or not.I just think their has to be wiser fiscal management than what we are seeing.

Well,the hype from HRNZ and the media played out just as i predicted.

All hot air.

i mean,"will it even attract any new starters",is what i asked above of the $20,000 bonus on top of the $200,000 stake.

why can i predict these things yet the so called clever HRNZ and media people can't?

Matthew peden, said "the $20,000 bonus is a way of adding more interest to what is lining up to already be a very exciting race.It gives the race an extra sense of occasion and we think it will be very well received."

what a plonker.

Edited December 2 by the galah

[LongOwner]

On 28/11/2024 at 6:45 PM, the galah said:

Well,the bonus payments take many forms.

You would think ,this would be a period in time,when every $ spent by HRNZ should be being evaluated for how effective,productive and the value of the returns on each dollar. 

So entain/HRNZ have had the $12,000 bonus payments for each 2 year old race.

the purpose of those payments was "to encourage more people to start their 2 year olds and to reward owners and breeders". That was according tom mauro barsi from hrnz.

Well,to me,i think its been a resounding failure. 

Why,well obviously anyone who follows harness racing has seen all the endless 5 and 6 horse races run throughout the season. Even now,when there should be plenty of 2 year olds running around,only canterbury can get a full field.

This week we have  6 2 year old races with numbers of 5,6(2),7,8,10,11 and other with  races with 2(2),3 2 year old starters.

So an f for fail on the encourage more people to start their 2 year olds .

so what about rewarding the owners so as to breed more horses.

Well ,silence is the answer there. So i'm guessing the anecdotol evidence will prove correct.Numbers being bred are down. 

Hey,but the big man from entain,hes got a pocketfull with the bonuses hes won,so at least he doesn't have to dip into his big piggy bank if he wants to breed a few this year.

Now,i'm not einstein,but the bonus 2 year old payments were never going to work because they were treating a symptom,never the cause.

people who said they thought they would work,well ,as i say often,did they really believe that or were they just in reality looking after a small % of breeders,mostly those in the same circles.

 

Now we have bonuses in other forms.

that is bonuses to encourage people to start their horses in races worth big stakes. 

Well duh,aren't the very same people telling us how clever this is,the very same people who said we need to up the purses of the group races ,because by doing so we will get better,bigger fields.

Well fellas,i'm confused,which one is it.

Look,if paying $20,000 to the first non group one placed horse,in a race already worth $200,000,gets you another couple of starters,well is that really getting value for money. Then they may also pay the connections another $10,000 to get them to start in the invercargill cup,if they can run a place.

Like i say,is that getting value for money spent. Will it even attract any new starters?

Why not just make it a preferrential barrier draw or say you will deduct 5 points off their rating if unplaced or whatever.something which allows you to invest that $20,000 or $30,000 in a way that encourages many more starters and gives oppportunities to many,not just 1,to earn more.

i'll give points for trying on the $20,000 chrsitain cullen bonus,but not many.

people can agree with me,or not.I just think their has to be wiser fiscal management than what we are seeing.

It is not a North Korean endorsed bonus scheme - it is to reward quality juvenile horses who have been retained for racing. Horse racing is not socialist - winners have always been rewarded.

The owners have not taken the first offer they may have received from Perth etc but have taken the chance to race a 2 year old and, with luck, thought they may get a bonus to help pay the trainers fees and bred again.

It is special to race a 2 year old and look at the filly races - near all have full fields.

A successful scheme as those 2 year old fillies are still in the country and therefore our future broodmares.

 

 

[the galah]

4 hours ago, LongOwner said:

It is not a North Korean endorsed bonus scheme - it is to reward quality juvenile horses who have been retained for racing. Horse racing is not socialist - winners have always been rewarded.

 

Come on.

HRNZ's bonus scheme is very close to a socialist type approach.

Just ask yourself why are HRNZ paying the bonus.

Surely its obvious?

its because they felt they had to intervene through distribution of not only stakes,but bonuses,to get more numbers to start.

Thats exactly like a socialist government(hrnz), attempting to control production and distribution of wealth that would not occur if left to a free market type approach.

4 hours ago, LongOwner said:

The owners have not taken the first offer they may have received from Perth etc but have taken the chance to race a 2 year old and, with luck, thought they may get a bonus to help pay the trainers fees and bred again.

It is special to race a 2 year old and look at the filly races - near all have full fields.

A successful scheme as those 2 year old fillies are still in the country and therefore our future broodmares.

 

 

So they get a 12 horse 2 year old fillies race in canterbury once in a while. Whoop dee doo.

You must realise if you go back 3 or 4 years ago ,prior to the season change, which put back their age change from august to  december,there were far more 2 year olds(formally 3),racing after august than there is now. And they weren't paid any bonuses were they.

Also,do you only look at canterbury 2 year old fields. This week auckland has a 6 horse 2 year old filly field. southland generally get about a 7 horse field.

And why do you think someone who owns a 2 year old filly is more important than someone who owns a 3 year old or 4 year old or whatever.

Help pay for the training fees of the 2 year old you say.

Have you not worked out owners will have paid more training bills for the 3 ,4,and older aged horses they own.So,using your logic,they should get bigger bonuses.iWhat makes the owner of a 2 year old so special.

2 year old fillies are our future broodmares you say. Well,what about the owners of our current broodmares who are older than 2?Why don't they count.

 

The dumbest thing about these bonuses, is they were never going to work. I started a couple of topics on the bonuses at the beginning of the year and everything i said has turned out to have been true.

And why did i say they were never going to work,well its because if were a trainer and you had a 2 year old who wasn't going to win,then you were never going to start your horse because there was nothing in it for you,other than devaluing or bottoming out earlieryour horse.

long owner,the proof of the failure of the bonuses is there for all to see,plain as day,just look at the fields.

if you are still thinking they work,which you seem to be,then i suggest you run for elcction at hrnz,as they will welcome your ideas with open arms.

Also,how about that chriatian cullen race,$200,000 stake with a $20,000 bonus and still only got 7 runners.You have to laugh,when you look back at the recent published thoughts of those who said that would work as well.

Edited December 2 by the galah

[the galah]

so this week they have a total of 3 2 year old races at the 5 meetings with fields out.

Field sizes 1x10 and 2x12. 

The reason for the bigger fields is i guess because they didn't have either enough colts/geldings, or fillies to split the races and run one race on the programme for colts and another for fillies. In other words to allow them all to get a start they have combined them.

Well,even though HRNZ  have been forced to run them this week against their will that way,doesn't it make obvious sense they should be running them like that most of the time anyway? In other words everyone gets a start,less stakes paid,larger betting pools.Better for the industries stressed balance sheet .

what i think is an obvious cause for concern is just how small the number of two year olds that are racing this week. The combined number of pacers and trotters across all 5 meetings would only be in the 40"s. Remember,a 2 year old now would have been 3 under the old season calendar just a couple of years ago.i believe Its an indication of the lack of numbers that will flow through in years to come.

Edited December 9 by the galah