What is the idiot Winston doing now?

[Freda]

1 minute ago, Brando said:

Freda, seeing that you are a trainer and have contact with a lot of other trainers, can I ask:

Is it the opinion of trainers that: The Northern region horse pool is superior to the Southland region as you have stated above?

Given there are greater numbers, generally, yes...but that is not the point is it?

That superiority should be reflected in the ratings allocated but it isn't.

 

[mardigras]

1 hour ago, Brando said:

So in your opinion, why does Tiered racing work in Australia? One day a horse could be racing for $35, next time for $100k still in its grade?

The main reason. Because the delineation is provided by city geographies. The designation of the tracks is done that way. The horses trained in the city or 'city grade' trainers also charge more. 

 

[Brando]

1 hour ago, curious said:

OK. Fair question. What I was meaning was that obviously there will be a range of winning performances for say an R65. I'm proposing that the average winning performance (however you measure that), is or should be the same, regardless of the location or stake of the race within NZ. I'm also suggesting the stake for all R65s should be the same, partly so the lower stake ones are not subsidising the others. The same horses are going around in the 10k ones as the 30k ones as Mardi has pointed out.

In Victoria, the same horses can go around for a 25k Provincial R70 on Tuesday or Thursday, a 40k R70 Wedensday Metro or a 100k R70 Saturday Metro.

It is fair to assume, trainers with vast years of experience will start/place their horses where they think they will be competitive based on the ability and tier. Champion trainer Weir does this the best placing his stable horses with the same ratings, in different Tiers across Victoria and South Australia.

Edited December 16, 2018 by Brando

[Freda]

2 minutes ago, Freda said:

Given there are greater numbers, generally, yes...but that is not the point is it?

That superiority should be reflected in the ratings allocated but it isn't.

 

And speaking as a trainer....the large teams of beautifully bred horses necessarily produce a lot of wastage.

Sent to a less pressured environment with, often, an outside or paddock environment, many of these horses improve out of sight.

It is not that they have developed better form because the opposition is crap, but they have enjoyed and adapted to very differing regimes.

That is off the ratings topic I realise....but you did ask for an opinion. 

[Freda]

2 minutes ago, Brando said:

In Victoria, the same horses can go around for a 25k Provincial R70 on Tuesday or Thursday, a 40k R70 Wedensday Metro or a 100k R70 Saturday Metro.

It is fair to assume, trainers with vast years of experience will start/place their horses where they think they will be competitive based on the ability and tier. Champion trainer Weir does this the best placing his stable horses with the same ratings, in different Tiers across Victoria and South Australia.

Will a horse hold the same rating across country/provincial/city?

[mardigras]

5 minutes ago, Brando said:

In Victoria, the same horses can go around for a 25k Provincial R70 on Tuesday or Thursday, a 40k R70 Wedensday Metro or a 100k R70 Saturday Metro.

It is fair to assume, trainers with vast years of experience will start/place their horses where they think they will be competitive based on the ability and tier. Champion trainer Weir does this the best placing his stable horses with the same ratings, in different Tiers across Victoria and South Australia.

How many horses that are not even placing in a 25k Country race, race next in a metro meeting, same grade?

How many horses in NZ that are not even placing in a $10k rating race, race next in a $30k+ race, same grade?

Are you going to claim the ratios are even close?

Edited December 16, 2018 by mardigras

[Brando]

5 minutes ago, mardigras said:

How many horses that are not even placing in a 25k Country race, race next in a metro meeting, same grade?

How many horses in NZ that are not even placing in a $10k rating race, race next in a $30k+ race, same grade?

Are you going to claim the ratios are even close?

I haven't claimed anything. Merely stating that the same rated horses can be placed at different tiers of racing based on their ability and not their rating, as judged by their trainers.

Edited December 16, 2018 by Brando

[curious]

I think the only difference between racing in  a 30k race in NZ and a 10k one is that the if you are beaten 5 lengths, you might run 3rd or 4th in the 10k one and 10th in the 30k one. I don't think the same horse will be any closer or further from the winner.

[mardigras]

Also, racing at Ellerslie today where the Auckland tier exists. Why are horses there racing for $10k?

[mardigras]

Just now, Brando said:

I haven't claimed anything. Merely stating that the same rated horses can be placed at different tiers of racing based on their ability and not their rating, judge by their trainers.

Can be - but generally not - because of the geographical delineation. There is no such delineation in NZ. Horses trained from anywhere race anywhere - and the same track caters for $10k races and $30k races - due to the non delineation. Such as today at Ellerslie.

[curious]

Just now, Brando said:

I haven't claimed anything. Merely stating that the same rated horses can be placed at different tiers of racing based on their ability and not their rating, judge by their trainers.

Yes, you have. Unless I'm misunderstanding you, I think you are claiming that a tiered stakes structure is necessary because the winning performance in a 30k race is better than that in a 10k race. Can you produce some evidence of that please and if not, why would you have a tiered stakes structure for the same class of race? I don't get it.

 

[Brando]

3 minutes ago, curious said:

Yes, you have. Unless I'm misunderstanding you, I think you are claiming that a tiered stakes structure is necessary because the winning performance in a 30k race is better than that in a 10k race. Can you produce some evidence of that please and if not, why would you have a tiered stakes structure for the same class of race? I don't get it.

 

You are definitely misunderstanding ?

My VIC example clearly shows that Tiered racing gives horses on the same rating band better opportunites to win based on their actually ability and not their rating, as judged by their trainer.

Like I said earlier, the NZ Tier structure is far from perfect but, once done right, it will have its place in NZ as it is meant to work like in VIC and NSW.

For now, I'll assume the trainers who work with their horses on a daily basis will know better than us. Thanks Freda! ? 

[mardigras]

3 minutes ago, Brando said:

You are definitely misunderstanding ?

My VIC example clearly shows that Tiered racing gives horses on the same rating band better opportunites to win based on their actually ability and not their rating, as judged by their trainer.

Like I said earlier, the NZ Tier structure is far from perfect but, once done right, it will have its place in NZ as it is meant to work like in VIC and NSW.

For now, I'll assume the trainers who work with their horses on a daily basis will know better than us. Thanks Freda! ? 

The issue is, it can't work like Vic or NSW. How do you actually make it that those outside Auckland don't race there unless they have a progressive horse they think is up to the grade?

And what do you do with all the Premier meetings that race all around the country currently. The model is flawed here, because the training and racing program does not mirror a tier. It does mirror that in OZ. 

That's the problem. Here they are just another race - as the scheduling isn't supportive of all levels getting a start. So they start where they can.

In my opinion, it is the single biggest flaw in the NZ stake money model. And a driver of less participation.

[Brando]

3 hours ago, mardigras said:

The issue is, it can't work like Vic or NSW. How do you actually make it that those outside Auckland don't race there unless they have a progressive horse they think is up to the grade?

And what do you do with all the Premier meetings that race all around the country currently. The model is flawed here, because the training and racing program does not mirror a tier. It does mirror that in OZ. 

That's the problem. Here they are just another race - as the scheduling isn't supportive of all levels getting a start. So they start where they can.

In my opinion, it is the single biggest flaw in the NZ stake money model. And a driver of less participation.

With every problem, there are solutions. Why can't it work here like in VIC and NSW? Isn't it up to the trainer's judgement which R65 Tier the horse is started in based on ability?

Having a cursory glance: Te Rapa put on a R65 1400m for 30k on Saturday while Matamata has a R65 1400m F&Ms race for 10k on Wednesday.

STITCH which is owned by Kevin Hickman(whom has invested plenty so would want the best RoI), and trained by Champion trainer S Autridge could have started in either race as neither had full fields. So why is it starting at Matamata? So I took a closer look and STITCH, has had 18 career starts and never raced in a Saturday Tier race. It would be logical to assume that her champion trainer has made the judgement that it is not up to Saturday R65 class.

Yes, in NZ one can start a horse where ever it can gain a start as you say, but isn't it up to trainers to start their horses based on judged ability; for the best opportunity of RoI for their owners who pay the bills.

Edited December 16, 2018 by Brando

[Reefton]

6 hours ago, Brando said:

Patrick Erin is a great example of a horse with ability been sent to Sydney to race for higher Tiered Prize money!

Why would many of the "high class" Northerners be competitive in Aussie? Northern pool of horses is inferior to Aussie pool hence they race in their Tier of prize money in Auckland. And when any NZ trained horse shows it has the ability to race and be competitive in AUssie, they are sent over to compete for the better prize money.

Can you list the northern rejects Piity has taken back north to kick butt?

two for a start(he will be able to list them) Beks(dam of Popsy) and The Governator.  I think you are copping it from all sides so not much point in me continuing to debate but it strikes me you have a bit of superiority complex about the standard of Northern racing.  I don't think anyone in Kiwi racing has too much to skite about on an international scale to be fair.

[mardigras]

8 hours ago, Brando said:

With every problem, there are solutions. Why can't it work here like in VIC and NSW? Isn't it up to the trainer's judgement which R65 Tier the horse is started in based on ability?

Having a cursory glance: Te Rapa put on a R65 1400m for 30k on Saturday while Matamata has a R65 1400m F&Ms race for 10k on Wednesday.

STITCH which is owned by Kevin Hickman(whom has invested plenty so would want the best RoI), and trained by Champion trainer S Autridge could have started in either race as neither had full fields. So why is it starting at Matamata? So I took a closer look and STITCH, has had 18 career starts and never raced in a Saturday Tier race. It would be logical to assume that her champion trainer has made the judgement that it is not up to Saturday R65 class.

Yes, in NZ one can start a horse where ever it can gain a start as you say, but isn't it up to trainers to start their horses based on judged ability; for the best opportunity of RoI for their owners who pay the bills.

In my view there are a number of reasons why it can't happen here - there are insufficient benchmark races at a 'metro' level to allow a pool of horses to race at 'metro' level meetings. Scheduling will require that many will have to race at 'country' level. If they change the tier to be higher benchmark only at the higher tier level, and the lower benchmark races are at the lower level (i.e class based), then the scheduling can be aligned with the needs of the horse population.

The NZ geography does not create a cost barrier since a single trainer will treat each venue the same.

The cross over of rating level is limited between country, provincial, metro in Oz - yet in NZ, there is no limited cross-over. i.e. in oz the majority of country races are maiden or low benchmark, then higher at provincial, then higher again at metro level. Whereas NZ runs maiden, 65, 72 etc for each tier.

And in NSW, they handicap the horses differently. As per this.

Racing NSW will allocate two benchmark figures for handicapping horses that race between sectors – one benchmark for metropolitan & provincial racing and now a separate benchmark for races in country NSW.

The creation of a separate country benchmark will see horses more appropriately handicapped when they move between metropolitan/provincial to country racing and vice versa.

Programming of races across sectors will be streamlined to reduce the number of separate benchmark levels. This will provide clearer definition between the strength of races as horses progress. For example, provincial benchmark races will be programmed at Benchmark 64 level, metropolitan midweek races then start at Benchmark 70 and Saturday metropolitan at Benchmark 78.

The streamlining of the structure of programmes will be accompanied by adjustments to the maiden win benchmarks from metropolitan and provincial races, with these generally to be assessed two points or 1kg lower than is presently the case.

With the introduction of a new separate country benchmark, race programmes will be adjusted to see the number of benchmark levels at country race meetings reduced in order to simplify and broaden race planning options for trainers. Starting at Country Benchmark 50, races progress to Country BM 58, 66, and 74.

 

 

[curious]

Yes, to make it work, they would need to adjust the rating system similar to NSW but as you say, the pool of horses is too small in NZ for that to work. It just makes no sense.

[Chief Stipe]

10 hours ago, Brando said:

With every problem, there are solutions. Why can't it work here like in VIC and NSW? Isn't it up to the trainer's judgement which R65 Tier the horse is started in based on ability?

Having a cursory glance: Te Rapa put on a R65 1400m for 30k on Saturday while Matamata has a R65 1400m F&Ms race for 10k on Wednesday.

STITCH which is owned by Kevin Hickman(whom has invested plenty so would want the best RoI), and trained by Champion trainer S Autridge could have started in either race as neither had full fields. So why is it starting at Matamata? So I took a closer look and STITCH, has had 18 career starts and never raced in a Saturday Tier race. It would be logical to assume that her champion trainer has made the judgement that it is not up to Saturday R65 class.

Yes, in NZ one can start a horse where ever it can gain a start as you say, but isn't it up to trainers to start their horses based on judged ability; for the best opportunity of RoI for their owners who pay the bills.

Brando - both races are still R65 class and if you win you still cop the same points penalty.  The only difference is the amount of stakes available.  Then when you look further up the classes you will see in the "Saturday classes" Open races that are no more than R85's when you look at the average ratings.  

Flatten the stakes, get rid of the so called tiers and help those stakeholders that are subsidising racing....maybe then we will see some decent Open class races again. 

As for STITCH - who's to say it won't come up against and up and comer 3yr old (before Christmas but wearing blinkers for the first time) looking for an easy kill to expedite its chances for a classic start?

[Freda]

2 hours ago, mardigras said:

In my view there are a number of reasons why it can't happen here - there are insufficient benchmark races at a 'metro' level to allow a pool of horses to race at 'metro' level meetings. Scheduling will require that many will have to race at 'country' level. If they change the tier to be higher benchmark only at the higher tier level, and the lower benchmark races are at the lower level (i.e class based), then the scheduling can be aligned with the needs of the horse population.

The NZ geography does not create a cost barrier since a single trainer will treat each venue the same.

The cross over of rating level is limited between country, provincial, metro in Oz - yet in NZ, there is no limited cross-over. i.e. in oz the majority of country races are maiden or low benchmark, then higher at provincial, then higher again at metro level. Whereas NZ runs maiden, 65, 72 etc for each tier.

And in NSW, they handicap the horses differently. As per this.

Racing NSW will allocate two benchmark figures for handicapping horses that race between sectors – one benchmark for metropolitan & provincial racing and now a separate benchmark for races in country NSW.

The creation of a separate country benchmark will see horses more appropriately handicapped when they move between metropolitan/provincial to country racing and vice versa.

Programming of races across sectors will be streamlined to reduce the number of separate benchmark levels. This will provide clearer definition between the strength of races as horses progress. For example, provincial benchmark races will be programmed at Benchmark 64 level, metropolitan midweek races then start at Benchmark 70 and Saturday metropolitan at Benchmark 78.

The streamlining of the structure of programmes will be accompanied by adjustments to the maiden win benchmarks from metropolitan and provincial races, with these generally to be assessed two points or 1kg lower than is presently the case.

With the introduction of a new separate country benchmark, race programmes will be adjusted to see the number of benchmark levels at country race meetings reduced in order to simplify and broaden race planning options for trainers. Starting at Country Benchmark 50, races progress to Country BM 58, 66, and 74.

 

 

Thanks, you just answered my earlier query.

[Poisoned Dwarf]

On 16/12/2018 at 1:00 AM, Reefton said:

two for a start(he will be able to list them) Beks(dam of Popsy) and The Governator.  I think you are copping it from all sides so not much point in me continuing to debate but it strikes me you have a bit of superiority complex about the standard of Northern racing.  I don't think anyone in Kiwi racing has too much to skite about on an international scale to be fair.

It's different for those who hold a couple of world records.

[Thomass]

16 hours ago, curious said:

I think the only difference between racing in  a 30k race in NZ and a 10k one is that the if you are beaten 5 lengths, you might run 3rd or 4th in the 10k one and 10th in the 30k one. I don't think the same horse will be any closer or further from the winner.

Haha I need a good larf at Cmas C....

My BP suggests very different...

For example I know Premier form beats mid weak almost every time..

Again its counterintuitive to think the best performers/best breds /best trainers won't target superior Premier races...with superior money

I know for sure this form beats mid weak...all day every day...

But I'm very well informed...and allow for excuses...I.e unlucky runs 

You and your boyfriend don't...

So no wonder you can't see the wood from the trees

Edited December 16, 2018 by Thomass

[curious]

I heard the Princess hasn't seen any wood for some time either. Any tips from the BP for last Saturday yet? Blinkers on preferably, down in class and 10/1 or better?

Edited December 16, 2018 by curious

[Kopia]

8 minutes ago, curious said:

I heard the Princess hasn't seen any wood for some time either. Any tips from the BP for last Saturday yet? Blinkers on preferably, down in class and 10/1 or better?

the princess is like taxinda....' don't send me any feckin flaky pastry, I want the real thing'

[Thomass]

2 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

Brando - both races are still R65 class and if you win you still cop the same points penalty.  The only difference is the amount of stakes available.  Then when you look further up the classes you will see in the "Saturday classes" Open races that are no more than R85's when you look at the average ratings.  

Flatten the stakes, get rid of the so called tiers and help those stakeholders that are subsidising racing....maybe then we will see some decent Open class races again. 

As for STITCH - who's to say it won't come up against and up and comer 3yr old (before Christmas but wearing blinkers for the first time) looking for an easy kill to expedite its chances for a classic start?

It's outrageous STH Is Racing have the same Stake Levels...

Maidens should be running for 8K down there and North at 12k...

Incredibly HQ runs for the same Stake as Whack a White....

....let's face it...the cost of a knock a ding dong At Aunt Floras in Whack a White is at least 1/2 of what it is at Ms. Whack a Ribena's on K Rd..

I rest me case

 

[Thomass]

38 minutes ago, curious said:

I heard the Princess hasn't seen any wood for some time either. Any tips from the BP for last Saturday yet? Blinkers on preferably, down in class and 10/1 or better?

And this idea that the Sth compares to times in the North...is another of yours and your boyfriends fantasys

I make the CD 0.2secs quicker...and the North 0.3 secs faster...as standard

Accordingly I factor that in...besides it being common knowledge

Punters like moi also know that a neddy who changes environments....changes attitude...as confirmed by Freda

Btw You two need a change to perform better...where are you off to these hols?