Winston has a serious point to make.

[Wingman]

I have just finished watching a recording of tonight's Guerin report. To get straight to the crux of the matter regarding thoroughbreds, Minister Peter's is not impressed with the slow progress of 'rationalization' which he believes is a continuing drag on the industry and stopping its ability to financially develop. He talked about events from the past, one that obviously annoyed him to a large degree, where he was invited to Kumara. Bookings made, entourage confirmed, travel booked and made, then on the day the meeting is cancelled due to pigs digging/rooting the turf.

Sound familiar to Tauherenikau's disaster yesterday? (All be it a lesser meeting but still an expensive exercise for most who didn't get to compete)

His take is basically bigger is better, yes, he said, we want (singular) representation in the provinces but so what, about small tracks that race once or twice a year, yet continually let the industry down. 

I know there is a catch twenty two here in that if the industry does not fund track development then how can country tracks afford to maintain their tracks to the level of city tracks. Then there is the shameful state of the Trentham track which suggests there is a hidden agenda which is, do not fund the tracks NZTR has no interest in being around come 2030.  

[Huey]

The issue here is , he is ill advised anf/or doesn't know what he is talking about.

I believe a combination of both, which bodes very poorly for the future of the industry. 

[Chief Stipe]

 

 

[Freda]

11 hours ago, Wingman said:

I have just finished watching a recording of tonight's Guerin report. To get straight to the crux of the matter regarding thoroughbreds, Minister Peter's is not impressed with the slow progress of 'rationalization' which he believes is a continuing drag on the industry and stopping its ability to financially develop. He talked about events from the past, one that obviously annoyed him to a large degree, where he was invited to Kumara. Bookings made, entourage confirmed, travel booked and made, then on the day the meeting is cancelled due to pigs digging/rooting the turf.

Sound familiar to Tauherenikau's disaster yesterday? (All be it a lesser meeting but still an expensive exercise for most who didn't get to compete)

His take is basically bigger is better, yes, he said, we want (singular) representation in the provinces but so what, about small tracks that race once or twice a year, yet continually let the industry down. 

I know there is a catch twenty two here in that if the industry does not fund track development then how can country tracks afford to maintain their tracks to the level of city tracks. Then there is the shameful state of the Trentham track which suggests there is a hidden agenda which is, do not fund the tracks NZTR has no interest in being around come 2030.  

Yeah, well Winston may love horses and racing but he's still ill-informed. 

Small tracks have been underfunded for years-decades- with 'preferred' clubs getting disproportionate amounts.  Every so often there would be another change in distribution but the overall result has been that many small clubs have been relying almost entirely on volunteers to upkeep their facilities.

The bulk funding of stakes did remove that burden at least but the die was well and truly cast for many by then.

One recent abandonment for Kumara hardly counts compared to the spate of abandonments over the last few years at all categories of tracks,  the whole outfit is a bloody disaster and Winston with presumably good intentions hasn't really helped so far.  He just has no bloody idea. 

The million dollar races he brought in did what, exactly?

Entains involvement has been terrific for those who have been lucky enough to get some stake money.

But long term sustainability looks as far away ever.  Nothing whatsoever has been done to address that....and administration costs keep ballooning.

The TAB will have to relinquish 50% profit in another 2.5 years, the Oaks was won by a 79 rated horse  - how can that race keep its rating?

Things are looking grand.

Edited Monday at 09:11 PM by Freda

[Chief Stipe]

19 minutes ago, Freda said:

the Oaks was won by a 79 rated horse  - how can that race keep its rating?

I don't see the relevance.  The rating is a reflection of a stuffed up rating system.  Not the quality of the horse.  Leica Lucy has won 6 races these season - 2 Grp 3's, 2 Grp 2's and a Grp 1 yet is only rated 79.  It got just 1 point for winning the Oaks!

The Grp 2 Wellington Guineas was won by an R70 horse!

[curious]

49 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

I don't see the relevance.  The rating is a reflection of a stuffed up rating system.  Not the quality of the horse.  Leica Lucy has won 6 races these season - 2 Grp 3's, 2 Grp 2's and a Grp 1 yet is only rated 79.  It got just 1 point for winning the Oaks!

The Grp 2 Wellington Guineas was won by an R70 horse!

Those are 3yo races. The rating system is independent of age. I don't think the rating system itself is so bad. Just that the resulting weight spread is ineffective.

[Wingman]

The rating system pushes all above average horses up the grades too quickly.  I had a look at the last 5 Oaks winners and prior to winning all bar one fell in the 70 somethings. The exception was Amarelinha who was R91 due to a ridiculous 17 points penalty for winning the Eight Carat but the most notable, beyond ridiculous was Pennyweka who came into the Oaks rated 70 having received 5 points for 3rd in the Desert Gold, nothing for 3rd in the Lowland, then showing a total disregard for the horses future once out of age group racing the handicapper penalises Pennyweka, with 28 points!

[curious]

1 hour ago, Freda said:

 the Oaks was won by a 79 rated horse  - how can that race keep its rating?

No chance unless the placed horses do something amazing in the remainder of the season. The NZPC somehow seem to think that prizemoney increases will fix race quality when there has never been an iota of evidence to support that and they don't provide any in their reports.

Wellington RC, NZ Oaks (G1) – after years of solid ratings, we have now
had two weak editions in a row, with this season rating 102.75 versus the 107
tolerance threshold. There was no improvement from considering the top 4
starters. Unlike in some past editions, the NZPC had no concerns with the
assessed ratings. There appears to be an increasing trend for staying fillies to
target the NZ Derby and/or Australian carnivals rather than travel to
Wellington. The NZPC hopes that a significant prizemoney increase that is
planned for the upcoming season will see the race return to its former level. A
Warning was imposed.

[Chief Stipe]

18 minutes ago, curious said:

Those are 3yo races. The rating system is independent of age. I don't think the rating system itself is so bad. Just that the resulting weight spread is ineffective.

The moment Leica Lucy sets foot on OZ soil it will be rated 20 points higher.

Captured By Love had a rating of 82 in NZ and is rated 102 in OZ.

Why aren't the ratings consistent between the two jurisdictions?

[Doomed]

56 minutes ago, curious said:

No chance unless the placed horses do something amazing in the remainder of the season. The NZPC somehow seem to think that prizemoney increases will fix race quality when there has never been an iota of evidence to support that and they don't provide any in their reports.

Wellington RC, NZ Oaks (G1) – after years of solid ratings, we have now
had two weak editions in a row, with this season rating 102.75 versus the 107
tolerance threshold. There was no improvement from considering the top 4
starters. Unlike in some past editions, the NZPC had no concerns with the
assessed ratings. There appears to be an increasing trend for staying fillies to
target the NZ Derby and/or Australian carnivals rather than travel to
Wellington. The NZPC hopes that a significant prizemoney increase that is
planned for the upcoming season will see the race return to its former level. A
Warning was imposed.

NZTR tossed in an extra $510,000 on top of the Group 1 subsidy to boost the Oaks to $1m in an attempt to keep its Group 1 status. Thank god they at least attracted one high profile horse, who is now off to Aussie.

Some might suggest they would have been better off spending the $510,000 to install some irrigation at Woodville.

[Chief Stipe]

9 minutes ago, Doomed said:

Some might suggest they would have been better off spending the $510,000 to install some irrigation at Woodville.

Why would they do that?  They pulled out of funding the Riccarton irrigation system upgrade - too expensive!

[curious]

1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said:

The moment Leica Lucy sets foot on OZ soil it will be rated 20 points higher.

Captured By Love had a rating of 82 in NZ and is rated 102 in OZ.

Why aren't the ratings consistent between the two jurisdictions?

No idea. But it's pretty much irrelevant for those horses isn't it? They are not handicappers at this stage.

[Chief Stipe]

9 minutes ago, curious said:

No idea. But it's pretty much irrelevant for those horses isn't it? They are not handicappers at this stage.

If it is irrelevant then why not have the same rating system?  The biggest difference I can tell is that Victoria doesn't assign a rating until a horse wins.  That rating assigned is 61 (unless it is a Grp win).  Grp wins no matter what age group have a minimum rating e.g. Grp 1 the minimum rating is 102.  So when Leica Lucy races in any race first up in OZ her rating will be 102.

In New Zealand we start giving rating points if a horse wins a trial no matter where it is held and against any opposition!  Then rating points if it places in a race.  I guess this helps determine order of entry into races.