Jump to content
NOTICE TO BOAY'ers: Major Update Coming ×
Bit Of A Yarn

How about this bonus scheme for owners?!


Chief Stipe

Recommended Posts

Victorian bonus scheme launched | RACING.COM
www.racing.com
Generic.

Maiden winners in Victoria are soon to be rewarded with an extra $2000 bonus payment with the introduction of the Ladbrokes Owners Incentive Scheme from next month.

The scheme, which offers up to $9 million in bonuses to Victorian owners over the next three years, begins from September 1, 2023 with eligible payments across some 1500 professional maiden flat races annually in Victoria.

The bonus payments will be available to the owners of the winning horse who have registered with Ladbrokes Racing Club, with payments prorated to an individual’s ownership percentage of the horse.

Once registered, owners will be eligible for bonus payments relating to all current and future horses in which they have an ownership interest when their horse wins its maiden flat race in Victoria.

Any registered thoroughbred owner can register for the scheme, and bonus eligibility is not dependent on the owner holding a Ladbrokes wagering account.

Eligibility is not dependent on the entire ownership group being registered for the scheme.  

Owners of a winning maiden horse who are registered for the scheme will be paid by Racing Victoria (RV) at the same time as they receive their prizemoney. 

RV Executive General Manger – Racing, Matt Welsh, said: “We are thrilled to partner with Ladbrokes on this fantastic initiative which will inject up to $3 million in extra bonuses per year into Victorian racing.

“Owners are essential to a vibrant racing industry, and this incentive scheme is another great way to reward those supporting Victorian racing. 

“Owners winning a standard $27,000 country maiden in Victoria can now pocket $2,000 on top of the $14,850 first prize if registered for the scheme. The boosted $16,850 first prize means the maiden will be worth the equivalent of a $30,600 race for those winning owners.

Individual owners and/or syndicate managers will need to register themselves or their syndicate and their maiden horse(s) via www.ladbrokes.com.au/lois prior to its win to be eligible for the bonus payment.

Entain Group Australia (owner of the Ladbrokes brand) CEO, Dean Shannon, said: “Ladbrokes is really proud of our innovative Ladbrokes Owners Incentive Scheme.

“While there has been a lot of focus on prizemoney gains at the top end of town over the past few years, this is recognition that for every horse and ownership group, just getting to the track and getting that first win on the board is a thrilling experience, be that in town or in the bush.’’

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, holy ravioli said:

Supposedly the same costs to race a fast horse as a slow horse.More happy owners,the better.

All mine have been fast.

The problem I had was that you'd win a lot of races and still be behind.

Your approach wouldn't help anyone.  Probably make it worse as there would be more slow horses to get around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, holy ravioli said:

No good being fast...for 800m!🙃

They were fast enough to win races and place stakes.

 A better way to aid the impoverished battler that you appear to be concerned about would be to maintain access to local training tracks rather than closing them down. 

Also provide free entry to races and reduce all other costs not directly related to the competitiveness of a horse I.e. provide a level playing field.

Your approach is to compensate by subsidy for poor performance.  Look where that approach has put the racing industry and the country for that matter.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

They were fast enough to win races and place stakes.

 A better way to aid the impoverished battler that you appear to be concerned about would be to maintain access to local training tracks rather than closing them down. 

Also provide free entry to races and reduce all other costs not directly related to the competitiveness of a horse I.e. provide a level playing field.

Your approach is to compensate by subsidy for poor performance.  Look where that approach has put the racing industry and the country for that matter.

 

Your approach is to funnel even more money to the top tiny %.Bit like your politics...lets make the few even wealthier at the expense of...the many.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, holy ravioli said:

Your approach is to funnel even more money to the top tiny %.Bit like your politics...lets make the few even wealthier at the expense of...the many.

It's called rewarding excellence.  Racing is a competitive sport there should be no rewards for running last.

There are no restrictions on making to to the top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Chief Stipe said:

It's called rewarding excellence.  Racing is a competitive sport there should be no rewards for running last.

There are obvious rewards for winning.If you won $55,000 instead of $50,000 it is not really material.

If you were paying the costs of racing a horse(you still need  numbers to makeup fields)and received a random windfall of $5000 it would be significant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

The other problem with your approach is that it won't improve the quality of the fields and by extrapolation the attractiveness of our betting product.

Not sure your extrapolation is valid based on the data. Isn't it the evenness of fields and competitiveness of them that adds attractiveness to the betting product? Our highest quality fields are our poorest earners relative to the stakes cost.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, holy ravioli said:

There are obvious rewards for winning.If you won $55,000 instead of $50,000 it is not really material.

If you were paying the costs of racing a horse(you still need  numbers to makeup fields)and received a random windfall of $5000 it would be significant.

So it's a "random windfall" now?

Who would get the random $5,000?  Will it be drawn by lot?

Will you have terms and conditions that any top stable horses that are not eligible?

So in your example you reduce the winning stake by $5,000 and GIVE it to ONE other non placed horse.  What about the other "battlers"?  Will you reduce the winning stakes by more and "redistribute the wealth" further?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, curious said:

Not sure your extrapolation is valid based on the data. Isn't it the evenness of fields and competitiveness of them that adds attractiveness to the betting product? Our highest quality fields are our poorest earners relative to the stakes cost.

The point @curious is distributing stake money to those that don't perform won't improve the quality of the fields.  I'm arguing it would do the opposite.

The only way @holy ravioli would not distort outcomes would be to give everyone the same amount as an appearance fee I.e.  some cash for turning up.

Now if the approach is to reduce top race stakes and bolster lower grade stakes e.g. reduce a Grp race by $50k and put $5k more into 10 maiden races than Holy Pasta might have a point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Chief Stipe said:

Your terms and conditions?  So in your racing nirvana impoverished battlers will be fed by a raffle system rather than performance. 

I haven't formulated the terms and  conds...yet.I merely floated an idea that I think has some merit.

Racing is full of variables....barrier draws are a 'raffle'...are they..not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, holy ravioli said:

I haven't formulated the terms and  conds...yet.I merely floated an idea that I think has some merit.

I believe it has no merit.

2 minutes ago, holy ravioli said:

Racing is full of variables....barrier draws are a 'raffle'...are they..not?

They are drawn randomly in order to counter a perceived view that some draws are better than others. 

I gather you are inferring that some draws are better than others?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

The point @curious is distributing stake money to those that don't perform won't improve the quality of the fields.  I'm arguing it would do the opposite.

A handicapping system is theoretically supposed to do that, so for me, I'd say fixing that so slower horses have an equal chance would both achieve HR's objective to a greater degree and make the wagering product more attractive.

We do have a small amount of appearance money now (back to 10th) which seems reasonable. So, already those horses essentially race for free.

  • Like 1
  • Champ Post 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, curious said:

A handicapping system is theoretically supposed to do that, so for me, I'd say fixing that so slower horses have an equal chance would both achieve HR's objective to a greater degree and make the wagering product more attractive.

We do have a small amount of appearance money now (back to 10th) which seems reasonable. So, already those horses essentially race for free.

I don't agree with the approach.

It dilutes the prize money for those horses that are competitive.  That has a number of downstream negatives.

Yesterday a horse won $1,500 in stakes and didn't even finish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...