Northam Cup

freodockers · February 3

Great field Saturday night, something to look forward to.
I see Tiz A New Day going round race before.
Geez I hope he didn’t get a ballot from the cup.
Criminal if he did.
Not to mention horse drawn next to him TS.

JayJay · February 3

Can only talk about my horse Freo...yep, he copped a ballot. Listed as Level 7-9 race, both Tiz and The Situation are level 7 and would appear certainties to get a start considering their form but they get snookered by the add on clause (preference to Level 8+) which was, depending on where you accessed the race conditions) not there when we initially nominated on Harness Web but it was there on the HRA racing calendar and then it got added on to Harness Web on Monday...as I understand things. Could be wrong but I think that is right. So spent the two weeks since the Busso Cup thinking (and planning) to start in the Northam Cup off the front.....and didnt get a start. A mistake, an oversight or do I need another visit to Spec savers. As someone else said, your head blows up reading the conditions. Would he have been competitive? Who knows but the race we cross nominated for has come up pretty strong as well. Might be a $100 buck weekend coming up.....hope the meeting proceeds with a crowd, the club deserves that at least....but the weather may yet play a hand.

freodockers · February 3

So what your saying JJ is they changed the conditions 2 days before acceptances ???

aussiebattler · February 3

freodockers said:
So what your saying JJ is they changed the conditions 2 days before acceptances ???

There are that many conditions on races it’s hard to keep track of what is has will be changed prior to single acceptance nomination cut off

Not seeing the noms you don’t know where you stand or what else you might be able to earn a quid in

JayJay · February 3

As I understand things, there was difference in conditions, depending on where you accessed the race conditions, which was corrected on Monday after a phone call. I could be wrong but I raised it with my trainer and then nominated for the race the horse eventually got a start in. Otherwise, he would have been staying home. The blind nominations are such a nonsense as to defy words.

freodockers · February 3

So your saying you nominated for a race you weren’t eligible for or you didn’t get a start because the conditions weren’t clear.
Sorry bit confused here.

aussiebattler · February 3

Advertised as L7/9+ preference to L8+ any L7 classified horse didn’t stand a chance of getting a start because of the preference clause L8+

JayJay · February 3

Understand.....tried to be brief. Trainer nominated the horse last week for the Northam Cup , I saw it come up on Harness Web as "nominated" but the trainer sees a different screen to what an owner does. When I noticed the conditions of the race on the HRA Meeting Calender (with the preference L8+ clause), they appeared different to what was on harness web (No L8+ preference clause). I phoned my trainer Sunday, he checked and was confused because although the horse appeared eligible as a L7 in a L7-9 race, he was getting the "not eligible" indication. I suggested we also nominate for the L7/L8 race as insurance in case what was on the Meeting Calendar were the actual conditions of the race. He did that and undertook to phone RWWA on the Monday to ask for clarity. As I understand, and I hope I am not misrepresenting anything here, he was told the Preference L8+ clause should have been on Harness Web, we could nominate for the race but were unlikely to gain a start.

Others are saying this system is doing their heads in...I concur.....I am 50/50 about bunging the whole lot on the market and saying it's just too hard. For christs sake, where does it say you have to be a Pitt Street lawyer just to nominate your horse and you can't even see who it is likely you will be racing against, or, as an owner whether you are actually eligible or not. It is totally outrageous and if I get another one of those bloody tokenisti,c patronising "you are a valuable owner, thank you for supporting RWWA" owners only emails advising you your horse has gained a start, I think I will projectile vomit.

freodockers · February 3

Perhaps if RAWWA do take note of this site we will get some clarification.
NOT.

curmudgeon · February 3

There is no doubt that the biggest insult to owners trainers drivers & horses in my 43 years in the industry is the reversion to blind nominations.

It is a concocted escape attempt by the tail which continues to wag the dog in this industry,

What a disgrace to be forced into a position whereby a horse which is 100% controlled and funded outside of RWWA is annexed beyond control of those who own, train and attempt to manage its exercise and racing schedule.... in order to plug holes in an inept field selection system. Additionally the threat of penalty befalls the connections if you deign to scratch a horse because you hold a view post blind acceptance that you consider the resultant selection is not a satisfactory outcome and not one that would have arisen if the nomination was visible....as they have been for years.

Beyond appalling treatment for the connections and especially shows little regard for the horses used as pawns.

JayJay · February 4

When the nominations were made available for both the Monday Pinjarra and the Tuesday GP meeting (which was cancelled due to very low noms), some, including me, thought this whole blind nom fiasco was dead in the water. Apparently, not so. Has there been anything come from RWWA Harness Department about where things stand on blind nominations Is it an adhoc process where they will sometimes be made available according to the whims of those trying to make a point about PBD $L3 ...or is it continuing on for the full 3 month trial? Who would know? The pawns are in checkmate once again and the King is still silent.

Arapaho · February 4

JayJay

I posted a comment regarding Blind Nominations on handicapping pages on Jan 27.

Did mention they should allow viewing of extended noms as by their policy at the moment no one can scr, when they extend noms.

So would only benefit by allowing viewing of these noms..

Someone close to starting in a race, may be enticed to start ,if field is of low numbers or quality.

The next day text was sent allowing vjewing of same, pretty much same words.

May be coincidence, Im not sure, but you might be right, they might take a gander at posts.

At least it is a start to be able to view something.

Know one trainer who nominated 2 late when she saw noms were below the norm.

Royboy · February 4

Blind nominations deferred

JayJay · February 4

The Single Acceptances/Blind nominations trial will be deferred
due to the current operating environment, impact of the covid lockdown
and uncertainty as to the restrictions which will be imposed at the end
of the lockdown period.

Nominations and preference changes will be available for all race
meetings starting with the Gloucester Park and Albany race meetings on
12 February.

"Deferred" tells me it is a bit like John Cleese's Norwegian Blue parrot....."It's not dead it is just resting". Not sure what covid lockdown and any the restrictions at the end of the lockdown have got to do with it....but it provides a nice cop out for a shocker of a decision in the first instance.

curmudgeon · February 4

Royboy said:
Blind nominations deferred

Excellent decision.

I think the extent of disruption to exercise schedules and planning of racing programs was underestimated by the original decision to reimpose single acceptances.

Participants will again have the ability to view nominations and plan ahead with their horses and commitments to achieve more positive outcomes.

This should actually reintroduce stability in nominations because of confidence in the renewed transparency.

I would suggest that to stop the second guessing and preference swapping that goes on once nominations are released for viewing ...that preferences should only be changed by scratching or changing from your preference order up to 18 hrs before acceptance time. In fairness I think that would give the selection office an early indication of the likelihood of individual acceptance numbers and makeup in any particular race which would aid preemptive administrative decision making on meeting issues.

VillageKid · February 6

A pretty good card of racing at Burwood Park tonight for the Northam Cup meeting.

After a full week of no pacing action here in WA I know I am keen to see them go around tonight. Lets hope the weather holds off and it is a successful night on and off course for the club.

JayJay · February 6

No crowd allowed on course.

Gilgamesh · February 6

I'm pretty keen on The Cheddarnator. In his qually he was just safe out but he did stand nicely, i'm hopeful that he can take the lead up off Perlee Gates who I suspect would be happy to sit at the distance

Gilgamesh · February 6

Also expect him to keep drifting

Gilgamesh · February 6

Happy to have something on Master Leighton earlier as well

rooster321 · February 6

Called off

Gilgamesh · February 6

When things go bad they go really bad don’t they.

JayJay · February 6

The radar and the forecast? ......didn't need to be nostredamus to work out that was going to happen, surprised they got 3 races in. New 4WD mobile obviously unavailable? A great shame that the club lost its Cup meeting.

JayJay · February 6

Run the Northam Cup at GP next Friday night same field, same stake...can't run it on the Sunday as Williams is on I think.

VillageKid · February 6

Move the Nugget to the 19th as well JJ?

JayJay · February 6

I think that would be a good move, don't think it will happen but whatever they do, act quickly. Trainers need some certainty and some earning capacity to pay staff etc. Most would have got nothing tonight (or from Friday night as well). Barrel of laughs being an owner as well.

lick · February 6

The Northam abandonment is embarrassing to the sport. A sprinkling of rain- a new 4 wheel drive mobile sitting idle at GP - and the Northam track below standard.

maybeso · February 6

The Northam track is not below standard. It just rained for 4 hours straight. The horses were fine, it was the mobile that was having issues. Have a look at the vision of race 3.

As for holding the Northam cup at GP, no. Why should the club be penalised and lose its premier race?

Or is it a case that all country cups should be run at GP?

JayJay · February 6

Weather was (predictably) sub standard, not the track, it looked very wet but safe, the two wheel rear drive mobiles are sub standard for a wet track.

Of course all country cups should NOT be run at GP but looking at the calendar, the next date for Northam is Saturday Feb 27th.....3 weeks away....it would be a different field and those who accepted might lose their chance to compete.

maybeso · February 7

On the flip side, a postponement gives the club the opportunity to have a crowd, get exposure in the community, and get some much needed income.

A $30k race at GP happens every other week and does nothing to bolster the profile of GP.

A 3 week delay, with visible nominations, may make the race field more interesting. Swings and roundabouts.

AbbysAce · February 7

Rain for Saturday had been predicted all week.

This isnt a one off, how many meetings have been lost in the last year?

And they wonder why trainers/drivers licence renewals are dropping by a significant % every year.

And GP can make decisions, they called the Chinese fireworks off, last Tuesday, 3 weeks before the date? When we were getting zero community cases ?

G'day Punter!

In this Discussion

Who's Online

Northam Cup

Comments