WACHRA Submission and Question Time In The legislative Assembly (Rundle/Whitby)Harness & Greyhounds

warrenrobinson

For the not so educated CODB means Cost of doing Business.

JayJay

Rocket_Reign said:

JayJay said:

Careful, you will be accused of "waffling on" by spreading facts Abby. We can't have reality intruding on the fact that Harness generates 48 cents return for every dollar it receives.

Lucky for Gp that it’s 48c if we relied on the country tracks only it would be a lot less.

As explained in depth at a meeting with Shadow Racing Minister Peter Rundle yesterday, this sort of wafer thin simplistic claptrap peddled by GP and it's umbilically attached "Owners Association" (and associated flunkies) fails any in depth scrutiny when factors such as RWWA grants, meeting costs, massively higher stakes pay outs for in many cases for 6 horse FFA's, prime wagering slot avoiding competition for the wagering dollar on a Friday Night from the major metro harness tracks and from the gallops on a Saturday (leaving the "heavy lifting to Country Clubs on a Saturday), Sky coverage, star horses, leading trainers and drivers and prime city location (to name but a few factors) are taken into consideration.

Given the above, GP should be generating way more than it does and as it consumes a higher percentage of Industry funds than it generates, it is extremely expensive turnover. GP is far from the financial guardian angel of the industry that it portrays itself to be twice weekly in front of a literal smattering of surviving patrons.

JayJay

CODB at GP.... not too many volunteers down by the palms in contrast to the hordes of them at Country Tracks....eg 4 paid security guards standing next to each other last Friday playing on their phones waiting for the next riot to break out....versus the local Lions club operating the gate  and the local footy club doing the bar. Very expensive turnover.

AbbysAce

So has anyone got any suggestions how to try and turn things around on any thos subjects?

Turnover? 

Prizemoney? Yes it is going up 1.4 million but that includes breeding bonuses

Westbred bonuses?

Owners?

Licence renewals?

Memberships?

Crowds?

Field sizes?

Going horses brought from NZ?

Media Coverage?

Amount of meetings?

Foals bred?

Junior Drivers?

Rocket_Reign

JayJay said:

Rocket_Reign said:

JayJay said:

Careful, you will be accused of "waffling on" by spreading facts Abby. We can't have reality intruding on the fact that Harness generates 48 cents return for every dollar it receives.

Lucky for Gp that it’s 48c if we relied on the country tracks only it would be a lot less.

As explained in depth at a meeting with Shadow Racing Minister Peter Rundle yesterday, this sort of wafer thin simplistic claptrap peddled by GP and it's umbilically attached "Owners Association" (and associated flunkies) fails any in depth scrutiny when factors such as RWWA grants, meeting costs, massively higher stakes pay outs for in many cases for 6 horse FFA's, prime wagering slot avoiding competition for the wagering dollar on a Friday Night from the major metro harness tracks and from the gallops on a Saturday (leaving the "heavy lifting to Country Clubs on a Saturday), Sky coverage, star horses, leading trainers and drivers and prime city location (to name but a few factors) are taken into consideration.

Given the above, GP should be generating way more than it does and as it consumes a higher percentage of Industry funds than it generates, it is extremely expensive turnover. GP is far from the financial guardian angel of the industry that it portrays itself to be twice weekly in front of a literal smattering of surviving patrons.

Regardless of what day GP runs the turnover is higher, transfer any country meeting to GP the turnover is higher. It’s quite simple to comprehend but y’all old fellas living in the 80s move on it’s a different world

cisco

It sure is a "different world". in the 1980's Moonee Valley Trots on a Saturday night was the place to be packed to the rafters now at a Melton meeting you could fire a gun in the "crowd"

Rocket_Reign

cisco said:

It sure is a "different world". in the 1980's Moonee Valley Trots on a Saturday night was the place to be packed to the rafters now at a Melton meeting you could fire a gun in the "crowd"

Yeah and now it’s easier to sit at home in the comfort of your own lounge with your iPad, 20 bookies at your disposal and sky channel on

cisco

Not disputing that fact. But how do "we" stop the game going down the gurglar!!!

JayJay

More facts before any more of your ageist diatribe .....GP receives 56.2% of total industry funding, everything, meeting costs stakes, grants etc....yet it only generates 53.6% of total industry turnover. That data is for all to read in the annual Industry Status Report 2021/2022.

So the reality is that it IS expensive turnover....and given all of the advantages it has as detailed above, it's performance is woeful. Fact.

And the prospect of dumping a further 24.7 million of Industry funds into a failed venue in  order to retain an out dated 800m track is beyond ridiculous.

Markovina

Rocket_Reign said:

cisco said:

It sure is a "different world". in the 1980's Moonee Valley Trots on a Saturday night was the place to be packed to the rafters now at a Melton meeting you could fire a gun in the "crowd"

Yeah and now it’s easier to sit at home in the comfort of your own lounge with your iPad, 20 bookies at your disposal and sky channel on

Have you ever been to Moonee Valley Rocket 

I went a few times - and it was a magnificent enjoyable night out their - the public facilities - granstands - eateries were just sensational - plus where the birdcage was situated you could view the horses either at ground level or high up in the grandstand - and the drivers would leave the birdcage - and go through a tunnel under the grandstands onto the track 

And the stabling area was quite beautiful - lovely Oak or Willow trees - and a 2nd area where you could exercise your horse - 

I think if they still had Moonee Valley - people would still go - for an enjoyable night out - given the facilities etc - and located in a great spot in Moonee Ponds 

Chariotsonfire

One question that should be asked has the move from Moonee Valley to Melton, Harold Park to Menangle and Wayville to Globe Derby brought all the perceived benefits?

Qld about to move from Albion Park to Gold Coast but at least there is a strong population base there looking for entertainment.

Rocket_Reign

Markovina said:

Rocket_Reign said:

cisco said:

It sure is a "different world". in the 1980's Moonee Valley Trots on a Saturday night was the place to be packed to the rafters now at a Melton meeting you could fire a gun in the "crowd"

Yeah and now it’s easier to sit at home in the comfort of your own lounge with your iPad, 20 bookies at your disposal and sky channel on

Have you ever been to Moonee Valley Rocket 

I went a few times - and it was a magnificent enjoyable night out their - the public facilities - granstands - eateries were just sensational - plus where the birdcage was situated you could view the horses either at ground level or high up in the grandstand - and the drivers would leave the birdcage - and go through a tunnel under the grandstands onto the track 

And the stabling area was quite beautiful - lovely Oak or Willow trees - and a 2nd area where you could exercise your horse - 

I think if they still had Moonee Valley - people would still go - for an enjoyable night out - given the facilities etc - and located in a great spot in Moonee Ponds 

A lot of that is in the planned proposal for the upgrade of GP. Outdated falling apart place as Warren and Tim say but in the same sentence don’t want it fixed, I think it’s a good thing that we’re updating our premiere performing track

Markovina

Chariotsonfire said:

One question that should be asked has the move from Moonee Valley to Melton, Harold Park to Menangle and Wayville to Globe Derby brought all the perceived benefits?

Qld about to move from Albion Park to Gold Coast but at least there is a strong population base there looking for entertainment.

I think the HP had to be done to save the NSW Industry financially - but Menangle that far out - nearly on the way to Canberra - i think if they had built a trotting track inside the Canterbury gallops track - which they contemplated many times then all would have been good 

Plus there was nothing attractive about where HP was - an inner city shiit box called Glebe - yes youd probably need a couple of million today to buy one of those renovated terraces which use to have 1 pound govt tenants in their . It is close to the city and University - but it is a seedy area - and you wouldnt walk around their at night - because there is a fair chance youd get bashed 

Syd Real Estate it is out of this world $ wise - they had to take the huge money on offer   - but it is a pity they didnt go to Canterbury Park 

Chariotsonfire

Interested in your thoughts about the involvement of the Giumellis (Swandoo) in recent years.

They have spent a small fortune on tried horses and yearlings to race in the Reed/Keys colours.

Despite winning many races the capital outlay and operational expenses would outweigh the stakemoney won.

Do you see this or similar investment in the industry as a positive or negative for WA harness racing?

Markovina

Swandoo - i was wondering who they are - because of all the horses they have got - dont know them tho - basically dont know any of the participants 

Yes they buy NZ horses - but they also buy yearlings - so they deserve a pat on the back for that - thats good for the industry 

I dont know what their financial situation- bottom line is - but some people are prepared and can afford to cop a loss - if they really enjoy something - or in this case say  love harness racing 

As Packer said back in the day - Kerry - its my money and i will spend it how i like 

JayJay

Some facts since RWWA was formed. All actions, by the way, were designed to "reinvigorate the industry" and boost turnover. The outcome has seen harness's market share shrink quite dramatically:

2003/04 86 meetings at GP (51 metro, 35 mid week).

2021/22 98 meetings at GP (52 metro, 46 midweek).

Same time period, total number of meetings held dropped from 275 to 255 with country (lumping them all together) went from 189 to 157, a drop of 32 meetings.

Same time period, 2003/04 there were 806 races run at GP which grew to 891 by 2021/22 whilst in the country, there was a decrease from 1435 races in 2003/04 down to 1260 in 2021/22. 

The only thing that got invigorated were the number of trainers (and owners and breeders) that left the Industry in this time period for good, never to return.

The concept of Industry Growth via footprint Reduction is a flawed myth and must be called out for what it is.

warrenrobinson

Facts always override opinion, hopefully the uneducated and naive participants take note.

warrenrobinson

Harness participants are the best customer for our industry, when you loose Trainers, Drivers,Owners, Foals & Clubs of around 60% in the last 20 years it confirms that rationalisation doesn’t work.Gloucester Park only raced on a Friday no midweek but the WATA committee who were the administrators of Harness Racing at the time decided to due to poor management reduce country meetings and allocate midweek to them why to increase turnover. In the last 20 Harness market share of turnover has fallen from 20% to 12% fact.

JayJay

One thing hasn't changed...the WATA still run trotting in WA, the formation of RWWA was but a temporary blip on the radar screen. The so called benevolent dictatorship still exists albeit in a more democratic guise...but a guise it is. They always treated Country Trotting as a lot of little "Olivers" walking up to the top table asking for "more please" and then handing over a few crumbs.

Of course, they would put on some party pies and sausage rolls for the Country Derby and make out like they were big fellas looking after their country cousins who had dusted off their "bags of fruit" for a big night in the city.... and then decry their contributions behind their backs as soon as they headed back to the sticks. It's always been that way and deep down, many of them to this day would wish that WACHRA would just bugger off and die a slow death.

Markovina

Chariotsonfire said:

Interested in your thoughts about the involvement of the Giumellis (Swandoo) in recent years.

They have spent a small fortune on tried horses and yearlings to race in the Reed/Keys colours.

Despite winning many races the capital outlay and operational expenses would outweigh the stakemoney won.

Do you see this or similar investment in the industry as a positive or negative for WA harness racing?

Well you posed the question - i gave my limited  thoughts on it - because i dont know them - or how much they have invested  etc

So what is your view - seeing you put up the question 

Chariotsonfire

I raised the question as it appears that majority of contributors to this forum seem to resent those that invest big money into the industry thus making it difficult for the grassroots participants to compete.

The lack of response to my query would appear to substantiate my overview.

sonny

I dont think thats quite right Chariots, I think the discussion centred around handicapping .

Chariotsonfire

Perhaps I should have started another topic but I think the large investors are at the centre of the handicapping argument.

JayJay

I think the central angst (one of them at least) about handicapping at the moment in the metro $L5 races and the ease of dropping back. The Conditioned system has taken the past drop back rule and put it on steroids and "grassroots participants" are being constantly dive bombed by very capable horses with excellent (but not winning) form dropping back on top of others with poor (but not winning) form. And with RBD, they can draw barrier 1 to add insult to injury (and poverty).$300k earners racing in $L5 8k or 12k races is just a hopeless form of so called "handicapping".

Too many horses are dropping back and then dropping back again after 5 non winning starts and not enough are going up. Can't blame the owners and trainers, it is within the rules. Not only is this killing the grassroots participants (as opposed to the so called  "Super Trawler" stables), it is providing a feast of extremely short priced odds on favourites, which may well appeal to the big corporate  punters but have zero appeal to the  average punter we need to have betting on the product, preferably on course.

I shouldn't, couldn't and won't comment on how Mr Giumelli spends his money (or the Bonds or Walmsley's or Hall Stable Clients or Aaron Bain, Jean Feiis Michael Boots or anyone else) , absolutely none of anyone's business but theirs, so long as it is within the rules, which it clearly is. 

Whether or not it is "Good for the Industry" is an age old argument that only History will answer, and it precedes the modern day "big spenders" It was going on with Sweetapple and Smith, Torre and Cipriano, the Annears, Porters, Lombardo, Norm Craven, JP Stratton or anyone else who operated on a mega level in the past....and it will go on as long as we have an Industry.

JayJay

Beat City, an L15 horse,  a perfect example of the stable utilising the conditioned racing system perfectly, and the "beat the handicapper" clause, for maximum return. Hasn't been "out of form" by any stretch but a number of its opponents nowhere near his ability or form(Walsh, Little Bit Of Fun, Brookies Jet etc)

JayJay

Just for reference, Beat City has a NR of 118, Street hawk (2nd) has a NR of 108. Little bit Of fun NR 63, Walsh NR 62 and Brookies Jet NR 51 and Beat City randomly drew barrier 2.

By any measure, this is as far away from handicapping as you can get but no doubt, it's because some of the bugles in head office trumpet that that its all because the participants "don't understand conditioned handicapping". Problem is that they do as evidenced by the declining numbers.

warrenrobinson

No handicap no turnover no future

getthechange

JayJay said:

Beat City, an L15 horse,  a perfect example of the stable utilising the conditioned racing system perfectly, and the "beat the handicapper" clause, for maximum return. Hasn't been "out of form" by any stretch but a number of its opponents nowhere near his ability or form(Walsh, Little Bit Of Fun, Brookies Jet etc)

correct Beat city is a perfect example of how to use the system but also correct is that Beat City highlights the loopholes that should have been closed '

these are the issues as I see them

Currently horses can drop back after five starts in the right level race without winning regardless of the horses form in those races so a horse could run 2nd for five starts while another horse could have run 6th in the same five races and they would both drop a level which is of little help to the horse running 6ths as he meets the same horse just under a different L5$LT level. some time back RWWA added the clause " not eligible horses placed in a higher level race in their last three starts" to the L5$LT $4000 and L5$ Lt$8,000 to slow the movement down but didn`t add it to the L5$LT$12k and higher races .   adding that clause to ythe higher races would slow down the downward movement

Beat City had five starts in L5$ LT$25k races to drop to L5$ LT$20k races (form in those starts 4-4-2-4-6) he then had five starts in L5$LT$20k races( form of 7-8-3-2-4) to drop to L5$LT $12k races - with that clause or a similar clause added Beat City would most likely have been still in the L5$Lt $25k races

Also correct is that there are too many horses dropping back and not enough going up resulting in low nomination numbers for GPM which is exacerbated by horses that race higher being penalised for doing so even if unplaced - if mister ardee and horses similar to him start on a Friday night in a higher level race he gets penalised in the midweek races so they are effectively locked out of GPM

Some time back Marquisard ran 7th of 7 at 100/1 in a race at Pinjarra which made him ineligible for the L5$LT$20k and L5$Lt$12k races for five and ten starts despite 18 of his previuos starts being in L5$ LT$12k and L5$LT$20k races - he is locked out of races

the effect of too many horses dropping back and the lack of flexibility  is lower metro noms

For the months May - June - July and August in 2019 the average noms for GPM were 144 compared to 119 in 2023

in the same four months the combined averaged noms of GPC - Pin - Nor - Cen - Wag - Nar - for 2019 were 134 compared to 132 for the same tracks in 2023

the drain of horses from GPM races would be slowed down if the aformentioned clause was added to metro racing - even better would be for it to be no more than one placing at a higher level in the last five starts - this would allow mister ardee types to race up and drop back and only be penalised if they ran two places from last five while at the same time preventing horses dropping back if placed more than once in their last five starts

GPM has the highest stakemoney the best horses and prime race day/time but the nomination numbers show that even the participants prefer to race elsewhere

JayJay

"Beat City had five starts in L5$ LT$25k races to drop to L5$ LT$20k
races (form in those starts 4-4-2-4-6) he then had five starts in
L5$LT$20k races( form of 7-8-3-2-4) to drop to L5$LT $12k races - with
that clause or a similar clause added Beat City would most likely have
been still in the L5$Lt $25k races"

Those 10 races Beat City contested whilst "dropping back" to L5$LT$12k races earned him $13,165 in those two months..... so the system allows him, a pretty capable horse, to drop back and still earn pretty good coin along the way. He then wins a Friday Night L5$ LT $20k race picking up $10,910, and then "beats the handicapper" in a Tuesday Night L5$ LT$12k RBD race (from gate 2) to pick up a further $5,155, all perfectly within the rules, superb use of the system. Picks up 30k to get back to where he started from 12 starts ago.

 A 118 NR rated horse (now 120) racing against  NR51 and NR61 horses.....like versus like racing as promised?...I think not.

And as far as all the flannel pedalled out about everyone wanting to race at the premiere venue at GP on a Friday Night?  well, the noms say differently, Moore mythology from the noddies down by the palms.

Chopchop43

In all fairness I think the majority of us on this forum who have an interest in horses whether it be owning or training have benefited from 'loopholes' in this handicapping system at some stage I can put my hand up and say I definitely have, I'm not a huge fan of this system by the way but I'm also not going to sit here and say it's a hunk of shit because I don't think the nr system is much better , just my opinion and 2 cents worth