Natinal Rating Information SessionsHarness & Greyhounds

JayJay

I attended the Bunbury Session yesterday run by Cameron Brown and Warren Wishart. The information presented was clear and easily understood. It was a good opportunity for questions and many were asked and well answered. It was well attended.

The back up data/graphs on turnover was alarming. Under HWOE, the proliferation of very short priced favourites was never arrested (a huge fail on one of it's major KPI's) and the damage to turnover was telling (on an all up national basis) when a $1.10 pop went around, with the damage declining rapidly as the price of the favorite edged towards the $1.90 mark. The fall off in turnover as I recall was around a $100,000 per race for the $1.10 favourite, simply unsustainable no matter how much the big punter likes them in order to anchor the multis. There were no figures provided for the turnover on stands where there is inevitably no sign of a favourite anywhere close to the $2.00 mark, almost always above that. I look forward to seeing that data.

The point was made very clearly that in a wagering sense, our product was broken, it was uncompetitive (a point made on this forum for over 6 years) and that the average punter with $20 or $50 in their pocket looking to double their money by backing a $2.00 favourite, will simply trouser their cash when the fave is a $1.14, or throw it on a mystery trifecta at the dogs.

A comparison was also made between the absurd word salad and jargon that has developed over time, with band aid after band aid being applied to the conditions attached to HWOE (with eligibility and non eligibility clauses). It became a complex, un-navigable labyrinth of nonsense for the average punter, versus the simplicity of NR being easily understood.

Unrelated directly, but very much tied into handicapping, was the programming nightmare that emerged over time, both in the ridiculous number of codes put up for each metro meeting and in downright moments of cringe such as the 2 year old programming post the big Westbred races, that resulted in 4 horse fields when blind freddie would know that many horses were immediately spelled after those big money races. Dynamic and flexible programming indeed. That, and the hopeless and successive 5 and 6 horse Free For Alls post the Nullabor throwing $31,000 each Friday night plus $25,000 on the Conditioned Pace, with L 15 horses spread across each one, remain a memorable blight. $31,000 just about funds an entire programme at Collie or Busselton. Also of interest was the sustaining of $L5 races, the programming of some lifetime win Non NR races and discretionary stands for community clubs.

I did hear directly that some Community Clubs put up over $27,000 of club generated funds over their limited season to provide benefits for participants in the form of extra stakes top ups, fuel cards, series prizes, trophies etc. I wonder how much of club funds are provided by the bigger or major clubs for the benefit of participants.

All up, I think it is reassuring that the handicapping will be far more easily understood, that PBD based on NR should produce far more competitive racing, that the programming side of things is being addressed and that suggestions from participants are being genuinely addressed and listened to. It also seems a long stretch to suggest that now the product has finally been identified as broken and uncompetitive, that outer country clubs should be rationalised for being unable to sell a non saleable product. 

I am happy to cop suggestions that I am dancing on the dreadful HWOE's grave, not on the personnel,but on the overall concept. Not dancing exactly but maybe a little soft shoe shuffling. I have consistently opposed it from prior to day one nearly 7 years ago, it has met all predictions of gloom without exception. Not for one second do I suggest that NR will solve all our ills but it is national, it is simpler for the punter to understand, if used correctly it will provide more competitive racing and it will give us a fighting chance. If suggestions on concession drivers are taken up, it may well spike a boost in the number of young participants which we desperately need.

One thing I am convinced of is that doing nothing meant the almost certain demise of our industry to just a few all powerful concerns racing themselves until there was nothing left to race for.

Chopchop43

JayJay said:

I attended the Bunbury Session yesterday run by Cameron Brown and Warren Wishart. The information presented was clear and easily understood. It was a good opportunity for questions and many were asked and well answered. It was well attended.

The back up data/graphs on turnover was alarming. Under HWOE, the proliferation of very short priced favourites was never arrested (a huge fail on one of it's major KPI's) and the damage to turnover was telling (on an all up national basis) when a $1.10 pop went around, with the damage declining rapidly as the price of the favorite edged towards the $1.90 mark. The fall off in turnover as I recall was around a $100,000 per race for the $1.10 favourite, simply unsustainable no matter how much the big punter likes them in order to anchor the multis. There were no figures provided for the turnover on stands where there is inevitably no sign of a favourite anywhere close to the $2.00 mark, almost always above that. I look forward to seeing that data.

The point was made very clearly that in a wagering sense, our product was broken, it was uncompetitive (a point made on this forum for over 6 years) and that the average punter with $20 or $50 in their pocket looking to double their money by backing a $2.00 favourite, will simply trouser their cash when the fave is a $1.14, or throw it on a mystery trifecta at the dogs.

A comparison was also made between the absurd word salad and jargon that has developed over time, with band aid after band aid being applied to the conditions attached to HWOE (with eligibility and non eligibility clauses). It became a complex, un-navigable labyrinth of nonsense for the average punter, versus the simplicity of NR being easily understood.

Unrelated directly, but very much tied into handicapping, was the programming nightmare that emerged over time, both in the ridiculous number of codes put up for each metro meeting and in downright moments of cringe such as the 2 year old programming post the big Westbred races, that resulted in 4 horse fields when blind freddie would know that many horses were immediately spelled after those big money races. Dynamic and flexible programming indeed. That, and the hopeless and successive 5 and 6 horse Free For Alls post the Nullabor throwing $31,000 each Friday night plus $25,000 on the Conditioned Pace, with L 15 horses spread across each one, remain a memorable blight. $31,000 just about funds an entire programme at Collie or Busselton. Also of interest was the sustaining of $L5 races, the programming of some lifetime win Non NR races and discretionary stands for community clubs.

I did hear directly that some Community Clubs put up over $27,000 of club generated funds over their limited season to provide benefits for participants in the form of extra stakes top ups, fuel cards, series prizes, trophies etc. I wonder how much of club funds are provided by the bigger or major clubs for the benefit of participants.

All up, I think it is reassuring that the handicapping will be far more easily understood, that PBD based on NR should produce far more competitive racing, that the programming side of things is being addressed and that suggestions from participants are being genuinely addressed and listened to. It also seems a long stretch to suggest that now the product has finally been identified as broken and uncompetitive, that outer country clubs should be rationalised for being unable to sell a non saleable product. 

I am happy to cop suggestions that I am dancing on the dreadful HWOE's grave, not on the personnel,but on the overall concept. Not dancing exactly but maybe a little soft shoe shuffling. I have consistently opposed it from prior to day one nearly 7 years ago, it has met all predictions of gloom without exception. Not for one second do I suggest that NR will solve all our ills but it is national, it is simpler for the punter to understand, if used correctly it will provide more competitive racing and it will give us a fighting chance. If suggestions on concession drivers are taken up, it may well spike a boost in the number of young participants which we desperately need.

One thing I am convinced of is that doing nothing meant the almost certain demise of our industry to just a few all powerful concerns racing themselves until there was nothing left to race for.

I think we can all agree the HWOE system has been a flop , but to replace it with s syst4eem that is nationally hated seems nonsensical for an industry that is on its knees ,I know your never going to please everybody but both systems have a large percentage of detractors

JayJay

The failure of HWOE in terms of providing competitive racing and increased turnover is not something that can be "agreed" or disagreed" with. The facts clearly state it's absolute failure.

 

I don't know if you managed to make it to an information session but there is no other take and zero option but to get rid of it.

The information sheets provided and associated "mock programmes" that were put up clearly indicated how NR may work...emphasis on MAY because it will be all to do with actual implementation ....along with other initiatives and tweeks for our local population, it appears to be worth a chance.

Value statements like "nationally hated" are meaningless unless supported by data. The new matrix should go along way to prevent the "bulging of the pyramid" that was the source of a lot of Tasmania's issues of late. Ray Murrihy's advice from his report has obviously been heeded at a National Level.

Chopchop43

JayJay said:

The failure of HWOE in terms of providing competitive racing and increased turnover is not something that can be "agreed" or disagreed" with. The facts clearly state it's absolute failure.

 

I don't know if you managed to make it to an information session but there is no other take and zero option but to get rid of it.

The information sheets provided and associated "mock programmes" that were put up clearly indicated how NR may work...emphasis on MAY because it will be all to do with actual implementation ....along with other initiatives and tweeks for our local population, it appears to be worth a chance.

Value statements like "nationally hated" are meaningless unless supported by data. The new matrix should go along way to prevent the "bulging of the pyramid" that was the source of a lot of Tasmania's issues of late. Ray Murrihy's advice from his report has obviously been heeded at a National Level.

I didn't bother wasting my time if you have enough people over east saying the system is terrible , what makes anyone think that it's going to magically work over here ?? It might be slightly better than what we have at the moment but anything would be an improvement over the HWOE system, just in my opinion I don't think this will be the solution to turning this industry around

getthechange

re NR -  think that in the current format that it will prove unpopular with the fraternity mainly because of one key difference and that is horses starting on 50 when the minimum is 30

differences - 2yos under hwoe receive 25% penalties - under NR theyy receive 50% penalties

3yos - under HWOE 3yos receive 75% of a full penalty - under NR they receive a full penalty

think it is the 4th matrix but it looks better than the previous three

i have no problem the matrix or the changes to 2yo and 3yo penalties but I have a big problem with horses starting at 50 when the minimum is 30

HWOE starts horses on the minimum of $0 for maidens whereas NR starts at 50 for maidens

If HWOE was converted to the same point scale of 30-120 as NR a maiden would be on 30 points

trigwll road -  - wins in maiden -- L2/4  - L4/5 - L5/6  and L8+ stand is a L7 -  with 5 x 4 point wins would be on 50 NR points and not 70 as he currentlly is

if he had won those five races in the new year he would have 5 x 5 point wins and be on 75 compared to 55 if hWOE had been converted

tgis is acknowleded in the RWWA handout which states under competitive racing and wagering that more dominant hore will face tougher fields sooner while struggling horses can find more suitable competiion

and I dont care how out of form or how many starts a horse has ahd is It shoulndt be possible for jedi Mind 297- 32-28-27  $325K to  be on 37 NR points and be able to draw inside maidens

Chopchop43

getthechange said:

re NR -  think that in the current format that it will prove unpopular with the fraternity mainly because of one key difference and that is horses starting on 50 when the minimum is 30

differences - 2yos under hwoe receive 25% penalties - under NR theyy receive 50% penalties

3yos - under HWOE 3yos receive 75% of a full penalty - under NR they receive a full penalty

think it is the 4th matrix but it looks better than the previous three

i have no problem the matrix or the changes to 2yo and 3yo penalties but I have a big problem with horses starting at 50 when the minimum is 30

HWOE starts horses on the minimum of $0 for maidens whereas NR starts at 50 for maidens

If HWOE was converted to the same point scale of 30-120 as NR a maiden would be on 30 points

trigwll road -  - wins in maiden -- L2/4  - L4/5 - L5/6  and L8+ stand is a L7 -  with 5 x 4 point wins would be on 50 NR points and not 70 as he currentlly is

if he had won those five races in the new year he would have 5 x 5 point wins and be on 75 compared to 55 if hWOE had been converted

tgis is acknowleded in the RWWA handout which states under competitive racing and wagering that more dominant hore will face tougher fields sooner while struggling horses can find more suitable competiion

and I dont care how out of form or how many starts a horse has ahd is It shoulndt be possible for jedi Mind 297- 32-28-27  $325K to  be on 37 NR points and be able to draw inside maidens

100% couldn't agree more maiden's drawing outside horses that have won that degree of prize .money is absurd hence why it is extremely unpopular over east

JayJay

Jedi Mind will turn 14 on January 1 and won't be eligible to start in anything. He has had 14 starts this year for 1 win, no placings, collecting $2,250 for his win. Hardly robbing the bank and not the reason that HRV is bankrupt..

Furthermore, you can't please everyone, or every horse, and throwing up an outrider example is in my mind not a totally valid reason to chuck the baby out with the bathwater. If you have a 100 cows in the paddock, and one gets sick, you don't shoot the whole herd.

That said, I can see the argument behind the suggestion of 30 as the start point. It is a question worth asking. Doing so would hand on a platter four or five gift wins to an above average horse but I don't see a lot wrong with that. When horses are born, they are all equal.

The question of  older "drop back horses" dropping in on maidens was asked and answered at the info session and a "Jedi Mind" wont be able to start in a race for maidens only, or 1 win only, or 2 win only or other races based on lifetime wins or lifetime dollars earned.

So, with sensible programming,  there will be opportunities for maidens to race "like for like", to drag up an old but little implemented descriptor from the bowels of the original HWOE publicity department.

The success or failure with any handicapping system is the programming, and then there is the programming and finally, there is the programming and half of of the issues with HWOE and the Conditioned Handicapping system it evolved into was the abysmal programming, which was freely admitted at the information session I bothered to attend.

 

getthechange

JayJay said:

Jedi Mind will turn 14 on January 1 and won't be eligible to start in anything. He has had 14 starts this year for 1 win, no placings, collecting $2,250 for his win. Hardly robbing the bank and not the reason that HRV is bankrupt..

Furthermore, you can't please everyone, or every horse, and throwing up an outrider example is in my mind not a totally valid reason to chuck the baby out with the bathwater. If you have a 100 cows in the paddock, and one gets sick, you don't shoot the whole herd.

That said, I can see the argument behind the suggestion of 30 as the start point. It is a question worth asking. Doing so would hand on a platter four or five gift wins to an above average horse but I don't see a lot wrong with that. When horses are born, they are all equal.

The question of  older "drop back horses" dropping in on maidens was asked and answered at the info session and a "Jedi Mind" wont be able to start in a race for maidens only, or 1 win only, or 2 win only or other races based on lifetime wins or lifetime dollars earned.

So, with sensible programming,  there will be opportunities for maidens to race "like for like", to drag up an old but little implemented descriptor from the bowels of the original HWOE publicity department.

The success or failure with any handicapping system is the programming, and then there is the programming and finally, there is the programming and half of of the issues with HWOE and the Conditioned Handicapping system it evolved into was the abysmal programming, which was freely admitted at the information session I bothered to attend.

 

Jedi Mind is an extreme but the incidence is much higher than you think(IMO)

horses in the attachment are largely from a yarra valley meeting run a couple of weeks ago

yes thsy are going to run races for maidens - less than 2 -3-4 races etc but a horse wiininng a maiden on 40 goes to 45 and a horse winning a maiden on 50 goes to 55

I did ask the question as to why start at 50 and not 30 and the answer was there are worse horses than those on 50 - and I followed up with arent there horses on 30 that would be less than 30 if they could drop further

i dont think NR should be used for pref draws in its current format - if they started at 30 it would make a lot more sense (see attachment)'jedi Mind cant start in maiden and other restricted races but in races up to ? (oick a figure) he will draw inside horses that will never earn 20% of his earnings

the above are the reasons it is so unpopular in the ES(IMO)

If Nr started at 30 and 30 was the lowest I think the industry would find it more logical and have less animosity to NR