New Handicapping System for the Trots

freodockers · February 2019

Getthechange would be a pity to lose your straight forward answers.

Everyone is entitled to there opinion.

You were a successful professional punter and trainer for many years.

Would appreciate your comments on the state of the industry at the moment and what needs to be done to fix it.

Ivorytrunkey · February 2019

It’s probably been discussed already but can someone explain the HWOE/L2.is it what you have earned your last two starts or only if you have won one in your last two? And if no horse has won in there last two starts how it is PBD?

aussiebattler · February 2019

Data provided is from 2003/2004 do you have anything current ?

108 R0 races won by first time winners that is 100% success for that race type

To fix maiden races in the MCR system "as stated previously " C0 only restricted to non winners would have done the job and scrap all low stake R0 races so they all get to earn a decent prize for winning their first race .

In the NBM

$4,500
4YO and older.
Maiden (HWOE = $0).

RBD.

Mobile (this is what was previously an R0)

$4,500
3YO and older.
HWOE LT $3,000.

RBD.

Mobile (this was previously an R1 only)

$4,500
3YO and older.
HWOE LT $6,000.

RBD.

Mobile (this was previously R0-R2 type race restricted to 2 wins )

generally the above examples don't differ much from previous model and programming of races with restriction in the MCR system was as effective as the above

As for the stress (it should be considered the stress put on participants is just as great as the stress of management implementing the system)

aussiebattler · February 2019

Ivorytrunkey said:
It’s probably been discussed already but can someone explain the HWOE/L2.is it what you have earned your last two starts or only if you have won one in your last two? And if no horse has won in there last two starts how it is PBD?

Handicapped only if you have won in your last 2 starts if no horse has won it is RBD

there is no effective PBD in this system YET

curmudgeon · February 2019

@getthechange ....the measure of success of the NBM will no doubt be debated for some time to come.

The more pertinent question is " Why the NBM at all "?

In an age where disunity is death and we have a harness racing code that is endeavouring to re-establish a national and international identity for itself eg the reincarnation of the ID as an iconic traditional event ......why has the NBM been delivered at all as an alternative to the HRA model that is about to be adopted in all other harness jurisdictions in Australia ?

Who pushed with unholy haste for the NBM to be released in a premature form and why the urgency? Was it an effort to try and gazump the HRA instead of delivering unity by accepting the National system? Was it ultimately a urinating up the wall contest that once commenced was hijacked by competing egos ? Is it not true that the longer the "tweaking" of the NBM goes on the more it looks like the old MCR system with narrowing bands equating to C classes and written conditions of exclusion/inclusion attached ? Why the flat out opposition to genuine PBD in the NBM ? Why the denial that a GPPBD is for each individual horse a Split RBD ? the list goes on...

I suggest that the Yearling Sales in each state will be a barometer of the future health of harness racing in each state. With 4 state sales contained in the 1 catalogue we have the ludicrous situation where before being broken in the horses contained in the WA Sale section are now already on a divergent handicapping path from the rest of the nations yearlings. I would postulate it does not auger well for the industry here. As evidenced by the outlier SA Yearling Sale being a disaster any points of difference can be a precariously balanced a train wreck in waiting. The determination to fly solo on this handicapping mission can only be detrimental to WA in the long run.

Chariotsonfire · February 2019

freodockers said:
Getthechange would be a pity to lose your straight forward answers.
Everyone is entitled to there opinion.
You were a successful professional punter and trainer for many years.
Would appreciate your comments on the state of the industry at the moment and what needs to be done to fix it.

Getthechange would know more about handicapping than all of us put together and he actually held down the Handicapper's job under the WATA for a number of years.

That is why I am prepared to give HWOE a go but am still of the opinion that PBDs need to be introduced as a matter of urgency and the stand handicaps need to be widened significantly.

Kane_26 · February 2019

Fair shake of the sauce bottle @Chariotsonfire but if @getthechange is the same Colin Smith I'm thinking of didn't he try implementing something similar 15 years ago with Matthew Skipper and it got rather hastily shot down? 85% of the industry don't like this new system so do we all simply not like change, are we all just dumb and can't figure it out or in your eyes is 85% of the industry simply wrong?

You both are obviously in the 15% that think it work, now is there a possibility that maybe you guys are wrong and this new system is completely flawed? It's safe to say Mr Torto and Mr Smith have got it wrong once before, could they have it wrong again?

I'm not for one second doubting Mr Smith's ability to be a handicapper but we are in the year 2019 not 2004. The handicapper who lost his job is the man who should still be in charge (just my opinion).

Chariotsonfire · February 2019

Kane my experience over many years is "what the participants want is not necessarily good for the industry."

Markovina · February 2019

Chariotsonfire said:
Kane my experience over many years is "what the participants want is not necessarily good for the industry."

Pretty poor form by some of the Chariots - he came on to explain the situation - and he got hounded out by quite a few of them

And your spot on about your comment - quite a few of the participants hate the officials - and resent them doing their jobs - there was a Ballarat Cup 2 or 3 years ago - Sat night bumper crowd - there were 5-6 runners in 2-3 prominent stables - David Aitken was one of them - and their flash sulkies were too big - outside the rules - so instead of changing them - they ganged up and withdrew their horses - so you were left with a field of 3 or 4( no respect to the patrons ) - and they only did that - to try to give a cheap backhander to the officials ( who were only doing their job )

aussiebattler · February 2019

I don't mind if he wants to stick around he can answer your questions and put forward his opinion as much as he likes

Im not against change (if they get it right) and like a good honest debate

but I will call it as I see it and if I see something that aint right will try to get it corrected and voice my opinion

end of the day Just want everyone to be treated fairly and honestly and with respect and at this stage it hasn't happened all that well with the transition into the NBM

freodockers · February 2019

Aussiebattler you are entitled to your opinion just like anyone else including getthechange.
Obvious there's a lot of frustration out there.
There is no doubt the industry needs change whether it be handicapping, sprint lanes or more stands.
The comments and heated debate are only a reflection of where the industry currently is.
You hit the nail on the head to be treated fairly.
In my opinion something that has been missing for some time as an industry.
Handicapping is only part of the solution and not the saviour.

JimmyPop · February 2019

The new system will work. It is based on a similar vein to conditioned racing in the US,

I think the major problem in this state is that participants don't like change. Those that understand the system will make it work for themselves. Those that don't like the system will bitch and moan.

The biggest problem with harness racing is that participants have generally had too much to say and they have generally got there own way which ultimately is self fulfilling.

The governing body have had to make change. The participants should understand the predicament they are in but they don't - Harness racing is going broke. Your market share is so poor and yet your distribution from the governing body is twice as much as what it should be based on performance. If the thoroughbred and greyhound codes kicked up and gained acceptance on a performance based distribution model harness racing would be left floundering.

In reality, harness racing should get right behind this model as the governing body are trying to help.the industry avoid a possible catastrophe.

If you don't understand market share, distribution and industry top ups then it about time you investigated and learnt and then you will understand why this system is being implemented. It is to try to save harness racing. The more the industry complains the closer you are at foregoing distribution to the other two codes. It is plain and simple. The governing body have had a socialistic approach to racing distribution and that has been a massive positive for harness racing in the past. The future may not be so bright if racing distribution is changed to a performance model.

luap · February 2019

G'day Curmudgeon

As an aside re your comment yesterday.

I can recall a Kiwi Test fast bowler named Cunis.

The late, great John Arlott referred to his name as being neither one nor the other.

freodockers · February 2019

Jimmypop who has been in control for the last fourteen years, don't need to hear song and dance just a straight answer.

curmudgeon · February 2019

JimmyPop said:
The new system will work. It is based on a similar vein to conditioned racing in the US,
I think the major problem in this state is that participants don't like change. Those that understand the system will make it work for themselves. Those that don't like the system will bitch and moan.
The biggest problem with harness racing is that participants have generally had too much to say and they have generally got there own way which ultimately is self fulfilling.
The governing body have had to make change. The participants should understand the predicament they are in but they don't - Harness racing is going broke. Your market share is so poor and yet your distribution from the governing body is twice as much as what it should be based on performance. If the thoroughbred and greyhound codes kicked up and gained acceptance on a performance based distribution model harness racing would be left floundering.
In reality, harness racing should get right behind this model as the governing body are trying to help.the industry avoid a possible catastrophe.
If you don't understand market share, distribution and industry top ups then it about time you investigated and learnt and then you will understand why this system is being implemented. It is to try to save harness racing. The more the industry complains the closer you are at foregoing distribution to the other two codes. It is plain and simple. The governing body have had a socialistic approach to racing distribution and that has been a massive positive for harness racing in the past. The future may not be so bright if racing distribution is changed to a performance model.

What ?...just like the socialist approach of the WATA when after initiating the inception of the TAB they agreed to a 60/40 split in favour of the thoroughbred industry to aid it because it was on its knees at the time.

Answer the question....who has been in charge for the last 14 years ?

Why wasn't the change made to the HRA national system ?

How much money has been wasted in the development of this NBM which has its genesis in a series of value judgements and opinions that lack integrity ?

Don't throw your bombast and derogatory remarks around here mate and expect people to sit back and be scared by the equivalent of a blowfish flapping around on a jetty.

It is typical that the blame for harness racings dilemma is cast upon the generally time poor bastards providing the product whilst the managerial sector sits at arms length and criticizes.

Where has management been in aligning all states with a decent handicapping system instead of promoting this garbage.

Harness racing in the US has been bailed out by Raceino's and slot rebates ......so don't bulldust that the US handicapping system is its saviour.

freodockers · February 2019

I was about to say that
:)) :)) :))

freodockers · February 2019

Jimmypot you are correct pacing performance is shite.
Charlotte Mills last week on racing radio confirmed this.
She even stated that current issues had been pointed out to RWWA ten years ago by industry people including myself at one of there conferences back in 2006.
They have done nothing to address these issues until now.
Yes the current state of affairs are probably worse than they are letting on.
But how did it get to such a point ?
That is the question that honest people of the industry want to know.
You see it as resisting change for the better.
I see it as a no confidence vote in the management that put our industry in this position.

freodockers · February 2019

BTW jimmypop don't think it is an isolated problem.
Pretty sure there are some issues starting to surface with the racing industry that are now heavily exposed in the pacing industry.
Stable/owner dominance and lack of horse numbers just to name a couple.
Had a chat with a well known Kalgoorlie trainer a couple of weeks ago.
Be interesting to see the result when they can't get fields this year for the second year running.

curmudgeon · February 2019

How could pacings overall relative performance be anything but shite to be truthful ?

Vision delivery ...the primary driver of wagering performance in any code has been eroded to a point where harness almost has to apologise for taking up the time it does to conduct a race.

We have resorted at the behest of half wits from time to time to one lap dash stupidity in order to reduce the time taken to present a harness race.

At one point legislation governed the amount of racing any one code could provide on a comparative basis. Now ....and here is where management of this particular code has been negligent ( hardly a surprise since the RWWA set up is that one person oversees all three codes and has thus a Wisdom of Solomon type deal going) SKY Channel delivery of harness has deteriorated to provide the TAB masters the equivalent of a pokie machine rotation of dogs and gallops because they take less time to complete any one event ..

Why bother to kick in the door for attention when once inside you **** in the same pot ?

getthechange · February 2019

Kane re smith torto skipper

incorrect - Garry put a computer form system together for me many years ago back in my punting days but this is the first time I have worked with Garry on handicapping

I worked with Matt Skipper when he was a steward and I was handicapper and think his integrity is unsurpassed.

However the ratings system that he put together in my opinion had too many holes in it and despite my regard for Matt I opposed his ratings system

freodockers · February 2019

Getthechange good to see you back.
Now can I have your feedback on sprint lanes and why they weren't introduced at GP.

savethegame · February 2019

RWWA . There top people do get misinformed from different managers and when they deliver big news...they look like fools poor richard burt on the clouse of kalgoorlie informed the masses that 72% of horses travelled to kalgoorlie to compete on weekly basis,was the reason .ultimately the tyranny of distance was the main factor, because survey showed participants didn't want to travel.

The part that got me was there data base showed trainers matt saw as pinjarra......courtney burch byford.........aldo cortopassi darling downs.....craig hynam byford. who were all domiciled in kalgoorlie for the season and they never changed there address or was that job of the stewards to ensure it happened thought there was a rule.....so they never travelled on weekly basis so poor old richards figures were out a mile....but rwwa said over and out,.

Markovina · February 2019

Alot are opposed to the changes - and have given their reasons why

However even the ones opposed are saying that WA Harness is in a spot of bother - turnover

What i would really like to know - and is crucial - is in WA how is the distribution from TAB betting allocated to the 3 codes - and most importantly how does that compare to other states ( forget Vic - because they get gaming revenue as well )

I remember reading a few years ago that in WA - re turnover/distribution the gallops is about right- but Trotting gets far too much ( in relation to turnover at the WA Greyhounds expense )

Id like to know the formulas used re turnover/allocation in NSW and QLD in comparism to WA

And will the sale of the WA TAB compromise what trotting gets over here

Gepetto · February 2019

Distribution has always been at RWWA`s discretion,so Harness has been favourably funded by RWWA despite their poor wagering performance. At 1 point I`m sure WA Harness was racing for the highest metro money in Aus while WA Thoroughbreds and Greys were around 60-70% of the notational benchmark for City money.

An outsider looking in would question why Harness has been given so much distribution

I don`t think the TAB sale will change much, RWWA becomes RWA, they just lose the responsibility of the day to day running of the wagering part of the business.

Wagering and distribution in the report below

https://www.rwwa.com.au/home/documents/WA Racing Industry Status Report 16-17.pdf.

getthechange · February 2019

re freodockers re passing lane

when they were first introduced I was 100% against as they make it harder for horses coming from behind and was also concerned about possible rorting

I rarely bet anymore but during my final years of punting I adjusted my betting at tracks with the passing lane more towards pegs horses and by the time I finished betting I was probably 50/50 about them

perception for the public of less horses being held up for a run probably has me at 80/20 in favour but still with some reservations regarding my initial concerns

Not sure who said it but horses get up on the inside at the gallops and nothing is said but we have tracks where there is a passing lane to allow horses clear running and other tracks where the driver of the leader gets fined for moving up the track and allowing an inside run which isn't very consistent

Think it was marko who said they should be as long as possible and would agree with that and would add as wide as possible

Short answer is favour them but not strongly enough to get into a raging debate

getthechange · February 2019

re freo dockers - state of the industry

obviously there is a lot of angst at the moment but as to how it is travelling I assume you were referring to financially

I will leave that to others with more knowledge in that area and I will stick to handicapping comments

As you said in a post handicapping may not be the saviour but an effective handicapping system benefits breeders by increasing the number of horses winning races and broodmares producing winners- it benefits owners by spreading stakemoney to more participants and increases the horse numbers for the racing product which then feeds income from betting - they are the basic aims so maybe not the saviour but in the long run pretty important

Gilgamesh · February 2019

Glad to see there are some finally questioning this whole "The USA is the way to go" model. Spent about 3 months in the US last year. Searched hard, couldnt find one possitive article on harness racing. Found a number of issues around turnover on the New York tracks, potential for one having to shut down. Was hard to find info on when meetings were on and the standards of meeting but could find plenty of info on the casino's at the track.

Chariotsonfire · February 2019

Similar to the Wesley/Mr Mojito race last week the RBD has been very kind to Race 1 at GP Friday.

Imagine what price Herrick Roosevelt or Bettor Aim would start from barriers 1 or 2.

curmudgeon · February 2019

Chariotsonfire said:
Similar to the Wesley/Mr Mojito race last week the RBD has been very kind to Race 1 at GP Friday.

Imagine what price Herrick Roosevelt or Bettor Aim would start from barriers 1 or 2.

Be interesting to re-frame all fields for races PBD HWOE and see how prices differ. I would imagine a significant difference over a month of racing.

Also...the last race ...3 y/o fillies. Why would you GPPBD a 7 horse field instead of PBD HWOE L2 when five horses have won in their last 2 starts ?

curmudgeon · February 2019

Re above...I understand the noms contain those conditions but the likelihood especially for 3 y/o metro class races is that there will be a few winners in their L2 that could do with separating from the lesser performed L2 in the barrier draw. Just a point of view.

G'day Punter!

In this Discussion

Who's Online

New Handicapping System for the Trots

Comments