G'day Punter!

In this Discussion

Who's Online

  • tony   4 seconds ago
1 Members & 36 Non Members

New Handicapping System for the Trots

Harness & Greyhounds

Comments

  • GilgameshGilgamesh    4,719 posts
    43 racing opportunities have been left vacant for Friday nights meeting at racing headquarters.

    Even when the plethora of race fit horses that were apparently instantly turned out due to the $L/3 being implemented are returned to work and ready to race again (at much expense) we aren't going to see all these places filled.

    Something has to be done to invigorate the sport. The racing needs to be more competitive, creating hype/discussion general interest. If you want to attract new punters the dividends need to be improved, none of my mates that punt on the gallops are going to come bet on GP for a quaddie paying $18. The racing needs to be improved, no one gets excited about a horse waltzing to the front and watching them going around in circles for 2 mins with a little dash home where no horses change position.

    The $L3 method of handicapping was a step in the right direction. Its implementation however was poor. 

    If it was part of an overall system it would be great, slow implementation as part of a collective could have shown to those who think if they ran a place they were going to draw 5-9 at each of their next 3 starts it wasn't the case (last Friday 24 horses drawn 1-4, 10-12 had run 1-3 at least once in their last 3 starts, 3 of those horses had wins, one of those winners drew 1) or if they thought they needed to draw 1-4 to earn in even races this isn't the case ether.

    I am a sarcastic smart **** but my want is for the sport to prosper. If something isn't done to improve the gambling product and the entertainment of the racing as a whole the sport we love is going to die a painful but also pretty quick death.  

    curmudgeon, VillageKid, MrSmartArse likes this post.

  • Rocket_ReignRocket_Reign    841 posts
    Gilgamesh said:

    43 racing opportunities have been left vacant for Friday nights meeting at racing headquarters.


    Even when the plethora of race fit horses that were apparently instantly turned out due to the $L/3 being implemented are returned to work and ready to race again (at much expense) we aren't going to see all these places filled.

    Something has to be done to invigorate the sport. The racing needs to be more competitive, creating hype/discussion general interest. If you want to attract new punters the dividends need to be improved, none of my mates that punt on the gallops are going to come bet on GP for a quaddie paying $18. The racing needs to be improved, no one gets excited about a horse waltzing to the front and watching them going around in circles for 2 mins with a little dash home where no horses change position.

    The $L3 method of handicapping was a step in the right direction. Its implementation however was poor. 

    If it was part of an overall system it would be great, slow implementation as part of a collective could have shown to those who think if they ran a place they were going to draw 5-9 at each of their next 3 starts it wasn't the case (last Friday 24 horses drawn 1-4, 10-12 had run 1-3 at least once in their last 3 starts, 3 of those horses had wins, one of those winners drew 1) or if they thought they needed to draw 1-4 to earn in even races this isn't the case ether.

    I am a sarcastic smart **** but my want is for the sport to prosper. If something isn't done to improve the gambling product and the entertainment of the racing as a whole the sport we love is going to die a painful but also pretty quick death.  



    It’s not apparent it’s fact that they were put out, I put 3 out and another trainer put 15 out thats 18 from one property that were racing also know that we weren’t the only ones to do it they’ll now be about 3 months away from racing this low numbers will have a flow on for a while until they build back up again
  • ChariotsonfireChariotsonfire    2,829 posts
    I think I have the solutions to our handicapping problems. I loved Curmudgeon's analogy of the Delorean from Back To The Future and we could even consider Time Warp from The Rocky Horror Show:
    1. Abolish HWOE and any derivatives thereof.
    2. Abolish all PBDs.
    3. Abolish closed noms and just hope the Victorian model that led to the best horse In Australia at the time in Sokyola having no one or no where to race for six weeks is not replicated here.
    4. 2yos 2:36 with the capacity to win in excess of $200k and starting their 3yo career as a maiden.
    5. 3yos 2:30 with the possibility of our $200k earner above winning only 2 races as a 3yo due to an injury plagued preparation with those two races being the Derby and a Westbred Classic.
    6. Open aged 2:28 with our $500k earner returning as a maiden in a RBD and racing against 4yos and older that may have never been placed in a race.
    7. Qualifying stakes - to compete you must reach a 2:25 mark but don't dare attempt to win one straight away. Run as many places as you can while picking off your 2:24, 2:23: and 2:22 marks in suitable country races. Win your Qualy when you have banked enough money and have drawn well.
    8. Metro racing 2:21, 2:20, 2:19 all single class races with RBD. 2:18 and 2:17 combined with RBD as with 2:16 and 2:15. Run any of the above with as little as four starters to keep faith with the participants.
    9. Fast Class 2:14. FFA Mobile one week RBD. Standing Start the alternate week but with a maximum back mark of 20m to give those that have won 20 or more races the opportunity to continue to dominate. Monetary incentives for handicapped runners say $2k off 10m (or 12 yards) and $4k of 20m (or 24 yards).
    10. Abolish the mares based Westbred Classics and return to Sires Stakes Finals so we can see below average horsess race in $100k races.
    11. Factor in a reduction of stakes and distribution of 20% across the board to cover the decrease in turnover.
    I expect to be charged with inciting an insurrection which will no doubt lead to my impeachment but at least the above will make a few people happy..

    Gilgamesh, VillageKid likes this post.

  • Rocket_ReignRocket_Reign    841 posts

    I think I have the solutions to our handicapping problems. I loved Curmudgeon's analogy of the Delorean from Back To The Future and we could even consider Time Warp from The Rocky Horror Show:
    1. Abolish HWOE and any derivatives thereof.
    2. Abolish all PBDs.
    3. Abolish closed noms and just hope the Victorian model that led to the best horse In Australia at the time in Sokyola having no one or no where to race for six weeks is not replicated here.
    4. 2yos 2:36 with the capacity to win in excess of $200k and starting their 3yo career as a maiden.
    5. 3yos 2:30 with the possibility of our $200k earner above winning only 2 races as a 3yo due to an injury plagued preparation with those two races being the Derby and a Westbred Classic.
    6. Open aged 2:28 with our $500k earner returning as a maiden in a RBD and racing against 4yos and older that may have never been placed in a race.
    7. Qualifying stakes - to compete you must reach a 2:25 mark but don't dare attempt to win one straight away. Run as many places as you can while picking off your 2:24, 2:23: and 2:22 marks in suitable country races. Win your Qualy when you have banked enough money and have drawn well.
    8. Metro racing 2:21, 2:20, 2:19 all single class races with RBD. 2:18 and 2:17 combined with RBD as with 2:16 and 2:15. Run any of the above with as little as four starters to keep faith with the participants.
    9. Fast Class 2:14. FFA Mobile one week RBD. Standing Start the alternate week but with a maximum back mark of 20m to give those that have won 20 or more races the opportunity to continue to dominate. Monetary incentives for handicapped runners say $2k off 10m (or 12 yards) and $4k of 20m (or 24 yards).
    10. Abolish the mares based Westbred Classics and return to Sires Stakes Finals so we can see below average horsess race in $100k races.
    11. Factor in a reduction of stakes and distribution of 20% across the board to cover the decrease in turnover.
    I expect to be charged with inciting an insurrection which will no doubt lead to my impeachment but at least the above will make a few people happy..




    You’re very childish for an 80 year old man

    Cant_Refuse likes this post.

  • GilgameshGilgamesh    4,719 posts

    I think I have the solutions to our handicapping problems. I loved Curmudgeon's analogy of the Delorean from Back To The Future and we could even consider Time Warp from The Rocky Horror Show:
    1. Abolish HWOE and any derivatives thereof.
    2. Abolish all PBDs.
    3. Abolish closed noms and just hope the Victorian model that led to the best horse In Australia at the time in Sokyola having no one or no where to race for six weeks is not replicated here.
    4. 2yos 2:36 with the capacity to win in excess of $200k and starting their 3yo career as a maiden.
    5. 3yos 2:30 with the possibility of our $200k earner above winning only 2 races as a 3yo due to an injury plagued preparation with those two races being the Derby and a Westbred Classic.
    6. Open aged 2:28 with our $500k earner returning as a maiden in a RBD and racing against 4yos and older that may have never been placed in a race.
    7. Qualifying stakes - to compete you must reach a 2:25 mark but don't dare attempt to win one straight away. Run as many places as you can while picking off your 2:24, 2:23: and 2:22 marks in suitable country races. Win your Qualy when you have banked enough money and have drawn well.
    8. Metro racing 2:21, 2:20, 2:19 all single class races with RBD. 2:18 and 2:17 combined with RBD as with 2:16 and 2:15. Run any of the above with as little as four starters to keep faith with the participants.
    9. Fast Class 2:14. FFA Mobile one week RBD. Standing Start the alternate week but with a maximum back mark of 20m to give those that have won 20 or more races the opportunity to continue to dominate. Monetary incentives for handicapped runners say $2k off 10m (or 12 yards) and $4k of 20m (or 24 yards).
    10. Abolish the mares based Westbred Classics and return to Sires Stakes Finals so we can see below average horsess race in $100k races.
    11. Factor in a reduction of stakes and distribution of 20% across the board to cover the decrease in turnover.
    I expect to be charged with inciting an insurrection which will no doubt lead to my impeachment but at least the above will make a few people happy..




    Come on Chariots clearly it’s the people who can afford to just turn out 15 race fit because they don’t like the idea of competing under $L3 that we need to let control everything, they will have everyone’s best interests at heart.

    VillageKid likes this post.

  • ChariotsonfireChariotsonfire    2,829 posts
    Well short of 80 Rocket but enjoy the banter.

    Rocket_Reign likes this post.

  • Rocket_ReignRocket_Reign    841 posts
    Gilgamesh said:

    I think I have the solutions to our handicapping problems. I loved Curmudgeon's analogy of the Delorean from Back To The Future and we could even consider Time Warp from The Rocky Horror Show:
    1. Abolish HWOE and any derivatives thereof.
    2. Abolish all PBDs.
    3. Abolish closed noms and just hope the Victorian model that led to the best horse In Australia at the time in Sokyola having no one or no where to race for six weeks is not replicated here.
    4. 2yos 2:36 with the capacity to win in excess of $200k and starting their 3yo career as a maiden.
    5. 3yos 2:30 with the possibility of our $200k earner above winning only 2 races as a 3yo due to an injury plagued preparation with those two races being the Derby and a Westbred Classic.
    6. Open aged 2:28 with our $500k earner returning as a maiden in a RBD and racing against 4yos and older that may have never been placed in a race.
    7. Qualifying stakes - to compete you must reach a 2:25 mark but don't dare attempt to win one straight away. Run as many places as you can while picking off your 2:24, 2:23: and 2:22 marks in suitable country races. Win your Qualy when you have banked enough money and have drawn well.
    8. Metro racing 2:21, 2:20, 2:19 all single class races with RBD. 2:18 and 2:17 combined with RBD as with 2:16 and 2:15. Run any of the above with as little as four starters to keep faith with the participants.
    9. Fast Class 2:14. FFA Mobile one week RBD. Standing Start the alternate week but with a maximum back mark of 20m to give those that have won 20 or more races the opportunity to continue to dominate. Monetary incentives for handicapped runners say $2k off 10m (or 12 yards) and $4k of 20m (or 24 yards).
    10. Abolish the mares based Westbred Classics and return to Sires Stakes Finals so we can see below average horsess race in $100k races.
    11. Factor in a reduction of stakes and distribution of 20% across the board to cover the decrease in turnover.
    I expect to be charged with inciting an insurrection which will no doubt lead to my impeachment but at least the above will make a few people happy..




    Come on Chariots clearly it’s the people who can afford to just turn out 15 race fit because they don’t like the idea of competing under $L3 that we need to let control everything, they will have everyone’s best interests at heart.



    I don’t even know who you are but I’m going to hazard a guess that we’d be in a much better place if we listened to the states leading trainer than you
  • ChariotsonfireChariotsonfire    2,829 posts
    I repeat Rocket what the participants want is not always good for the industry overall.

    VillageKid, Gilgamesh likes this post.

  • ciscocisco    805 posts
    The only problem We have Chariots is if we dont have owners or participants - We dont have an industry at all

    Rocket_Reign, VillageKid likes this post.

  • JayJayJayJay    7,629 posts
    The common thread from everyone on here is a concern over the lack of numbers.....8 races, low field numbers, it is there for all to see However, nailing down the exact cause is difficult and I think it is a combination of a number of factors:

    A growing and ongoing concern over HWOE in general as a handicapping model. I have disliked it from day one, its implementation was very flawed and it created an atmosphere of distrust as "points were taken" but it barrelled on anyway whether it had industry support or not. Promises were made and not fulfilled, opponents were dismissed as negative nellies living in the past and it created a very febrile atmosphere.

    As far as $L3 PBD, it seems horses were tipped out based on the evidence presented on here but it is hard to quantify. What is clear is that opponents of $L3 marshalled their opposition very effectively and exerted sufficient pressure to bring about an end to the 3 month trial after just 2 weeks. Some peoples opinions obviously have more influence than others and therein lies the problem.....always back self interest, it tries very hard...on RBD and PBD, common ground and compromise is an elusive concept. I find it hard to accept that the "tipped out" horses who have had 10 days off will take 3 months or more to return to racing, unless they were going for an extended break anyway. As I understand things, we are now back to a 50/50 split of RBD and PBDL with the $L3 concept dead and buried forever, without any of the sensible suggestions made by GTC and others being given a chance, and without the benefit of ever having appeared before a jury. That is not management, it is a reactive knee jerk response.

    The blind nomination fiasco is in my view a major factor......again, apart from a very few at  the top end of town, it is difficult to find many that support this very flawed decision. Taking the ability to place your horses to best advantage is a dagger in the heart of the vast majority of owners and trainers who are not fortunate enough to have a very high quality horse .....and that would be the vast majority of the ever shrinking numbers of provincial participants. Figure on the numbers of licensed personnel don't lie.

    And finally, the low numbers must have some correlation to the continual movement of both low end horses to the East and high end horses to North America....a consequence of the insanity of having dual handicapping systems operating in Australia, which has created the obvious disparities that determine that a horse with a relatively high HWOE but a very low NR is money for old rope for astute Eastern State trainers to gather up such horses and in most cases get an instant return. I have maintained a list over the last 12 months numbering well in excess of 80 horses. Some balancing occurs with NZ and E/S imports but the NZ trade has slowed during Covid with transport and quarantine issues.....and North American exports have been really compromised. It must have an effect on overall horse numbers.

    I hear anecdotally that there has been a covid inspired increase in turnover....and certainly a casual glance at parimutual figures confirms this and it is a rare ray of positive light.....I know, I know, that is but a small slice of the pie but it is the only figures publicly available in spite of past promises made to reveal data on betting turnover, number of short priced favourites etc....and the movement on Westbred bonuses and incentives is universally acknowledged as a great move, although it will be a slow burn to get more horses on the ground. However, it will require innovative management, transparent decision making and compromises from vested interests to find a common purpose and a solution......people must think of the overall needs of the industry rather than their immediate self interest if the sport is survive at any sort of sustainable level. For sure, look after yourselves but think about the big picture every now and then or else those few that survive will be racing for ribbons
  • aussiebattleraussiebattler    277 posts

    Gilgamesh said:

    I think I have the solutions to our handicapping problems. I loved Curmudgeon's analogy of the Delorean from Back To The Future and we could even consider Time Warp from The Rocky Horror Show:
    1. Abolish HWOE and any derivatives thereof.
    2. Abolish all PBDs.
    3. Abolish closed noms and just hope the Victorian model that led to the best horse In Australia at the time in Sokyola having no one or no where to race for six weeks is not replicated here.
    4. 2yos 2:36 with the capacity to win in excess of $200k and starting their 3yo career as a maiden.
    5. 3yos 2:30 with the possibility of our $200k earner above winning only 2 races as a 3yo due to an injury plagued preparation with those two races being the Derby and a Westbred Classic.
    6. Open aged 2:28 with our $500k earner returning as a maiden in a RBD and racing against 4yos and older that may have never been placed in a race.
    7. Qualifying stakes - to compete you must reach a 2:25 mark but don't dare attempt to win one straight away. Run as many places as you can while picking off your 2:24, 2:23: and 2:22 marks in suitable country races. Win your Qualy when you have banked enough money and have drawn well.
    8. Metro racing 2:21, 2:20, 2:19 all single class races with RBD. 2:18 and 2:17 combined with RBD as with 2:16 and 2:15. Run any of the above with as little as four starters to keep faith with the participants.
    9. Fast Class 2:14. FFA Mobile one week RBD. Standing Start the alternate week but with a maximum back mark of 20m to give those that have won 20 or more races the opportunity to continue to dominate. Monetary incentives for handicapped runners say $2k off 10m (or 12 yards) and $4k of 20m (or 24 yards).
    10. Abolish the mares based Westbred Classics and return to Sires Stakes Finals so we can see below average horsess race in $100k races.
    11. Factor in a reduction of stakes and distribution of 20% across the board to cover the decrease in turnover.
    I expect to be charged with inciting an insurrection which will no doubt lead to my impeachment but at least the above will make a few people happy..




    Come on Chariots clearly it’s the people who can afford to just turn out 15 race fit because they don’t like the idea of competing under $L3 that we need to let control everything, they will have everyone’s best interests at heart.



    I don’t even know who you are but I’m going to hazard a guess that we’d be in a much better place if we listened to the states leading trainer than you

    I queried the manager as to the reasons for PBD/$L3 and below was explained by KH 

    The PBD/$L3
    trial was withdrawn due to the lack of support from the industry.  There
    was a significant number of complaints from a wide range of trainers as well as
    correspondence received from two of the industry bodies outlining concerns with
    the trial.

    We had a
    teleconference with the industry bodies and explained the PBD/$L3 was targeted
    at the punters and attracting the punting dollar over and above the wants of
    the industry participants.

     

    Whilst the
    industry bodies acknowledged their understanding of what we were trying to
    achieve they indicated great reluctance to support the completion of the trial
    on the basis of:


    • The unfairness to maidens

    • Double handicapping

    • Potential for misuse to gain a better draw at the next start

    • Unfairness to participants

     

    To appease
    industry we could have taken the PBD/$L3 off maidens but then we would have to
    decide what to do with the L1-L3 races and then Nights of Thunder Heats etc and
    the changes and demand for modification to the trial operation would have
    continued until the trial wasn’t pure enough to provide enough data for
    analysis. 

     

    We could have
    pushed through and completed the trial and then with the (very small sample of)
     data try and determine if there was a noticeable change in turnover and
    if it was enough to increase revenue by an amount that justified implementing
    long term.
     

    At the end of
    the day, we have acquiesced to the industry demands.

     We had good
    success with the blind noms last week and not so good this week.  I don’t
    know if removing the PBD/$L3 will have an impact on field sizes.  It
    certainly wasn’t withdrawn for that reason.

     

    freodockers likes this post.

  • aussiebattleraussiebattler    277 posts
    It provides a better explanation as to why it was removed and not supported 

    Gilgamesh likes this post.

  • GilgameshGilgamesh    4,719 posts

    Gilgamesh said:

    I think I have the solutions to our handicapping problems. I loved Curmudgeon's analogy of the Delorean from Back To The Future and we could even consider Time Warp from The Rocky Horror Show:
    1. Abolish HWOE and any derivatives thereof.
    2. Abolish all PBDs.
    3. Abolish closed noms and just hope the Victorian model that led to the best horse In Australia at the time in Sokyola having no one or no where to race for six weeks is not replicated here.
    4. 2yos 2:36 with the capacity to win in excess of $200k and starting their 3yo career as a maiden.
    5. 3yos 2:30 with the possibility of our $200k earner above winning only 2 races as a 3yo due to an injury plagued preparation with those two races being the Derby and a Westbred Classic.
    6. Open aged 2:28 with our $500k earner returning as a maiden in a RBD and racing against 4yos and older that may have never been placed in a race.
    7. Qualifying stakes - to compete you must reach a 2:25 mark but don't dare attempt to win one straight away. Run as many places as you can while picking off your 2:24, 2:23: and 2:22 marks in suitable country races. Win your Qualy when you have banked enough money and have drawn well.
    8. Metro racing 2:21, 2:20, 2:19 all single class races with RBD. 2:18 and 2:17 combined with RBD as with 2:16 and 2:15. Run any of the above with as little as four starters to keep faith with the participants.
    9. Fast Class 2:14. FFA Mobile one week RBD. Standing Start the alternate week but with a maximum back mark of 20m to give those that have won 20 or more races the opportunity to continue to dominate. Monetary incentives for handicapped runners say $2k off 10m (or 12 yards) and $4k of 20m (or 24 yards).
    10. Abolish the mares based Westbred Classics and return to Sires Stakes Finals so we can see below average horsess race in $100k races.
    11. Factor in a reduction of stakes and distribution of 20% across the board to cover the decrease in turnover.
    I expect to be charged with inciting an insurrection which will no doubt lead to my impeachment but at least the above will make a few people happy..




    Come on Chariots clearly it’s the people who can afford to just turn out 15 race fit because they don’t like the idea of competing under $L3 that we need to let control everything, they will have everyone’s best interests at heart.



    I don’t even know who you are but I’m going to hazard a guess that we’d be in a much better place if we listened to the states leading trainer than you



    Yep no vested interest at all.

    curmudgeon, VillageKid likes this post.

  • savethegamesavethegame    2,786 posts
    edited January 2021
    Surely the fossils pretty  confident without checking that over 60 --75% of the licences sit with that (age bracket ) plus what i would  like to know the % of trainers that pay up for a licence year in year out that don't have a runner.

    Its not rwwa"s money but punters that invest, which allow's 25mil. for distribution.--- codes pay 9mil. to sky. ------23mil. on integrity. Talking to a fellow---- mixed up with the corporates that facebook is becoming a beautiful tool in identifiying multiple account holders, so once they identify a collusion on big winners then payment may be open for discussion .----without reliance on integrity units.

    If punters continue to walk & few more fossisls  go pushing up daisys. Ribbon colours for 1st will be up for discussion. 

    Forget the previous Messiah's figures he quoted,  in regards how much harness receives above what turnover they actually generate-----.but his words they are well looked after.

    Chariots so how does that playout each group puts a case forward for there respective codes gallops, trots, dogs, each ones share wouldn't be enough at the table?  Who has the final say.Ceo ---Board------- or Hally (ha).

    VillageKid likes this post.

  • ChariotsonfireChariotsonfire    2,829 posts
    Some on here pushing for leading trainers wishes to drive our industry forward.

    I can tell you that in 2013/14 single class racing with RBDs was introduced to appease the leading trainers and there was an immediate downturn in turnover from which the industry has never recovered.

    RWWA has tinkered with the mix since albeit unsuccessfully and we seem to be going around in circles hence my facetious post regarding the Delorean and Time Warp which seems to have gone over the head of some.

    RWWA Harness Racing Management is facing a dilemma in that unless they can increase turnover a reduction in distribution will be inevitable.

    I am not convinced that $L3 was the way to go for PBDs and to their credit they addressed the concerns quickly. What happens next will hold the key to the future.
  • Rocket_ReignRocket_Reign    841 posts

    Some on here pushing for leading trainers wishes to drive our industry forward.


    I can tell you that in 2013/14 single class racing with RBDs was introduced to appease the leading trainers and there was an immediate downturn in turnover from which the industry has never recovered.

    RWWA has tinkered with the mix since albeit unsuccessfully and we seem to be going around in circles hence my facetious post regarding the Delorean and Time Warp which seems to have gone over the head of some.

    RWWA Harness Racing Management is facing a dilemma in that unless they can increase turnover a reduction in distribution will be inevitable.

    I am not convinced that $L3 was the way to go for PBDs and to their credit they addressed the concerns quickly. What happens next will hold the key to the future.



    I still would like to see actual proof of how far turnover is down? As I’ve said if we’re going off tabtouch and tote pools then we’re doomed because punting has moved on from that
  • Browny123Browny123    97 posts
    I think the PBD had some merit..just be a bit smarter on the implementation..
  • GilgameshGilgamesh    4,719 posts

    Some on here pushing for leading trainers wishes to drive our industry forward.


    I can tell you that in 2013/14 single class racing with RBDs was introduced to appease the leading trainers and there was an immediate downturn in turnover from which the industry has never recovered.

    RWWA has tinkered with the mix since albeit unsuccessfully and we seem to be going around in circles hence my facetious post regarding the Delorean and Time Warp which seems to have gone over the head of some.

    RWWA Harness Racing Management is facing a dilemma in that unless they can increase turnover a reduction in distribution will be inevitable.

    I am not convinced that $L3 was the way to go for PBDs and to their credit they addressed the concerns quickly. What happens next will hold the key to the future.



    I still would like to see actual proof of how far turnover is down? As I’ve said if we’re going off tabtouch and tote pools then we’re doomed because punting has moved on from that



    Clearly from my number of posts I have some time on my hands today, I’ll see if I can find anything, assume it should be available RWWA pages somewhere.

    Rocket_Reign likes this post.

  • Rocket_ReignRocket_Reign    841 posts
    Gilgamesh said:

    Some on here pushing for leading trainers wishes to drive our industry forward.


    I can tell you that in 2013/14 single class racing with RBDs was introduced to appease the leading trainers and there was an immediate downturn in turnover from which the industry has never recovered.

    RWWA has tinkered with the mix since albeit unsuccessfully and we seem to be going around in circles hence my facetious post regarding the Delorean and Time Warp which seems to have gone over the head of some.

    RWWA Harness Racing Management is facing a dilemma in that unless they can increase turnover a reduction in distribution will be inevitable.

    I am not convinced that $L3 was the way to go for PBDs and to their credit they addressed the concerns quickly. What happens next will hold the key to the future.



    I still would like to see actual proof of how far turnover is down? As I’ve said if we’re going off tabtouch and tote pools then we’re doomed because punting has moved on from that



    Clearly from my number of posts I have some time on my hands today, I’ll see if I can find anything, assume it should be available RWWA pages somewhere.



    Excellent but I don’t think it’s made public regarding the amount of $ put through the corporates
  • ChariotsonfireChariotsonfire    2,829 posts
    Rocket I had access to the full turnover figures in 2013/14 and I can guarantee that the decline was alarming following on from 10 years of steady growth under RWWA.

    I no longer have access to that data and RWWA keeps the corporate and fixed odds information very close to the chest.
  • Rocket_ReignRocket_Reign    841 posts

    Rocket I had access to the full turnover figures in 2013/14 and I can guarantee that the decline was alarming following on from 10 years of steady growth under RWWA.


    I no longer have access to that data and RWWA keeps the corporate and fixed odds information very close to the chest.



    Very interesting as to why the wouldn’t release it yet we just have to take their word that it’s terrible

    Chopchop43 likes this post.

  • ArapahoArapaho    222 posts
    Turnover,turnover,turnover we all keep bumping our gums with this word to show how much we care and how much we are striving to save our industry.
    No matter how good a system is and how exciting a race may be, you are not going to get maximum turnover if your not betting on it.
    My point being RWWA after having a function for the  barrier draw for the WA Pacing Cup ,either forgot or didnt make sure that the TAB had the information and were ready to supply a market to the betting public.
    It was only after a member of the public (not on any pay roll) 8 hours after the Corporates had started betting on our Prestigious race and asked,could they put the prices up. that in fact the WA TAB ,our  life line started betting on the race.Surely this would have been a priority, remember Turnover,Turnover.
    By the way the WA derby looks like being a ripper race this year with talk of Ragazzo Mach which may be coming,the likes of  Lavra Joe ,Eldaytona and a heap of others with real good ability,surely would create great interest as a  pre post betting market.
    Unfortunately our life line haven't framed a market yet, but other Corporates have,
  • GilgameshGilgamesh    4,719 posts

    Rocket I had access to the full turnover figures in 2013/14 and I can guarantee that the decline was alarming following on from 10 years of steady growth under RWWA.


    I no longer have access to that data and RWWA keeps the corporate and fixed odds information very close to the chest.



    Very interesting as to why the wouldn’t release it yet we just have to take their word that it’s terrible



    So you can find Revenue easily enough as a collective, they provide all sorts of KPIs around each code, greyhound runners to injuries, harness winners to positive swabs etc but when it comes to how they collected the revenue all codes are bracketed together, my guess would be that is so no one can get on their high horse and say we generate X but only receive Y.

    But it is easy to find what come from Tabtouch and what came from other.

    In 2013 Tabtouch, be that fixed or tote contributed 316M compared to 59M from other (Corporates and a couple of other minor, would need to go back to that years results to get full details)

    In 2020 Tabtouch still contributed 310M other was up to 140M. Of the 140M, 117M is from the corporates through race fields and Point of consumption tax. Interestingly 6.5M is unclaimed tickets, still plenty of reasons out there to be an emu!

    It surprises me that Tabtouch still has that strong a hold, turnover Tabtouch vs Other would be interesting to see what comes back dollar bet vs dollar bet.

    The figures would have to be available but appear not fit for public distribution.
  • Rocket_ReignRocket_Reign    841 posts
    Gilgamesh said:

    Rocket I had access to the full turnover figures in 2013/14 and I can guarantee that the decline was alarming following on from 10 years of steady growth under RWWA.


    I no longer have access to that data and RWWA keeps the corporate and fixed odds information very close to the chest.



    Very interesting as to why the wouldn’t release it yet we just have to take their word that it’s terrible



    So you can find Revenue easily enough as a collective, they provide all sorts of KPIs around each code, greyhound runners to injuries, harness winners to positive swabs etc but when it comes to how they collected the revenue all codes are bracketed together, my guess would be that is so no one can get on their high horse and say we generate X but only receive Y.

    But it is easy to find what come from Tabtouch and what came from other.

    In 2013 Tabtouch, be that fixed or tote contributed 316M compared to 59M from other (Corporates and a couple of other minor, would need to go back to that years results to get full details)

    In 2020 Tabtouch still contributed 310M other was up to 140M. Of the 140M, 117M is from the corporates through race fields and Point of consumption tax. Interestingly 6.5M is unclaimed tickets, still plenty of reasons out there to be an emu!

    It surprises me that Tabtouch still has that strong a hold, turnover Tabtouch vs Other would be interesting to see what comes back dollar bet vs dollar bet.

    The figures would have to be available but appear not fit for public distribution.



    Is 140m their share of what goes through corporates or what was bet in total? Would baffle me if tabtouch is holding more than the corps on races
  • savethegamesavethegame    2,786 posts
    6.5 MIL. unclaimed dividends when the walks in were closed for a fair while 2020 forcing them to join as account holders with tab touch or corporates which removes great portion un/claimed divis. sure that figure isn't with refunds included .Seems alot once a year punters at respective cup meetings, having no idea,throwing them in the bin.before start time.

    Gilgamesh, VillageKid likes this post.

  • GilgameshGilgamesh    4,719 posts

    Gilgamesh said:

    Rocket I had access to the full turnover figures in 2013/14 and I can guarantee that the decline was alarming following on from 10 years of steady growth under RWWA.


    I no longer have access to that data and RWWA keeps the corporate and fixed odds information very close to the chest.



    Very interesting as to why the wouldn’t release it yet we just have to take their word that it’s terrible



    So you can find Revenue easily enough as a collective, they provide all sorts of KPIs around each code, greyhound runners to injuries, harness winners to positive swabs etc but when it comes to how they collected the revenue all codes are bracketed together, my guess would be that is so no one can get on their high horse and say we generate X but only receive Y.

    But it is easy to find what come from Tabtouch and what came from other.

    In 2013 Tabtouch, be that fixed or tote contributed 316M compared to 59M from other (Corporates and a couple of other minor, would need to go back to that years results to get full details)

    In 2020 Tabtouch still contributed 310M other was up to 140M. Of the 140M, 117M is from the corporates through race fields and Point of consumption tax. Interestingly 6.5M is unclaimed tickets, still plenty of reasons out there to be an emu!

    It surprises me that Tabtouch still has that strong a hold, turnover Tabtouch vs Other would be interesting to see what comes back dollar bet vs dollar bet.

    The figures would have to be available but appear not fit for public distribution.



    Is 140m their share of what goes through corporates or what was bet in total? Would baffle me if tabtouch is holding more than the corps on races



    Yeah both the 310M and the 140M are the amounts received from RWWA by Tabtouch and then Corporates/other.
  • GilgameshGilgamesh    4,719 posts
    Yeah the unclaimed income seems very high to me too.

    I tried to copy and paste that section but it came out terrible.

    https://www.rwwa.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/2020-RWWA-Annual-Report.pdf
  • Rocket_ReignRocket_Reign    841 posts
    Gilgamesh said:

    Gilgamesh said:

    Rocket I had access to the full turnover figures in 2013/14 and I can guarantee that the decline was alarming following on from 10 years of steady growth under RWWA.


    I no longer have access to that data and RWWA keeps the corporate and fixed odds information very close to the chest.



    Very interesting as to why the wouldn’t release it yet we just have to take their word that it’s terrible



    So you can find Revenue easily enough as a collective, they provide all sorts of KPIs around each code, greyhound runners to injuries, harness winners to positive swabs etc but when it comes to how they collected the revenue all codes are bracketed together, my guess would be that is so no one can get on their high horse and say we generate X but only receive Y.

    But it is easy to find what come from Tabtouch and what came from other.

    In 2013 Tabtouch, be that fixed or tote contributed 316M compared to 59M from other (Corporates and a couple of other minor, would need to go back to that years results to get full details)

    In 2020 Tabtouch still contributed 310M other was up to 140M. Of the 140M, 117M is from the corporates through race fields and Point of consumption tax. Interestingly 6.5M is unclaimed tickets, still plenty of reasons out there to be an emu!

    It surprises me that Tabtouch still has that strong a hold, turnover Tabtouch vs Other would be interesting to see what comes back dollar bet vs dollar bet.

    The figures would have to be available but appear not fit for public distribution.



    Is 140m their share of what goes through corporates or what was bet in total? Would baffle me if tabtouch is holding more than the corps on races



    Yeah both the 310M and the 140M are the amounts received from RWWA by Tabtouch and then Corporates/other.



    They get a much smaller piece of the pie from the corporates than they do from tabtouch though don’t they
  • GilgameshGilgamesh    4,719 posts
    Gilgamesh said:

    Gilgamesh said:

    Rocket I had access to the full turnover figures in 2013/14 and I can guarantee that the decline was alarming following on from 10 years of steady growth under RWWA.


    I no longer have access to that data and RWWA keeps the corporate and fixed odds information very close to the chest.



    Very interesting as to why the wouldn’t release it yet we just have to take their word that it’s terrible



    So you can find Revenue easily enough as a collective, they provide all sorts of KPIs around each code, greyhound runners to injuries, harness winners to positive swabs etc but when it comes to how they collected the revenue all codes are bracketed together, my guess would be that is so no one can get on their high horse and say we generate X but only receive Y.

    But it is easy to find what come from Tabtouch and what came from other.

    In 2013 Tabtouch, be that fixed or tote contributed 316M compared to 59M from other (Corporates and a couple of other minor, would need to go back to that years results to get full details)

    In 2020 Tabtouch still contributed 310M other was up to 140M. Of the 140M, 117M is from the corporates through race fields and Point of consumption tax. Interestingly 6.5M is unclaimed tickets, still plenty of reasons out there to be an emu!

    It surprises me that Tabtouch still has that strong a hold, turnover Tabtouch vs Other would be interesting to see what comes back dollar bet vs dollar bet.

    The figures would have to be available but appear not fit for public distribution.



    Is 140m their share of what goes through corporates or what was bet in total? Would baffle me if tabtouch is holding more than the corps on races



    Yeah both the 310M and the 140M are the amounts received from RWWA by Tabtouch and then Corporates/other.



    More accurately put most of that 140M is what they receive from the government which is raised from the corporates.

    93odd Million of that is from race fields legislation, which I believe they receive the whole kit and caboodle to distribute to the relevant race clubs across Western Australia.

    24odd million is from Point Of Consumption tax. Now that amount only has to be equal to or more than 30% of total revenue raised by the POC tax.

    In simple terms my understanding is we now have a point of consumption tax of 15% of all bets placed by WA residents regardless of who they bet with on any event which then goes straight to the government and they on pass 30% to RWWA and keep the rest.

    VillageKid likes this post.

  • ChariotsonfireChariotsonfire    2,829 posts
    You mentioned in an earlier post that you had no idea who I am Rocket. You must be one of the very few who have not worked out my identity so I will give you a brief precis of my life within and without the harness racing industry. 

    Born in Pemberton with a horse in the backyard up until I was 20 as Dad was a hobby trainer.
    Started working life in the Bank of New South Wales (Now Westpac) where I spent 15 years.
    Played a bit of football including 6 league games with Swan Districts before being drafted (not to the VFL or AFL) into National Service.
    Spent the 2 years at Puckapunyal where I defended the country at The Showgrounds, Kilmore, Bendigo and Shepparton.
    Returned to the Bank and took on the Lancelin TAB restricted Agency for 12 months before obtaining a Bookmaker's Licence in 1976 which I held for 25 years until 2001 where I worked in all three codes but specialised in the Trots. During that period I had the largest turnover of any trot bookie in Australia.
    During that period I also ran a successful retail liquor business with an older brother eventually selling out to Coles after 10years.
    When I ceased bookmaking I was asked by the the then Racing Minister if I would accept a position on the TAB Board to provide some knowledge and expertise to that Board on the current wagering landscape.
    RWWA encompassed the TAB in 2003 and I was appointed by the harness racing industry as its representative director, a position I held for 11 years before not seeking renomination in 2014 as I felt I had run my race and it was time for a change.

    So the fossil has been around a bit.

    freodockers, VillageKid, Markovina likes this post.

Sign In or Register to comment.