Its latest media release tells us that trainers are offering positive feedback to the close-in single and dual lures being trialled at Sandown and Meadows in recent weeks. Out with the hooped lure, in with the tightly located variety. The trial is now extended to major meetings.

Amazingly, its only a short while since the wide hooped lure arrived and was quickly adopted around the country all to much applause (although a handful of objections persisted).

Its much longer since the first genuine trials were run in Brisbane and Adelaide. Over a full year, they demonstrated that breaches (FTC and fighting) were reduced significantly and that the running was generally OK. Not applicable in Victoria, it seems.

The recent Victorian switch comes without any data to support it (unless GRV is hiding it) but a few anecdotal comments from trainers and clubs have been mentioned

greyhounds maintain their line when running
there is less interference
the lure being closer to the ground is making the dogs chase a lot better.

Really? How would they know that? Has anyone been counting? Are there before and after comparisons available? Was the hooped lure unsatisfactory and, if so, how? Was the hooped lure better or worse than the previous standards (both single and dual bunny)?

There are no answers to these queries or not ones that have been published. The same goes for the FOL trials at Geelong. And for surveys of injuries at various tracks (the club knows but not the public). We know nothing about the GPS tracking that has been running in Melbourne, either.

New Zealand, where the idea of the hooped lure originated, is no great help as that country has a wide variety of lures in use and no comparative data has emerged as far as I know. However, dogs seem to swap from one to the other without hassles.

Waffle 1, Facts zero.

Ive had one thrive with it and another that did much better with the hoop arm and did okay with the single lure trial at Sandown.

But with the dual shell ease into the first turn and cant seem to decide which hare or if any shed run after. The difference in het confidence running to the bend is substantial and her results reflect that.

So has anyone had similar experiences? Just curious.

Just my opinion.

Rich.

The standard philosophy amongst administrations is to publish nothing, presumably on the ground that it gives people nothing to support or object to.

In this area, the only exceptions have been GRSA and QGRA (or RQ)on FOL. The former involved a flawed trainer survey (only a minority responded) while the latter have done it twice - the earlier one showing reduced FTC and fighting, the latter showing not much difference.

That GPS experiment in Melbourne would have gone to UTS but what happened after that is unknown. The same goes for Tasmania where the GPS device on the thoroughbreds' saddle cloth was rumoured to have been tried with greyhounds but nothing has been heard.

GRV has also conducted major surveys on public attitudes and on the detail of race injuries, especially broken hocks. Nothing published there either. GRNSW used an outside mob to run a survey on grading and associated bits and pieces. That was alleged to help inform everyone about the decline in breeding - although how the two subjects were merged is a mystery. Nothing heard about that either.

It's much more than "courtesy" mate. It's our money they are spending. And we are now in an era when welfare matters are supposed to be a priority yet we are still hiding the facts and giving antis all the ammunition they need to mount serious objections to the sport. The first cab off the rank should be transparency.

If they don't want to listen to people itk (which is fair enuf), try it at the one track over a much longer period of time if they feel the need to reinvent the wheel again wld be my advice, instead of ruining the sport for everyone.

I think we are all aware of your negative opinion of the hooped lure. But the trouble here is that neither you or anyone else has produced reliable evidence one way or another (bar Qld re Albion Park). Plenty of anecdotal stuff but nothing worth using for serious decision making.

To my mind, by far the major objective of track equipment and design is to keep the runners separate as far as possible, thereby reducing interference and, by extension, falls and injuries.

Three points about the wide lure. It was extensively trialled, after which every state and club has adopted it so it can't be all that bad. Second, there is no evidence that it is worse than the close-in options and my conclusion is that, by definition, it must have some positive impact for certain dogs which might otherwise crash to the rail. (I emphasise "some", not lots). Third, much is made of the idea coming from NZ. Perhaps, but note that NZ has both wide and narrow spaced lures so that large numbers of dogs would be moving back and forth using different lures without too much apparent trouble. In fact, the only common denominator is that all tracks use finish-on.

Surely the principle is that out in the bush a greyhound would chase after a large variety of prey irrespective of its size or movement (note it was used extensively against marauding kangaroos). In turn, that might tell us that keenness is more important than anything else.

As for your "mass exodus of punters" - sorry mate, cant have a bar of that. There have been far too many overlapping events to be sure what influences the decline of good punters.

That's about as far as the near-facts go. More facts might be helpful but not for one individual's dogs. We need 500 to 1,000 samples and, even then, I am not sure how you would classify them. The only possible measure I can think of is assessing injuries or interference for a large number of trips over the same track-distance before and after the change.

None of which helps to explain what GRV is on about with its current move back to a narrower lure with one or two bunnies on the arm. (Note GBOTA at Wenty ran with a dual bunny on a longer arm for many years). All that tells me is that GRV has no idea what it is doing. If I am wrong there it is up to GRV to tell us the full story.

Nicolas now theres some real sense. But of course nearly all break-in establishments use a single bunny, not a dual lure.

Hint breakers: if you can reeducate a dog on the double bunny let me know as I have a dog thats gone backwards substantially on the new dual one!

Im going to try and prove a point with this shortly bu taking her to a single lure track here in Vic while they last. And i do expect her not to get confused at the first turn. Its only ever occurred on the double bunny. And lets think for a moment about chase instinct.. if a dog saw two bunnies in the wild, it will initially chase and then look for one to dart left and another two dart right and it will go for the slower one of the two. Thats 4000 years of prey instinct in genetics to target the weakest or slowest when presented with two choices.

All i can say is check out my tragic case on fast track called Hedonistic. She was getting into a consistent groove (no world beater mind you but holding form). Now this double bunny has done her head in and mine. All her worst indecisive runs have been chasing the new design.. CRN then MEP and now SAP. You can even see the difference in runs between the lure types. Ughhhhh. Tearing my hair out.

They just shldn't have messed with what was working in the first place.

An interesting observation. One of us will be right about this within 14 days. ;)
And if I'm wrong about this I'll cop it on the chin. Just remember I haven't had the dog since day one...but she was going pretty good exiting Adelaide into Vic until the runs hitting the dual lure then she's started pulling out early before first turn. Wasn't doing that in other runs with the hoop or the single lure.

Linebreed No Intent using different individuals at a high percentage thru the sire of choices dam, it's a really good place to start imo as the same niche was successful with her litter. g/l if you breed with her.

I just know how much she loves the tassels at home and how she's put in her best for me always following tassels. I have no idea how she was reared or broken in but her behaviour kinda says a lot.
We'll see because I'll post the results on this thread win/lose/draw.

Ryan,

I introduced this thread because decisions are being made for unknown reasons - or unknown to most of us. That is poor administration practice but it is more normal than not.

No amount of casual comment from trainers is going to help with that - only serious in-depth analysis will do the job. Sadly, those decisions will be made in-house by authorities who lack either the expertise or the data background. On many subjects, one man's view - eg from a chief vet - is of no more value that a hundred others unless it can be backed up by serious analysis of the relevant facts. (The bloke advising GRV on euthanasia etc was a highly qualified vet and top administrator who started off the "overbreeding" nonsense but who clearly failed to properly study the whole subject).

NSW walked a little way down that road by employing WDA (an independent group) but while it did come up with some useful points it also recommended further research into a number of matters. That has not happened, although the UTS studies are helpful in a limited area and not related to the subject we are talking about here.

I have also suggested many times that the industry needs a small expert panel to report annually on the STATE OF THE BREED - which might well touch on part of this subject as well as on the direction in which breeding is heading - and the faults within. That has not happened either.

Similarly, there is no central source of knowledge of best practice in breeding - rearing - education - training - racing distances and frequency, etc. It's all a matter of what your mates told you or what your old man did (as WDA pointed out).

For a start, there is no reliable source which breaks down PUPS WHELPED into categories like ...

Died due to A B C etc
Diverted due to FTC etc
Retired prior to entry to racing for reasons D E F etc
Outed once, twice or more due to FTC or Fighting
Career terminated due to stud duty - injury - form etc.

On top of which, GA has decided to stop publishing any stats at all while the states offer some but not all of what GA used to do, and in different formats.

What this industry is doing is like building cars without knowing how many have crook airbags. Not good enough!

Essentially, industry operators, such as trainers, are working with one hand tied behind their backs. Hence you will get 11 different opinions from 10 trainers (one will change his mind half way through) and observers like me will get even more confused.

What i dont particularly like about the GRV decision is the one size fits all approach being taken. Standardisation works well with technology but with living creatures like dogs, some are bird dogs, some are ground hunters. This standardisation removes choices and flexibility to place your dog according to what it chases best.

Time will tell if dogs go interstate or if they all fit into the standardised mould. But anytime I hear standard this/uniform that I cringe because I know its removing choices and flexibility.

Jason,

You imply that lures should be different from track to track (NB that is true of NZ) - ie we should have more choice. By definition, that removes some choices from your approved list, thereby restricting your ability to earn money. I doubt too many trainers would buy that.

Let me offer an illustration from a different viewpoint. Slingshot Hammer is a talented racer but would have to be classed as a risky beginner. Therefore, like most other dogs, its success depends on whether it jumps well or not. It got out smartly once at Wenty, and won, but not the second time. And Wenty has not only a different lure but also different boxes (the aperture height is lower than in Vic).

Now move on. Which thing outweighs the other - jumping ability or the nature of the lure? I stand to be corrected but I have not seen the dog FTC anywhere. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the jump is a far more dominant influence on its fortunes.

A related issue is that dogs may well be educated or trained using different lures to the ones you mention. So what effect is there when the dog moves from lure X to lure Y? Do you just trial it and hope for the best. I return to my hunting analogy where greyhounds have always chased after varying prey in varying conditions - ie they seem more flexible than they get credit for. In turn, that would be consistent with the theme that dogs are not chasing shapes or colours (they are part colour blind anyway) but are concentrating on the movement of a perceived prey.

Anyway, my topic here was not intended to push one lure over another as such, but to plead for more factual information to be made available. I would want to know about the Hammer and 499 others as well.

(PS: I have yet to hear of an Oz offending dog which moved to NZ and is then confused by all the differing lures there. On the other hand, many improve remarkably).

(PS2: Many or most dogs race at 10 or 20 different tracks. Some have their favourites and do well there but I have never heard of one that objected to the lure, as such).

(PS3: Do you remember the days when tipsters were prone to mention that dog A or B was "only" a daylight dog so the nighttime race might confuse it).

Ah, so many things to think about.

Just wondering? Your points raised mostly baffle me..
Theres tons of dogs that have a preferred track where they perform best and become specialists. Theres tons of dogs that have a preference for a given track and/or a given object to chase.

Even some pets will chase a frisbee but not a tennis ball let alone racers.

Theyre animals and they didnt come off an assembly line even if punters would love that for consistency.

We could talk about Slingshot Hammer as an example till the cows come home. Or we could talk about his brother Flash fernando that runs in blinkers.
We could talk about mine having a preference and a point I will be making about how her runs vary very shortly based on the object she is chasing,

And yes in NZ there are track specialists for many and sundry reasons.

Whats wrong with that? They have a track that suits them and sustains their career even if they are not versatile

Not all dogs are.

For an old-timer you are forgetting a fundamental principle in racing - Horses for courses.

(P.s - yes many dogs have received FTP tickets at tracks and clear all tracks except venue of offence. Because they dont chase properly at a given venue)