It's the same thing mate. If hardly any can get 700 (which is true) it follows that the breed has got weaker, which means the numbers which can get 600 or 500 will also be affected.

Horses have gone the same way. That's why their Melbourne Cups are filling up with overseas types - ex Europe, Japan, American and NZ - and they are reducing the distances of classic races.

Both codes are chasing the quick buck - a business policy which always has a hidden cost.

The cause is breeding - the beginning, middle and end of the argument. Star Kingdoms v.v, Head Honchos. Squillions in prize money for two year old horses and greyhound clubs trying to outdo each other in feature events for a handful of up and comers, regardless of the economic justification.

It's almost too late but for over a decade now I have been proposing to authorities the creation of a permanent expert panel to report annually on THE STATE OF THE BREED. At least then we could expect some advance warning of significant trends and take action to reverse the negatives.

While they think about that we can at least stop throwing good money after bad in subsidising crook dogs in middle distance races around the country and instead put it into searching for sires and dams with stamina. No idea exactly how, it's not my bag, but it has to be done.

PS: Wenty still runs some 280s which is even sillier than the 400s you mention. Brisbane, Hobart, Launceston, Angle Park and Cannington all run sub-400 races. At major venues, only Sandown and Meadows have held off but watch out - Meadows used to run 311s (at Olympic Park) so you never know.

its the biggest issue atm and if its not sorted out the dogs will have trouble chasing for 300m before you know it.

Could expand on exactly what you mean by that, Bruce?

Relatively, Australian horses and dogs are no longer able to run long trips. The odd exception simply proves the rule.

I have asked many times why this has occurred but seldom got any answers which made sense - with the sole exception that money rules. Owners (which often means trainers, too) want to get their money back quickly. But stayers need maturity, sprinters not so much.

Horses do that via big dough for youngsters in Golden Slippers, Blue Diamonds, etc, and sires which throw sprinters- eg Star Kingdom.

Dogs do it similarly - eg Group standards for some Maidens and sprinting sire after sprinting sire, eg Head Honcho, Brett Lee and so on.

But this thread has highlighted the really big problem. If you keep breeding from sprinter after sprinter after sprinter you will not only lose staying qualities but the overall breed must become weaker - which it has. In turn, that is reflected in the ever increasing proportion of races over 400m or less. Trainers use those because that's all their dogs are capable of.

That then leaves with the question - do we want to keep going down that road? If not, what do we do about it? Answer - fix the breeding.

Method - put people in charge of the industry who can anticipate and identify the trends and then act appropriately. The current mob are always reactive, never proactive. For example, in just two years the entire industry has moved from "overbreeding" as the big problem to "underbreeding" today. That's a 180 degree turnaround yet we still have not defined the problem, let alone found a solution.

To help with that effort is the reason I called for a permanent expert panel to report yearly on The State of the Breed. The problems we are talking about in this thread are not new but have been mounting for quite a few years. I am just a mug observer but I can watch and I can count and the issue is plain as a pikestaff. It's a flood progressively moving down the river. But surely it is fixable?

If there were reliable statistics provided by our National Body that gave us KPI's in relation to distance range of progeny, city winners etc etc

Then Breeding incentives for studmasters and breeders who have sires who have won better class races in the 500m-700m or are proven to sire capable dogs in this range across all tracks can be formulated to reward these participants for going the extra mile and providing more hardy and durable dogs who can compete in several distance ranges at the highest level

Thinks like reduction in studmaster registration fees, frozen semen registration fees, further increases in prizemoney to these distances etc

It's all about allocating resources to the way the controlling bodies want the breed to be shaped

One only has to examine PAW's breeding program to see what he undertook on his own behalf

If they haven't got the guts to do it, then the owners/trainers/breeders will follow the easiest path for a financial return and that is to breed and own speedy squibs i.e. quick return and easier to train and manage their careers

Pretty soon 700m will be a thing of the past the way we are travelling

With the he nos of litters you've bred over the yrs PAW, from a consistency perspective, is it true that in every litter you will have 300m, 500m, and 700m dogs, or is that just a wivestale ?

Thanks in advance.

I can only support your points - with one minor exception.

Re "further increases in prizemoney to these distances etc". Not a goer. We have already been down that road in most states - ie with bonuses for middle distances at country tracks and for 700s in the city. It has not worked. It simply offers more cash to inferior dogs and does not address the breeding question.

Likewise, the GRNSW survey regarding grading changes for breeding improvement and the GRV plot to reduce some charges (but for all breeding, not just stamina-related breeding) will not be effective. Both have failed to properly analyse the problem just as industry reviewers in three states also addressed the froth and not the substance.

Separately, Ryan has asked PAW to define the distance capabilities of his output. However, we already know the answer to that. It's on the scoreboard. Like the rest of the population the vast majority cannot run out a good 700m, not consistently. Some do well over 600m/650m but no more. Many cannot run out a strong 500m, although it is much better now than it was a few years ago. The current Wheeler camp is not a solution to staying needs, nor, so far as I can see, was it ever intended to be. Since he is now cutting back it is unlikely to be so in the future. Look elsewhere.

Firstly, more money and greater reward entices the greater effort.

That is a principle of life, not greyhound racing

It is a principle that needs to be enforced and addressed.

You note, I didn't just address prizemoney only, but it is the ultimate carrot.

There are all the costs along the way in breeding, incentives, charges etc and then there is changes to programming and grading systems that need to be adjusted to get trainers to try their dogs over further ground rather than just take the easy way out and keep them fresh for 400m bend start racing

I spoke to a trainer recently about trying a dog over 500m that looked like it was screaming out for 500m. My words to him were that with more work and trialling it will get there for sure.

His answer was, if I trial mid week it will get more injuries. He wasn't interested in taking it any further

That mentality does nothing for the sport. He was just too lazy to trial it, he just keeps it fresh and takes his chances in the jackpot lottery of 400m bend starts.

And he's worried about injuries, how ironic!!!

Secondly, I would, at an educated guess based on my own stats, say over 70% of PAW's runners have won over 500m which is far better than any other large breeder in this country

PAW modified his breed years ago to introduce hard US lines to our speed lines to improve durability, distance and have dogs race for longer

In my book he has definitely achieved that, at what cost, only he knows, but he has reaped a lot of benefits n the last 10 years.

He has stated somewhere himself in the past that he aims to breed dogs effective in the 450m - 650m range. (correct me if I am wrong Paul) which are the sweet spots for Victorian city racing

He doesn't seem to be interested in getting stayers but will gladly accept should one of his good 600m dogs step up (again Paul correct me if I am wrong)

He will still be a big fish because the pond is getting ever smaller

PS Wheeler camp greyhounds won 6 out of the 11 races at The Meadows yesterday over 525m/600m with several placings as well

I don't see any other breeders/group producing similar results

that's not what I asked him at all, perhaps you may want to revisit

That's a pretty broad question Ryan.
Most litters bred nowadays have a possibility of running those distances. How well they run them is a different story.
Other than to say yes, what other information do you expect from PAW'S reply?

Yes it was.

And no.

When you breed 50 litters a yr, rear and take sometimes over 4 mths (I think I read somewhere), to break them in, such breeders get a pretty good idea of the 'type' of dog they have. So I was after mainly his experience with 'type' and the potential a particular litter may show from an early age to reach those distances, which isn't available statistically or which may differ from their racetrack performances.

btw I dont think PAW wld need anyone to interpret or vet a question that was directed specifically to him. If he's not on a break at this time of yr and wants to ans the question he will, if not he wont. Seeing this is a forum and we are lucky to have people such as him contributing, it wld be polite if others wldn't pre empt his responses.

OK but that applies to bank robbers, too.

There can be no doubting PW successes, whether the city/provincial meetings or elsewhere. It is nothing short of magnificent.

However, please also count the losers. I have no idea of the final stats but I seriously doubt your 70%/500m winners. Remember our top sires are flat out getting to a 17% win rate.

Anyway, I can't recall a single stayer which he has produced - ie stayers as opposed to dogs which have won over 700m. The two are not the same. The best would have been Xylia Allen which broke the Wenty record one week and collapsed on the home turn a week later (a performance it repeated 3 or 4 times, but feel free to argue the toss).

Further to the above - I just checked yesterday's Vic results. The Wheeler win/loss ratio was 6/15 at Meadows, 0/3 at Cranbourne, 1/1 at Bendigo and 1/10 at Ballarat. Total 8/29 which is 21% or 16% over 500m. Of course these are only the dogs that managed to stay in one piece and get that far. It's a tough gig but still pretty good in the circumstances.

And Relax Ryan - we still have some freedom of speech in this country. In fact, several years ago I wrote a significant piece on Wheeler dogs after analysing careers of all his team racing in Victoria. It revealed that very few were getting 500m and many were fading at the end of 450m. Amazingly, a year after that he started importing the USA blood with good success. Just coincidence of course. A little later, my editor at the time wrote a much bigger piece on how the Wheeler empire worked.

Maybe I should do an item on Ricky Ponting's dogs? His lot are also consistently failing to get the 500m strongly.

I think you've misunderstood Sandro and the way you've tried to calculate those stats doesn't make sence.

Andrew

Unfortunately, Bruce likes to play devils advocate, but when he tries to get too smart, he manages to outsmart himself and loses all sense of reality

Bruce

You have all your B/S theories, I only deal in factual information

Bank Robbers, very funny haha. Except Bank robbers steal for a living

PAWs ability to breed 500m+ winners from his broods have got nothing to do with sires % rates

His whole breeding, rearing and education regime is geared to producing dogs capable of racing in city Victoria

Your statistical analysis of one days racing makes no sense at all

You can't isolate one day and call that gospel....you are illogical if you do that

I will bet for pups born I am not too far off the mark whether they are winning over 500m+ in Victoria or anywhere else in Australia over 500m+

You talk about breeding to achieve these results, he is a living study of how it should be done

Instead of $h!tting all over him why don't you pay attention for once before you fly off into your fantasy land

I couldn't really give a Flying F#%k whether you do or don't consider them real stayers or not

Your argument really holds no water, because if they win over 700m then they are stayers, whether they fall into your version of what is a stayer or not