Bob,

We have not got any more - with less quality or not. That's a strategic issue.

In any case, it does not cover the short course problem. In fact it would make it worse.

Trial tracks are a management issue - but obviously a serious one. It is also a big factor in all sports as there is more demand for ovals than there is land left to put them on. I grew up playing comp tennis on backyard courts, maintained by the bloke who owned the house. They are all gone, too. Imagination and innovation is what is needed.

MONDAY 8TH OCTOBER

11 RACE CARD

8 RACES OVER 297 MT

WHO WOULD TURN UP TO WATCH RACING OF THIS SORT.

CAN IT GET ANY WORSE.? I DO NOT KNOW .

HOW HAVE THINGS GOT SO BAD ,

i can recall the days when a short distance race was 462 mt.
standard distance 480 mt
staying races 600 mt -1000 mt

something has gone very wrong in OZ.
as a breeder of hounds with ability to run over extended distances, i do not see how you are going to turn the tide any time soon

you only have to look at racing in USA.

racing over 500 mt is normal
whole litters racing over this distance
tell me how many litters in OZ have 6- 9 dogs racing at 500 mt and beyond.

maybe Bruce can update us on a few stats

Bruce

They are only welfare issues if the dogs aren't prepared properly for the task

You obviously missed my proviso regarding having 2 x 700m races in the preceding 4 weeks

In the past we used to see dogs who were jumping from 500m racing to marathons

Now that was a welfare issue that was not regulated very well at the time

I don't think we should be having them weekly, once every 3 months on a circuit would be ideal, so that the dogs involved in it are prepared properly for the race and are being scrutinized by suitably qualified trainers and vets

And yes I do want to see the 969m marathon at Wentworth Park back in action

With the decline in "Trialing Tracks" over the years & bullsh1t rules that prohibit friends from using other trainers straight tracks (but their kids can play on those peoples swings & monkey-bars)......Well, THE PLACE HAS GONE MAD.

With the involvement of those limitations, you can't possibly train a greyhound to run 520m PLUS, without those facilities readably available or close by, at your disposable.

Bob,

The "expressions of interest" deal was no more than a knee-jerk reaction by GRNSW to a point made by UTS in its interim report. In that it simply said injuries were and would be lower on straight tracks, which is hardly news. UTS did not as such recommend creating those straight tracks.

Even so, the industry (or really the respective major clubs)let Wyong and Appin fade away. Similarly, Capalaba is struggling and Virginia is only part time. The new Murray Bridge complex does include a straight track right in front of the main building, designed for both racing and trialling. Healesville has done well and expanded, mainly because of its TAB coverage.

In short, some authorities take the initiative and some don't. Qld and NSW are "don'ts".

Incidentally, the whippets used to be a variety feature at many tracks but I have not heard of them for a long while. Also Jack Russels. Where have they gone? Trainers might not be too fussed but the public enjoyed them (if any were present).

"tell me how many litters in OZ have 6- 9 dogs racing at 500 mt and beyond".

No idea, mate. Nor does anyone else.

The core problem is that the stud book does not speak to the form book. Such stats used to be available in USA but never here. (G-D has terrific breeding data but its form figures are hopeless). That should be corrected - as it is for thoroughbreds. But, even if we tried, the data would be three years old because GA has stopped bothering to publish Oz data - latest is 2015. You can get a lot by adding up all the individual states' data but they don't always report in the same way - life is not easy!

However, here's a wild guess. It is unusual for a litter to contain two good dogs, even less so three. The odd exceptions are irrelevant. If you define "good" as the ability to run out a decent 500 then you might get a similar result. But, as Sandro points out, you would never really know unless the respective trainers put the work in to get them up to 500 or whatever.

For the above and other reasons, comparisons with other countries are odious. USA, for example, offers very few sub-500 trips but the UK does.

Re Northam - this country club is designed to handle low quality dogs with low prize money - hence the short trips. Much more serious is that Mandurah and Cannington are now doing it, too. As I said elsewhere, that's because WA has run out of dogs - their own or the many who used to be imported from the East.

Bob,

My sympathies that you did not succeed at punting.

The core of this thread - 400s at Richmond - is essentially about breeding. Breeding is most definitely a national issue. And dog and semen transporters would be disappointed you did not give them a plug.

But, while we are on Richmond, tell me why the club and GRNSW did not insist on a location change for the horrible 400m boxes. There's plenty of room and they spent $700k rebuilding the track a few years ago. They could even have fixed the flat first turn for 535m at the same time.

(I am still trying to work out how to combine "no total knowledge of the industry" and your request to stop quoting other states. The two don't mix well. Could you ask Valerie about that?)

WA this week Monday to Thursday.

46 races

275 mt 3
297 8
302 7
380 5
405 13
490 3
509 3
520 4
588 + 0

blind Freddy can see it has all gone belly up
can only see it getting worse

is the problem that we now only have short race trainers.
or do you only have short race hounds ?

Roger,

The short answers are possibly yes to both.

A more studied guess would be that WA has long been dependent on imports from the east - often dogs that had run out of suitable grades at home. Almost by definition, 500m dogs would dominate that group - otherwise why would owners send them all the way to WA, or why would WA owners buy them? (Take the Britton family out of the discussion as they are a special case).

Also, WA prizes were attractive and WA owners were prepared to pay good money for performed dogs.

Further, WA has recognised related problems for some years and has therefore chosen to ease some of the local grading rules for those imports. WA particularly addressed the higher grade sector - ie dogs capable of running 500m.

Move on to 2018 and look at what is happening. Fields in the East are all light on - there is a general dog shortage - and it is unlikely to improve significantly in the short term. Therefore, owners in the East have less incentive to look for financial options in Perth - they have equal or better options at home.

Combine all these factors and WA is seeing a reduction in available, better (ie 500m) dogs. Hence the list of shorts you mentioned.

WA, with only two and a half tracks, has never been self sufficient in numbers or quality. No matter what it does, a small state is stuck with a thinning out process - eg Prince of Thiefs (terrible English) was sent to the East for his stud duties rather than sit at home for a handful of dams. Tasmanians are a bit luckier as they can more easily nick back and forth to Victoria (and v.v).

WA and Tas do well at AFL because an unusually large proportion of the population play it from childhood onwards - not so in NSW and Qld where major options are on offer. NRL does poorly in SA but gets by in Vic because large numbers of Pacific Islanders and Kiwis live there (and most are not physiologically suited to AFL). And so it goes on.

The movement of dogs has long been a function of economics - meaning some combination of cash and opportunity. WA will improve when the Australian dog population rises again.