The Greyhound-Data Forum has been created to act as a platform for greyhound enthusiasts to share information on this magnificent animal called a greyhound.
Greyhound-Data reserve the right to remove any post that is off topic, advertisements or opinions they consider to be offensive.
If you answer then please try to stay on topic. It's absolutely okay to answer in a broader scope but don't hijack posts by switching to something off topic.
In case you see an insulting post: DO NOT REPLY TO IT!
Use the report button to inform the moderators so that we can delete it.
Mark Donohue Australia (Verified User) Posts 3236 Dogs 6 / Races 0 05 May 2016 05:44
(0)
(0)
I saw that a TAB B 5th Grade up to 420m is now $1020, which is a reduction ?
Sandro Bechini Australia (Verified User) Posts 19488 Dogs 15268 / Races 1856 05 May 2016 05:45
(0)
(0)
Mark Donohue wrote:
I saw that a TAB B 5th Grade up to 420m is now $1020, which is a reduction ?
A Grade 5th grade up to 420m is now $4,000+
James Saunders Australia (Verified User) Posts 4644 Dogs 3 / Races 3 05 May 2016 05:55
(0)
(0)
Mark short course dogs can be run more often than 500 plus dogs so prizemoney should reflect that.Some good increases.
Mark Donohue Australia (Verified User) Posts 3236 Dogs 6 / Races 0 05 May 2016 05:57
(0)
(0)
A2 money has gone down to Metro level. To me, that's a big reduction, but TAB C has gone up a bit along with A up some too. I like the longer the distance the better the prize money.
Mark Donohue Australia (Verified User) Posts 3236 Dogs 6 / Races 0 05 May 2016 06:29
(0)
(0)
james saunders wrote:
Mark short course dogs can be run more often than 500 plus dogs so prizemoney should reflect that.Some good increases.
. James, Hypothetically, a 280m at WP on Saturday could fetch $4000 +, followed by a TAB B 400m on Tues to Fri for $1020, although it's highly unlikely, but we did see some short course races on Saturdays last year or year before.
Pauline Moran Australia (Verified User) Posts 22 Dogs 0 / Races 0 05 May 2016 06:36
(0)
(0)
Sandro, with only one Metro meeting, don't think you will see many 270 metre events on a Saturday nite. So far all I can see is another exercise in spin and PC, resulting in less money, plus no mention what the reduction in unplaced money. Lets face it what are we breeding for, to get a greyhound that can find its way to pathway events or perhaps we might get one that is competitive in town, that would be a shame, would it? in the eyes of the the GRNSW it appears to be the case.
Sandro Bechini Australia (Verified User) Posts 19488 Dogs 15268 / Races 1856 05 May 2016 06:59
(0)
(0)
Hi Pauline
Maybe not, but the trend over the last 30 years seems to be the shorter the distance the better
Not that I agree with it, but that seems to be the way the game is heading
The argument from GRNSW is to redistribute the funds away from the pinnacle and redistribute amongst the placegetter, so more people in the game can get a piece of the pie.
Let's face it, 90% of dogs born are not city dogs.
Sure, I have no problem in rewarding better class dogs with higher prizemoney but it's not equitable for the industry as a whole for 10% of dogs born to get the bulk of the prizemoney.
It's that kind of elitism that drives the wastage of greyhounds in this industry.
A fairer distribution of prizemoney along all grades is what was required.
Why do we need a $250k first prize for the Easter Egg?
If it was $150k, do you think no one will come to Wenty to try and win it?
Why does a $11k maiden final in NSW recently have $10k to the winner and 2nd got $500, beaten half a length.
The distribution of 65%, 25% and 10% is fair, but in my view 1st place should have been cut to 60% and third place increased to 15%
I applaud the redistribution of prizemoney, it will keep more dogs in play for longer and it will provides more of those who who invest in the sport with opportunity to to get a few quid back from a lower class dog, and increase the incentive to try again.
The bigger challenge is to fix up the grading system which at the moment doesn't help young dogs trying to find their feet in their racing career.
Mark Donohue Australia (Verified User) Posts 3236 Dogs 6 / Races 0 05 May 2016 08:49
(0)
(0)
I don't have a problem with what you have written. . I would like to see from GRNSW where the money has come from expressed in $ figures n percentages. An increase of over a million dollars, but where did it come from and what else did they skim and/or move laterally ? Like Pauline mentioned above, GRNSW needs to explain what they propose to do with unplaced money. I suggest that they were quick to reduce it so hopefully they are quick to reinstate it.
Steve Harvey Australia (Verified User) Posts 1175 Dogs 0 / Races 0 05 May 2016 09:50
(0)
(0)
Sandro Bechini wrote:
Hi Pauline
Maybe not, but the trend over the last 30 years seems to be the shorter the distance the better
Not that I agree with it, but that seems to be the way the game is heading
The argument from GRNSW is to redistribute the funds away from the pinnacle and redistribute amongst the placegetter, so more people in the game can get a piece of the pie.
Let's face it, 90% of dogs born are not city dogs.
Sure, I have no problem in rewarding better class dogs with higher prizemoney but it's not equitable for the industry as a whole for 10% of dogs born to get the bulk of the prizemoney.
It's that kind of elitism that drives the wastage of greyhounds in this industry.
A fairer distribution of prizemoney along all grades is what was required.
Why do we need a $250k first prize for the Easter Egg?
If it was $150k, do you think no one will come to Wenty to try and win it?
Why does a $11k maiden final in NSW recently have $10k to the winner and 2nd got $500, beaten half a length.
The distribution of 65%, 25% and 10% is fair, but in my view 1st place should have been cut to 60% and third place increased to 15%
I applaud the redistribution of prizemoney, it will keep more dogs in play for longer and it will provides more of those who who invest in the sport with opportunity to to get a few quid back from a lower class dog, and increase the incentive to try again.
The bigger challenge is to fix up the grading system which at the moment doesn't help young dogs trying to find their feet in their racing career.
Hey Sandro ! I totally agree with all the valid points u raise in your post m8. Its about time 2 water & fertilize the roots & soil instead of the flowers all the time , that's what makes a plant grow & blossom ! I could go on & have a long rant about a lot of issues NSWGR has but I won't. All I'll say is this: I tip my hat 2 all those still involved in the game from breeding, rearing , educating, pre-training & training + lets not 4get the owners as well cos its far far tougher now than its ever been since day 1 & in my opinion its all about the "love" not the $ these days cos real good K9's are very few & far between that's 4 sure ! Regards 2 all the dedicated K9 folk out there .
Valerie Glover Australia (Verified User) Posts 239 Dogs 2 / Races 0 05 May 2016 21:22
(0)
(0)
Hi Mark Some very good points on this topic'' But please let it be known to all that have not been paying attention''GRNSW recently made another damaging cut to nsw country tracks to the tune of another 100 race meetings ,,to support these tab money changes,,that followed a previous cut of 136 race meets not so long ago.. I ask Jack and yourself and others to give us some support on these issues or do some people only think we don't need country tracks, ? because that is what seems to be showing at the moment. Try asking Armidale or Mudgee what they have left to tell you'' thanks.
Mark Donohue Australia (Verified User) Posts 3236 Dogs 6 / Races 0 05 May 2016 23:54
(0)
(0)
Hi Valerie, Some people just don't get country non-TAB racing. They believe it's a blight on the industry when in fact we need It more than ever. That's why the Hub n Spoke Model is still the best approach to the current downturn. Someone worked it out that it's like they took 8200 chances your dog was able to start n now another 8000 chances are gone ! So, it's a forced reduction to the industry. . Using the flower analogy, they've removed some weeds, trimmed back the flower so hard that it mightn't grow to its true potential because of an over-zealous n manic gardener ? Meanwhile, other flowers in other paddocks are allowed to flourish with the right help.
Mark Schlegel Australia (Verified User) Posts 3168 Dogs 9 / Races 5 06 May 2016 01:35
(0)
(0)
Mark Donohue wrote:
Hi Valerie, Some people just don't get country non-TAB racing. They believe it's a blight on the industry when in fact we need It more than ever. That's why the Hub n Spoke Model is still the best approach to the current downturn. Someone worked it out that it's like they took 8200 chances your dog was able to start n now another 8000 chances are gone ! So, it's a forced reduction to the industry. . Using the flower analogy, they've removed some weeds, trimmed back the flower so hard that it mightn't grow to its true potential because of an over-zealous n manic gardener ? Meanwhile, other flowers in other paddocks are allowed to flourish with the right help.
I think most people support country racing.......but most also recognise that NSW in particular has FAR too many tracks and FAR too many races (in particular lower grade or non-tab races). It's simply not sustainable!
How many of the 34 tracks listed on The Dogs website are still in operation? How many are non-TAB?
From what I can see, tomorrow you have 3x TAB meetings and 7x non-TAB! SEVEN NON-TAB!!! That is just ridiculous!
Victoria managed to rationalise their industry 10 years ago. Now virtually every track races twice a week, has trial days/nights every other day and all operate profitably. Every track is TAB.......so they all pay their own way.
NSW needs to close at least 10 tracks, upgrade at least 5 or 6 to TAB status....and increase the weekly meetings at those tracks. Less tracks, same amount of racing, more of it TAB = sustainable industry.
Mark Donohue Australia (Verified User) Posts 3236 Dogs 6 / Races 0 06 May 2016 02:18
(0)
(0)
We are three times the area size n twice the population. You can't fill all of your races and we have hundreds of dogs left out of races every week. So, you're comparing apples with oranges. You don't have the ICA to worry about; nor the Tax Harmonisation. Your model is not required here atm. Let's see in five years time when we wont have that many dogs. As far as I'm aware two to three tracks might be forced to close in the next six to twelve months as they mightn't be viable. . Then, you have the political influence, power of persuasion n our mute reps. I can walk away anytime without much loss or harm, but IMO this is dead wrong ! Just like CSG. It's wrong in most places !
Grant Thomas Australia (Verified User) Posts 11447 Dogs 64 / Races 20 06 May 2016 03:12
(0)
(0)
" Maybe not, but the trend over the last 30 years seems to be the shorter the distance the better '
I'm probably wrong but didn't I read of dogs such as Oldfields etc that went the other way the last 30 yrs...???...had to start breeding for the longer distances...
Mark Staines Australia (Verified User) Posts 4497 Dogs 70 / Races 14 06 May 2016 03:19
(0)
(0)
Send the Whippets too N.Z. the Capital of Squib racing, we want things to improve not go backwards.
Mark Schlegel Australia (Verified User) Posts 3168 Dogs 9 / Races 5 06 May 2016 04:27
(0)
(0)
Mark Donohue wrote:
We are three times the area size n twice the population. You can't fill all of your races and we have hundreds of dogs left out of races every week. So, you're comparing apples with oranges. You don't have the ICA to worry about; nor the Tax Harmonisation. Your model is not required here atm. Let's see in five years time when we wont have that many dogs. As far as I'm aware two to three tracks might be forced to close in the next six to twelve months as they mightn't be viable. . Then, you have the political influence, power of persuasion n our mute reps. I can walk away anytime without much loss or harm, but IMO this is dead wrong ! Just like CSG. It's wrong in most places !
Population of NSW = 8 million Population of VIC = 6 million
NSW tracks = 30? VIC tracks = 13
NSW meetings/week = ~40 VIC meetings/week = ~22
You have nearly double the meetings and more than double the tracks servicing an area similar in size to VIC (90% of your tracks are within a 3 hour drive of each other). I'm seeing a lot of races with empty boxes and/or no reserves.....so, even with more breeding in NSW there are more races/tracks than dogs available.....and that's only going to get worse with the huge drop in breeding that has occurred.
Tough decisions need to be made if the industry is to survive in NSW.
Mark Donohue Australia (Verified User) Posts 3236 Dogs 6 / Races 0 06 May 2016 04:34
(0)
(0)
You're looking in the wrong places and being selective about it. Three times the size n 2 million people more than VIC. See if you can gather that many people on a weekend. We should be growing not being stifled to grow. The market is stating that we are growing better than the other two codes.
Mark Schlegel Australia (Verified User) Posts 3168 Dogs 9 / Races 5 06 May 2016 04:49
(0)
(0)
Mark Donohue wrote:
You're looking in the wrong places and being selective about it. Three times the size n 2 million people more than VIC. See if you can gather that many people on a weekend.
WA is 3 times the size of NSW.....does that mean they should have 90 tracks? .....OR......WA has one third the population of NSW......does that mean they should have 10 tracks?
NSW has nearly all of it's tracks within an area of the central coast/Sydney part of NSW that is about the same area as VIC and services a similar population.
You can't count the vast expanses of inner NSW where there are few people and almost no tracks!
Does NSW have 3x as many dogs? Does NSW have 3x as many trainers/owners? Then what relevance is the total size or population of the place????
It's simple maths really. How many tracks can the industry support and sustain?
If you can't see that you have far too many tracks for the number of participants and dogs in those areas....then you are only contributing to the ultimate demise of the industry.
Steven Martin Australia (Verified User) Posts 7681 Dogs 180 / Races 66 06 May 2016 04:50
(0)
(0)
I think you'll find they won't have to make any TUFF decision in regards to closing down country tracks.
The country tracks will simply choke to death through lack of greyhound numbers & will have no choice but to voluntary close their doors .
The choking effect will begin IMO mid 2017
Mark Donohue Australia (Verified User) Posts 3236 Dogs 6 / Races 0 06 May 2016 05:11
(0)
(0)
Mark, now you are comparing grapes with oranges. These tracks are already established. You won't have an expansion there because the market won't allow for it. You are applying a simplistic and an immature view. The best comparison is the VIC model. I'll agree to disagree. . Steve, it won't be the dogs that will choke country racing. It will be governance.
Do you have questions about greyhound racing?
