that's the race they said we'd get 8000 thru the gate, we got 3500, not everybody listens to 2gb/ky..

like I always say, AJC spends more on toilet paper then we do on advertising..

On the general question, I see that SMH now runs greyhound items at least five times a week and prominently displays fields and tips daily. That's an advance on previously and may be true of rural media as well??

The second choice is the Racing Hub / Racing Spoke Model where the `Hub' is the TAB Track and the `Spokes' are the other surrounding non-TAB tracks which feed into the TAB track. To me, this is the preferred Model. Wauchope was earmarked to be a TAB track around the same time as Gunnedah, but someone forgot about Wauchope as Gunnedah has been TAB for about 18 months.

Wauchope doesn't need to be loam if it is only going to race 13 or 26 times a year under the first model or 26 times a year under the second model. The climate allows for the track to recover, and grass is the best and cheapest surface to race on. However, they do need decent air-conditioners.

If you think that the first Model and removing 17-19 tracks from our vibrant industry is good, say nothing. Don't expect people to travel further with their slower dogs to get beat all of the time. That might suit people who reside and operate near TAB tracks, but I just hope you don't breed slow dogs in NSW because you won't have a place to race them. Of course these tracks tipped to go, are located in regional areas (except Potts Park).

Another myth is that closing these non-TAB tracks will lead to a decent increase in prize money. If spread across the every race, it is nominal. These tracks don't take much to operate and aren't a burden on the industry. They do the `greater good for the greater number'. They still get plenty of nominations for meetings.

They have to add in at least one straight track

Appin? or add onto Goulburn/Richmond?

heard goulburn, no chance richmond..

I heard the same, but I have heard a lot lately. There are only six weeks to the Election so well probably know more after it. The two straight tracks are likely to be at the Centres. Gunnedah expressed an interest..... and I heard Tweed Heads. IMO, theyre both doubtful propositions, but who knows...... what about Queanbeyan?? $126k or so spent on feasibility study.

Jumping on the Board is a suggestion with a bit of fun, because it wont happen. It doesnt matter how much integrity you have.

Theres a current article out about Queanbeyan. The Govt instructed someone to give Goulburn Thursdays racing dates., The Govt is giving them funding for lighting so they can return to Sunday Nights (Canberra @ Goulburn). The Govt ordered the feasibility study for Queanbeyan. Whos running the show Mr Mestrov ? Kerching! Kerching !

I don't know the internal machinations of GRNSW but from a commonsense point of view what's the point of funding a new track at Queenbeyan when you have a facility at Goulburn that can race 3 times a week, with potentially, one meeting as a straight track meeting

There isn't enough dogs now to fill all the meetings we have listed around the State

There is just no point building another track in the next 2 years...reassess then

Funds can be spent on prizemoney,re-homing of ex-race dogs and breeding bonuses i.e at the start, during and the end of the racing lifecycle

If we don't have dogs and owners and trainers, then there is no need for tracks

For some two decades, sorting out goodies and baddies has been the flavour of the month, starting about the time that the respective values of Maitland and Cessnock were being debated and Newcastles Beaumont Park was in its death throes. They got that wrong, then right, then wrong again, or something like that. Either way, Centres of Excellence were a popular centrepiece, even though they really never happened.

NSW now has 16 TAB tracks and 17 non-TAB tracks while spots like Tweed Heads, Orange, Penrith, Griffith, Albury, Singleton, Queanbeyan (yes, Queanbeyan), Wentworth and Wyong were wiped off the map for one reason or another. Canberra, too.

In two cases (Tweed Heads and Albury), the losses were harder to sustain due to the closure of nearby interstate tracks (Gold Coast and Wangaratta, resp).

More radical surgery is now on the table but the reasons for that are not clear. The current, chronic shortage of dogs is a factor but no-one has yet concluded the reductions will be permanent. Money will be an even greater problem as expenses (wages and overheads) are out-running income.

So, what will happen if both TAB and non-TAB numbers are cut back? Or even just one or the other?

First, the greyhound breed and greyhound racing will be less exposed to the NSW population.

Second, there will be less investment into racing and related services.

Third, betting will ease back in line with the loss of familiarity with the sport.

Fourth, breeding will drop off as opportunities diminish.

Fifth, overhead costs will drop a little the amount dependent on the nature of the track eliminated and its relative position in the local region.

The conclusion has to be that there are more negatives than positives in that list. Sure, an odd or occasional rationalisation may be manageable. But, over a period, any substantial change is likely to be very costly. Whichever way you look at it, the industry is dependent on broad-based support from both participants and the public, including the betting public. It is already on weak ground so it cannot readily sustain further falls.

By far the biggest worry would be further deterioration in breeding. Fewer dogs will ensure fewer races.

The solution demands two changes: tighter cost control and better promotion to ensure betting growth. Both will be necessary, regardless of the number of tracks.

In that context, spending money to see if Queanbeyan can support a brand new track is whistling in the dark, or lunacy, even if it is in the Deputy Premiers electorate.

Bruce, did you take a common sense tablet today ? TY for summarising what everyone has been writing.

A vibrant industry shouldnt be reduced by 55% to 66%. Starving it of funding and spending whats available elsewhere, such as administration, feasibility studies, etc is not the answer n certainly doesnt justify closing tracks. It certainly doesnt make good sense to think about building another just because of people in power. I hope the Govt gets flogged at the March Election.

The reason the sport is is being contracted downwards/held back (whichever way you want to look at it) in NSW is because the sceptre of unwanted greyhounds that are either not fit for for racing or breeding or come to the end of their racing life, is still hanging over our heads

A real solution for re-homing these dogs is not finalized yet and from what I know is still in progress by GRNSW

Euthanasia is not the answer that is desired

Also, proper historical data on movement of pups/dogs to other states and overseas needs to be built up to examine how much NSW actually supports their racing pools as well

In the meantime, whilst breeding definitely needs to go up to increase the current racing pool the authorities are also mindful of it getting out of control again and not having a full solution for rehoming these dogs

Whilst trainers/owners are being forced to look after dogs that should be rehabilitated for rehoming, they are taking up spots that the next group of race dogs would have taken up

This is an additional burden on the participants of the industry, one which is not being compensated for to them by way of rehoming allowances or by having higher prizemoney available to be earned by those retired dogs over the years to help fund that waiting period

Effective Rehoming is the key if you want breeding and racing to start improving

That's the real issue Mark