Just to clarify my position Dubbo is my local track by doing this I will need to do more travelling. But the industry is bigger than any person and whatever it takes to make the industry better and sustainable for the future

Very true - and you might have added very strong support from the ladies in all areas. Even Darren Flindell calling the races for a while there.

It still comes down to the fact that there needs to be state and national programs to raise the profile of the greyhound. If you have a sound base then people with a bee in their bonnet will be put in proper perspective.

Having said that, at least dog people in the area did have other options reasonably available.

Anyway, at the moment we have short and long term problems.

Immediately, there is a dog shortage so you will have to put up with 10-race meetings or whatever. In that case why not promote them more - and more professionally? (The 11th and 12th races are usually rubbish anyway).

Longer term, we have to convince the community that the greyhound is a terrific animal and is therefore worth supporting as an owner, breeder, whatever.

Remember that today's problems are more than just a matter of live baiting, euthanasia and stupid memos from GA. There has been a long term fall in breeding numbers - not huge but steady. Why so? Nobody knows the answer because they have not bothered to find out and have been blindsided by nonsensical claims about "overbreeding" by people who never bothered to study the subject or the industry.

Also bear in mind that the trots continue on their downward path (crooked or not), that thoroughbred breeding is in much the same boat as greyhounds, that wagering on racing is in long term decline - with greyhounds providing a temporary stopgap as it scheduled more races - and that corporate bookies have destroyed the integrity of the greyhound market.

Today, punters regard footballers more highly than horses or dogs. So whose fault is that? Greyhound racing has to look in the mirror.

Qld has some hope that the current QGBOTA effort will bear fruit but I would not hold my breath given the miniscule influence greyhounds have on the multi-code body. In other states the GBOTA has proved to be useless, as have the state authorities.

Dismal, yes, but the potential is still there. Good quality commercial management can address that. Committees can't.

Bruce

Sometimes you make a statement that is nonsense, as it appears that you only have the view of the punter, rather than walking in the shoes of the participants, don't take it personally.

Cessnock is a great case in point to support the above criteria.

It may have had its licence taken away due to the shameful politics of a defunct body like the NCA but at least the local greyhound community have had the bar to keep it operating as a facility for them and any other persons who would care to trial and educate their dogs their.

The Club is obviously hopeful of racing again and if they can pull it off, with the support of the Council, in terms of zoning and protection (as it is a showground and not owned by the industry at this time) and with the support of GRNSW with the plans that they have in store for the track to make it a Centre of Excellence, then it could and will outstrip the GBOTA's outdated Maitland facility by a 100 yards

Fortunately, there is only a small difference between love and hate so I dont take much notice of the Likes/Dislikes. In any event, the vast majority of comments here come from trainers which is a pity as there are many more people concerned about greyhound racing than just them. (3,300 v a dew million).

Anyway, we seem to agree on most points so all we are left with is the question of re-licensing Cessnock for TAB racing, apparently instead of Maitland.

First, Sandro, please dismiss any thought that the NCA was involved. At the time of delicensing I doubt they could find it on a map. The events you are probably talking about occurred later and also involved the Wyong and Singleton closures.

Apart from the politics, the only issues involved with Cessnock v Maitland were (a) GRA said it could not justify two similar but adjacent operations and (b) it went to great lengths to investigate the pros and cons over what must have been some years. I repeat my earlier point the initial report favoured Cessnock but it included false data and so the decision was reversed. GBOTA was not involved with Maitland at that stage. End of story.

Again, I repeat that it is a terrible shame that the Maitland club/Show Society/Council could not get together and come up with plans to create an all-singing and dancing complex that advanced the interests of other potential users, the community and the above three. But they couldnt and didnt. Worse, they have even lost the trots. More fool them but not unusual around the NSW regions.

While I have not seen the place for a while, I understand no major improvements have been made to public facilities at Maitland as I understand they are still a bit ramshackle, leaky and out of date. So be it but, even so, they are superior to those at Cessnock. I assume you guys have been to Cessnock on a cold and windy night with a southerly blasting in through the big curtains amid swirls of dust???

Now, you take a shot at me because I present the punters view. Thats a bit simplistic, as I am a generalist by nature and experience. But I must point out that punters, gamblers, viewers and whoever want two things. First, a good clean race where they can see where their money is going. Second, if at the track they want the same thing plus a degree of comfort. Before and now, you cant get that at Cessnock, no matter how much your dogs tell you they love it. The prime physical problem at Cessnock is that it is hard to see what is happening in the first half of the race.

What you forget is that the industry is trying to sell a spectacle. If you short change the public they will go elsewhere. You will have lost the industrys major plus a close and intimate experience of wonderful canine athletes. Thats what sells the product and contributes to your wages. The industry values your expertise as trainers but it has no choice but to cater for customers if it wants to survive.

Incidentally, what evidence do you have that Cessnock will win out "with the support of GRNSW"? Writing a letter and getting a cheque signed are two different things.

PS: If you want a good clean view of racing, it is high time someone organised better cameras at Wenty to cover 720m starts and the back straight in general. Only Bulli is worse.

The NCA knew exactly where those tracks were and manoeuvred them beautifully to support the 'freed up dates' case for The Gardens

Anyway, that is part of the sport's historical woe's.

Better to look at the future.

Love it or hate it, we need more one turn facilities in the state to cut out these diabolical 400m bend starts.

The only ones who likes them are the various betting agencies around the place as they are hit and miss events and from a welfare purpose are not dog friendly

That's about when my hair started to fail out. Rules were MADE-UP on the run over a 55 day period.

I know you've stated that you haven't seen this study on "Aged Dams producing lower quality progeny", but I'd like to know more about it. If you can get a copy, point me in the right direction of "Who did it"... or show me any particulars please send me a copy or PM me. I'm rather interested in reviewing the results.

Cheers, Steve.

"Today, punters regard footballers more highly than horses or dogs. So whose fault is that? Greyhound racing has to look in the mirror."

Football (all codes) is controlled by businesses which have to be customer-centric and commercially-focused to survive.

On the other hand, the Greyhound industry is controlled by several State government authorities, so we need a few mirrors.

And none of those Luna Park mirrors, because they might like what they see.

It is also relevant that development in football codes transcends to the grassroots level across all States. The Greyhound industry, which is arguably more rurally oriented, is run by city-centric organisations with no decentralised operations and with little attention to grassroots development.

Perhaps the change should not be rationalisation, but in the nature of adoption of contemporary standards for industry development, commercial operation, compliance, and engagement with grassroots constituents.

Quite so. But those grassroots constituents came in an era when there was no SKY and much smaller TAB turnover. Oncourse takings were good and clubs paid considerable attention to what patrons asked for while dozens of bookies competed for their business. Races titles identified with local areas, hence Parramatta Stakes, Lisarow Stakes and so on. The authority was much more in the background (and was run by GBOTA/NCA anyway).

I can recall the uproar many years ago when the first club ever accepted cash from a sponsor to put its name on a race (I think it was Bulli). Generally, the mob was horrified at what they saw as giving away its heritage. Sounds silly now but it was serious then.

Today, income is derived from Clubtabs and Pubtabs in Timbuktu or wherever from people who often would not know the difference between the backside and front of a dog, or are having a rest from the pokies and who could not read a formguide to save their lives. They neither know nor care where the track is.

Clubs sat back and chatted only to trainers. Well, in most cases they were one and the same. Authorities did likewise, improving only in the area of drug controls. Fans faded into the background. Breeding numbers started falling off, as did the breeds stamina. Aging trainers quit. Facilities started falling apart. Minority groups began influencing everyday life, including racing, fuelled by media who were grateful for anything controversial.

Services needed by trainers improved in leaps and bounds, always generated by firms outside the control of racing bodies feed, medicines, transport, etc - but they were applied to a system which was cemented into 1950s folklore. It got cranky if you dared suggest a change.

Lately, there has been a renewed effort to bring in fresh blood to the breed from Ireland and America. The same recipe needs to be used for the codess management and organisational structures.

Oh, on the one-turn versus circle track matter. Wrong question, fellas. What we need are better designed and built one-turns and better designed and built circle tracks. Better, that is, for the customers. If they like them, trainers will like them even more.

The study. I have looked and looked but can find no reference. No good me asking because they don't respond to my queries, especially not south of the Murray River.

Having said that, as an amateur, I can see some logic in it but I admit that is based on anecdotal evidence of a few cases.

Perhaps the problem is more one of messy procedures?

Several years ago, when Bob Cartwright was running the shop at Lidcombe, I got him to do a computer printout of trainer postcode numbers for the Central Coast and Hunter. The region then had 2,500 licensed persons and they were widely dispersed. While the total population has increased substantially, I doubt there has been much change in that number.

Anyway, your geographical points are right enough but what do they mean? Today, more efficient and airconditioned cars and trailers plus lots of freeways have changed the ball game. And trainers do not live in major towns but between them. And they get petrol money.

You might also remember that pre-1987 Hunter trainers used to trundle down the old Pacific Highway, through the middle of the Wyong shopping strip, round and round the snake-like road past Gosford and eventually end up at Harold Park, where their big dogs liked to race. Not occasionally, but every week.

The HP closure, plus strikes and whatnot at Beaumont Park, had a catastrophic impact on income in the region, to say nothing about any influences on breeding patterns. (Hunter dogs are bigger than WPK dogs - always have been).

My point is that geography and distances are always worth considering, and are allegedly included in discussions of club licensing and allocation of dates, but they can be overwhelmed by other factors. The lack of vision at GRA, GBOTA and the Dept of Racing in arbitrarily shutting down HP, without any replacement, had a monstrous effect on NSW racing, the Hunter in particular, and on the breed. The effects linger.

Note that in December 1927 there was one track in Sydney, four in the Hunter and zero anywhere else in Australia. Black Top and Chief Havoc must be turning in their graves now.

Maitland 565m - while an improvement on the 575m horror start it illustrates the blinkered thinking that governs track building in this country. The 565m is still on a slight bend but could well have been further improved by bashing down the fence, fiddling with the pen and installing the boxes where dogs could see straight down the back straight. Instead, the job simply followed the religious mantra that all starts must be located on the track proper. The prospect of a shute off to the side is never considered - hence interference is not only increased but guaranteed. (Repeat 50 times around Australia).

Maitland 680m? It was before my time but Maitland used to have a 700m trip. No idea why it disappeared. Both Beaumont Park and Singleton had longer trips. Both killed off.

Improved facilities at Maitland - see my earlier comments about the failure of the club/Show Society/Council/community to address the potential for development of a major multi-user facility.

Moss Vale - What you speak of was entirely due to volunteer ladies who were dedicated to and proud of the job they did. They also ran a funny local tote (on Quinellas, I think) out of an old caravan (probably illegally but who cares). The Moss Vale lesson - keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

"Love it or hate it, we need more one turn facilities in the state to cut out these diabolical 400m bend starts".

Mate, most of those crook 400m starts are on one-turn tracks. It is unavoidable wherever you have a standard 450m main trip. In such events even pushing them out wider will not help much in reducing interference. They are too close to the turn.

On the other hand, a 400m option on a circle track offers the opportunity of creating a mini-shute of much the same distance but where the dogs can look directly down the back straight. Gardens, Richmond and Ipswich are classic examples of that prospect but they all ignore or just fiddle with the option.

Gardens, for example, went from a 413m bend start to a 400m bend start (for $50k). Gosford shifted the boxes by 1m to the right and solved nothing. Richmond spent $0.7 million (in old money) in rebuilding the track to exactly what it was before. Ipswich just ignored the problem so that 67% of 431m winners are LAW runs and the hell with the rest of them. Angle Park installed a 388m start on the bend when it could have knocked down the fence - ditto Strathalbyn and Mt Gambier. And so on and so forth. Gawler is not too bad but is still on a slight bend.

The only reasonable 400m available is at Grafton.

I am basically in favour of any sub 550m distance that starts in a back/home straight with a reasonably distanced straight run to the first bend instead of starting where the corner comes up straightaway

In 600m races it is not usually as crucial but still not desirable

The tracks should be roomier and allow for these distances to start on a straight

If we had the funds available I would knock down and start over, but that's wishful thinking

Therefore, the next best option is to re-organize race programming that gives more meetings to one turn tracks that have the 350-500m starts at the top of a straight and to restrict the tighter tracks that currently have the 400m bend starts to 500m-700m racing only

If GRNSW had the balls to back up their welfare policies, that's what they should do

You have skipped over my point that there are literally dozens of tracks around the country where sometimes big money has been spent only to end up with the same old problems. The only conclusion is that either they have no idea what they are doing or they their objectives are not what most of us want to see.

So money has been available in the past - but badly spent. Whether that will be the case in future is problematical.

Also, I pointed out that there are no one-turn tracks - bar Grafton - where your idea is present or possible. But there are many circle tracks where a good 400 could be constructed providing the industry dumps the traditional practice of positioning starts on the track proper. A tiny example (design-wise) is the Canberra 600m but they did not quite go far enough.

600m designs are a problem as no matter that type of track you have you will always be forced to place the start somewhere near a bend. In those cases, we need to maximise the potential for putting them somewhere where they do the least harm. It's a tricky challenge but a necessary one as 600s are a popular and valuable part of the package.

For example, I don't much like the 400(bend) and 520(first turn) at Gosford but the 600m start is about as good as it gets and the nearby turn has a good camber. The 590m at Bulli also works reasonably. But virtually all other 600m starts at major tracks are smash and grab deals. It's just lazy designs.

I am not saying you are wrong, but firstly, money I agree, has been badly spent in the past, but its gone and won't come back

Secondly, with all the new regulatory burdens, we really don't have the cash flow now to reinvent the wheel and build and remodel many tracks

Therefore, my only solution at this time until the industry is able to build up new funds is to eliminate racing from 400m bend starts, re-direct those races to the current horseshoe tracks around the State, employ Temora, Goulburn, Wauchope, Grafton, Maitland and Bulli and may even require the re-introduction of Cessnock

The only area really lacking a one turn track is the Western plains ie Bathurst/Orange/Dubbo

This would be where a completely new facility could be built to house a dual track facility and there is also plenty of free land around Richmond to build a new one turn track

Richmond inner track could be used for city class racing and finally the sport is freed from Wentworth Park

That's how I would approach it, but it needs GRNSW to have some guts