Even a properly re-built Richmond would do.

A BIG FAT NO from me.

Hang on. Let me re-think that question.

Q. Do 500m dogs need more work (trialling & exercise) then 300m racing dog when preparing them to race?
A. Yes.

Q. 300m racing dogs can run twice a week, every week bar injury. Would you, therefore race a 500m racing dog exactly the same?
A. Only if your a d1ck3@d and want to break the dog down in less then 3 months.

Summary.

Then....Why the bloody hell would I race a dog over 500m for $5000 when I could race over 300m twice a week, every week and have the chance to win $10,000.

Bugger it. What was I thinking? Can I please change my mine to yes.

YES 300m racing dogs should have the right to earn the same prizemoney of $5,000 at Wentworth Park as that means I have to do less, to earn more. I don't really give a rats ar$3 if the punters hate betting on these suicide races because there's no incentive for me to aim higher anymore due to equal prizemoney opportunities.

Think about it everybody for a minute..........$10,000 a week or $5,000.

Arhhh bugger it. I may as well start breeding to short course stud dogs while I'm at it to help guarantee speedy squibs.

Yes it's true.....I'd rather watch 500m or even 700m dog races any day of the week, but now there's no reason to pursue that avenue anymore so lets all go 300m.

Come on everybody. Lets ALL breed short-course races. Less work, more earn.

PS...I'm a Owner, Breeder & an ex-trainer....But I might come out of retirement if equal prizemoney rights catch on all over Australia because all I have to do is load them into the trailer & rock up at the track to have the chance to win twice as much....I'm sold.

----

Distance dogs, seriously? We don't breed them anymore. We have bred selectively for speed so assign prizemoney equally and proportionate to demand. rewarding for distance is so 1990's. Wish it wasn't but this is through our own breed for speed needs.

I would like to see higher prizemoney to distance dogs but ONLY if they reinstate handicap distance racing with staggered starts. Can't see that happening anytime soon unfortunately.

I also want hurdles to make a come back as well. Particularly miss Olympic Park handicap hurdles over distance. Short of that everything Jodie Lord said!

Therefore, higher prizemoney should definitely be allocated to the these races to reward trainers, owners and breeders for their work, dedication and patience

Of course, dogs who can't definitely get past 450m need to be catered for, I wouldn't like to see a reduction on their money, but at least the prizemoney for the higher distances increased

All our classic and open races are mainly at 500-600m and beyond and this is where the funds should be aimed at development of greyhounds

I generally agree with your last post but would like to emphasise that 500m racing is the gold standard for good reason. It tests both the speed and the strength of the average greyhound (as we know it today). It challenges the knowledge and skills of the breeder and trainer to bring dogs up to or close to that standard. And the fans like races of that length or longer.

Those features sponsor the maintenance or improvement of the breed, which must always be the prime objective. If we fail there the code is doomed and no-one has a job.

A negative has been that track layouts have never matched that same quality standard but at least that is getting some attention now.

A 500m race implies a circle track but there is no reason why one-turns in the 450m/480m category should not do well at the same time. They help cater for a greater variety of racing types, particularly wide runners, and can often be just as testing as the longer circle trips or sometimes more so (eg Bulli, Horsham, and could I mention Harold Park?).

Equally, straight track racing over 350m/366m (but not 300m trips!) serves a genuine purpose; it is demanding enough on its own and caters for special needs such as dogs returning from injury or those which have trouble getting around a corner. What on earth is NSW going to do to fill the gap, and why has it not done it already? Ditto for coursing.

All other sub-350m trips serve no purpose at all other than to occupy the time for weak dogs which happen to be good at jumping out of a box or not. They certainly do not contribute to the advancement of the breed.

The corollary of all this is that if you hammer the 500m needs you will also get a number which can handle 600m or 700m, perhaps with extra specialised treatment.

The way our industry is structured, the only way of achieving the desired objective is to pay for it less for the shorts, more for the longs. For example, a 20% standard premium over the 500m group will justify the longer time taken to qualify a would-be stayer. Obviously, there are breeding implications, too, but I leave that for greater minds than mine.

A key point is that it has taken a couple of decades to get to the stage where speed-speed-speed is now the dominant or sometimes the only factor. To bring about change, we need to set objectives for 2025 and 2030 and work hard to get there. Start now.

* * * * *

Slow/weak dogs: Off to the bush. Non-Tab but with modest support. Or, if appropriate, create Non-Tab meetings at TAB tracks.

Handicap races: No problem. A bit of variety. But take care when publishing stats.

Hurdle races: A dead duck. We all loved watching but injury rates were higher. Too few dogs were trained for the job. Usually, one or two dogs dominated and the rest were wasting their time.

Dog population: A totally different question. A matter of marketing, PR and public image.

You will see all betting pools for each race. Now if I use just those as my guide and compare all provincial 400m races or less to 450m provincial races or greater you can be assured 450m plus races generate on average minimum $5k EXTRA turnover per race.

For every 100 races that's $500, 000 EXTRA TURNOVER. This could be 10 million plus each year. And that's ONLY based off TAB figures.

Think using short course as a stepping stone to greater distance is a must but also believe prize money must reflect.

what are you on about, no one is stopping you from nominating a 500 mtr dog over the shorts , then you won't have to "train" them so hard...lol

Malcolm Smart wrote:

Ok lets look at opinions do 300 mtr dogs that race at WP deserve the full prizemoney answer below and state whether you are an owner or trainer or gambler or in obnoxious case an anti.... me = YES / trainer

Give yourself an upper-cut ---> EXTERNAL LINK

just trying to find out why you can't put your dogs over the 300, since you can if you don't train them as hard..

Its ok , the Trainers say YES, only the Owner/breeders say no, so Ill take that as a YES..

Until that is shortened to 270m