Is this common ? I don't use it much but a dip sample for Saturday Night, wasn't good. I switched elsewhere to watch others so I didn't miss any.

Additional Prizemoney Kicks In From December 1
By GRNSW

Tomorrow not only signals the first day of the final month of a tumultuous year, but December 1 is also very significant for greyhound racing participants in NSW.

Tomorrow will see the latest round of prize money increases in NSW, with an additional $800 being added to provincial events of 440m+, fifth grade and above, across the State.

It was only earlier this month when prize money for provincial maiden events increased by $440 per race, and Tomorrows increase is just the latest from Greyhound Racing NSW as part of the record $47 million which will be returned to participants in 2021-22.

From Tomorrow, a provincial 440m + fifth grade event will carry prize money of $3,110 up from $2,310, with the winner now receiving $2,000, an increase of $500.

Fourth grade provincial events of 440m + will also be total prize money of $3,290 up from $2,490, with the winner now receiving $2,100, an increase of $500.

The new numbers for provincial Non Grade 440m + events sees overall prize money rise from $2,630 to $3,430, with winners now receiving $2,200, again an increase of $500.

Further announcements around more dispersal of prize money will be made in coming months.

---------------------------------------------------------------
GRNSW now trying to build up racing pools for 440m+ greyhounds which is a good thing for the sport overall

There appears to be no cut back in sub-440m races which is pleasing and thus provides decent prizemoney for all greyhounds at all levels

Still would like to see Novice/Juvenile Grades introduced with premium prizemoney and futher increases in Maiden prizemoney

Im just hoping that greyhounds wont be stuck in kennels trying to gain a start because of track closures and types of races being programmed.

Once again, well done to GRNSW.

Many need upgrading and some need complete change

Richmond Straight has been added, arguably to replace Appin/Wyong straight tracks

Grafton has been completely changed

Tweed is on the agenda

Wentworth Park underwent major track adjustments a couple of years ago

What I think is pretty important, is even some of the tracks are closed for racing, that they are kept active and up to scratch totally subsidized by GRNSW to provide infrastructure for all trainers to educate and trial their greyhounds

Some of these tracks can have added training items like slipping runs, bull rings, fight back arms etc added to assist trainers to train their dogs to keep them fit and at a standard for racing

I think the latter is what is really missing, there are very few commercial private trial tracks anymore where you can take your pup to get it ready for racing

There is no question that a business like the greyhound industry evolves and we have been going through a transitional period for about six years, but that doesn't mean we should be closing tracks. How many thoroughbred tracks have been closed in the last five years.

Yes, some need upgrades, but we have / had $30 million over five years so surely we haven't spent it all just yet?

Taree underwent changes to bends and slope coming down from the 392m boxes. The kennel block and watering area before that. Contact the club for further details. To completely change it to loam is ridiculous. Yesterday's Taree Meeting looked good on the eye and the dogs navigated the track effectively, but I haven't read the stewards report. Congratulations to the Taree Club.

The reason why thoroughbreds race on grass is because it's the best surface to race on and grass doesn't get thrown up into the horses' and jockeys' faces like loam does all of the time. Wet tracks it might. Loam is not good for dogs, and some love to race on grass over loam and vice versa. So, choices should be available for our dogs on a point of welfare and racing. Weve improved our way of curating our tracks over the last few years.

Whilst you talk about all those extra facilities at tracks, Cessnock could cater for them and perhaps Wauchope, but not at the expense of racing at the latter. We should be expanding or improving the product, not contracting it. Armidale could have been given a `facelift' and same with Coonabarabran, but gooone! If Tamworth is still the same Tamworth, it's political that it is still around. However, they were interested in going to a much bigger site in the same town, but it hasn't eventuated. The talk and vibe about it was encouraging.

How long has Tweed been on the Agenda? A few years ago, they were talking about putting a track in at Murwillumbah. It's a lovely little town, but it floods! It needs higher ground.

How long has it been for new track to be built on the GC? Im told it wont happen. Stay tuned I have more to talk / write about in relation to S/E QLD racing.

Sandro, I take your points but I would re-word it a bit.

First, I can see it is vital to make training facilities available at every possible location. There is more demand for that than for actual racing. It is an essential tool that helps make the product.

Second, we have seen relatively little closure of tracks and only then for realistic reasons - eg Orange, Cessnock and Penrith were surplus to requirements while other shutdowns were a long time ago or (for Tweed Heads) unrelated to basic administrative factors.

Third, the number of tracks has been typically influenced by the location of trainers, not by any demand from the public. The converse is that potential closures almost always get a reprieve lest the voters react against the government/Minister.

Fourth, the survival or progress of any track is always subject to the opinion of GBOTA or NCA, and is not a measure of the authorities ' business assessment on behalf of the entire industry (eg the loss of Appin and Wyong straight tracks). That is also why we ended up with a dumb deal on the IDC.

In the final analysis, the number of tracks must be set up and limited to those which can contribute positively to the industry - financially and in other ways. That means those which can attract plenty of dogs and plenty of customer support and therefore also justify statewide promotion. That is not occurring today.

That overflow is why we have ended up with a very mixed bag of tracks today - too many to allow the industry manager to achieve excellence. Consequently, everyone has to be satisfied with second ort third best.

We'll done NSW long time coming but finally some positive progress.
Hopefully the raise in prize money will have similar results as the high prize money levels have in QLD.
The number of new names in the training ranks has increased substantially. Good to see hopefully it will happen in NSW.

I wont go on about some serious career ending injuries at three major NSW loam tracks. I hope its just a bad week.

A few years ago when the gubberment was planning to close us down I googled the number of thoroughbred tracks (TAB and non-TAB) in NSW. I believe there were about 120 tracks. I doubt if there have been track closures since, but I could be wrong.

If our product is to remain strong we need to stop closing down tracks? Wauchope is a viable club. How is it possible to breed more when there is a likelihood of dogs remaining in kennels? Are they only wanting to race more at certain tracks close to Sydney?

GRNSW took two meetings from the MNC recently and gave them to Gosford and The Gardens when it was for certain MNC (Taree / Wauchope) would have fielded strong programs. That's their business, but I disagree with it. Try closing down one of the northern region tracks and see what happens.

We have to continue to strengthen regional racing. All regions. There will be a time when we leave Wenty Park, we won't look back.

Has the industry signed another contract to stay at Wenty Park because I think we only have one or two years left on the current lease?

Currently, there are about 130 tracks.

Mark Donohue wrote:

How is it possible to breed more when there is a likelihood of dogs remaining in kennels?

There are about seventy to eighty nominations left over for tomorrow's Taree's 12 Race Meeting. That's one example.
.
.

Mark Donohue wrote:

Has the industry signed another contract to stay at Wenty Park because I think we only have one or two years left on the current lease?

I'm told, but it's unconfirmed, that the lease has around five more years to run.

Qld beautiful one day, perfect the next!

As illustrated by the Olympic Park complex, the action in Sydney is and will be strongly concentrated in the triangle from Strathfield out to Badgery's Creek and across to Penrith - with Parramatta as the focal point.

Wenty is gone. The five years until the lease runs out is barely enough time to think about the long term but that's what needs to happen. The track badly needs a complete re-build but that is not going to happen. Others can make use of the building, or just knock it down. Put it up for disposal and you will get knocked down in the rush.

Forget Richmond - it's more remote and flooding in the area will always remain an issue. It can remain as a strong provincial circuit to back up the main chance.

The search should be on to (a) identify a new location and (b) find partners to establish a good business case for a premium track cum business/entertainment centre - all within the above triangle.

The longer we leave this task the harder it will get.

In fact, for anyone who considers GRNSW is a good manager, this challenge is what will separate the wheat from the chaff.

They already had an under utilised track at Menangle and big money was made selling HP to the developers. BIG MONEY! We don't own WP so totally different and though it's a one mile track and great for racing, I don't think they are doing any better in TAB turnover, now that they are out there and it's for the die hards.

I grew up watching HP trots and greyhounds and WP greyhounds and they sure were a spectacle. Fast-forward and Covid hasn't helped and from a marketing perspective, there is no atmosphere at the track.

GRNSW has very little chance of finding acreage to operate a City track because no government will approve a track that will be swalloped up by urban small, which is now and been going on for twenty years or more. That means Richmond will have to do. It's no WP, but ..... it's either WP or Richmond. The problem is that GBOTA operate WP and Richmond operate independently of GBOTA.

Bruce Teague wrote:

As illustrated by the Olympic Park complex, the action in Sydney is and will be strongly concentrated in the triangle from Strathfield out to Badgery's Creek and across to Penrith - with Parramatta as the focal point.

Buckley's chance of finding anything in the triangle. With the Airport coming, purchasing land will blow the budget for the next ten years. Don't expect the Gov't to give us money. Gladys and others wanted us to fall over in five years. Here we are. Still surviving with a legislated inquiry almost or just completed.

Bruce Teague wrote:

Wenty is gone. The five years until the lease runs out is barely enough time to think about the long term but that's what needs to happen. The track badly needs a complete re-build but that is not going to happen. Others can make use of the building, or just knock it down. Put it up for disposal and you will get knocked down in the rush. Forget Richmond - it's more remote and flooding in the area will always remain an issue. It can remain as a strong provincial circuit to back up the main chance. The search should be on to (a) identify a new location and (b) find partners to establish a good business case for a premium track cum business/entertainment centre - all within the above triangle. The longer we leave this task the harder it will get.

There is nowhere. There is no land for it. It's all for the developers.

Bruce Teague wrote:

In fact, for anyone who considers GRNSW is a good manager, this challenge is what will separate the wheat from the chaff.

He is aware of the dilemna.

Did it fallover?

Fairfield Showground is still under-utilized