Jump to content
Craig's 5 Winners Spring Summer Comp Second to Last Day Feb 22
Sir Gee Gee's(Sir Gallivant/Rex) HARNESS Comp continues FEB 23RD OAMARU - BURNIE
[[Template core/front/profile/profileHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

mardigras last won the day on February 14

mardigras had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

341 Excellent

About mardigras

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Enable
  1. mardigras

    Catalyst $1.10

    This is a good question. I use a set method of determining chance which is related to horse performance based around time of performance overall and with some consideration around distance/track condition (and a few other things around horse history). Those performances being related to its competitors in the same way. But my methods ignore finishing position and class of race, but they do use a method of allowing comparison between a time run on track A over distance B on assessed track condition C with any other time run on track D over distance E on assessed track condition F. So if a horse wins 10 G1s in a row but all in relatively slow time, the horse might well be brilliant, but I won't have assessed the horse to that degree. So it may well have been winning (which I ignore), but meet horses running faster in their prior races. The public may be happy to take $1.10, and I'll be different. The horse may then win as it was better than what it had shown on the track in terms of time. I'm happy for that to happen. And as you say, I'd have been likely to assess a horse as having a better chance relative to odds available - and betting on that would therefore lose in this example. For me, it's about whether the assessment works out over time. If I had 1000 Catalyst type events where I rated it say 1.60, I certainly expect that only around 600 of them won, not 900. If 900 times that won, then I'd be wanting to re-evaluate as to how I got it so wrong. Remembering of course, that a horse at $1.10 on the tote is afforded approximately a 71.3% - 77.8% chance of winning. Which isn't much more than someone who may have assessed the horse at a 63% chance? The difference being that even if you thought it had a 80% chance of winning, the $1.10 is still not value. You could say my methods are therefore wrong. And I'd be happy for anyone to think that. In all of Winx's Cox Plate wins, I rated her as less chance than the public, and she still won. I also ignore the rating the jurisdiction gives a horse - so I ignore whether the horse is rated 100 racing against a horse rated 60 - irrespective of the weight variance. The rating is someone else's assessment. (This is in respect of my pricing, not the 25% chance, but the idea is still the same)
  2. mardigras

    Racing Bill

    My opinion is that under the cost model of NZRB, NZ thoroughbred racing generates zero or close to it in net revenues (net betting revenue less costs associated with generating that net betting revenue). If it is positive, it wouldn't be by much. The $80m is coming from off-shore racing, sport and pokies in the main.
  3. mardigras

    Stratford RC

    Care to expand. We have little to go on apart from the turnover (which should be yield). But the costs to run the meeting at either venue is the same? Or not? NZTR fronts up with the same, the stakes were no doubt the same. I'm not sure what the apples and oranges are?
  4. mardigras

    Racing Bill

    Self funding as in what?
  5. mardigras

    Racing Bill

    The other issue with the submissions is that you get people that are commenting on things they know very little about. Suggesting that V'Landys has helped things in NSW is ill founded. There is a balancing act that needs to be undertaken in order to achieve the best for the industry as a whole whilst maintaining the levels of income a code body requires to create aspiration and incentive (and stakes). All V'Landys has done is taken the 'increase the cost to the punter option' . People that continually praise him should perhaps ask themselves one simple question. Why has he had to continually seek to change things such as race field fees, POC taxes, levy rates from the government - if all of his measures have been so great? The reason he has to do that, is because his measures directly impact the sustainability of what he is trying to achieve. And when he's gone, it'll be too late to realise the error of his ways. It's the same here. Taxing the punter more and more does not deliver more and more in the long term. It's a short term strategy.
  6. mardigras

    Racing Bill

    And great point about attracting punters. However, I don't see that changing with less tracks, if the money isn't spent on those track surfaces. Having more racing at Trentham, Awapuni, Te Rapa and Ellerslie will not deliver that attraction. They will still be crap with no confidence to many larger punters - the same issue they face now.
  7. mardigras

    Racing Bill

    Also, the sale of urban land around the major clubs in Australia - has not been to the benefit of RV or other code bodies etc - it has been to the benefit of the club itself. The issue they are all missing when they compare Australia to NZ when they talk about the wagering platform, is that in Australia they haven't suggested they should fund the industry well beyond what that wagering platform provides. In NZ, they all want huge stakes increases even though the wagering does not align with that. Comparing it to Australia is folly, since the wagering platform and the stakes model aligns there. We only have an issue because we want to provide stakes beyond the level of interest in betting on NZ racing. No doubt driven by what happens in Australia and the costs of rearing/training a horse to race. If we provided stakes of $10k maidens and Group ones at $100k, we might align a lot better. But no one wants to hear that.
  8. mardigras

    Racing Bill

    I've just watched the submissions put up by Curious elsewhere. Bloody interesting. And one of the areas I see where there is the split. There is the difference between those clubs that are subsidised compared to those that are doing the subsidising. Yet the politicians clearly haven't understood that (until perhaps now if they've understood the submissions). Something so damn obvious. Let alone the land grab aspect. And seeing my old mate Whiteman. That was a crackup.
  9. mardigras

    NZTR turnover data

    Maybe they could start presenting FO yields by meeting also.
  10. mardigras

    All things Derby

    She probably did. But she could sprint more than once in a race.
  11. mardigras

    All things Derby

    The more times a horse can sprint/accelerate in a race, the better. It's what made Sunline so good.
  12. mardigras

    All things Derby

    No doubt. But if they stay and don't have a turn of foot, then they likely don't win. At this stage, we have zero idea as to whether Vladivostok can run out a half decent 2400m - which is all that is often required. I'm not so confident in your view of many 3yos showing brilliance over 2000m not being able to do so in a derby. I'm not sure Buzz Lightyear had a decent turn of foot. He was a leader and that profiles a little differently. The horses that sprint often around the 350 - 250 to win races is what I like. Vladivostok did that. He just ranged up, but the distance he put on them in that 100m won the race. If you watch the three wins by Makybe Diva in the Melbourne Cup, they are all almost identical. She sprints at the 350 - 200 to set up a margin, then is being caught. to win by the same margin each time.
  13. mardigras

    Catalyst in Aus

    Whilst I agree tables could be turned (or another winner entirely), in the guineas. My view is the barrier and weight weren't a factor in the outcome. We'll never know either way. My additional view is that Catalyst actually had the better run in transit and still got beaten.
  14. mardigras

    All things Derby

    The key factor for me to win a derby is a turn of foot, as opposed to staying, imo.
  15. mardigras

    Avondale Cup

    True, but happens in most races and on the day, many horses just get in the way. This one didn't as we was last/second last nearly all the way.
×
×
  • Create New...