Jump to content
The Race Place
HARNESS COMP
PJ's 5 to Win Comp ROUND 3 - Trentham Sat Dec 5 - 9 races + one from Oz - closes 12.39pm Races 1-9: Trentham card Race 10: Doomben Race 5 - Roku Gin Winning Rupert Plate

mardigras

Members
  • Content Count

    1,996
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    49

mardigras last won the day on October 5

mardigras had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

911 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. SC, have you ever investigated things like price (and any assessed chance you may have done), to see where the overall outcomes are more in your favour at various chance/price levels or at price/chance ratios. I do see quite a number of very high priced winners - so is that something you have analysed from past performance to see how that goes in relation to your selections? Do you actually invest in these - or are they more of an idea whereby you may back some and not others as the program of races unfolds?
  2. mardigras

    2020 3yo crop

    Doesn't Mongolian Khan rate - went one better than Veandercross by winning the Caulfield Cup as a 4yo after winning two Derbies.
  3. Awesome. When I'm back home, I'll give it a read.
  4. No, poor decision to invest in an AWT given the state of the turf tracks and the current sustainability of the NZ industry. I don't see AWTs changing the overall revenue generation relating to NZ racing, or the overall attraction of NZ racing to additional participants. I would have preferred to see investment in a complete overhaul on a cyclic basis of the current tracks, to get the current infrastructure up to an accepted standard long term, rather than introducing a new piece. It's trying to plug an issue by not addressing the issue imo.
  5. But maybe allowing the extension of some to continue a prep. (Even though in NZ right now, I think it is a poor decision).
  6. HK? With all the extra revenue, they'll be competing stakewise with them soon enough.
  7. Any rise in the Vic numbers from 7 up - is just as likely to be unrelated to the number of starters. The number of races diminishes the higher up you go, creating greater impact +/- from outlier events. In the data I put up, both 11 and 12 starters had lower average per runner than 7 starters. Betfair is in line with expected - since they are fixed odds. Smaller fields will have higher betting per runner typically as highly favoured runners attract disproportionately higher fixed odds betting. On the tote with very small field sizes, you would expect less betting - the commissio
  8. The issue with what they write is that it seems to me they think they can still run the same number of races - but each with more starters, and therefore more revenue. But it won't work out like that.
  9. Doesn't really matter how the TAB came to be. It was still afforded special privileges by the government (and whatever the past, IS a government entity). And sports betting and off-shore racing were never a part of what was the original TAB. If the TAB starts acting as a hotel booking site or a bungee operator, I guess that's OK as well since they have a brand name that has been created over many years and the man in the street loves to go to hotels and travel around. More non income taxing paying money for the good of the racing industry. The TAB is now simply a government vehicle f
  10. Taking the races/starters and stake information from the NZTR report. If you reduced the number of races to 1450, retained the same number of horse starts, you would end up with average stake over $30k. It's about programming, not field size as such. And you would run less meetings overall which reduces the costs of running meetings. You would then get the opportunity to reduce total stake payout (instead of upping the average to $30k), spend more on infrastructure as you try to alter the ratio of betting attraction between NZ and off-shore by making racing more attractive here.
  11. The income streams are a form of benefit handout. That's all they are. NZ Racing management seem happy to continue on that path. Says a lot about the type of people in NZ Racing management.
  12. I said I would put up some data around betting and field size. The idea that more revenue will be generated from larger fields is simply not something that is known to happen (long term). You could create greater efficiencies around the year's races by better programming, but the revenue generated annually isn't likely to correlate with field size, unless your program is stuffed. Below is from 4 years of NZ gallops betting. There is little difference between the turnover per starter at the low numbers to the higher number of starters for the commingled pool of VIC TAB (NZ TAB inclusive).
  13. I'd expect it will only change when the situation becomes more evident to the public. Most wouldn't realise the situation NZ racing is in with regards to how it is funded. So the government is able to sweep the situation under the carpet in the hope the masses don't find out. Send him an email asking him if the government would be able to set up a 'vehicle' such as the TAB whereby that vehicle could make non income tax paying profits and distribute that across all the restaurants in NZ so that restaurants overall can keep going even when they are unsustainable themselves. Maybe we can hav
  14. "and the synthetic tracks will also produce significant savings for owners" "The Cambridge Jockey Club and NZTR began planning for the synthetic track some time ago, with the involvement of the Provincial Growth Fund [PGF] allowing the scale of the project to be extended. A robust business case was compiled and was further examined by RITA before the PGF funding was confirmed." The robust business case is so robust, they would have made it public surely. Anyone seen it? I also like how they make sweeping statements such as producing significant savings, but what backs this state
  15. The whole idea behind tiered racing is farcical here. Punters don't give a toss about it - the major tracks get the premier meetings (with the excess funding), but the punters aren't any more interested in them than any other meeting on a comparable date. And none of the meetings are anywhere able to fund themselves from betting revenues. Time to increase the pokies venues.
×
×
  • Create New...