Jump to content
The Race Place


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


mardigras last won the day on July 4

mardigras had the most liked content!

Recent Profile Visitors

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

mardigras's Achievements


Contributor (5/14)

  • Reacting Well
  • Dedicated
  • Very Popular
  • First Post
  • Collaborator

Recent Badges



  1. Well I think the powers are happy to just make shit up as they go. Evidence etc doesn't really come into it. The PoC to Australia may not be an issue if they indeed do not accept bets from off-shore punters. But I'm not sure that is the 'real' situation for all punters. And how does the implementation of the PoC work anyway given the easy ability to hide your ip address thereby clouding the point of consumption?
  2. No, the PoC hasn't been a factor - more that I'm not finding the value I would usually find (although barry not having the same issue). And as I now only have two betting options (betfair and NZ TAB), the pricing options are simply not as competitive as on other jurisdictions, and my limited choices make that worse. And I am having less and less confidence in my assessment of ability due to the variance presented in each track - making it difficult for me to actually determine where performance sits (this likely reflects in point 1). I'm not up with whether the PoC is being paid by offshore as yet. Given the reluctance of our governing organisations being open and transparent, I don't expect we will see such details. They will just group it up into something and report the revenue side, ignoring any other aspect. In your reading, is NZ therefore also paying PoC to the Australian states - my understanding was that NZ was not part of that. Can you confirm?
  3. Well 6 years ago, the TAB net profit was $144m. Compared to the TY budget of distributions of $138.7m, in a year where betting organisations have been delivering significant gains in revenue as a result of the covid situation. And they then write such bullshit comparing made up budget numbers. Set the budget to $50m and then go WOW, look what we've done. The racing industry itself in NZ has no relevance to the population anymore. In one year, I've reduced betting by about 80% on NZ racing - and I'm a long term punter. The comment above is spot on - you wouldn't know racing exists in this country. And the grand plan is just more of the same, make money from everywhere else, so that a few can carry on pretending anyone is interested. Pretty sad. If this was an area of business in a corporate world, it would be removed from the business, 100%. It is only going because no government has been prepared to deal with it properly. Probably in the hope that the continual mismanagement will ultimately lead to what has been happening anyway, self capitulation - which will make the decisions around continued government funding a lot easier some time in the future. Let's go back to 2006. Returns to the industry (based on the latest levy rates), would have been $130m (in 2006 money). Using the reserve bank calculator on CPI, that equates to $170m in todays money. Nearly all from racing, and the majority from NZ racing. And none of the $40m profit from pokies that they need now to get anywhere near that. Now we are in a lesser position (from a value of money perspective), and very little of that comes from NZ racing. Well done NZ TAB and code management. Give yourselves a pat on the back for such brilliance.
  4. I read an indicator from Greg Carpenter suggesting the horse (Incentivise) might get around 53kg for the cups. If that is the case, then he is handicapping on hype. I would certainly have expected him to get 50kg max. Still it will help the price I am laying him off at.
  5. Also, near on 40% of the world's population are in China/India - where the wealth divide is probably significantly greater than the model above.
  6. Spring racing getting closer. A few possibly interesting things. 1. The nomination date for both races has been brought forward to August 3rd. (largely due to point 2) 2. The new scanning/health and safety rules have not been met well with the Euros generally. Many stating they are too difficult to consider bringing horses over. Hence point 1 is to try and identify what the possible NH interest will be. 3. New hype horse Incentivise now heads the markets for both races. Yes, impressive winning races. At of course could well win these races. I'd be wary backing Incentivise, especially for the Caulfield Cup. The main issue this horse will face is that it likely will be weighted on the minimum. And given it has still been running around in late June, having had 8 starts this prep (first 3 as a maiden), it won't be able to have a long break and win races to lift its weight. Which is why I would be cautious around the Caulfield Cup. The horse will likely need to win a ballot free race to run in either. Most of the ballot free races into the Caulfield Cup are 2000m or less from now, outside the Herbert Power which would mean running back to back into the Caulfield Cup. And I'm not sure they will target those shorter races (could be wrong), if he targets those shorter lead in races, he would likely have to win the Caulfield Cup to then make the Melbourne Cup (or win the Hotham on Derby day). I suspect they will want to try and win the Bart Cummings as a ballot free Melbourne Cup race. It has been increasingly difficult to make the field just from weight penalties alone, when weighted on the minimum. And for those kiwis with horses they think are decent stayers, in the advent that the Euros don't come in any great numbers, this year gives NZ trained horses the likely best opportunity to win these races. The depth without the Euros will be shallow, even with the NH horses already trained there. I might be wrong, but the current direction the fields are taking is full of a bunch of hacks.
  7. Probably because they are still the official jockey - as they have not had a replacement yet (officially). And they will be slow to update when they happen.
  8. Plenty of sports world wide that are played by few.
  9. Yes, I think US$. And I agree. The contributors are generally under-rewarded, and things like minimum wage won't change that.
  10. From Statista. pretty much as expected and likely continually changing in the same direction. And I'm not actually against this outside of the issue I have of the disparity between the risk takers and the people that actually are largely involved in generating that income. Something that is also unlikely to change any time soon. • Chart: The Global Pyramid Of Wealth | Statista
  11. It's kinda one of the reasons comparing generations is largely pointless. Different environments, different advances in other things around physical performance, money etc. Was John Walker better than runner x - even if x runs faster. He probably was.
  12. I don't mind some stirring. Perhaps they look inferior because they don't dominate like they did. Of those, WI is inferior, as they had massive strength, especially in bowling. India and England would be superior to what they were in the 80s. Here's some stirring - perhaps the pitches in the 80s were inferior, making half decent bowlers look good?
  13. Except it hardly every happened. You love stats. Try these. Look at the balls per wicket variances.
  14. Yes, the main difference to me is the ability to bowl sides out. In the 80s, NZ needed Hadlee so much, now they have 3 that succeed at a rate well beyond the others from the 80s, and well beyond what most NZ teams have had - removing the dependency on one player. And that is without Jamieson.
  15. Whilst not a lot to be gained comparing generations, I would still disagree. Whilst many of them were very good players, they were really only considered 'legends' because they were the best we had for a long period. The current group have been playing consistent across all forms of cricket for some time. Ranked first in tests (before winning the championship), 1st in ODI, and 3rd in T20. I would have attended close to every test played at the basin during the 80s, and they simply didn't have the consistency -outside of Hadlee who is a standout, and Crowe. And that was at home. And that is a ground where they should have had an advantage. Yes they broke some new ground with some of the results achieved, but I would take the current side if I had to choose one to send in.
  • Create New...