- This topic has 40 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
I’ve never understood the desire to attract the best quality horses. Occasionally it has concerned some top class horses but not as a rule.
Halve the prize money, pay down to the first six only.See if we get such a multiplicity of entries from the usual sources after that.Can’t see the prize money cut idea working. As gillamandango says why not increase the prize money for a British winner if going down that path as in general British prize money is a pittance. What if the sponsor doesn’t want an Irish winner to get less? And what would you do with the extra money leftover in the event of an Irish winner?
The idea of cutting the prize money for an Irish winner in the National would have zero effect and field would be more or less the same.Nick Smith from Ascot is always jetting around the world trying to encourage foreign runners to Royal Ascot. What would he do if they started winning all the races there?
If Willie Mullins is restricted in numbers in certain races, what’s to stop Patrick Mullins starting training and getting the same allowance in races and even Willie’s missus?
The French have much better prize money than you get here.
The bigger problem for me has been the number of horses running in the same silks rather than from what yard they come from. The prize money for the race was boosted some years back and has not made it a better race. Halving of prize money may just deter throwing so many darts.
The failure of top British trainers to establish middling quality staying chasers from plenty of promising novices is another matter. I think the concentration of larger strings is anti competitive and I’d contend plenty of them would be better off in smaller set ups. Henderson said he has to keep Seven Barrows choc a bloc to make it pay. It doesn’t seem a good model
“The French have much better prize money than you get here.”
So has pretty much everywhere. Why? Pari mutuel systems. But, of course, you’d have people up in arms if their “choice” were taken away here. And the first ones to complain would be the bookmakers.
Don’t have a big issue with multiple runners from one owner because it really is only JP and Gigginstown that can go mob handed to that extent and if each of their horses have raced and attained a high enough rating to get into the race (where others haven’t) then you can’t argue with that.
The big handicap chases in Ireland are most often big competitive fields (as are their maiden hurdle races etc…couldn’t possible be down to less overall racing though), which you can’t always say for the English counterparts and throwing more money at the race(s) will not matter if the horses either simply aren’t there to run in them or fail to attain a high enough rating to get qualified for the race.
I do think that the compressing of the handicap range to encourage the ‘more classier horse’ to enter and thus making it infinitely harder to get rated high enough to even get in at the bottom of the handicap range has had an impact too on numbers.
Also a major difference is that the Irish are now retaining more of their breeding stock that in times past would have been sold over to England to race and for me it is down to the English trainers to build up a better networking system in order to source the young horses….something that Mullins has a distinct advantage over pretty much every other trainer either side of the water.
The race has suffered from being over fiddled with (sometimes even when it wasn’t needed) for too many years and that has landed us where we are now…..another long distance staying chase that just happens to be run over a non park course with different looking fences – no matter how the Powers/ITV Racing try to dress it up, the National is no longer the race it once was and a lot of it has been due to self inflicted meddling.
“the National is no longer the race it once was”
———————————————–Good.
Value Is Everything“Cut the Prizemoney? Alternatively, leave the pot as it is, and add a 25% bonus to the UK winner, if that is a path you think should be followed”.
—————————————-There is only a certain amount of prize money to go around.
The “bonus” prize money needs to come from somewhere.…So if the level of prize money was left exactly as it is now – for say 5 years…
And then we announce a bonus… That would be ok by you because the prize money would not have been “cut”?Cutting the prize money for overseas trained winners would make it less economic for multiple entries too.
Value Is Everything“Can’t see the prize money cut idea working. As gillamandango says why not increase the prize money for a British winner if going down that path as in general British prize money is a pittance. What if the sponsor doesn’t want an Irish winner to get less? And what would you do with the extra money leftover in the event of an Irish winner?
The idea of cutting the prize money for an Irish winner in the National would have zero effect and field would be more or less the same.Nick Smith from Ascot is always jetting around the world trying to encourage foreign runners to Royal Ascot. What would he do if they started winning all the races there”?
————————————————————–
I’d love there to be 33% more for a British win added to existing prize money, Yeats. But where does the money come from?
As Glad’ rightly says, Britain’s punters won’t be happy with a Tote monopolyYou’re dead right – cutting prize money for overseas winners (or as I’d prefer to say “those winners without the bonus”) – would have zero effect on this year and probably next year too. Which is why I did say “long term”. As in – encouraging British owners to come back to British yards is likely to take a bit of time. Once they’re back and once better horses have been trained for a few years by British trainers… Then it should make a difference.
tbh I wish Nick Smith would stay in his office.
Australian sprinters are far less successful nowadays at Ascot. Why? Could it be something to do with the coinciding with the much harsher steroid rules they’ve now got over there? I seem to remember Takeover Target’s trainer saying their success is because they’ve got a different breed. TT was by Celtic Swing.
…And American rules are not the same as ours – making it far easier to get muscle onto 2 year olds… Their horses come over and compete against European horses that have not been allowed those drugs… And the American trainer that does best over here has been in trouble in his native country several times for even breaking their rules… and gets his wrist slapped for it.Value Is EverythingTwo things that could be done:
1. Tighten up the qualifying conditions. Currently it is just required for a horse to have finished in the first four in a chase over 3M or more at any point in its career. So if you finish 4th of 5 in a 3M novice chase, even if only four finish, you’re qualified for the National. I would opt for either ruling out novice races as a way to qualify, or make it first four in a race with at least 10 runners. And I’d extend the rule to first six in races like the Hennessy and other named major handicaps.
2. Introduce a quota system. Maximum field is 34, then only 14 (or 16, or 20) can be Irish trained. And leave it up to the Irish authorities to decide how they select the runners to fill the quota. Seems to me to be a perfectly reasonable thing to do, given that most of the prize money comes from UK sources.
If you have a quota system with let’s say 14 Irish and 20 home runners, most likely the home team might be represented by horses rated under 130. That would go right in the opposite direction when you allow inferior animals to contest such a grueling test just because their owners and trainers have different passports.
In the top races you want to see the top horses. But, I wouldn’t mind having the so-called Nationals acting like a qualification race for the GN. For instance the top three from the Welsh version would automatically qualify, if they meet the remaining criteria for participating in the race.
You could also add a small breeding bonus for GB bred horses. But what exactly is a British bred horse? Do sire AND dam have to be British bred or just one of them? What exactly defines the nation of the foal if the parents are British and French?
Although it’s good to get some classy horses running I don’t think attracting the best horses should be what this race is about. Look at some flat races with big fields, the Cesarewitch or Cambridgeshire perhaps. Certainly decent quality but rarely top drawer.
If the visiting public are racegoers or interested tv viewers they should expect to see a good few horses that have been running on home courses. Qualifying races should perhaps be prescribed and highlighted to deter the seldom seen types who may have mopped up the odd placing behind something good in a novice or beginners
I think AP’s idea is an excellent suggestion.
Maybe with a the maximum field being 34 it would be fair to have – half the field – a 17 runner maximum for Irish trained horses? Although would some get a late switch to a yard in Britain? I suppose a rule could be found to stop that potential loophole.Giving the Irish authorities the choice of how they find those 17 may also lessen the criticism.
If possible I would like to see at least some “win and you’re in” Irish races too.
Maybe the Kerry and Munster Nationals, Troytown, Paddy Power Chase, Thyestes, Irish Grand National (possibly first 4 in the latter).
Looking through the top Irish handicaps, I hadn’t realised before how few top races they have at more than 3 miles. Could be why they seem to be less exposed when moving up to the Grand National trip. There are the Killarney and Cork Nationals and Quinbet type of races, but those don’t seem to be worth as much as the 3m races and so don’t seem to attract many of the top handicappers that get into the Grand National.
Value Is EverythingI do love to see a Grade 1 horse run in a handicap, but they are handicaps and I agree Pilgarlic, the class thing has been overplayed.
Value Is EverythingMark, if you want to have the 50:50 rule which equals 17 runners from both countries, still try to have a minimum handicap mark. For instance an OR of 144. If both countries have enough horses rated at 144 or above there will be 17 runners each. If one country doesn’t have enough of the above mentioned runners, then allow the other one to fill the gap with it’s entries. The race shouldn’t be open for horses 10 lbs. below a certain mark.
At present the 17th GB horse in the remaining entries is the 137 rated Good Boy Bobby. (Current rating 135 as he has dropped a couple of lb running in veterans’ chases since the weights came out). GB first reserve would be Tommie Beau on 136. Actually they are kind of old style National horses- neither has fallen or UR in a combined total of 46 chase starts andd Tommie Beau definitely stays 4 miles (although GBB possibly doesn’t).
There are 11 GB horses rated 144+ in the entries.
I do like the idea of win and you’re in races, but it would probably have to be “highest placed GB horse in GB qualifier and you’re in”, otherwise the usual suspect Irish trainers would target the Welsh and Scottish Nationals and what have you more heavily.
Unless they do Richard Newland’s idea of just banning the Irish from everything except Cheltenham and maybe the Grand National itself…but then how do you handicap GB and Irish horses against each other if there is so little crossover? My guess would be that the GB horses would end up on inflated marks, so at least they would get into the race…but they would then be hammered by better handicapped Irish horses.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.