- This topic has 214 replies, 31 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
One last comment – Cjboy suggested earlier that owners were subsidising punters. I’d argue that we are actually subsidising racecourses to a far geater extent. Punters can bet on other things, and we know that they do, but the tracks will always need owners to supply them with horses.
AP
THat’s not an argument, it’s a fact. I totally agree with you, my previous comment was a reaction to the fact that there seem to be far more punters that racecourse owners posting on here.
Anyone can download the annual report of Arena, in which they brag about increasing profits and future profit growth due to the media rights income they are set to receive.
I would argue that the funding of racing, when considered properly, counting both the levy and the media rights income, is nothing like as bleak as the prize money decline would suggest.
The big problem is that the racecourses have received the media rights income, not a central fund for racing, so it is disappearing outside the sport in dividends and taxes on profits made by racecourses.
CJB
So tomorrow’s Lingfield card is the first over the jumps to be boycotted, in part or in whole, by some of the sport’s leading figures over the prize pots put up. Whilst drawing conclusions on the basis of the entry for that meeting and that one alone may verge on the premature, there are nevertheless a few details that leap out straight away.
1) Whilst the initial entry wasn’t huge, the final declarations number 53 in total. That’s just one fewer than the better financially stocked card at Ayr tomorrow, where
– the going will be similar if not an increment better,
– the pool of horses in the course’s usual catchment area gagging for a run is still presumed sizeable enough (with normal service still being tentatively resumed after that 37-day run without a meeting in Scotland alone) for a better turnout to have been mustered.
2) The Lingfield boycotters include among their number trainers that hardly bless the the course with a steady supply of runners as it is. Mr Hobbs has sent a mere 13 jumps runners to Leafy in the last five seasons, Mr Henderson also 13, Mr Nicholls 13 again, and Mr Pipe 29.
Even allowing for the comparative paucity of jumps meetings at the venue in its Equitrack / Polytrack era, let’s not be convinced into thinking a grand total of 68 combined runners from these trainers spread over 22 meetings at Lingfield since the start of the 2006-7 jumps season represents an especially vast, significant level of patronage that is going to fizzle to nought should a boycott endure.
Those totals don’t consist solely of runners in the sort of lower-rated, lower-remunerated contests under attack, in any event. The most recent surviving running of the Grade 2 December Chase, for example, comprised a three-runner affair – Burton Port represented Henderson, Massassoit represented Nicholls, and Bench Warrent turned out for that other friend of courses offering small prize-pots, Charlie Mann.
Nicholls has been equally contented to run the likes of Michael Muck in the December Chase, Five Dream in the Summit Junior, Super Foremen and Hoo La Baloo in a class 2 handicap… and so the total continues to erode.
Take such races out of the equation, and it starts to become increasingly dubious how much Lingfield actually
needs
this Gang Of Four to pad out its bread-and-butter race fields, anyway. Lingfield’s ownership by Arena Leisure may have helped influence the decision, but at this remove it seems (at least) that its singling out for this particular statement of intent from the top trainers hasn’t made quite the earth-shattering impact as yet. Maybe it will in due course.
Now cold-shouldering races at somewhere like a Huntingdon, perhaps, may have represented a more significant shot across the bows…
gc
Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
Premiership Racing and Championship Racing, dear oh dear if we actually get to that type of labelling – which I’m sure RfC would love.
If football is an example then the lower tiers will bounce along on the bones of their a**e being offered occasional crumbs.
But hell, the top level raises all the income so why shouldn’t it keep it rather than act in a responsible way for the good of the sport overall.
League One club supporter
Anyone remember "banded Racing" or was it "regional racing" ?
It was utter dross whatever it was called, and it didn’t work
More on Lingers courtesy of the RP. Make of it what you will:-
Lingfield numbers down on first day of tariffs
LINGFIELD’s seven-race jump card on Monday, which is the first day of the Horseman’s Group’s recommended prize-money tariffs, has attracted 53 declarations, down on the 91 from last year’s eight-race fixture.
Four of Monday’s races fail to meet the minimum levels and leading trainers Paul Nicholls, Nigel Twiston-Davies, Philip Hobbs and David Pipe gave their verdict on the tariffs by not entering anyhorses at all.
Hobbs said this week: "As from Monday I am not intending to enter in races below the tariffs where it is possible."
Nicky Henderson had made entries, but he targeted the beginners’ chase which is more than £1,100 above the tariff. However, he did not declare his runners.
There were five double-figure fields declared 12 months ago compared to just one – the mares’ bumper – on Monday.
Flat-racing bands are effective from April 2.
Think I read in today’s RP that the overall value of the card fails to meet the Horseman’s Tariff by just £240.
At least someone else has the chance to win
Have had a look at the tariff versus guaranteed prizemoney at Lingfield today, not including the all weather bumper…
Time… Tarrif… Actual… Abv. Tarrif
02:05… 2834… 4000…02:35… 3924… 3400…
03:10… 4742… 4100…
03:40… 2616… 3000…
04:15… 2834… 3100…
04:45… 3924… 3400…
Whats interesting is that the three tariff surplus races (£1816) could have paid for the tariff deficit races -£1690 and brought all 6 races above the tariff therefore increasing the possibility of normal entries and making it a more each-way punter and levy friendly card. Were Lingfield hoping to attract some decent newcomers in the beginners chase with the relatively large prizemoney in the 2:05? Seems to have backfired if that’s the case. Gary Moore and Venetia Willams are two of the more notable trainers to seemingly ignore the tariff today.Anyone remember "banded Racing" or was it "regional racing" ?
It was utter dross whatever it was called, and it didn’t work
Still got it, look at most all weather meetings like today’s at Wolves.
Don’t know why anyone would put up claimers as a good idea unless they were farming them, they are largely uncompetitive.
Don’t see what is wrong with the excellent idea put forward on here last year of graded racing replacing most handicaps, seems worth a try with so little money to go round, the further up the pyramid you go the more you compete for. No reason to believe the races wouldn’t be as at least as competive as handicaps, probably more so.Cav,
The position with the Beginners Chase at Lingfield this afternoon exposes the stupidity of this idea of a tariff.
The reason this race offers prize money higher than the tariff, is because Lingfield have called it a Class 5 race. Why is it a Class 5 race – because Lingfield have set the prize money at a lower level than is normal for a Beginners Chase, the majority of which are run as Class 4 races. In the next two months, Folkestone is the only other track running such a race as a Class 5 contest.
So here’s the Catch 22. If Lingfield had put up an extra £500 for this race, it would almost certainly have been regraded as a Class 4 contest. But as a Class 4 chase on a Monday offering £4,500 in prize money, it would have been BELOW that Horsemens Tariff!
So Lingfield actually look better by offering less money, at least by the warped accounting used to develop this tarrif.
AP
I too felt that there were a few stables mopping up all the prizes with the rest scrapping for scraps so I’ve had a quick look at the trainers table this morning.
Top 5 have earned a shade under £4.5m, the same as the next 15 in total. You then have to go down another 50 trainers to accumulate that amount. That’s 7% of the top 70 mopping up 33% of the pot. In all honesty, not as bad as I’d thought it might be.
I had a look at a small group of second tier trainers with similar strike rates who I perceived to be having good seasons so far – Kim Bailey, Neil Mulholland, Peter Bowen and Gordon Elliott. Their winners have on average returned £3800, £5800, £3500 and £4800, compared to the top 5’s £10000, £7000, £7500, £8100, and £12400. Knocking on half the return.
Average prize money return per runner to date for my comparison group is running at £799. The same figure for the top 5 is £2233, almost three times as much.
The difference in comparative returns is significant but at an absolute level it must be some sort of a struggle. Peter Bowen has sent out 320 runners who have generated prize money of less than £200k and he has nearly a 205 strike rate!
All I can conclude is that it is a very different game at the top and you don’t have to be very far down the ladder for that to be the case. Not every one can afford to operate a boycott, no matter how much they may agree with the cause.
First thing i would do is work closely with the Irish racing industry so we dont suffer from an irregular fixture list.
Moindays and Tuesdays can sometimes see only 2 UK meetings and no irish. The come Thursday we get 3 UK afternoon meetings, 1 Irish meeting, Maydan and then a twilight meeting.
So Mondays give punters 2 meetins and more time to get bored and play the FOBT but yet at times on a thursday we have 6 meetins all nearly coliding with each.
3 meetings at 10 min slots i preumse are the best levy generators so cant we spread this action around a little better.
I know i cant keep up if theres more than 3 meetings on any given day so therefore wont punters at home be the same.
Can I just point out that, as possibly the only forumite still active who saw every Regional (Banded) Racing meeting staged at Southwell, Banded racing is the best friend of a gambling man outside of a pair of loaded dice.
Only two or three horses could possibly win each race and winning horses dropping down from a Class 6 first time was a licence to print money. Kempton still offer Class 7s ever week and they are a joy to play in, if not to watch.
Compare that with the two Sandown handicap hurdles run on Saturday. Had a copy of Sunday’s Racing Post floated down from the heavens onto your lap while you were eating your bacon and egg sandwich, you still wouldn’t have correctly predicted the winner. Daylight robbery.
The Regional Racing initiative was abandoned not because of any aesthetic concerns, but because of lobbying by bookmakers.
Just pointing out, chaps.
Thanks, AP.
Never realised that the racecourses themselves were responsible for class number allocation. Does that not leave the tariff system easily open to abuse by the racecourses themselves? I mean couldn’t other tracks drop their beginners chases to class 5, offer four grand in prizemoney, make themselves look good for tariff purposes but in effect connections would actually be competing for
less
prizemoney in these chases than before.
Very stupid indeed, if that’s the case.
Just had a look at the average winning prize money for beginners chases since the start of 2010. I found 121 races with an average of £3757 for the winner. Today Lingfield are offering £2740, over a grand less than the average for this type of contest, yet they are offering overall prizemoney of 41% better than tariff for this class of chase.
Cant see owners being too happy with this new system if the racecourses start making class "amendments" to their racing programs.
Will anyone look at the tariffs ?
As an owner who plans his own runners, im very aware of the prize money situiation. But if i felt a race was best for my horse for a multitude of reasons the tarrifs set by the horsemans wont affect where i run.
As has been pointed out with that beginners chase today, the system is flawed. Also i might as well run for less money at Wetherby and cost myself 50 quid transort than run for above the tariff 100miles away which ends up working out worse for me.
Heres an idea.
Any chance of the lower prize money races only been for horses trained withina certain radius of the track to avoind the transports costs for owners. Owners must now pay more in transport bills than entry fees through the year which is money wasted through the system.
If not ban ‘away’ runners, offer a bonus for home winners ?
Something akin to the (officially) defunct Regional Racing initiative would be ideal for the proposed ‘second tier’ of racing, wholly distinct and separate from the ‘first tier’. A pursuit organised and funded only by connections and the racecourses on which they’re run with no levy contribution, no SIS coverage and no off-course betting. Its own set of ‘Rules’ and its own handicap/ratings
Like Points it could act as a nursery for young horses, who if proven good enough could then go on to run in the ‘first tier’ under standard JC Rules with better prize money bolstered by levy; and, again like Points it could also act as a repository for old horses on the terminal downgrade. There really is little justification in my opinion for denying modest gelded Flat horses the opportunity to race beyond the age of 10, should they and their owners so wish. How many Flat horses run under JC Rules at and beyond this age? Not many I’d warrant. What happens to them all at present?
Max and his chums will have the horses all to themselves on-course, wheelbarrows waiting in the car park
Can racecourses put on hurdle only cards? If so, it looks an even easier way for NH tracks to meet the tariff.
Or a 6 race card of 5 hurdle races and a hunter Chase?
Cav,
For handicaps the class is based on the rating band. but for novice and maiden races, afaik the class is based on the prize money. So if a course staged a beginners chase for ten grand, it would be a Class 3.
Ditto for hurdle races – most maiden hurdles are Class 5, but the one at the first Cheltenham meeting of the season offers ten grand, so it becomes a Class 3. The only purpose of the Class allocation is that it is used to decide on penalties in future races.
It would make far more sense to set a tariff by type of race then by class.
Jose,
The rules of racing require two chases per meeting unless a course is given special dispensation for exceptional circumstances – for example when the chase course is unraceable but hurdles are OK.
AP
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.