smokin

Statistically it shouldn't happen.

It all started with a phone call. A mate had looked through a tried horse sale, seen a lot that appealed and being 2 minutes away from the saleyards I took a trip to have a look for him. Going through the complex, I bumped into a vet I knew, asked him to come have a look and armed with an opinion and a look at the lot, got on the phone for the sobering truth.

There is no defying, the horse was fat, so fat I thought he was pregnant, which is impossible. But there was issues with his legs, not back, but front. He needed to be treated with kid gloves, get the weight off him without putting him under too much stress and I suggested finding out who had him before. He was 3 rising 4, no exposed form, this could be Takeover Target Mk II or an ambassador for canned pet food. This was half the fun, but I had done my job. I gave the info and left it at that, if he was going to be purchased, then that was for those with the money to decide.

Three hours later the phone rang and the news was, the horse was purchased, for just under 10K. I thought that was a little over the mark, but if someone else was bidding, they must of seen something or knew something I didn't. Regardless I organised the transport and the agistment until he went to his new home, friends made it cheap, but he was in good hands.

18 Months down the track, he has had 3 starts. Started favourite every run and placed every run. Honesty is a great quality in a horse, but the bookies had definitely got their fill. The trials an tribulations along the way have been wide and varied. No injuries thank god, but ownership shuffles, paperwork galore, emails, text messages and illness had all conspired against the horse running at his best, but that all changed from the first run this prep.

Missing work and having weather go against him, gave us the opportunity to participate in a paid barrier trial, a 1000m race that again he placed in, which topped him off for his next run. Which happened last Saturday.

Considering only roughly 25% of horses actually win a race in their career, the thought of standing on the edge of the life of a winning owner is one of the sweet thoughts in life. Having operated in the industry in many guises, the role of owner was completely new to me. I had bought horses for other people with success, worked with some of the biggest stables with great success, raised foals to sale ring with success, but had never plunged into ownership.

Nothing will beat that thrill of seeing him go past the line first. It got close, he didn't win by a space, but he won. In the book and the Saturday just gone, will forever live in the memory as a monumental day. However, if I wasn't listening to the radio when the horse ran, I wouldn't of known he was racing. Of course, I knew the horse was in and I knew the race was on, but what astonished me is the complete lack of service from the raceclub where he ran.

I am in another state, so I would never of had the chance to get to the races, yet I received nothing from Racing Queensland to say my horse was running at this track. Nothing from the club saying your horse is racing today, here is your free entry tickets, please bring 3 friends and enjoy the day. Nothing from the club congratulating me on the win, nothing from Racing QLD to say you are a winner, here is a link to your video or a photo of the presentation.

This is the level of service though the racing fraternity is providing the owners of the world? I got no word from any of the bookies I bet with saying if your an owner please bet with us on your horse. Nothing from Racing NSW saying, we see you have a horse racing today, here is a free ticket for you and a friend to come to our meeting instead.

The thing is, they have every single one of my details. Email, phone number and address as these are needed to register a horse. I am actually astonished that the race itself is even run. The one of my mates that did get the chance to go, had to pay to get in the gate, then go the raceday office, was given two members tickets, he had his g/f and dad with him and had to buy one more ticket for himself.

The sponsor, who wasn't a local business but a national company, had no-one there to present the sash, no one to talk the talk, just the rep from the club and a quick usher into the committee room, where they were served a couple of drinks and a sandwich, before being ushered out with 15 mins before the next race was run.

Now that may be the only race our horse ever wins. It didn't look like it, but he may break down tomorrow and have no athletic future. So as with so many other aspects of this industry, it has left me feeling pretty empty, even though the investment is much higher than return.

I find it amazing that this is my experience of winning the Melbourne Cup. It might not carry the name, the purse or the prestige, but I may of won the only race of my life, and I have got a rather nasty taste out of it.

smokin.......

Happy New Year, Australia Day and everything else that has fallen in between.

Having had a bit of time to smell the roses over the New Year, it has amazed me how poisoned and biased Racing media has become. With the advent of racing coverage going wall to wall, sky channel offering two new channels that push more and more content onto "live" TV and the print media aligning with those that seem to pay the bills, I wonder how long before something of a serious nature occurs in racing circles that will expose the lengths that administrations have gone to, keeping the buttered side of the bread up.

Looking at most of the racing outlets, including those on-line, it is hard to sometimes see the line of advertorial start and editorial finish. It would appear that almost all racing media operates in bubble of self gluttony to ensure the next story brings in a little more cash, whilst not alienating the ones who have gone and paid before.

One perfect example of this would be Racing and Sports. I have always enjoyed the mostly factual stories that the boys there run. Decent reporting with a strong opinion and never an organisation to back away from criticism if it was required. That was until the day the Benchmark Handicapping system came on-line and the partner on board with Racing NSW in this was, Racing and Sports. Now you would be very lucky to find any objectivity in reporting done on Racing NSW, the handling of the court case or other policy from the Druitt St Bunker and it is always done with a roses up twist shining on the corporate partner.

And our old friends Racenet, whilst there is enough free advertising done on these forum pages for services they provide, they are becoming master advertorialists too. More stories about the products they provide or the results they have got. Most of the stories run of a morning are regurgitations of the sky sports racing racing program at 9am and more questionable points of view especially when it comes to the administrative authorities and people of influence.

The television stations are no better par for course. Sky Channel are the master urgers. Turn on the raceday coverage tomorrow and hear how every meeting around australia is a competitive betting affair, or the monotone, dreary, brain dead presenters bleat on about how impressively that horse won, or this horse has a lot of promise. When a horse shortens in betting, this is a "big go", when I am sure the average man who is not that way inclined would prefer vision, an information. Not a talking head breaking the concentration and 15 markets on the go, when you are interested in seeing mounting yard footage maybe a quick interjection from a betting ring to update info there, but that is about all that is required. It is amazing what happens when the power of silence is observed. Maybe they should try it.....

TVN, I was a massive fan of TVN when it started. I appreciated the effort that the raceclubs went to in order to protect their product and the vision they created. It was a stand that should of blueprinted the way forward. That raceclubs were entitled to provide the vision to maximum effect, not for maximum income of a media company. Whilst it was founded out of frustration, it has become a very frustrating channel to watch now. Everything is about the advertisers and nothing is about the racing. Everything is a betting move, a market mover, and the insistence of personalities to praise everything about what happens with glowing references and corporate bookmakers that make the world a pleasant place to exist. WOW, I would prefer they changed the name to Roses Vision.

Look it is a large generalisation, and some of TVN's staff are great at what they do, but I don't think anyone has ever really looked into what makes great television for the punter. Giving vision to the pub and tab market was were it started, however the advent of the stay at home punter, the vision providers have started to alienate them too. So much going on, all the time, with no time to draw breath....it is easy to see how punters in particular can get bored with what is going on. Too much information all the time equals turn the thing off. Real simple.

Finally getting to print media, I will tell you straight up, never believe a word written in any reference by any news limited paper in australia about Racing NSW, especially in a Sydney newspaper. I thought most of what you could read in a newspaper should be impartially written, however, when I stumbled across the fact that on more than one occasion in the past 12 months, Racing NSW had hosted functions, at major race meetings specifically for news limited journalists, that shot my confidence in anything printed in those main stream outlets, especially about Racing NSW and the shoddy operation it runs.

Asking my Fairfax racing journo folks if they had the same treatment extended to them, they laughed and stated it has happened for a couple of years, it used to be all racing journalists. My how that has changed......

And to take to task the websites of these papers. The New Limited Superracing website is still telling me that ilovethiscity can win the Guineas(that was Oct last year), Border Rebel needs to carry a weight carrying record at Randwick(28th Dec, last year) and finally Guest Wing won the Perth Cup (New Years Day). For a one stop shop and wrap up of racing news from around the country, it is just pathetic.

The fairfax website used to be great, now it is pathetic. I think there is only 2 staff writers for fairfax covering racing australia wide. The content is daily, but is woeful on substance. If it happens in Melbourne it is news, anywhere else, bad luck! 

So in all the outlets that seem to make up the mainstream racing media, the brush runs with the same ink. As long as the back is there to be scratched, please scratch away. I don't understand why they need to not make it obvious and by that end, I couldn't care less, if someone is advertising on your channel or in your paper, let them advertise, but maintain the impartiality for the benefit of all.

It has been proven in the forum pages here, take the Shame Luxbet, Shame thread. Good on the Winning Post for printing the letter about Luxbet, but why change the name of the company to "a prominent corporate bookmarker" instead of who it is about: LUXBET. Name them, regardless of if they are an advertiser or not. Do the crime, do the time, unless they are filling your back pockets!

Who does do it well? I'll give kudos here to the Just Racing Website. Phil Purser, who I wouldn't know from a bar of soap is a breath of fresh air in racing media circles. Opinionated, direct and calls a spade a spade. The corporate juggernaut wouldn't go near him with a barge pole, because he sees through the spin and tells it like it is. There are many others who can pen an article, deliver a consistent report or pull a punch, but far too often the punch is thrown with the force of a moth

How is this a situation that could change?

I think the need to ratify the racing media is long overdue. The newspapers can publish what they want, as can independently run websites, but they don't seem to. It all looks to be carefully orchestrated and surely set up for no controversy which makes integrity disappear into the ether.

I see the need to get rid of 4 racing channels. 1 pay tv and 1 free to air channel is what the industry should be aiming for. The expense spared from running three other channels wont cover the costs of a free to air channel, but putting racing beyond the means of the average is defeatist. There would be nothing wrong with running a channel that gave you home state coverage, plus the highlights of the main races interstate. In Qld, the channel showed the qld races, both metro and provincial/country on the day, then interject the coverage of the big races from down south, with NO crap associated. In NSW they show the same, both metro and provincial/country from NSW and then again the big races from interstate if there are any on.

Wouldn't this approach start to identify the sport to the public? Concentrate the racing in the home demographic, give the boost to the industry in the home states, to give it a public profile that doesn't exist on the back of buttering up news organisations, ensuring the ROSES are always in bloom?

Of course this approach would only work if the racing program was ratified! One race per 10 mins, even on a Saturday, oh of course, that makes so much sense......to everyone except those running the show!

A channel run by the industry for the man on the street, something that makes sense as opposed to the madness of 4 channels now, or does that make too much sense?


smokin......

The Druitt St Bunker has fired a new salvo off in the Race Fields legislation bunfight after sending the CEO of Betfair two letters claiming defamation and demanding retractions and apologies. By claiming that the result of the court verdict handed down last month was great news for Tabcorp and in response to a website blog he wrote on November 19 where he questioned race field payment arrangements between Racing NSW, Tabcorp and members of the Tabcorp wagering group including the Victorian TAB, Luxbet and TAB Sportsbet.

Whilst challenging the validity of the ruling is not beyond the questioning of anyone who has been judged against, I somehow think that the C.E.O of Racing NSW has decided that he is the new dog on the block, hiding behind the ruling made in favour of Racing NSW and using this as the new club by which any dissenter is going to be charged, badgered and beaten into submission.

Furthermore V’Landys has now been quoted as stating that Tabcorp and Luxbet do not receive a rebate to offset the race fields legislation fees and claiming that the TAB was paying 4.7 per cent of turnover and is now required to pay an additional 1.5 per cent of turnover to bring them up to 6.2 per cent.

In one single article though, Mr V’Landys has proven his point that his spin has him in such a whirlwind, the guy is dizzy…..

One look at the Judgement by Justice Perram will determine that the following was discovered: In fact in 2008/09 RNSW refunded the fee paid to it by the TAB in full. That is consistent with Mr V’Landy’s’ advice to the board that no fee would be recovered from the TAB and in a deed of financial release stated an amount from RNSW $13,882,935 that the Payment Amount is not a refund or return of any part of Applicable New South Wales Race Fields Fees.

So, that Racing NSW in the financial year of 08/09 just gave Tabcorp a $13 Million dollar gift is the most generous piece of corporate gift-wrapping in the history of racing.

The sooner Racing NSW get the point that the whole legal challenge could have been avoided if the Racing Distribution Agreement had been altered in the first place to include the 1.5% they were seeking to charge, there is no discrimination of charging then, no court case and the only thing that could be challenged is the validity of the legislation, when if it is charged to all operators, would of ended up in the same vote as was handed down in November. You are allowed to charge what you want for your product, just not in a discriminatory fashion.

But The Druitt St bunker, instead of getting to the pointy end quickly, want to have their cake and eat it too.

Smokin…………

I wrote a couple of weeks ago regarding my opinion of prize money, the hopeless quest to attempt to raise city to $100,000 per race on non-feature race days and the abandonment of supporting the grass roots of racing and the lack of understanding that racing will only prosper if you increase the health of the front line of racing, that being the country and provincial racing circuits.

A simple look through the recently published Australian Racing Board’s new Racing Fact book would indicate that to aspire to raising prize money to compete with jurisdictions that operate with the same prize money  levels is showing the door to a big industrial cellar, without doing anything to enhance and increase the revenue stream that is driving your levels. Whilst the courts can currently decide who owes who what, how about a strategic move to increase the quality of your product.

The strategic plan released by the Druitt St Bunker speaks of grandiose visions of splendour and increasing the confidence of the consumers of racing, but in that same document, I am sure you can imagine, there is not one mention of the word, Punter.

There is plenty of mention of the following, A $70 million investment in infrastructure over the next 5 years to improve customer facilities at racecourses as well as improved racing surfaces and training facilities, also significant capital expenditure is required to improve the level of customer facilities at Sydney racecourses, as this is vital to attracting greater business from corporate customers, sponsors and attendees at racetracks. Plenty of mention to customers, but no identifying who they are….

In strategic objectives: Increase involvement in racing by customers and other industry participants, Deliver superior thoroughbred racing and facilities to our customers and participants through the use of best commercial practice and innovation. As the document goes on the amount of waffle that comes from the pages is just deplorable. There is mention of pressuring government to alter tax collection rates and so it goes. But again there is not a single mention of just who the customer is in Racing NSW eyes.

Is the reason for this that they actually have no idea who the customers of Racing in New South Wales are, or is it more that as long as the mugs keep turning up to plonk their hard earned down an whatever rubbish they serve up, is what is most important? How could a customer base continued to be treated with such contempt is beyond me. Maybe it is because like those employed in the front line of racing, the punter, doesn’t have a voice to demand a higher level of service from the powers that be.

In the advent of the digital age, there has been very few developments in the reporting, presentation and divulging of form and its related products. The Racing NSW website, which should be a one stop shop for all form products based on racing in NSW is pathetic. The ability to check out a meeting, but also look at the horses form is easy enough, but the quality of the form is what is lacking. Today for example, at 11am I looked at the form for today’s meeting at Rosehill and the scratchings had not been updated! It gives you all the usual form rubbish, especially considering the information that is available to the peak body. Even in the Mug Punters Bible (any TAB form) it always states that the TAB takes no responsibility and you should see official lists.

Why on earth would you do that when the official lists are just plain worse. If you want a great form guide, go to the Hong Kong Jockey Club website, or go to Singapore’s Turf Club website. Both are brilliantly laid out, have as much information as you could ask for, including position in running at the 800-400 metres, individual sectional times and video comments on the individual horse.

This information should not be left to third parties to divulge, if you want to instil consumer confidence in your product, wouldn’t you be the source of all the information? Wouldn’t you seek to have the product you provide represented in such a manner that no one else in the game would come close to you? Wouldn’t this then make the so called “experts” be providing an opinion instead of mis-represented fact that they are divulging form?

But when you add in that there is no move by Racing NSW to have the RDA ratified to supply the amount of meetings the industry can sustain a healthy product, get the tab to stop the rounding down nonsense on Racing in NSW, seek to have the Australian Racing Board push for minimum wagering standards through federal law……the list goes on!

Smokin….

With the announcement that the Future Music Festival will be held on the 12th March making it clash with the Randwick Guineas meeting, the response has been swift in condemnation and ridicule for the decision that the AJC has made.

Trainers have come out quickly to condemn the move, punters are up in arms and the "participants" are apparently appalled!

Is this the new environment that things are going to exist in, post possible win of the race fields legislation case?

If this announcement had been made only 7 days earlier, the overall response would of been, looking at the bottom line, a possible 600K return to the industry for the use of one of its facilities is worth the disruption. However, now everyone is falling into the golden carrot of money being thrown around from left right and centre and losing sight of what the AJC is attempting to do with the festival.

An event that has grown from 7K to 42K people in the time that the race-club has hosted it is too good to lose. Especially when the competition is so hot for events as it is. Here the race club has discovered and developed a new revenue stream that has been the mantra of the Druitt St bunker and everyone who has had two cents to add to the racing debate, yet they are quick to jump down the throat of the club for doing exactly that.

To move the event away from Randwick is total lunacy.

I don't recall reading or hearing that the AJC and Racing NSW has decided to cancel the Randwick Guineas Next year, they are moving it to another of the AJC's racing facilities, or is that more the problem here?

The AJC has Warwick Farm that more often than not sits there, yet provides more training hours to more horses than any other facility in Sydney. It already has had the Chelmsford and Warwick stakes meetings taken off it, so it gets to run the Randwick Guineas for one year. Big deal!

600k to the AJC for the movement of 1 Group 1 race, for 1 year to accommodate the earning capacity of the facility, or stuff the money and host the raceday which may make 30K if they were lucky?

Don't cut your nose to spite your face. If the AJC has a guaranteed revenue stream, foster it, harbour it and turn it into genuine money that can be reinvested back into the facility and the industry.

smokin.....

Last Wednesday Morning, the trumpets could be heard all across the CBD of Sydney as the Federal Court handed down a verdict that could have severe ramifications for the Racing industry in NSW for years to come.

Almost a week has passed and plenty of time for the spin doctors to put out the usual drivel, however, I want to centre on how this can be seen as a win for the participants, as named by the Druitt St Bunker, the prospect of the gold lined clouds be soon forecast away when the thunder starts to roll in the hills as this will not be anything near the golden carrot.

The prospect of raising prize money sounds great in theory, but to raise money to the levels that are being discussed, especially in the Metropolitan Area is bordering on suicide. If the TAB wasn't driving the demand for meetings and Racing NSW easily signing off on whatever they request, there is a chance that this could work, however, with the TAB Racing Distribution Agreement demanding 123 Metro Meetings and 127 Provincial. Over 52 weeks, considering that Hawkesbury and Scone now have stand-alone Saturday Meetings, leaves 50 Saturday meetings, 52 midweek meetings, makes 102, with another 21 meetings to be split over public holidays, the joke that is Night Racing and the odd Sunday Meeting.

Does anyone else think that 50 race meetings, if we were to subtract the carnivals, which would take out another 11 Saturdays, drops the number to 39 meetings, that would be truly deserving of $100,000 per race?

Considering that Racing is no longer managed as a sport, it is an all-consuming, all-bludgeoning machine that the powerbrokers believe would fall apart if it was left to take a break for a few weeks. E.I proved Racing is a strong product that if it was to break from time to time, would not only survive, but come back bigger and stronger and drive the demand for itself.

And herein lays the problem, There is no consideration to the fact that Horse Racing is a Sport. Anyone that has done any study into what sport is, can identify what makes a sport unique, however, the sport in Horse Racing has been lost, and was lost a long time ago, then the industry lost the TAB. Horse Racing had become an machine, that for its own benefit needs to be rationalised in SUPPLY.

I wholeheartedly agree with racing for $100,000 per race on a Saturday, if and only if, you were to drop about 60 meetings a year from the metropolitan calendar. There is no way then you would ever be seeing a race with only 3 runners per race. Racing needs to stop the oversupply and support the rationalisation of the top of the tree (metropolitan meetings) and use this as the guide to develop the day in and day out product, being country and provincial racing, increase the returns at the grass roots and the returns go back to where they need to be. If you increase the health of the grass roots, the top is what will prosper, once the lifeblood is pumping.

And speaking of the lifeblood, I would love to see how the Court ruling is going to improve the livelihood of those employed in the front line of racing, at the stable level. Mr V’landys was quick to spin ''They get up at 3 o'clock in the morning. Strappers are on 30 grand a year, 'Well now, the first thing we will do is look at how we can increase the wage rates of all our participants throughout the industry. They won't go living in poverty anymore.” Asked what kind of pay rise a strapper might expect, he said it should be ''at least $10,000''.

I know the life of a stablehand, it should be the greatest job in the world, I would have loved for it to be my occupation of choice. What I could not stand for, and my eventual reason for leaving is that not only does the humble stablehand get treated like dirt, but they are paid like dirt. There is absolutely no reason for a strapper or a horse to be out of bed at 3am, Horses don’t like it any better than the humans do.

The age old arguments just don’t fly anymore. Horses are worked early in the morning to escape the heat of the day is a common one, yet you expect them to race in 40 degree heat at 3pm in the afternoon. People wonder why there is such a rise in this atrial fibrillation, maybe horses just aren’t conditioned to race day, they are conditioned to early mornings, not racing at 3 in the afternoon and 9pm at night. Tommy Smith started training his horses under the cover of darkness, to hide his methods and before professionalism, it was a hobby, to be done before your usual occupation. If you want to start looking at ways to nurse the staff into some type of health look at not only when they work, but how much they work. It is ridiculous to expect a staff member to work 13 mornings straight, give them 1 day off every 14, and expect them to be switched on and happy with their work.

$10,000 is not going to make any difference to getting someone like me back in the industry. Racing NSW have had many opportunities to listen to my concerns, I have hounded and harassed and barked at them for many years. Yet they see this as a problem that is not there’s to fix, as they do not employ the stable staff.

Never mind the fact that jockeys get 1% of the national prize money pool to fund there association and set them up for life after riding and serious injury. I have asked many times, what has been done for the track work riders and stable hands that I know have been seriously injured, had prolonged injury enforced absences and need re-skilling to enter the workforce away from racing? Nothing, yet for jockeys this is seen as a priority.

As an employee group in Racing, the track-work riders, stable-hands and forepersons total approx. 3300 members strong. They have no access to any type of up skill training, counselling services, dispute resolution services or any type of industrial representation. If Mr V’landys can see a 10K improvement per year to each of these employees, that would total in excess of $33 Million. I thought the industry was in line for maybe $50 million a year extra through the 1.5%, if they were lucky to sustain current wagering trends and get into a position to implement the money.

Racing NSW could get this industry moving forward quicker than a Ferrari in 1st gear if they were less obsessed with continuing with the machine and employing genuine strategy to work the industry over from the grass roots up, not the other way around.

Smokin....

Howdy fellow Australian Forumites!

With Betfair now going beta, I can host my own BLOG!!

PROTEST, UPHELD! Is a blog that looks at just what the administration of this great sport is doing to destroy the industry that holds so much potential, that should be one of the great sports this country has, but apart from 1 week that occurs at Flemington, the state lines get so critically wrong that it is slowly killing not only itself but the very lifeblood that keeps it going, the punting dollar.

In this, my first entry into PROTEST, UPHELD! I am going to look at a peculiar thing that has popped up in the Racing NSW declaration of weights, in particular the column that states, actual weight.

I am sure we have all heard the spin regarding the Benchmark Weight system that is being implemented in Racing in NSW.

The Racing NSW policy states that Benchmark Handicapping is out to do the following:
•    increase the veracity and confidence in the handicapping model
•    apply a combination of mathematical analysis with the oversight and adjustment of experienced handicappers to produce for the industry an objective assessment that measures the true intrinsic merit of each horse’s performance
•    produce handicap races in NSW that more accurately reflect the ability of horses contesting these races, making them more competitive
•    create more opportunities for nominators to place their horses – reducing the number of restrictions on eligibility, make every race a highly competitive event, creating more interest for participants to analyse each horses chances
•    create increased betting interest to stimulate wagering turnover.

Whilst there is merit in what the Benchmark System is trying to do, it is a simple matter of fact that if you strip away each of the above points, the last one, being increased betting interest to stimulate wagering turnover comes down to field size, which is a very current issue considering that last Saturday, only 46 horses combined to stage a Saturday Metropolitan in Sydney.

The Druitt St Bunker (Racing NSW) has a fantastic spin doctor in Peter V’Landys, who quotes that "We don't have the pool of horses like Queensland do, and the furthest training centre from the city centre in Victoria would be no more than three hours away. Sydney does not have that luxury. For our city meetings we're relying on the same pool of horses from the metropolitan area and provincial areas."

Well Mr V’Landys looking at the Australian Racing Fact Book from 07-08. NSW staged 5414 races with a horse pool of 10,037 horses registered, and 54,800 starters, which included the ACT. IN QLD there was 4728 races staged, with a horse pool of 8160, with a total of 46060 starters. So much for relying on the same pool of horses…..

But Back to Benchmark Handicapping. I was perusing weights the other day for a Provincial Feature Meeting when I can across the following:

        Horse           Benchmark    Wgt  True Wgt    Trainer   
DEALER PRINCIPAL     102    58.5    58.5    Anthony Cummings
RAINBOW STYLING      102    58.5    58.5    Michael, Wayne & John Hawkes
SNOW ALERT         100    57.5    57.5    Chris Waller
SPINNEY         98    56.5    56.5    Peter Snowden
CONISTON BLUEBIRD     95    55    55    Bede Murray
STRIKE ONE (GB)     94    54.5    54.5    Chris Waller
ALEXANDER OF HALES      92    53.5    53.5    Chris Waller
GET UP JUDE         90    53    52.5    Kevin Moses
KEEPIN' THE DREAM      88    53    51.5    Patrick & Wayne Webster
DEVILS ARCADE     86    53    48.5    Gai Waterhouse
KIMILLSY         86    53    48.5    Kim Waugh   
BEIJING BOY (NZ)     85    53    50    Chris Waller   
KICK 'N CHASE         84    53    49.5    John O'Shea
KONTIKI PARK (NZ)     83    53    49    Gai Waterhouse
SUPERREACT         82    53    48.5    Allan Denham
ZAMPARA         81    53    48    Matthew Smith
STAR RIPPER         77    53    46    Bart Cummings   


TRUE WEIGHT!!!! I ask anyone who follows racing on a regular basis who punts on it, WHY ON EARTH would you publish a column of weight  that the horse should actually be carrying, if the minimum weight is established at 53kgs? If anything it shows how poorly weighted a horse is, in relation to the class of the race.

What this displays is whilst the minimum riding weight is 53kgs and the reluctance to raise the top weight mark, is a true incomprehension of what a weight spread does as a betting proposition.

It should be a given that if a trainer can book a rider that can ride the true weight, then the horse should be entitled to carry the TRUE weight as allocated, instead of the ridiculous minimum weight of 53kgs.

The recent increase of the top weight in benchmark of a particular race, from 58 to 59kgs is still a long way short from creating a genuine weight spread. I insisted at the release of the Benchmark Handicapping System that the top weight should be no less than 60kgs. Well, the looks from around the room, especially those from the Druitt St Bunker were ones of bemusement. A horse carrying 60kgs??? Not in this lifetime.

Despite the over saturation of racing that occurs in metropolitan NSW, the fact that the Benchmark System still remains a non-inclusive system of handicapping remains. Although the weighting system allows for a horse above a benchmark to be included in the race, what it does not allow is the horses that try to step up a grade, however receive a weight bonus by getting in “light” as they should is not afforded, due to the 53kg minimum, Australia wide.

A true and proper handicapping system would recognise the horse that is highly performed trying to step back in grade, but receive the penalty as it should,  but the horse trying to step up in grade and being moderately performed, is not penalised by trying to step above the grade it is currently in.

Benchmark Handicapping has its merits, however, what it needs to do is provide the opportunity for a trainer to maximise the spread in weights and give the punter the chance to wager on a race that gives a true and proper weight spread. 5.5kgs or less is pathetic, a true weight spread would be 7-9kgs, something that as the above nominations show, would be very achievable, if the opportunity existed to accept with a rider that was a natural light weight, and use the true weight as assigned by the handicapper.

Smokin………….