G'day Punter!

Sign In Register

In this Discussion

Who's Online

1 Members & 81 Non Members

sat 2yo race split

West Australian Racing
DaleDale    1,346 posts
edited October 2013 West Australian Racing
this isn't usual is it? i thought the first 2yo races of the season have 5-6 runners. This weeks noms have 2 fields of 14.not complaining because i like seeing babies flogged into the ground, makes for an easy 3yo punt.

+1 -1

Comments

  • DaleDale    1,346 posts
    8 parnham runners between both.

    +1 -1
  • RIORIO    14,902 posts
    NO, speaking to a leading trainer on the weekend and he felt the wetter July - September period may have helped nurse some of the babies all the way to racing. With less shin soreness than usaul.

    Indy likes this post.

    +1 -1
  • DaleDale    1,346 posts
    cheers, that makes sense.


    +1 -1
  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    7,985 posts
    Without checking records, the first 2YO race of the year for the past few seasons, would have struggled to get 10 runners and in most only 7 or 8. So this is very unusual. It gives an unusual opportunity to early runners to get some prize money on the board for feature races in February through to April. I think it is generous of RWWA to stump up $60,000 for both.

    Dale likes this post.

    +1 -1
  • DaleDale    1,346 posts
    i am sure there will be horses picking up prizemoney off only a 400 trial... sounds easy sometimes.

    +1 -1
  • DaleDale    1,346 posts
    and paul jordan with these oratorios is a fair leg up.

    +1 -1
  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    7,985 posts
    Dale said:

    i am sure there will be horses picking up prizemoney off only a 400 trial... sounds easy sometimes.


    a favorite of Dion Luciani as well for his babies, just a 400M trial or two
    +1 -1
  • raconteurraconteur    610 posts
    Damien Wyer said:

     I think it is generous of RWWA to stump up $60,000 for both.

    is RWWA putting up the $60K per race for these races, Damien?
    +1 -1
  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    7,985 posts
    raconteur said:

    Damien Wyer said:

     I think it is generous of RWWA to stump up $60,000 for both.

    is RWWA putting up the $60K per race for these races, Damien?
    According to CRIS both races have a $60,000 purse. I would presume that if for some reason the races both fell away, they may combine them with a fresh barrier draw as two races @ $60k each would be a farce.  But if they run as advertised then yes it is an additional race of $60,000 that wasn't in the calendar.

    I presume the Westspeed bonus would be split however if two nominated horses won each leg. 
    +1 -1
  • RIORIO    14,902 posts
    edited October 2013
    I'd presume RWWWA will do anything it can to win the confidence of owners back..they were the only group severely effected by the cancelled and postponed meetings. I'd suggest RWWA will soak it up with full Westspeed payments of equal amounts in both races
    +1 -1
  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    7,985 posts
    edited October 2013
    That may be true, but a deadheat is split, not paid out twice.  But if only one of the horses is Westspeed nominated, that horse gets 100%.
    +1 -1
  • RIORIO    14,902 posts
    as it should be..will be 2 x 60k races with westspeed bonuses in both..RWWA want to get some friends back
    +1 -1
  • TheDivaTheDiva    13,248 posts
    westspeed would surely be paid on both races.

    rick likes this post.

    +1 -1
  • raconteurraconteur    610 posts
    edited October 2013
    Damien - my question was actually whethe it is  RWWA or PR which is funding the $60k for each race,

     as you made comment that   .....it was generous  of RWWA to stump up $60k for both.
    +1 -1
  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    7,985 posts
    I thought as much when I saw your response.

    Last season the contribution to prize money from Perth Racing was less than $1100 per race on a Saturday. All black type races are funded 100% by RWWA, such as the $1M Railway Stakes. Sponsorship dollars go to consolidated revenue of Perth Racing, not to stakes. 

    Now I don't know the prize money distribution for this season, but I don't expect dramatic change. Figures will be available shortly via the Financial Report tabled at the AGM in November. The below are figures taken from the most recent published report of Perth Racing. They show a fall in real contributions by the Club to Racing from 9.6% to 2.4% which in dollar terms was a reduction from 2008 at $3,064,000 to 2012 at $788,000. These numbers then need to be divided by the actual number of events conducted to see the race by race contribution, which at 737 in 2012 means that on average $1,069.20 was topped up by Perth Racing to get to the stakes that we see run on Wednesday's and Saturday's.

    What RWWA have allowed Perth Racing and other Club's to do with stakes, is to redistribute after consultation with them, the stakes money from RWWA across a meeting so long as 100% of the RWWA funding is given out in stakes. Individual Club's can then either top up or use the stakes money to build the status of a certain grade or age race. That is why we have $40,000 racing on a Saturday alongside $60,000 2YO & 3YO events.

    Now I am willing to be corrected, but I am only going on their information supplied to the Members, which is freely available on their website. Here is the table.

    Five Year Statistical Summary
    2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
    Race Meetings
    • Ascot
    • Belmont
    • Total
    45
    46
    91
    48
    44
    92
    45
    47
    92
    46
    44
    90
    46
    45
    91
    Races 746 759 743 726 737
    Starters 7,507 8,004 8,386 8,269 8,154
    Average starters / race 10.06 10.55 11.29 11.39 11.06
    Attendance 206,510 211,145 205,321 191,224 200,493
    On-course totaliser sales ($’000) $40,881 $38,698 $37,589 $36,596 $41,852
    TAB on WATC meetings ($’000) $131,311 $134,181 $134,468 $134,373 $137,066
    RWWA Net distribution ($’000) $31,763 $33,361 $32,480 $32,224 $32,658
    Stakes & subsidies ($’000) $34,827 $36,573 $33,864 $33,006 $33,436
    % distribution 109.6% 109.6% 104.3% 102.4% 102.4%
    Membership 2,712 2,644 2,530 2,611 2,624
    Total revenue $62,831 $65,631 $62,439 $62,247 $65,667
    Total expenditure $65,292 $67,136 $64,152 $63,696 $66,225
    Operating profit / (loss) ($2,461) ($1,505) ($1,713) ($1,449) ($558)
    +1 -1
  • marlishmarlish    2 posts
    whats everyones picks for 2yold race
    +1 -1
  • DaleDale    1,346 posts
    our memory girls brains them in the first and mysticity r2. Morals.... but where can i get fixed price on a wednesday for a 2yo race in WA.
    +1 -1
  • raconteurraconteur    610 posts
    Thank you for that Damien - that explains the principle. I misread you initial post - thinking that RWWA actually directly funded the $60k ( through another mechanism)  for each of the two 2 year old races this Sat. ta
    +1 -1
  • RIORIO    14,902 posts
    edited October 2013
    Had an interesting chat to a fellow horse owner and occasional punter at
    the track today and i was reliably informed that the 2 races for 2yr
    olds on Saturday was a well planed, joint decision between RWWA, WAROA
    and the trainers.

    After the couple of disastrous meetings the
    questions was discussed between RWWA an WAROA if they could entertain
    having 2 races for 2yr olds on the first race day for the 2yr olds this Saturday.

    The
    end result is that we do. That is why there were a few 400m trials on
    Monday. The numbers may drop off, but if both fields can hold up to 8 or
    more this will be a great feather in the cap of WAROA in trying to get a
    bit of that lost stakes money back out to owners.

    Is good to hear all these industry bodies working together for the greater good

    And whilst on the issue..don't forget that WAROA have their AGM on this Saturday before the races.

    Chelsea likes this post.

    +1 -1
  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    7,985 posts
    RIO said:

    Had an interesting chat to a fellow horse owner and occasional punter at
    the track today and i was reliably informed that the 2 races for 2yr
    olds on Saturday was a well planed, joint decision between RWWA, WAROA
    and the trainers.

    After the couple of disastrous meetings the
    questions was discussed between RWWA an WAROA if they could entertain
    having 2 races for 2yr olds on the first race day for the 2yr olds this Saturday.

    The
    end result is that we do. That is why there were a few 400m trials on
    Monday. The numbers may drop off, but if both fields can hold up to 8 or
    more this will be a great feather in the cap of WAROA in trying to get a
    bit of that lost stakes money back out to owners.

    Is good to hear all these industry bodies working together for the greater good

    And whilst on the issue..don't forget that WAROA have their AGM on this Saturday before the races.

    Whilst I applaud having extra races put into programs to make up for lost meetings due to track conditions, not a single 2YO Owner was inconvenienced by those three meetings being lost. 

    So this as a reason is absurd.  

    thefalcon likes this post.

    +1 -1
  • RIORIO    14,902 posts
    ???? sometimes i struggle with the way you comprehend things Damo.. it is obvious that owners were the biggest group of participants financially affected by the race day cancellations. It is impossible to give money to owners of horses that haven't run, but as an organisation RWWA have provided an opportunity for race horse owners to get some extra stakes money.

    It is 60k of stakes money going to horse owners that wouldn't normally..that - as you have acknowledged - is a big plus to horse owners..

    I cant think of a fairer way to get money back to owners than put on extra races

    Dale, Chelsea likes this post.

    thefalcon dislikes this post.

    +1 -1
  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    7,985 posts
    Then put on races for the ratings of horses that were affected. 



    Thoroly_Bread, thefalcon likes this post.

    +1 -1
  • RIORIO    14,902 posts
     but it still wont get back to the same owners??? so i see no difference what grade of race, as long as they put a few extra ones on

    Chelsea likes this post.

    thefalcon dislikes this post.

    +1 -1
  • LeglessLegless    5,108 posts
    If what you say is correct Rio - IMHO its akin to cancelling a sports car race and making up for it by putting on a couple of extra races for buses.

    The fact that they are throwing in a bit more to make up for the losses owners suffered has to be applauded - surely like for like would have been the way to go :-?

    thefalcon likes this post.

    +1 -1
  • DaleDale    1,346 posts
    but that just comes back to "you cant keep everyone happy all of the time" This deal about replacing lost races at the same class is crap, drop it and give it a rest.

    thefalcon likes this post.

    +1 -1
  • LeglessLegless    5,108 posts
    you like seeing the babies flogged into the ground Dale - I come from a different school - lets drop it for now and discuss it after the event
    +1 -1
  • RIORIO    14,902 posts
    a. there is a lot more 2yr olds up and about this year
    b. there isn't another 2yr old race for 2 weeks
    c. it is the best way to get the most money back to owners..60k instead of in some instances 40k.

    If you could repeat the exact same races as those lost i'd see your point. you cant so, the next best option is to get as much as you can for owners

    JustanL likes this post.

    thefalcon dislikes this post.

    +1 -1
  • RIORIO    14,902 posts
    hang on I've just seen what you are trying to say..You want to reward the horse rather than the owner that actually pays the bills..doh!!!!!! silly me

    thefalcon dislikes this post.

    +1 -1
  • LeglessLegless    5,108 posts
    Not about the exact same races - not of the opinion that can be achieved - how many babies are being pushed ( and will break down) because the carrot has been dangled - we will know soon enough

    thefalcon likes this post.

    +1 -1
  • LeglessLegless    5,108 posts
    RIO said:

    hang on I've just seen what you are trying to say..You want to reward the horse rather than the owner that actually pays the bills..doh!!!!!! silly me


    [-X- why would i do that - isnt it better to blow wind up my own arse because I've paid the bills for decades, then blow wind up the trainers, vets, and hangers on arses and not even mention the animal - after all it hasnt done a thing
    =))

    thefalcon likes this post.

    +1 -1
Sign In or Register to comment.