Printable View
Is group classification of a race solely determined by $? I'm asking after seeing the Inner City Pace is classified a Group 2. How can a C2-C4 be a group 2 race? Seems absurd. Other than sex and age classification racing surely open age group races should be open for all horses. The gallops wouldn't have a Group 2 Benchmark 60 or a Group 3 maiden. Just a curious observation....
It is within the guidelines but more importantly it has been around for years (50 I think) and if you care to look at past winners you will see some rippers,Bold Biami and Rip Van Winkle are two that come to mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtrain
This series is whole heartedly embraced by the good people of Maitland and surrounds and the atmosphere on the final night is second to none.Even allowing for the Third World amenities it is a great night out,still.Just like a night at the Trots used to be.
Tend to agree with Ron and stand to be accused of tribalism (happily). When a country harness club knows its got something that brings the crowd to its big night of the year, not only should it stay but it should be nurtured. Never set foot on the Maitland track but know for a fact the last two years have been absolute crackers!! Up here Grafton way, the CRJC once not too long ago had the ONLY Group Three country race in the nation (aka the Grafton Cup 2400m). Some smart bean counter thought that wasn't right and sure as s*** the Cup was downgraded to a Listed race. When that happened the class of horse entered dropped exponentially. These days the Cup is nothing more than a glorified mid-week welter handicap that would go around at Canterbury in the middle of Winter.
There is an importance attached to these types of races that only the locals and connections of horses nominated can quantify. Case in point being Come On Frank being aimed at the SA Cup next week when he is clearly at the end of his current preparation. There is a matter of pride involved (BTW do your state proud Frank) and I have got to admire that spirit, successful or otherwise.
Back to the original point...does anybody remember Kensei? He won the Grafton Cup back in 1987 and went on to win the Melbourne Cup a few months later. Guarantee there won't be another because the same calibre of horse will never grace the Grafton track in July again. The smarties who know better have seen to that. So if you are on a committee of a country club, embrace what you have and hold on to it as tight as you can and build on it. The rewards are there to see when your local community turns out in droves to enjoy it. Its not all about metropolitan meetings guys.:)
This what it is about,check the crowd.http://www.trotstv.com.au/?mc=MD050113&rn=7
We should have Graded Stakes Racing based on specific $$$ criteria because in some States you can win an 'Oaks' or a 'Derby' & score a Gr. 1 win...for $$$ that is waaaaaaaaaay below the 100k mark. That just devalues the whole thing.
Yes,money and only money. The only criteria that we should have,the only benchmark we should strive to surpass,the only reason we all should have to compete,the only measure of worth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple V
Stuff the traditions,stuff the poorer relations,stuff those who are having a go,stuff those of tradition,stuff those who might feel they can beat their superiors,stuff those who feel that the idea of history should prevail.
Let's make the Inter Dominion (ha,ha,ha) a victim of “we've got more money than you,so get stuffed”. Oh,we already have?
We've got more money than you,so,we will take 80 years of tradition,throw it out the door and institute an event that looks like an invitational,discretionary FFA, that has an highly subjective set of entry criteria that will bring many bitter recriminations over the years.
That this will devalue the achievements of previous winners means SFA. We've got the money so you can all get stuuuuuuffed.
Let's take away from smaller club's their major meeting for the year. Let's give those volunteers who work all year to prepare for their minute in the sun a good swift kick in the guts because they don't have the money that others have. Let's disregard the opinions of trainers and drivers who say that while this particular event may not have the dollars attached to it,they look forward to winning it anyway. Let's take away any recognition that doesn't have a monetary value
Let's make our group races the same as “Royal Honours”,if you can buy it,it's yours.
Now I may be wrong saying that Brian Hancock was the trainer, driver, who said the following,and I paraphrase and offer an apology if it was not he,that he had an elderly lady client whose sole ambition was to have a runner in the Inter Dominion,not that her horse would be a chance of winning,but to be a “part of the show”. The remark was also made that this lady's attitude was what kept the game going.
Stuff that all you double fisted wankers, where's the money?
Missed the point entirely Ron.
Why should, for example, an Oaks in SA with... say a 25k ticket...carry Gr. 1 status placing it alongside a NSW Oaks...with say a 100k+ ticket?
Didn't miss the point at all.You have just made the same point again,that $$$ should be the only criteria for group status.
To apply that logic,the high bid for the Inter Dom should enhance the standing of that event.
Would (could) you agree that it has?
I dont have a problem if a club wants to run an Oaks for 20-25K, BUT it should not carry Group/Black type status. It makes a mockery of horses having to beat the best to attain a certain level of excellence. The reality is that the higher the stake, the stronger the field. Some of the recent Oaks/Derbies in certain jurisdictions have been nothing more than maidens....
Ron you have missed the point. Of course money should be the criteria. Group races should be won by the best horses in the country. Birdsville Picnics gets a big crowd and has a dedicated group of volunteers that help run outback queenslands most famous race day, so by your logic it should be a group race. Ridiculous. Group races should be raced in by the best horses for the best money. I know myself when reading APG catalogue at this time of the year you will see progeny of a Group placed/winning mare and you ALWAYS have to check if it was the SA oaks where it was beaten 30m in 2.02.
Group races should be for our elite HORSES in any particular racing category. Not just because an event is well publicised, patronised and run by any club.
[G"day Grant,Quote:
QUOTE]Of course money should be the criteria. Group races should be won by the best horses in the country.[QUOTE
I can see quite easily the point Ron is making and his opinion is that $$$$ should not be the ONLY criteria, and I whole heartedly agree, on the one hand you say Group races should be open to all horses and on the other it's about $$, so what is it?
The Australian Pacing Gold has group status, has big $$, but isn't open to all 2yo's , so should it be afforded group status??
The Maitland Intercity pace is open to all C2 to C4 horses, and is one of the biggest prizemoney races for this grade of horse in Austalia and attracts the elite horses in that grade year after year, sure it's not $100K and I can see the point that you, Triple and Harvey are making about some age classics having sub par prizemoney, but if the powers that be in that state haven't got the backing or cabbage to offer 100k plus should the people training/breeding and competing in their state get a double wammy by having their classics downgraded? I think it must be tough enough for our colleagues in SA as it is, so personaly I'd rather see them get some support to lift their prizemoney on these races from the other states than getting shafted.
and I wholeheartedly agree with Ron's sentiments about what has happened to the interdominion, its an unfortunate fact that our society has become more like the septics in regard to "whoever has the gold makes the rules", that was never a popular way to conduct ourselves years ago but unfortunately those days are gone the god almighty dollar holds sway and just don't try and get in it's way or you'll get trampled.
Cheers,
Dan
[VVV] No, you're still missing the point. That makes no sense at all...because the ID is & has & will always been an Open All Age race with prizemoney that well exceeds the (in recent times) 'traditional' 100k barrier for Gr.1 status. It has always been accepted as the pinacle of racing here in the Southern Hemisphere. The $$$ may vary on a year to year basis depending on who hosted the event... but it has always gone off for big $.Quote:
Originally Posted by 2minuteman
What I am crooked on is that, as it stands at present, for example...an above average 3yo filly can go & win a 25k 'Oaks' against moderate opposition and she will be accorded Gr.1/Black type status in a Sales catalogue, placing her up on the same level as a top shelf 3yo filly who wins a 100k+ Oaks against the best 3yo fillies in the Southern Hemisphere. If that's not a stone cold clear cut argument in support of giving Group Racing the rocket and switching to a Graded Stakes format I've never seen one.
VVV wouldn't buyer due dilligence of the catalogue give the game away? Any filly who's sole claim to fame is a budget group race would have a correspondingly low dollar earnings beside her name as well wouldn't she? I do see your point but rather then hammering more nails into the coffin of the industry in poorer states shouldn't we be seeking ways to bolster and grow it?
Are the sales catalogues going to be ammended in the future to highlight those mares that took their mark on the 1400m track at Menangle? Doesn't the fast marks obtained by average mares in moderate company on the bigger track in an environment of higher prizemoney also corrupt the information contained in a sales catalogue?
I don't miss the point at all,you moved it.This thread was about the Group 2 Maitland Inter City Pace and I made comment on that basis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple V
Your points about the status of Inter are correct but your reply did not answer the question re. the new format.
As above. Any breeder or agent worth their salt should know what they are getting themselves into.Quote:
Originally Posted by dizzy
Money should be "the criteria".Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtrain
Your comment,my emphasis.
Following that, today's Magic Millions 2 year old race should be Group 1?
I also ask you to define the $$$$ for Group 1,Group 2 etc.
[VVV] ???? At the risk of being howled down Ron, I really don't follow the ID/Open Class horses that closely.Quote:
Originally Posted by 2minuteman
I watch them when they go around in a big $ race, I try to get to the Miracle Mile once a year but that's about the scope of it.
I much prefer 2yo & 3yo racing...largely because that's most likely where, as a breeder, I'll have some level of involvement via a starter that we've bred & sold or whatever.
If by chance one of them made it all the way through to ID Class then maybe I'd pay more attention to it. I couldn't tell you what the upcoming format was to be upfront. I know it has changed from previous editions, that's pretty much it.
I tend to believe comments for and against the format of the series are largely the domain of those who have a dog on the fight....the people with horses racing in it (owners & trainers) & those who are the big fans of ID Racing.
50k is Group 2Quote:
Originally Posted by 2minuteman
100k is Group 1 I think.
My argument is not that these monetary goal posts should be shifted but that for an open age race to receive group 2 status but be restricted to horses c2-c4 seems absurd. Open age Group racing should be exactly that. Open. Regardless of crowd size. Nowhere in Australia do they gave a group 2 M0 or Group 2 c0. This race just seems absurdly graded as a group 2 in comparison to every other race on our open age group racing calendar.
Around and around,I'm hopping off.
Gee Grant, you really have completely missed Ron's point haven't you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtrain
You have fairly consistently said on this thread that " of course money should be the criteria" but apparently now that's just for open age races?
Whilst you have have been pretty keen to point out Ron has missed YOUR point, ( if that could be clarified mate that would be good because you seem to keep on changing your tune).
And now you have made the claim that because "Nowhere in Australia do they gave a group 2 M0 or Group 2 c0" a restricted front race carrying group status is "absurd".
In an earlier response to your thread I asked you should the APG have group status, as it is not open to all 2yo's, so far you have not responded, do I take from that you have no opinion? or are you still forming one?
No wonder Ron has given up trying to make HIS point, you and Triple are like a couple of scratched vinyls, ie: making the point that nobody "gets your point" whilst completely ignoring the argument of others.
Listening is a skill.
Cheers,
Dan
I understand APG is a murky area Dan I agree however are you comparing Maitland to the APG? Any yearling owner can pay up for the APG series so is that much different to paying nomination fees for the Golden Slipper? Do you honestly believe the APG should not be group listed? We are lucky in the trots that our MAJOR sale all falls under the one heading across Australia. I still in all your rant cannot see any justification of an open age restricted race being group listed. $$ should be A criteria. Not THE criteria.
My point remains the same. Open age races, to be group listed should not be restricted.
Quote:
Of course money should be the criteria.
Good to see that your point remains the same Grant, and as far as "Open age races, to be group listed should not be restricted." that point mate is just your opinion,which differs from mine and differs also with the HRA guidelines.Quote:
$$ should be A criteria. Not THE criteria.
Your comment "Of course money should be the criteria." Not mine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtrain
Of course it's an opinion. Isn't that what we use forums for? Is strange though the race in question is the ONLY group 2 race in Australasia for open age pacers that is restricted. It differs in grading to every other race on the Australian calendar in both gallops and trots.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danno
Grant, there are a few others; The Carousel C2-C5 ($50k Group 2), the Tontine C2-C4 ($30k Group 3), the Premiers Cup C2-C5 ($50k Group 2).Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtrain
Regards
Mark
Thanks Mark. I knew of the tontine but overlooked others. The Maitland isn't as one out as I thought.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Croatto