Racing Program - Again (td)

This is not a new topic, I know, but for the life of me I can't understand why it is so difficult to put together a proper racing program.

I was quite chuffed with our filly (Codega's) performance over 2000 metres on New Year's Day, so I have been eagerly browsing through the 'Programme of Meetings and Fixture List' to seen where she would be able to have her next start - to my disgust I find that there is NO maiden fillies race over further than 1800 metres in the program UNTIL 12 FEBRUARY - which is a workriders race - (the closest suitable race being over 1800 on Jan 29). In contrast there are at least 3 maiden fillies races over 1600 - and 1 or 2 over 1400/1450 and also maidens for the colts over 2200 as well as 2000.

So we have a few choices (none of them ideal)
1. Let her stand in her box for the month (well until the 29th at least)
2. Run her over 1600 to keep her going (and run the risk that she that if she runs unplaced, she does not qualify when the next race over 2000+ comes along)
3: Take on the colts over 2200 or 2000

There was no shortage of entries for the race this past weekend - it ended up with 15 runners - so don't try to hide behind that excuse - will the guys putting together the program PLEASE WAKE UP:X

Frodo , don't just look for a maiden race . Your filly has a handicap rating . Why restrict her to running in a maiden plate , surely there is a low mr handicap you can nominate her for .
I can't for the life of me understand why trainers more often than not confine their maiden runners to maiden races .

If your horse has a merit rating , run it in a handicap , simple as that .

Just my opinion !

antsinner Wrote:

---

> Frodo , don't just look for a maiden race . Your
> filly has a handicap rating . Why restrict her to
> running in a maiden plate , surely there is a low
> mr handicap you can nominate her for .
> I can't for the life of me understand why trainers
> more often than not confine their maiden runners
> to maiden races .
>
> If your horse has a merit rating , run it in a
> handicap , simple as that .
>
> Just my opinion !

Agree with Antsinner, they do it successfully in the UK, why not here?(tu)

Greg i'll bet that there are no handicaps over those distances , which brings Frodo's dilemma back to square one !

I really battle to see how owners keep head above water in this game .

I felt and feel like we are in the same boat as Frodo. We have two staying horses in Gilmore Girl and Danger Point, the amount of races over 2000 meters for these horses are minimal. There are plenty of races 1800 meters or shorter though. After the KZN feature season Gilmore Girl was fit and well and we couldn't get a race for her for three months, either no races or the races we put her in did not have enough horses accepting. I feel it we are being penalised for having staying horses.

Fortunately we have had a few races and have a few coming up for our horses but this could run out suddenly.

antsinner Wrote:

---

> Greg i'll bet that there are no handicaps over
> those distances , which brings Frodo's dilemma
> back to square one !
>
> I really battle to see how owners keep head above
> water in this game .


Yip, no handicaps either - and in any case our filly was rated at a gross 57 (that should hopefully go up to somehting like a 65 after Saturday), so even getting into a lowly MR handicap is not easy - my point is why have 5/6 races over 1400/1600, but none over 2000? K*k and betaal - or get out - those are an owners options, it seems.

The statistics show us that the majority of the demand for Maidens is up to 1600m and the majority (over 80%) of these Maiden races are therefore programmed accordingly.

We generally programme 3 or 4 Maiden Plates over 1800m / 2000m per month on the Highveld - usually 2 for Open and 2 for F&M. In addition there is usually 1 Maiden Open race per month (where fillies can also run with their sex allowance) over distances beyond 2000m.

These principles are based on the historical demand for races for each of the programming periods (as obtained from the ongoing assessment of the races scheduled and their success or otherwise) and the input of the trainers who represent the RA on the Programming Committee (currently Mike de Kock, Sean Tarry and Alec Laird for the Highveld). Clearly we need to put on races that best fill and accommodate the majority of the horse population to the benefit of betting turnover and consequently stakes.

It should also be pointed out that all Maidens who have qualified for a Merit Rating (with 3 or more runs on a given surface) are eligible to run in handicaps - something that is not utilised nearly as much in SA as it is in other racing countries.

Thanks for taking the time to explain the situation.

I agree that stats will show that the demand for races up to 1600 will be greater than for races beyond 1600 - I am not so sure that the difference is as great as 80% vs 20%. If that were the case why did we have a full field of 16 runners (plus reserves) carded for the 2000 fillies maiden on New Year's Day - if the demand were not there, the field would have been MUCH smaller.

Even taking the 80/20 scenario as fact, surely the 2 races per month (for maiden fillies over 1800+) should be more evenly spaced - in January we had a fillies maiden race over 2000 on the 1st followed by another over 1800 (inside track) on the 29th (4 weeks apart) while there are 5 races for maiden fillies races on turf scheduled over 1400-1600 in between these dates.

I am aware that maidens with a MR can be entered into lower handicaps, but I would suggest that this is not the reason why lower handicaps exist - they are there to cater for winners (not maidens). Also it is in my view not very clever to race the average maiden 3 yr old filly into a lower handicap over ground as she would be yonks out at the weights.

Imo, if the races for maiden filles over ground were scheduled properly, it would not be necessary to run maiden fillies against colts, or to run maidens in handicaps,

Although I respect the trainers on the Programming Commitee, I suggest that perhaps in order to strike a better balance, input from some of the 'lesser lights' in the training ranks should also be considered when putting the program together.

So in closing, in light of my arguments above, I suggest that the program should indeed be re-assesed and some alterations made.

Just felt I had to vent my frustrations again (an email to SA Horse Racing went unanswered); we may actually get a chance to run Codega on 31 March in a fillies handicap over ground (but chances are that she will be eliminated again even off her too-high rating of 70); thanks to the programmers for putting on a race ON 29 MAY :X:X - thereby forcing us to run her in unsuitable races over shorter in the mean time(where she will run poorly - so at least I suppose it would get her MR down to an acceptable figure); just don't accuse her of 'inconsistent running' when she runs to her ability on 29 May