What Next!

Does racing benefit from arranging races for horses that cannot win a maiden at level weights.We will inevitably end up with handicap races with more and more "1/2" time winners.
Whats next................ races for horses that are disabled and amputees?

Oops...missed that a thread along the same lines already open....sorry !

Is the introduction of qualified maidens actually economics.....if 75% of all maiden races ,suddenly included the word "qualified".........how many millions would be saved in stakes?

If they were extra meetings i could see the point,create a new class for the lowly rated runners to take part..

Yup Hibs,I think that it is important to monitor that the total stakes,raced for,doesn't become less overall,due to more and more stakes reduced by the introduction of some qualification.

The UK had the Banded racing a few years ago, early morning starts, the punters soon lost interest...

Banded racing made yesterday at the Vaal look good.

I do not have a problem with the type of racing that took place yesterday at the Vaal (with the exception of the 'maiden handicaps' which I think is going too far) - provided this remains the exception (once every 2 or 3 months) and not the norm. I do believe that provision has to be made for the 'weaker' class of horse to earn back some of the hard earned cash spent by the owners - and the argument that this leads to shock results also has a positive spin-off; it has been suggested by some people that in order for racing to compete with the casino's, there should be an opportunity to win big for a small outlay. Also, 'shock' results are certainly not limited to these meetings (witness the result of the Allan Robertson at last week's 'cream of the crop' Jackpot of Sprints)

Most importantly as pointed out by rob, the total stakes raced for should not be reduced by having more and more of these 'qualified' races and the rules for entering horses in these races should also be looked at imo (in order to ensure that the 'target market' is reached)