It seems that no entry form was published in early/mid 2016, which would be the normal nomination timeframe for the 2018 Classic. It may be a coincidence that the thrust was for reduced breeding at the time, and the club was in the hands of an administrator.

No entry form was released in early/mid 2017, which would be the normal timeframe for the 2019 Classic.

So unless the nomination timeframe is to be radically changed, the (not so good) prospects for the 2019 Classic perhaps could also have been announced on 19 December 2017.

And I hope that the industry is more multi-dimensional than just existing for serious gamblers.

Bruce

All you have done is agree with me that most of the punters of this world are not discerning creatures.

They are just as likely to bet on the next at Perry Barr at 11.30pm at night as much as they have bet on the races at Royal Randwick or Wentworth Park earlier.

I have it on fairly good authority that the English dogs are an absolute bonanza for the NSW TAB.

Words like, 'the best thing we have ever done' and 'high profit margins' seem to be the norm regarding these non-descript meetings.

It really goes to show that the era of the smart punter is gone, and the era of the small outlay phone punter is in

While there are good punters around and you may well be one of them, its no point in complaining about the quality when the industry depends on the returns of the four legged lottery races

My only concern is that more of this money should be coming to participants across the board to all levels of each racing code who provide the product, rather than in the pockets of the betting agencies wages and their shareholders

From there, once there is more money available to clubs, authorities, participants, rehoming agencies etc standards can be raised for all areas of the sport

While all that is going on, the punter will just punt and keep making the betting corporates richer with their stab in the dark punting and racing will continue on the meagre returns they get from the profits.

In the meantime, races like the Warnnambool Classic, Richmond Auction series, Ipswich Auction series are beacons of hope for our beleaguered participants

Bruce you forgot the word "old". Surely you mean not fun any more for serious "old" punters. Like going to a dance, or work or anywhere its just not as much fun for serious old people that's life!
Cognitive dissonance is a bitch Bruce.

The Warnambool Classic is a classic case of marketing the product. Scaring breeders with uncertainty caused lower numbers and an administrator possibly following instructions may have contributed to it's cancellation.
I only read your post to see how long it took you to mention "live baiting' which you do what ever topic you post on.
Don't ask us to move on if you can't.
No doubt you are serious Bruce. To be taken seriously is proving to be illusive.
You say no to administrators we need managers.
No to committees we need panels.
Set the job up for old punters not young mug gamblers.
You don't like breeding incentives, Vic bred incentives, high stakes maiden series, the Warnambool Classic concept, short races, long races, Fanta Bale, Wheeler or much at all really apart from writing. I mentioned a while ago Bruce you write well but you lean towards negativity.

If you addressed the subject rather than the person you might make fewer errors. (I have virtually given up punting, as I said previously).

To mix metaphors, you are cherry picking and then making a fruit salad. It makes no sense.

You said "You don't like breeding incentives, Vic bred incentives, high stakes maiden series, the Warnambool (sic) Classic concept, short races, long races, Fanta Bale, Wheeler or much at all really apart from writing. I mentioned a while ago Bruce you write well but you lean towards negativity".

OK, first of all, delete the last three in that list. Not only are they lies but I have actually said the opposite. In particular, distance racing warrants promotion because it's a positive sign for the breed and the customers like longer races. What I have said is that the vast majority of contenders cannot do the job. Currently, the bonuses being offered for longer races are a total waste of space. They produce nothing except mediocrity, barring the very occasional dog which can go on to better things - but which would have done that anyway, bonuses or not. Find another way.

I have been critical of the first six on your list for one simple reason - they don't work, or, in the case of the Classic, not well enough. By all means try something new but do it in such a way that the industry is advanced - not just the wishes of a few trainers but the industry as a whole, including its income stream.

Your "high stakes maiden series" are beloved of trainers. I know that. But not to anyone else. Do you realise that greyhounds is the only racing code, and the only sport known to mankind, where that happens? Only one trainer and one owner benefit while the industry loses. Not just in terms of wagering turnover but in asking the public to view scrappy racing from dogs which are still learning.

Subsidies are the bane of modern life as politicians try to curry favour with one or other sector of society, only to send the country broke while your electricity bill doubles. Vicbred bonuses achieve nothing other than to discriminate against some dogs which might otherwise help to create better fields. They offer no help to Vic trainers because that cash would otherwise go into normal prize money given to the same people. Napthine (a fine supporter of the dogs) pulled out a big pile of grants a few years ago to encourage breeding and raise employment. Neither happened. In fact, during that period Vic breeding actually declined.

Short races, hated by customers, are not races at all but jumping contests. They help only to increase crook breeding. If, as some trainers claim, a dog can be trained to move up to 500m or 600m, then why not move a 300m dog up to 400m?

So, yes, there is a lot of negativity there. Guilty. I also read a lot here from trainers complaining about what authorities do - they are usually unhappy with their lot. Why is that?

None of that should be a surprise when the industry is being run by amateurs and bureaucracies and hammered by over-zealous government regulations. It's the 1950s with occasional fresh coats of paint. It's why all forms of racing are being overrun by other forms of gambling and why sports betting is going gangbusters. Ignore that at your peril.

PS: those sports contenders are not for mugs but for the cream of the crop at premium venues with premium facilities, all with a high female and children content.

You are not playing the ball, mate. That could cost you.

My intelligence on customers and short races comes from rubbing shoulders with them for decades on end - at the track and in the TAB. Plus being regularly asked, "Got a tip, mate?". Often they have no idea of the race distances and get a shock when it is suddenly all over. They may not mind losing but they hate getting wiped out early.

Indirectly, that is also the reason why race quality mostly now has little effect on wagering figures. If the mob don't really know what they are doing they also have trouble figuring out the race in front of them. Maidens might attract the same dollars if they come on at a particular time of the night. To me, that's a worry.

I would love to chat more with trainers but 90% or more are notoriously reluctant to talk to strangers. In fact, I hear more on this website than I ever did at the track.

And please name me a genuine short course champ that has kicked on and produced lots of good all-round racers. The last one I can think of was Queenslander Yo Yo (something) but I can't remember him producing much of note.

NB I would not include 350m straight track racing in my "banned" list. They have separate values. Your other examples are irrational.

These Classic and maiden series offer something different and many people CHOOSE to enter them, they r not forced or pressured to.

When weighed up with pros and cons of having them it is obviously believed that the positives outweigh the negatives.

There r only a couple of them so its not like the fields at every track on everyday are lopsided due to them ok.

So leave your negativity at the door and try really hard to see what many, many people see r good events for the INDUSTRY as a whole.

As such, it was not a regional high stakes event that could be cherry-picked by the top tier as easily as the cups.

It had its own niche, and for it to be taken away is a loss for greyhound racing, another blow for grass roots participants, and unfortunate for the club.

Perhaps such things should be accepted when there is gross under-representation of greyhound racing people in decision-making roles.

Gee Bruce. You've got to stop making these bl00dy stupid statements mate.

I'll name just one sire who broken 10 track records between 311m & 411m, plus another 5 over slightly longer journeys ---> CLICK HERE

Otherwise, I return to my basic plea. The Classic is attractive to many trainers. OK, put it together in such a way that it benefits the whole industry. If you do that the rewards for everybody will increase.

Your commentary on 300m/350m racing is irrelevant to the topic of the Warrnambool Classic

It's a race that is worthwhile supporting and IMHO if the race is no longer a race made up of puppy nominations, the GRV should consider that it be returned as an age-based Classic over a 3-week period

I agree.

Unfortunately, I had to respond to another off-topic post lest I get verballed in the future.

"I'll name just one sire who broken 10 track records between 311m & 411m."

Not the other 5 T/rec's he broke so I obviously noticed your "Short Course" remark.

Which brings me too I don't know what planet you live on, but this is how I categorize racing distances greyhounds race over (give or take a little here & there on difference tracks designs) -

Short - under 440m.
Sprint - 441m to 550m.
Middle - 551m to 650m.
Distance 651m & over.

Bruce. I love your passion for the sport & most of your work too, but sometimes we get it wrong (ie Token Prince).
Just ask the members of the tipping comp I overlook lol......although I've been pretty spot-on over the last couple of weeks.

Broadly, I have only a couple of problem with your distance brackets.

First, the average greyhound achieves its top speed at around 435m.

Second, many 425m dogs cannot run out a good 450m. Bendigo to Ballarat is a good comparison there.

Third, some 400m dogs are gasping at the end of a 425m race, possibly because they were not running out a strong 400m in the first place.

Fourth, Some or most 300m/350m winners cannot run out 400m very well (but training may come into it there).

Fifth, I would strongly contend your 441m/550m bracket. It should read 480m/550m. A great many good 450m dogs cannot get the 500m/525m trips. (In reverse, many good 520m winners have difficulty with the last 30m at Horsham or Bulli - due to the longer home straights).

These are averages, of course, so there will be versatile dogs that have a greater reach. (Pretty Short is one example).

But hark back to my overall 435m point. This also emphasises that once you get beyond 435m most dogs are slowing down, including in top events over 520m The winner is more often the one that slows down less than the others. "Finishing on" can be an optical illusion.

It is also relevant to consider their jumping ability. A leader does not have to worry about interference but, on the other hand, it may be using up its petrol in the first half of the race and have less to use at the finish.

Track shape also makes a big difference.

Anyway, interference aside, Warrnambool 450m is a good test, as are many on the Cup circuit.

So I would want to group them as Sub-400m, 400m/430m, 431m/460m
and so on. I find those distinctly clear brackets.

While I am here, let me correct Simon. I have never said the Warrnambool Classic as such is bad for "the industry", only that the heats are, and that they should find some other way of skinning the cat.