I fully support what you are saying.

Our grading definitely needs to be flatter with the transition to higher grades to be slower and young dogs being protected. 99% 0f young greyhounds dont fall into Wow Shes Fasts territory.

Also dogs should not be unfairly graded to build fields for faster dogs. Dogs of similar ability should be graded together as much as possible.

Whether you agree or not we still need those marquee races but not to sacrifice the needs of the 90% that do the hard yards. Thats where sponsors are important.

The sport has had to win them back after the ban, I can see the investment that's been made un welfare and rehoming is slowly starting to bring them back.

Thats a positive too

We have them now and more specifically on the race calendar we have more then enough over the sprint distance , so much so you cant race in all of them !

Any new ideas like the Phoenix shouldnt be added on top to the existing, grass roots and majority grade fields should be top priority and first in line no matter what !

With middle and distance racing 2nd in line after that

Its not a grey area where its open for debate

Everyone has towed the line and waited long enough and whats available for the best sprints is more then enough as it is , eg 2 million dollar chases in 2022

Fair crack

So we have a hybrid system of points and local track grades, which means out graded young dogs coming out of grade 5 into 3/4 or even FFA fields and also good dogs sitting in their kennel if a race to suit their grade wasnt available.

The other codes dont have local grading as they race across the State just like us. The biggest problem with Fastrack wasnt just Aged Prize Money, although it was a clear fail - but it is local grading which distorts fields and creates uneven racing.

Any proper analysis would prove this up, and bringing in top down grading with a Statewide ranking for each dog would give better outcomes for fast and not so fast dogs, more even fields and better wagering (less odds on favourites).

So GRV have tinkered with Fastrack grading and are removing APM - one positive step, but have missed the chance to fix grading by creating a statewide ranking for each dog.

So we head into the New Year with a first four of wishes - better returns for all especially the grass roots on huge GRV wagering; track surface up grades using soil science experts along with experienced track-men and trainers to develop a gold standard for surfaces and using infrastructure funds already sitting in the GRV balance sheet which reflects a cashed up regulator with $42 million in accumulated profits and more from this FY; a decent grading system and fairer treatment relating to contaminants.

Transparency, accountability and efficiency from the regulator would be the real XMAS present - most likely only possible with a new corporate structure like RVL have, instead of our government bureaucracy only answerable to the Minister - and not the true stakeholders (participants and clubs).

All the best for XMAS and New Year and safe racing and success to all.

Made many sit up talk about the concept for nearly 12 months. And still going.

My understanding is that the Phoenix was an initiative of the Meadows club and then just grew into a multi-sponsor deal. However, many of those funds were effectively lifted out of funding sources which might otherwise have been spent on normal races.

In any event, huge prize money events will generate public interest only if they are pushed hard and are a continuing part of the annual offering.

While we are on that general topic, it is ridiculous the greyhounds persist in offering a Melbourne Cup. It does not matter how long it has been in place it needs to change the name otherwise the code is losing out to the horses and getting reduced value for any PR investment. For example, a Victoria Cup would work much better.

Also, much of the Million Dollars came out of unclaimed dividends, mostly at the instigation of the Ministers office. Thats the only way that could be accessed.

Re Michaels point The $1,000,000 Chase is a prime example. Handsome Prince won it, as did Good Odds Harada, for those who don't remember, and they went to stud soon after.

Well, yes, they did very well on the night but are not in the champion category. Thats just racing. Breeding is a different subject.

Other related comments effectively support what I have been pushing for years ie boost good provincial 5th grades because they are the guts of day to day racing. If that means cutting back a little on bottom level Z grades for squibs then so be it. The industry as a whole would benefit. Much the same applies to the excessively high prizes allocated to genuine feature events. Sure they are worth a premium but they do not need to be so high as to reduce the incentives for regular racing. Trim both categories and boost the major provincials year round, not just the Cups.

Lastly, there is a listing of several subjects which GRV is allegedly concentrating on. Fine, but that list omits the most serious shortcoming track design and layouts. That is primarily where injuries and high interference come from.

Just as one example, you will see on Sunday (Sale Cup 650m) that both turns at Sale need attention one is too tight and the other is compromised probably as a function of differing elevations between the track and the 650m boxes. This is not uncommon see The Gardens, for example, where they positioned the starting boxes and only after that did they drop the racing circuit on top of it. It should have been the other way round.

You are right, of course. Runners are light on. And have been since 2015, if not before.

A business, any business, grows when it gains more customers. That happens when they like the product and can make use of it.

For a long time now, it has been plain that the current customer profile comprises mainly people who don't know greyhounds and don't much understand betting - we call them mugs in pubs. Fortunately, they have been playing fairly well recently as other ways of spending their money have been truncated. It's no good buying a move ticket if there are no movies on.

Now things are easing up a bit it's a good time to venture out and try to raise the level of interest - which therefore helps breeding over time.

The first step is to get more people appreciating the greyhound as such. Today, as always, too many people simply don't like them, mainly because they know little or nothing about them.

We first have to sell the breed. Everything else will follow.

All the extra cash being pocketed by authorities should be allocated to advertising, PR and national marketing programs. Do it again and again. It works for Harvey Norman.

There are plenty of dogs missing out on races (sometimes at least forty to fifty per meeting) because they are being nominated and not gaining a start.

Of course there are exceptions to the rule, but if you cut back on races then you will have more dogs sitting at home, with owners and trainers getting confused and frustrated with the industry and perhaps considering their future. We should be `growing' the industry, not contracting it.

The balance is pretty good at the moment, but there is always room for improvement and expansion.

Bob,

We are. We are. That's why 60%-plus of all races are over short trips, many of them recently manufactured ultra-short distances for dogs without much ability.

But who is patronising what? Over the last several days here are the short fields .......

Bathurst 3 of 12 short
Maitland 9/10
Nowra 2/12
Grafton 2/12
WPK 1/10
Young 2/10
Goulbourn 7/11
Gardens 4/12
Richmond 4/12
Wagga 2/11
Casino 5/12
Dapto 3/11
Dubbo 3/12

And that is leaving out Late Scratchings as they could be due to unforeseen events.

36% of NSW races could not fill the boxes. So, yes, we need more dogs. Added to which, genuine punters will not bet on scrappy 300m events coming off the bend.

Sometimes the figure is over 60 - 80 dogs missing out for one particular meeting. Yes, some have vacant boxes for races, because of types of races being programmed.

A quick look at Gunnedah for Thursday, only 2/12 with a vacant box in each, 12 races and plenty of reserves, and about 40 dogs not gaining a start (excluding reserves), which is probably below average.

A quick look at Dapto for Thursday, 4/10 with vacant boxes, but two races are Maidens and one a FFA, and about 20 dogs not gaining a start (excluding reserves), which is about right. The same with Bathurst yesterday for 12 Race Program.

One has to factor in region, season, types of races being available and flow of nominations. Raw numbers don't paint a true picture.

When the nominations reach over 180 or even 200 that's when there is a big problem. I've seen those numbers too, but lately I haven't been paying to close attention to suggest it's a regular issue.