I don't know too much about the bookmaking levies and how they affect distribution of funds. It's all Greek to me. You've been here Oddy, so you'd have a much better idea of how the UK and Australian systems compare. I'm not trying to big up us or the American scene, maybe you can shed some light on why the UK and Australia have roughly the same number of foals bred each year, and I suppose roughly the same amount racing, yet we have better prize money with only a third as much invested by punters? Today we also had 6 meetings on offer, and I think the smallest purse per race was $16,500 in Bunbury WA. Even Darwin surpassed them. Sydney's minimum for the day was $50,000. The highest rated race there was a bench mark 70. The tote is probably the answer.
Yep mate, I would kick the bookies out of horse racing (it ain't much of their turnover anyway) and just have tote betting, with all the profits flowing directly into racing. It works wherever they have it (you mention Australia and USA, but France, Hong Kong are 2 other perfect examples). I realise some will moan about not being able to shop around for the best prices etc but to me that is a small price to pay for the good of the sport (I only bet on the Cheltenham Festival anyway so no problem for me). The bookies can bet on every other sport under the sun so leave them to it.
funny that in the usa , where capitalism and the market are unquestioned mainly , they to use pool betting as a way of funding the industry ? only here is it left to levies on parasites profits
RB, I've just had a quick peek at racing today in the USA. There are whole programs of absolute rubbish racing. I think the smallest stake to the winner was about US$6,000 for claiming maidens. At Gulfstream, the Maiden Claiming for 4 year olds plus, was US$15,750 to the winner. Amazing.
It's really annoying that I can no longer find the threads on the old BBC606 forum. I did a long analysis on the future of horse racing in the UK. And, without trying to remember the detail, one of the conclusions I reached was to have fewer racecourses, but not out of reach of enthusiastic race fans. As Cyc says, the consequences are far from ideal and it is something that would have to be phased over a number of years with due consideration to all those employed in the industry, not to mention the lower grade horses. A major problem is that all racing thoroughbreds have to be trained at registered yards costing anything from £1500 per month and upwards just to be able to race, with little chance of winning any prize money of note. In show jumping most people train their own horses (or pay private trainers) and the best progress to high prized events and international level where the media coverage is such that the sponsors roll in to boost prize money. At the lower end events are self funded by entry and membership fees. There is no such route in thoroughbred racing. So there is a demand for higher prize money. So where do they think this money is coming from? Why should it come from anywhere other than those enjoying the ownership of the horses and maybe some local sponsors? The sport needs 2 separate regulators; one for sport and one for professional (the latter of course being the current set up). Looking at another hobby which has a large user base. Dog showing. When you look at the number of dogs at Crufts, these are just the few that qualified; there are thousands of other dogs competing that haven't qualified. And there we have several levels. Championship show level, Open Show level, and levels below those. In the 60s it was not uncommon to have 60 dogs (of the same breed) in one class at a championship show and there was prize money. Over the years, prize money dropped and the number of entries dropped and some dogs ended up in rescue homes. For a long time now, there has been no prize money at most shows. Entries are considerably lower (outside Crufts) and puppy registrations down in those breeds most affected. I suspect the same will happen in horse racing so they might as well plan for a manged route to the inevitable
I believe the only way is to have a centralised organisation managing all aspects of thoroughbred horse racing. Not unlike in France. That was another conclusion I came to in my long analysis way back
Can't a private person train a horse in the UK? For a hundred bucks, a person who owns a horse, can secure a licence in NSW. Description You will require this licence if you intend to train horses for thoroughbred racing. There are four categories of trainer licence: Trainer: you will require this licence if you intend to train thoroughbred horses for racing. Owner Trainer Permit: allows you to train and race thoroughbred horses that you own. Trainer Partnership: allows up to three people to train as a training partnership. If you intend to form a partnership you share all responsibilities, duties, obligations and rights provided by the Rules of Racing in relation to the training of racehorses. Temporary Visiting Licence: If you are visiting from another state and intend to train a horse or horses for one month or such a period approved by the Agency. Please be aware that: you are required to register any stable hands that you employ you must comply with the specified rules and your licence may be subject to conditions.
You can probably add France to that equation. Another country where the tote pays the piper, and the sport calls the tune.
I suppose it depends upon what sort of trainer you want to become Ron. I think if it's just some bloke handling his own horses, he wouldn't need to prove anything on the financial front. Maybe. Eligibility requirements To be eligible as a trainer you must: provide evidence of satisfactory and current public liability insurance have completed the required training course submit all the required documentation submit the relevant application form pay the required fee. Further eligibility criteria may vary depending on the type of trainer licence you are applying for. Please consult the Contact Officer for more information regarding eligibility requirements.
