Not sure this is even possible.

How about having a pool of horses available to everyone (donated by players) for breeding purposes in the league.

I know we had the bring and buy sale thing in the past, but that really felt like you were just managing other peoples horses.

With this proposal you would be breeding the pair yourself.

Open a thread were players can download other players horses and integrate them into their own breeding barns.

1. It would make the league more competitive.
2. Would give players who don't play that often a chance of wining group one races.
3. We could create a top stallion/mare hall of fame.
4. It would remove any 'suspicion' that this is what is already happening. (Just for the record, personally I don't think this is happening anymore).

This might not be of interest to the top players who dominate the league.

Players would however be able to follow their stallion/mares offspring in the league if we publish the lineage for each runner.

There are no doubt other positives and negatives, feel free to give your opinions.

Anyway just throwing that out, interesting to see what people think.

Maybe just a pool for horses that have competed in the league already for breeding purposes during the following seasons.

This means they have a career after their league exploits have finished.

I am happy to go along with the majority whatever that is so that is it from me.

thing is steve you are still relying on other peoples integrity to put up their best,if I put up my best then get someone elses 2nd or even 3rd string surly that will leave me at a disadvantage,im all up for spreading the winners but the people who put the hours in get the results I know if a horse ive put up sires a derby winner that's not going to make me feel great.sorry if you don't agree just my opinion.

however if there was a pool of horses (non human trainer related ala keith beaky) made available for download for breeding purposes only could be a better option one for mark me thinks

You wouldn't need to put up your best. Just ones that you feel comfortable with. Would expect players to keep their best for themselves that is only natural.

Yes, someone might breed a better one with your second string, and I can understand how that might be a problem.

Interesting idea that last one.

I don't think players should be allowed to use other Trainers horses myself even if the best ones was put up but the Idea that Mark could put a some horses like frankel for the Flat and Sprinter Sacre for the Jumps to breed with would be interesting.


Gray

It is an interesting idea. Would like to see a range of horses covering all distances.

Mares and Stallions.

If you made them incompatible to breed together it would still give the likes of Ghost and Paul and yourselves the edge with their better horses.

But would possibly narrow the gap between players.

I would be comfortable with all stallions or all mares only so you would still have to work for it as apposed to crossing 2 superstars and getting a monster in the first gen

Agreed. There would still have to be some reward for players putting in the time and effort.

I always thought this was a good idea, but over the years people have proved that they cannot be trusted with systems like this, as such I don't think anything like this should be implemented. Imagine the arguments as well!!

What I do think could be something to think about is some sort of sales system, mostly for the bottom of the table trainers to use what prize money they have got/starting money to buy duds who will be deleted in the week 5 window from 'better' trainers. This way they have a chance to have a horse run in a top handicap or group race with a realistic chance of winning or placing. It would only be available for horses trainers want to retire and there would be no swaps or exchanges between trainers, it would all be above the board with some kind of pricing system based on either the horse's rating so no 'behind the scenes' deals could be done.

I think that could work.

Yes I have thought about this also, and I think it is a good idea.

A sales ring within the league, with a set amount of money for each player to buy horses other players no longer want, sounds like it would work well.

At least there would be some skill to it.

Not sure if TOM would cope with this, only Leon or Mark would know the answer.

An addition to this would be to have pre-season breeze up sales.

A week of racing where players could put in the horses they don't want.

A number of races could be set up and ratings given. (Obviously these ratings would not carry forward to the league). Then they could all be put up for auction before the season starts.

This way you could see which horses you want to buy in a racing capacity.

If players were given a set amount they couldn't just buy all the winning horses, but would have to use their judgement to accumulate a stable.

Think this would bring in more players.

I have no idea about TOM, but again I think your idea could be open to exploitation. At least if the horse has already been uploaded and has raced in the league you know what you're getting. Or I guess you could increase the max stable number to 35 (for example) and people could upload that many for a "pre-league trials week" and race them and decide which 5 they want to send to the sales. At least then the horses would be racing against actual league horses which would then bring in an element of skill in predicting which races had the best horses etc.

New trainers or trainers with fewer than 10 horses in their stable get first pick and then it's a free for all. But some ratings system would have to be brought in so horses can be fairly priced. This would bring in new players too as people with poor horses, or no horses would have the opportunity to buy something from the pre-league trials. If TOM would allow you could then have a week 5 sale too.

It would be interesting to find out if TOM could do this. But as with all these things you'd have to be very careful that nobody could exploit the system because no matter how honest people might be now, certain people have proven in the past that we can't trust anyone with this kind of system.

All very good points. Definitely something to think about.

I have changed the thread title.

I have thought this for a while, but the idea has always been pushed to the wayside. It would be good to see if it could be implemented and then see how if worked if it was implemented.

Not really sure what context my name is mentioned in? Cheating no doubt