View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 11:47 pm



Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
 Some ideas for moving forward 
Author Message
Group 1 winner
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 11:03 am
Posts: 4104
Location: Wales
Post Re: Some ideas for moving forward
Taunton wrote:
I like Martins points, and I agree very much that already the league works very well. Be careful to fix something that aint broke.

I understand the need to implement and keep the interest in new trainers, but as a new trainer myself, I wouldn't want it to be too tailor-made so that it doesn't feel like an achievement to get a win. But some more handicaps would be nice, and bigger fields in G1. Even though my horses would finish half a mile behind in a G1, it is always something extra to have a horse in such a race, even though it is virtual.

I have had a horse in the Grand national this year and it was great, even though it didn't have a chance. But just to see my horse running around Aintree competing with other trainers horses, was as close as to the real thing i could get and I was buzzing.

I was realistic in terms of my chances this year, but I wanted to see what the level was like. I think it will be difficult for the top trainers to improve a lot, but easier for us lesser trainers maybe to take bigger steps and slowly get nearer.

I think it must be ok for someone to dominate and be best, I actually think that is great, but it is also nice that there are races that we smaller trainers have a chance in. And that will give us the motivation to join the wolf pack who will chase the best trainers.

Small improvements are always good, it prevent things being stale, but implement with care and keep what works today.


I 100% agree with u.


Mon Jul 24, 2017 7:59 pm
Profile
Group 1 winner

Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2014 4:39 am
Posts: 2497
Location: South Australia
Post Re: Some ideas for moving forward
I think I must highlight the concern that Martin, I and other trainers that have mentioned it from time to time is the retention of new trainers.
And how do we improve keeping new trainers interested.

With the qualifying races and especially the finals where it is noted the small fields - I wonder if that is because a lot of those trainers actually don't read the forums and realise they have qualified?

Maybe us comms need to be more switched on and actually mention directly after the finish of a qualifying race that the winner or the first two or three have qualified for the final in week 13 etc.

Just a thought.


Tue Jul 25, 2017 12:43 am
Profile
Group 1 winner

Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2016 4:16 pm
Posts: 2297
Post Re: Some ideas for moving forward
My thoughts below:

Quote:
1a. The removal of the rule forbidding horses to make their debut in G1 (G2) races. To be honest I am not sure why this rule was ever implemented in the first place. There is absolutely nothing beneficial about it. No horse gets a weight allowance and it isn't in place in real racing. I can only assume it was implemented at some point in the past when the league was run differently. It is vital that this pointless rule is removed.


Cannot say I am fussed eitherway, though I am not sure I see why this is a problem that needs to be solved?

Quote:
1b. Running in conjunction with 1a the sixteen runner limit on G1 races should also be removed. Once again it is not in place in real racing and serves no other purpose other than to protect the top trainers from getting their horses boxed in by lesser ones. To put it bluntly TOUGH. That's life and if it happens it happens. The fact that middle level trainers are supposed to be ok with 25 runner fields round a tight track in their races but the top trainers don't have to put up with it in the top races is nothing more than elitist. Again I assume this rule was put in place back in the day because the rule makers wanted an edge. Real life limits should be in place. Newmarket can take 30 for the Guineas but we are limited to 16. The Derby can have 20. I want to see 25 horses running in the Arc and hearing about hard luck stories of not getting a run. These two rules should be removed as I can see no good reason for them. I also believe the 16 runner one has been broken on at least one occasion this year.


I both agree and disagree with this. From a quality point of view having a bunch of 50 rated donkeys running in G1 is stupid, a factor that in real life would be mitigated by entrance fees to a degree, and where these horses then go backwards and wipe out a real contender is bad for the best races in my view, will add another layer of randomness above and beyond what the racekit already serves up and will further encourage top trainers to breed front runners to avoid the chaff. I do however think 16 is perhaps a little to restrictive, why not a blanket raise to 20?

Quote:
2. Auto qualifying for big races. For example winners of the Craven, Nell Gwyn, Fred Darling, Greenham, Free Handicap etc get automatic entry to the appropriate Guineas race and the winning trainer can still run another if he wishes. That could of course mean someone like Paul could have 4 qualified runners and then choose to enter another. Not a problem, only one can win so if he enters 5 that's 4 other races that someone else can win. It would be entirely up to Paul to decide how much he wanted to win the 2000 Guineas as opposed to another race on the same week. Just like real life
.

Sort of see what this adds, and that it will hurt the top trainers by forcing them into races they may not want to run, or consequently forcing them out of races to avoid the auto qualifier. But it also wallops the mid tier who may want to tackles the entry races but avoid the G1 looking for wins elsewhere.

Quote:
3. Putting the transfer window back a week to after Royal Ascot. In real life most trainers break the season into segments and most use RA as the end of their early campaign. This is why a lot of the late maturing 4yos win the Ascot handicaps and then go onto become group horses. The benefits for us are numerous. Bringing horses in on a week where they are ineligible from most of the races makes no sense and results in some ridiculous size fields in the races they can run in. Also having the window after Ascot would encourage people to bring back good handicappers for a second season to run in the big early season handicaps knowing they could retire them after Ascot. After Ascot is a perfect time for a week off as well and would be beneficial to the handicappers who would have more time to re-evaluate horses handicap marks. It is a pivotal point in the real racing calendar so it makes sense to make it the same in ours.


No problem with this personally.

Quote:
4. The introduction of a championship series of races to replace the current Bonus Race set up. Instead of running between 2 and 6 bonus races on the Wednesday. I would suggest we run 2 per day. These could still be shown on TOM as they are now but just run 2 each day. The exact format of these races should be agreed by all but I would tentatively suggest 2 races per week for an AW championship say 0-85 over varying distances culminating in a 5 or 6 race finals meeting in week 12. 2 races per week for a Turf championship 0-100 in the same format culminating in a 5 or 6 race finals meeting in week 13. This would give lower end horses a big race to aim at the end of the season. At the moment the AW finals are run in a week where the qualified horses have many other opportunities so sometimes the fields are quite small. This finals series would be a good balance to the G1s at the Breeders Cup and the Australian races. Something for everyone to aim at and look forward to in the final weeks. The other two races could be used for a weekly maiden race or a gamebred series. Gamebred is interesting as it would really give newcomers a chance to compete whilst they got the hang of league play. There are some issues though with the possibility of people turning G1s into sellers etc but in reality people could be doing that already and it doesn't seem to have been a problem. This could be counteracted by making the gamebred series for 2yos. If I am correct I believe the horses race record transfers to the CK when you export it showing wins/runs and rating. If the only horses allowed were unraced 2yos this would be extremely even and potentially very interesting as no one would know what they had until it ran in the league. To achieve this I believe you would have to increase stable size to 25 with 5 gamebreds. Something which I think is worth considering anyway.


No real issue with this, and I think I may just skip the whole gamebred aspect (be nice to still have the 5 extra) :)

Quote:
5. Making all G3 races after the transfer window handicaps with a maximum rating of 120. This is probably quite contentious but G3 hcaps are commonplace in the NH and making them hcaps on the flat would make them more competitive and give those horses who are just that bit too good for the prestige hcaps but not quite G1 somewhere to go. Listed races could remain conditions events but with a 120 limit so the G3 horses had level weights options and they weren't farmed by G1 horses.


Not sure I like this really, seems too cheapen the group races to me, makes them easier to win in theory, and only that, whilst arguably not making any odds if a real monster arrives, handicapping flat makes little change in my view. What do you think this adds?

Quote:
6. To make 5 more achievable I would suggest not allowing G1 winners to run in anything other than G1 or G2 races until they have been beaten twice. (This may not be possible on TOM or some may feel it hampers the top boys too much).


Hate that, punishes the people who pick off the odd G1 now and again, me and my three G1's this year, for example. No fun for me having to bang heads with Paul and John, if there is a tasty G3 to enter. Would make more sense however if it applied to multi G1 winners, 2 or maybe 3 before it takes effect?

Josh


Wed Jul 26, 2017 4:13 pm
Profile
Group 1 winner
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 5:56 pm
Posts: 5650
Location: uk
Post Re: Some ideas for moving forward
Race Changes for New Season

Will be allowing to increase Stable sizes to 25 doing this will try and stop Small fields and the races Schedule expands to take in more races per week also might be able to have more than one entry in certain Races like Wokingham and Cambridgeshire Handicaps.

I am Planning Changing rules and restrictions to group races later in the season after the Royal Ascot Meeting in Week 6 so from Week 7 some changes will be put into place.

From Week 1 Max enties for Group 1 Races will be increased to 24

Group 1 Races ( Min rating 80 No Max Rating )
Group 2 Races ( Min Rating 75 No Max Rating )
Group 3 races ( No Min Rating Max Rating 110 )

These are some ideas i am looking at.


Gray

_________________
simple in mind but wonderful in young life
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNzbn9 ... idx5pNkHaQ


Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:12 am
Profile YIM WWW
Group 1 winner
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 8:48 pm
Posts: 15142
Location: Republic of Ireland
Post Re: Some ideas for moving forward
Cheers for the update Gray

_________________
Website http://www.aidanobrienfansite.com
Email pjrhodes1122@gmail.com
Twitter https://twitter.com/aobrienfansite


Fri Aug 04, 2017 10:58 am
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 39 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.