I have no problem with how you have split the handicap races, maybe make it 4 races at 100 and 4 races at 110, but any race from listed upwards would in effect be a G1 in reality as all the top trainers will have horses in these races.

If I am being totally selfish as a top trainer and there are 36 races per week, I want at least 15-18 races per week that I can enter horses into. Your breakdown of races just about gives that.

Agree Jim, we seem to have got ourselves in a tangle with trying to get smaller trainers a bigger win (G3 etc) which causes the schedule to be effected, I think we have to accept that trying to get smaller trainers a group win isn't going to work (I was an advocate of this) but I do believe that the lower, mid tier are happy with a 0-65 and if they can sneak a 0-110 that's a group race in many of our/their eyes.

Money is irrelevant on all our races, as we don't use this as a gauge for top trainer, its all about wins, so win everything up to 0-100 and you will be challenging the top on wins although not the prestige of the classics etc. would be interesting to see.... unless we use money as the gauge for the top trainer, then more of the top guys would head for where the money (especially if you make all G1's 2 entries) is and not just the win, opening the lower listed, 0-110, G races to the lesser trainer....

As I have always banged on about - if you want to keep trainers - especially new trainers, then they need to be able to be competitive and hopefully pick up a win or two throughout the season - if they stick to it after the fifth week - we lose at least three new trainers each season by week five. We need to retain them, not lose them.

I think we need to keep Group races as they are - without maximum ratings - I think minimum ratings in G1s is fine. G1s are for the elite trainers and they shouldn't be handicapped to enter them.
If anything it forces a top trainer to place a gun in a G3 or G2 because that is the only relevant race for their horse and in a way that is counter productive to open those races to the middle tier trainers.
As I mention a few weeks ago - making Cup races with good prize money is the way to go and we can make them from 0-65 to 0-110 or beef up some Listed races with maximum and minimum ratings.

This is the reality!
It doesn't and will not work and it feels hollow when you do win or place in a big races because there was a maximum rating because deep down, if it was open your horse had no chance.

I agree, a max rating on a listed race is acceptable but all group races should be open. I accept my position as a lower level trainer because I do not have the time to invest in breeding monsters.
This is my seventh season (all of SO5 & SO6) and I have managed one group win and a splattering of group places but it was a genuine win and not demeaned by top trainers horses being ineligible. If I am going to win a group race I want it to feel like a proper accomplishment.
For what it is worth I think there is nothing really wrong at all with the flat schedule; there is the odd duplication of near identical races but nothing a couple of very minor tweaks would rectify.
Darren

I second this, Darren.

Totally agree BUT i do think there is room to make some excitement in the lower rated races. And yes there needs some tweaking to clean up the near identical races - not only in the lower grades but up the top as well. Double entries also need to be expanded.

it just looks like week 13 had become aimed at lower mid trainers

very very little for top 6 trainers without double entries id have about 5 runners in wk13

its not easy to sort a schedule out

When i was working this out with Gray before the season started - week 13 i thought was going to be top heavy with G1s with the extra aussie ones involved.
As i mentioned earlier if we take away the max rating then that opens up 3 more G1s.

Not looked at week 13 yet to be honest but if that is the case it is a pretty sad way to end the season.

With regard to the ease of making a schedule - it is actually very very easy to make a schedule. The main work has already been done by the horse racing authorities of the world and the foundation of a perfectly good league schedule has been created by Gray. You just have to come to a sensible decision as to where you want to go and start from there with a sensible balanced approach and not be guided by things you feel you have to put in or can't take out.

In every schedule in the world there is a balance between grades and there are overlapping areas. Not 50% top and 50% bottom. Its more like 25% top, 50% middle and 25% bottom with grey areas between. So what you have to do is ensure that the top trainers can still get into half of the middle tier races and the middle have some chances to drop into the bottom as well as get into some at the top. The bulk of your trainers are mid tier with a small group of elites and a small group of newcomers. You don't need any races below 0-70 because nothing should ever realistically be out of the handicap in a 0-70. You don't need 2 Group 1 sprints or 12f in a week either unless they are age restricted. You need a solid range of 0-70 0-80 0-90 0-100 0-110 0-120 0-140 and pattern races. I have seen pretty much every top trainer have runners in 0-90 handicaps this season. Therefore you know 0-90, 0-100, 0-110 0-120 is your bread and butter spread that most people can get into. With your group and 0-140s for the cream and your 0-70 and 0-80 for the bottom end. Some races need min ratings also so that they are channelled into the correct grade. All races need to be double entry with an agreed max field and no guaranteed one runner either except in something like the GN. Best horses for the best races. People will soon come to realise which races they will get in and which they won't and they will enter accordingly. It is remarkably simple really.


This will sound strange to some as I constantly bang on about realism but in some areas we try too hard to stick to complete real life meetings. For example do we really need all those Breeders Cup races or all those Novice races in Ireland this week - some yes - but all, no. Do we need to encompass some races from around the world. Yes we do as we are a multi national set up. But do we need so many identical races from different countries - no I don't believe we do. We just try to cram too much in and it invariably ends up either top or bottom heavy. On the NH side there was a week not long ago where you couldn't get many 2 milers into races. This week 13 of the 31 races are over 2 miles. In the same way that we will lose trainers who can't win we will lose trainers who can't enter. Only 31 races on NH this week when most have 30 horses. 12 are novice/4yo only and 13 are 2 milers. Who has 13 2 milers in their stable .... who has 12 novices - probably not many. 22/31 races are open to all with no max and another one is 160 max. We have 2 champion hurdles, yes one is a handicap but it a no limit handicap so 75% of the trainers can't win it. We have 2 nationals and a Whitbread Gold Cup all long distance chases with no max limit. Then you add the long distance La Touche Cup ( has anyone ever heard of this race being spoken about as vital to the racing calendar) and its made a 160 max. So anyone with a long distance chaser rated lower than 130 is quite likely running out of the handicap but hey ho at least they have 4 choices of where to go and lose.

On the flat with about 36 races a week, 25 stable max and double entries then there is no reason why every horse shouldn't have a greater than equal chance of finding a race it has some semblance of a chance in every week. On the NH side double entries need to come in and more races need handicap caps of less than 140.

In a nutshell what you do is the exact opposite of what is done. Instead of saying oh we need this meeting in ... we need these South African and Hong Kong races in .. we need this carnival in ... we need all of Punchestown and Perth in. What you actually say is ok we need x amount of races over this trip and this grade etc and then choose the ones you want. If that means certain races get culled then that's the way it is. And if you have to move things slightly away from where they should be to balance things up then you do it. No logical reason at all why Scots Nat or Irish Nat meeting couldn't be next week. No reason at all why Irish and English Guineas meeting can't be the same week to make the Ascot races more interesting. It is our world lets make it how we want it.

When you have the two top trainers ie Josh and Paul both saying they can't get into any races. The mid tier like Stu, Doug and I saying it .... and almost certainly the newbies would if they all came on here ... also Jim and Steve have questioned the balance some weeks ... then it is clear some changes are vital.

the schedule is fine theres just a few tweaks needed it doesnt need a drastic overhaul it was designed so a horse couldnt run 13 times a season there was a rule at 1 stage that actually limited the amount of times you could run a horse (thats one for the old timers) the split is pretty much perfect you only have to look at the trainers table for this re-inforcement the amount of runs.
So as i say it just needs a tweek not a drastic overhaul ala beaky.

The amount of runs has nothing to do with it. Some people, myself for example just stick them in even if they have no chance or else there isn't any interest. And that's the point, people shouldn't have to do that. There should be a viable race for almost every horse.

As for the not running 13 times thing well I would guess that like me many people had never even heard of that old rule. And that is another issue. Old rules that are not relevant anymore need changing. I suppose there is something in the old rules that brought in the not running in a G1 first time out too. No one has ever explained to me what good that rule does.

The other point Steve is that yes from yours and John Morgan's perspective, from your way of playing the schedule is fine. But for others it isn't. That is the point it should not be about what is good for some it should be what is good for all. And when top middle and bottom have issues with it then people coming out saying its fine are just looking at it from their own point of view.

Also if you want to look at stats just look at yours and John's percentage strike rate compared to everyone elses

but should it matter if a horse can run every week or not?

I'm only talking flat but the schedule does need more tweaking for balance and there should be special races made that lower and even mid trainers can have a crack at - because there is no way in blazes that any low or mid trainer has a chance at a Group 1 race or even Group 2 or 3 for that matter. The Starte Orders WFA Cup 0-70. The Strategic Designs Cup 0-80, The Steve Rann Cup 0-110 - make all of them worth around a hundred thousand quid. Make some of them a minimum rated race - The Steve Rann Cup 0-110 with a minimum rating of 90 so there isn't a big weight scale.
The John Morgan Alice Springs Cup 0-90 with a minimum of 75.

I think before crying I want this and I want that, we should ask the ones who do the work to make these changes are willing to do it.
I can live with it when I can't enter all horses every week when it secures we have some more seasons.
Worst case would be to lose the ones who organise the whole league and make the league races possible because of all this malcontent.
Some changes could be good for the league but maybe we should ask first Leon and Gray it it is possible.

the problem is mart that a balance has to be struck 1 have 1 horse in my stable that is rated under 111 and that is on 107 if not for group races where do i go ? i'm not going to apolagise for having a good stable i agree the game should be fair to all depending on the level your at, but over the last few years or so the top trainers now have given more away than when we were struggling rookies we had no help just little snippets here and there.The likes of john pj thunder are always willing to help anyone, which i believe has made the game even more competetive.
i really dont know where were going with this but there will always be top middle and lower tier trainers whatever happens,or do we remove the majority of G1s to cater for the middle lower newbie sector thus making it not really viable for the likes of me to have a stable and make it easier for the casual player to have winners.i dont know i just hope whatever is decided is fair to everyone