If the numbers are correct? Thats not a dig but I have found four of your stats to be wrong in the last couple of days. So are they 100% correct?

6,8 and 10f have too many races. 12f could be brought up a little but not much. 14f is obviously the distance that needs more and I would also say that there is scope to have a 2m handicap every week.

You are very keen to bracket all the 2m+ horses together. This is another part of your theory which does not work. Pinks For Girls is a 2m horse and nothing more. He doesn't stay 2m2 at Chester. Feat Ping struggles over 2m but was unbeatable over 2m4. And they are both top class horses. I have dozens of stayers the same. Megastar is a 2m2 horse and can win over 2m at Ascot but has no chance over 2m4. In the reverse could not win over 2m at a sharp track but would destroy most fields over 2m4 at a sharp track because of his turn of foot.

A lot of new trainers dont actually know some of their horses best distances when uploading. The breeding indicator might say 1m7 but it could be a 2m4 horse. I have a few like that. This is another reason why you cant bracket them all together. I would say I understand stayers as well as most, but you dont seem to care for any of my opinion or theories. Yet you haven't, by your own admission, done much with stayers yet seem to be the authority on deciding the schedule for them.

Just doesn't add up.

So we cut 6/8/10 bring 14 up and add more 2m+ races so you can have 2m handicaps every week and then also 2m2 and 2m4 races? Is that what you are suggesting?? Please.. listen to yourself. Cutting 6/8/10 and bringing 14 up without touching 2m+ means that 2m+ has more races than any other distance.

Ok.. for the last time. Put numbers on the races please. I'm off to work but I'll pick them up later. Otherwise just wait for the schedule and then we can continue.

As for stayers don't forget I have 1m6 and 2m horses and I know full well what breeding stayers takes. It takes a lot of time and effort to get anywhere near 2m+ yet you want the casual new trainer to target these races? Why? All because there are races for them to win. And why are there races for them to win? Because you want to increase them in the first place? It's the chicken and egg story all over again. Why do you refuse to accept that new trainers find it easiest to breed what is common in the game? Which is the short / middle distance? Instead you want them to do all this fancy breeding to get stayers and the extremely long stayers at that. Which will simply put them off the game? Isn't it easier to simply give them more races to win at the distance which they find breeding easiest?

But that's too simple I guess. Easier to make folk target the really long races because we put those races in there for them to win instead of giving them the races they are already breeding horses for.

PS if you don't trust my numbers then how about you do them yourself?

Scrap the Ascot Gold Cup, get those plodders in the NH game where they belong.

Joe I've had it with Matt to be honest . He can't do the numbers but he wants to argue the case for not making any changes.

I'll have a schedule up sometime tomorrow/thursday latest. All this talking here simply distracts me from finishing it. Anyone can see that based on the last schedule the handicap races need a rethink. I really don't see why we're trying to force new trainers to target 2m+. But Matt has a real fetish with this distance.

And I haven't scrapped the Ascot Gold Cup. (stop egging Matt on ). I have cut the G1s from 65 down to 53 though and am just making sure those are balanced.

2m+ horses were a small percentage of the uploaded horses yet the 2m+ races are taking up a big percentage of the races, that doesnt add up. How many races are we talking about cutting here? Wouldnt bother me in the slightest if they were not cut, even though I dont have any runner over 1m6 and those are still 1m4 horses, but I really dont see how we can possibly make a case for having more of them.

Change the record. You're boring, Andy. What do you mean please listen to myself? I take that as a personal attack.

I haven't refused to accept its easier to breed 5-8f horses. It is easier. Why do you keep misquoting me? Thats childish and also an awful thing to do in an argument or discussion. Its a bit pathetic if thats how you have to play it.

If you keep making statements which are untrue, I will correct them. Thats not childish or a personal attack. If you dont like my tone or how I answer the questions/facts then I suggest you get your facts right in the first place. Facts are different from an opinion.

My point wasn't about breeding stayers, it was about how they run and perform. I said I have a 2m horse who doesn't stay 2m2 so dont bracket him as a 2m+ horse. He isn't. Your points about new trainers are also as if its an exact science. It isn't.

You are far too literal and have no maneuver to bend or adapt to thoughts over than your own. That is no good for the schedule.

Fancy breeding? You mean like finding hundreds of mares to have the best horses. Thats what i call fancy breedng. Gradually breeding stamina into your lines isn't fancy breeding. Trainers have been doing it for years. You're borderline Autistic at times.

I dont trust your numbers as you have consistently got them wrong. There's my evidence, where's yours for getting them right?

This is a farce now and you are intolerable. I've found it hard to keep quiet but I will try now because this is a complete waste of my time.

Im sure I'll be lambasted for my childish antics once more and my personal attacks. Id just like to say that I clearly won the trainers championship on wins. And anyone that says differently I will take it as a personal attack and state that you are behaving like a 12 year old. How dare you correct my incorrect statement.

What i have noticed about Matt is he is too busy to do anything with the league but not too busy to criticize
i dont want to start an argument i have had enough of them over email with Matt
i will now lock this thread if this continues it bloody pointless bickering and i have had enough im sure i am not the only 1

Andy please carry on with the sched and we will go from there when its done

I agree scrap all races above 1m6. Complete waste of time

Thats nice of you to make that public, Paul. Very mature of you.

to be honest Matt i find this to be trouble making IMO enough is enough this can easily get out of hand
you don't listen i said hold off until Andy had finished 11 pages of this is just ridiculous
and you are the one that wants the best for the lge and wants to protect it
enough is enough lads

I dont listen? I can tell you numerous times when people doesn't listen. Lets look back at last season when Rich stepped down and then within hours, days the new season was in motion without hardly any consultation or discussion with our trainers. You then nicely blamed me for Steve doing a runner and still do. I wasn't the one publicly slagging him off, that was the old school. Yet you somehow blamed me.

For me this schedule is going in the same direction. I thought the plan was to discuss and take on the ideas and thoughts for improvement throughout the season from everyone and implement these into this seasons schedule. Is that whats happening? Or are we just heading for one persons opinion?

If someone is going to continually misquote me and put words in my mouth im not just going to sit around and say nothing. That also goes for stating facts which are incorrect.

I have locked this topic. The topic is going around in circles. Its obvious that those with long distance horses (Matt and myself ) are against this and those without stayers are for this.

Personally I don't see why all the distances should have an even spread of races especially as there are 30 races but if people want it otherwise so be it but it will be highly unlikely that I will bother having any flat runners

Andy do the schedule and we will go from there.

Once its done open a new topic and we can discuss again

look at my new thread i think you will see i want everyones opinion
i am not getting into a slanging match with you Matt
as stated b4 you were perfect candidate for president but you are too busy
and no one else came forward

you could have done the sched yourself but again you are too busy to do it
but not too busy to help fill up 11 pages here

anyway enough is enough