20 horses to start with is a good idea and then the increase to 30 sounds great.

The current schedule is ok, but does need tweaking here and there.

Am not interested in the UKRA Rich tbh mate.

Has for the NH side it's a pretty good schedule already with all the top meetings in place. though i think Cheltenham and other big meetings do need to be updated to the current races on show and maybe a few more races added to it.

If Ryan/Paul is up for it we could start on it when i get back from my holiday, so early April.

When do you think the new season will be up and running again. You got a date in mind?

What I mean is that if we are losing 5 weeks we might lose some big meetings.

What might be good is having two big meetings during the same week where ordinarily the meetings would be too close together in real life for horses to compete at both.

I was thinking of starting the new season around the Guineas time, depending on how big the changes are so April is good.

1) Confirm 12 weeks is a good length for everyone
2) Confirm which leagues are continuing
3) Rewrite the schedules
4) Confirm staff roles
5) Argue about the lack of handicaps
6) Start season

Sorry my mind his all over the place today.

Yeh the idea of having 2 big meeting on the same week could work out very well.

For the Championship meetings ie, Cheltenham, Aintree, Punchestown and the Championship final week. we could do the same has Cheltenham and have 25 races per week for them. Not sure if there is over 25 races at Cheltenham this week, i think there is 27 or more in total.

Also the Paddy Power/Hennessy Gold Cup/Racing Post Chase have to be changed into Graded Handicaps for next season, am sure they are G3 level.

If myself, ryan and paul can all get on Skype, we could have the schedule done in under 2 weeks.

Another thing Rich, is Neil going to be our NH Race Sec again for next season. If we are going to increase the races each week, think it may be a good idea to have 2 Race Sec for the NH.

What do you have in mind for the Handicapping for the NH. This is one of the biggest concerns for me. Though TOM tries to do a good job it does need addressing for next season.

I definitely want a handicapper for the big handicaps (and would like to see more of these in the schedule), I think this is a good middle ground.

With a shortening of the schedule to 12 weeks even a 2 run rule is probably not fair.

Maybe a reduction of handicaps and an increase in restricted/banded races would make the workload less for a handicapper but still give the smaller trainers a chance? I know that's a controversial view but my reasoning is that I don't think any trainer needs a handicap to win a race, if you take out the top trainers that gives them a perfectly reasonable chance.

In real life handicaps are a massive part of racing but in the league I think those that profit are good horses who experience bad luck not bad horses fairly weighted.

I would agree. It was damn hard to win a handicap for some of the top trainers last season, i didn't think it was possible but a few managed to win them off top weight.

The graded Handicaps are very good races to add into the new schedule i think. Will give the small trainers a massive chance of a big win.

It did throw up some nice surprises last season in them.

Maybe have from the 25 races each week 5/6 restricted races each week.

Coming to think of it, the numbers was alittle low in them races towards the end of the season.

Dont like this idea one tiny bit, just for the fact your sectioning top trainers and lesser trainers. lesser trainers want to beat the top guys and if thats by planning good hcap routes and getting a nice horse on a nice weight then that should stay.

But is planning a good handicap route running a horse over inappropriate distances to massage the rating in their favour? Because that leaves a pretty sour taste in the mouth. I know it happens in real life but in the league it's essentially cheating because trainers know their horse's preferred distance on upload.

More worrying is that the big stables tend to be better at this than the smaller stables.

If the trainers with horses who aren't quite as good are encouraged to compete at their level then when the big handicaps come around they will be weighted for their level and this will give them a much better chance.

This shouldnt happen and l thought stewards where in place to make sure this didnt happen?? The fact that the top trainers dont win handicaps is cus they mostly run them in there first 3 runs in a group race or listed so rightly should be hit with a high mark as in real life. Agree some marks where crazy even with a maiden win but a handicapper should do this a lot better. Not sure if DB would be interested but he was awesome at it for the flat

I understand were you are both coming from. It would be good to add more handicaps, but graded ones to the new schedule.

Going to be hard to please everyone, that's why it's good to get things going now on what best for the new season ahead.

I think Steve was our Handicapper in season 3 of the NH and he did a great job aswell has DB.

Would be great if he could help or teach someone on how to go about assessing mark for horses in the league.

What do you mean by planning a good handicap route? I think competing in races of fair ability is probably the best way to do this, in which case more restricted races would be ideal.

edit: The handicapper would have to be good or it would be even worse than not having one.

Is this a real question

I would happily do the uk flat handicappers role, provided I could completely re-write the schedule to incorporate more rated handicaps (40-70), (50-80), (60-90), (70-100), (80-110) and less group races - unfortunately I don't think that is going to happen as I believe Rich wants to reward players who work hard at their own game.
This offer will remain open as I believe it is the best way forward in attracting new players. I won't be holding my breath for an answer.
As the structure of the UK flat league stands I have no interest in putting a stable together for it (and as a consequence getting involved in its running) - no great loss for the league obviously. .

I agree, without the US and more races every week in the Uk l cant see why both handicap races and group races are made evenly, a typical saturday has 1 or 2 Group 1 races in real life. new players are the key to keep this league growing and removing handicaps in my opinion is not the way forward

The UKRA needs a lot more Handicaps and Maiden races imo. There is way to many G1 races throughout the season.

I do agree there has to be more Handicaps than G1s, the balance is deffo catered towards the so called elite trainers of the league.

Also agree the US league is poor and has to go.