TRY as he might, our SYDNEY contributor PETER MAIR, cannot get an answer from RVL on this important issue to racing in that State:
‘OVER the past decade or more, attention has been drawn to the insidious consequences of RVL inflating race fields, by paying substantial prize-money to horses finishing down to 10th place.
Recent re-presentations of these concerns were summarily rebuffed:
…………our racing team are aware of your views …………. If the racing team wish to discuss further they will contact you accordingly ………..
While ‘you’ is waiting, it is noted that if some racing is routinely compromised, that would be at odds with some commitments RVL makes, in its annual reports:
………. to be fair to all – not least punters [THE CUSTOMER Why we’re here] – and more generally [integrity: ………. race meetings in particular, are managed and conducted to ensure the highest integrity, building continuously on the reputation and integrity of Victorian thoroughbred racing.]
Concerns about administrators inducing the inflation of race-fields have two elements.
Obviously too many horses, with ‘no hope’ of being truly competitive, are being accepted to run at substantial cost to RVL for ‘participating’ [c.f. Financial Discipline -‘Every Dollar Matters’].
Less obviously, races run at metropolitan tracks are unlikely to be fairly run when congested with too many runners. Asking ‘Gemini’ if some RVL races favour runners starting from inside barriers – the answer is a resounding ‘yes’ (runners drawn wide ‘are’ disadvantaged).
[Races run in Melbourne at Caulfield and Flemington, widely accepted as not fairly suited to inflated fields, include those over 1400&1600 metres at both tracks – and 2000m races at Caulfield.]
Put more sharply, RVL should be both aware and concerned that all too often the Saturday races likely to be ‘rough’ can reliably be identified on Wednesdays when the acceptances, barriers and pre-post odds are published.
Saturday’s races at Caulfield are illustrative. The following ‘concerns’ were put to RVL on Friday.
-
Three races will be run over 1400 metres: 14 have been accepted to run in Race 3; Race 4 has 11 and Race 7 has 13. Race 9, over 1600, has 13. Among other races: Race 2, over 2000m, aims to have 16 starters, while Race 6, over 1100 may see 16 immature 3yro fillies contending.
After scratchings, mainly runners drawn wide, two races remained as focal points.
For Race2, a BM 78 over 2000m, with 15 starters (from 20 nominated) the declared F4 dividend of $85,000 was a gross understatement as not all the pool was paid out. (on the NSW TAB it was a ‘skinner’ – no dividend paid] The F4 in Race 3, a BM 78 over 1400m paid $30k – 12 starters of 14 accepted.
Policy issues to be addressed
Over the 10 years that RVL has paid prize-money down to 10th, the average field size for metropolitan races has not changed much from 10. Not disclosed in annual reports, however, is that field sizes for Melbourne racing, accepted for the big-betting Saturdays, can be inflated to the maximum 14 to 20 (with some 5 emergencies to cover scratchings). This looks like a determination to inflate the fields – with longshots if necessary.
RVL should stop paying to inflate fields – mainly because doing so compromises the integrity of the racing.
On a different tack, the case for a policy review may be stronger if unplaced runners are ‘paid’, in total, some $200,000 across a ten-race card for finishing 4th to10th – it is a fair question to ask RVL if that money is ‘well spent’. In short, does the industry ‘take’ from the increase in the betting turnover on the inflated fields recover that outlay – not likely, perhaps, if the additional turnover needed on the day is around $4,000,000.
