Transparency - Paul Lafferty initiative

In Gauteng and Cape Town often we have a workriders race to open events.on Saturdays..These races normally have raced runners or very few unraced horses contesting - now if the operators actually cared for the punter they would rather place this race as the first leg of the PA instead of a Maiden with maybe 4 or more unraced runners... There are practical steps that can and should be taken to limit uncertainty for punters.... Racing is sold as a game of skill but guessing on first timers requires luck not skill... I have seen massively priced horses run bush on debut and badly bred horses run well on debut so using breeding is not always correct....

Easy, very simply, because that "offer" is not yet on the table. The offer, as I remember it, is about first timers. If you look back at my posts you will see I have said things like too little, too late and needs widening asap but it is a start etc. Of course, what you say is correct. Indeed I have campaigned on this forum probably as loud or perhaps even louder than anyone else for transparency etc. But what we have here is an "initiative" which is more than we have had before so let us try to find ways of best implementing that initiative for the good of racing. It can then be hopefully developed to encompass the whole transparency thing more broadly. Yes, I would like it all done yesterday but that is simply not happening and not going to happen tomorrow so I will concentrate on what is happening.
Neigh, the bookie thing, is an obvious concern. They will simply have to come on board too. If they don't, we all stop punting so it would not be in their best interests to be "stupid". Maybe wishful thinking lol And PS I watch the betting and monitor prices all the time, it is often as misleading as it is helpful. And thanks for the "thank you", was good of you when you are clearly seeing this issue quite passionately from a somewhat different angle to me.

I was not having a go, I'm highlighting many issues. I am on the coal face in SA with runners in many stables. Getting information is a challenge. NOT INSIDE information just information. Goosen is the ONLY trainer i have that answers the phone when i call (3/4 times a month) others DONT , they don't get back to me, they forget to inform me about AHS.

Now its easy to say well I'm the customer so ill move the horses, BUT to where? I have many friends in the game and therefore i can and sometimes do see communication from their trainers.

So then it boils down to old school v new school as i said as recently as last week i had a trainer tell us we have a good one because its working with a 2 time winner.

Barrier trials and or any other initiative won't work in SA because its a complete cultural overhaul thats needed.

Ask yourself why there are no claiming races in SA, why can one mostly only buy a horse from a sale. Very few private deals go on and very few change stables. Its as if there is a code of "lets not do this to show each other up"

For me its makes NO sense for horses to be having CLEARLY prep runs in races ahead of features.

When asking one of my trainers the following here was his reply:

J: " tell me why can Stoute get a horse ready 1st time out to win over 1600m and most in SA can't"
T: "its not that simple, for starters he has the Lime Kilns which are well kept and organised, we have tracks that sometimes you cannot work horses on"
T: " he does not have to deal with AHS every year"

There are some very emotional opinions about who is entitled to what and misperception that with this info we will better know what a first timer is going to do.

Frankly as a punter is doesn't worry me at all, i am more interested in raced horses that have been off for more than 60 days having a gallop that is televised and changing the rule in the Pick 6 with maidens.

As an owner i don't have a big punt on my first timers anyway and i believe in not cutting the horse in half first time out. If a horse has some ability believe me the work riders & jockeys let everyone know including other stables which really gives me the shits. I know a few trainers and when they approach me in the parade ring and say i believe you have a nice one then where do you suppose that info came from?

Many of the trainers out there also have to race horse before they are 100% ready because some owners believe they are machines. So even if the horse has ability they may not be ready. This subject is a massive storm in a tea cup unless someone provides some real stats, i for one do not believe that a field full of 1st timers is a worth while betting prospect.

Even when i have a first timer, i am told by at least three different punters that they have heard of 3 different horses in the race. If the betting was the guide then every odds on first timer would win...... i highly doubt that is the case but you will have someone coming up with some conspiracy theory as to why it didn't win.

Easy, I didn't think you were having a go, I just think that what you are talking about, although I agree and have campaigned here for it, is not directly relevant at this moment in time. In SA you sadly often have to go by stepping stones, this is the first stepping stone to me. Whether a second stone is laid, and a third, fourth etc remains to be seen.

TS, yes, I do bet on maidens. I often think value can be found and that is primarily because I look at trainer/jock, draws and most importantly at sibling form etc. I often simply go past a hyped-horse because I can't see where the hype is coming from (sometimes I am right, sometimes it shows my fundamental lack of knowledge about breeding etc, c'est la vie de un gambler! lol ). But, I am doing so less and less these days. However, I would be happy to continue to bet on maidens if I feel I am playing on a level playing field. I do not see why I should study and invest only to find out that my choice was never in the race to win but there was no way of me knowing that. And the idea is to get more people punting, not less. Again you are correct about horses returning from a break etc but, as with Easy's comments, that unfortunately is seemingly not yet on the discussion table.

It's quite awhile since we last had such an interesting thread!

It is also instructive to read the differing takes on the matter.

Firstly - all strength to Paul Lafferty's initiative. Any effort made to empower the punter with more information is to be applauded.

Here's my take for what little its worth:

I have owned horses since 1978 but see myself more as a punter than an owner. My racing activities have largely withered over the last decade or so for one very simple reason:

The sport is not to to be trusted as a viable (as opposed to profitable) FINANCIAL venture; simply because I have seen & been on the butt end of FAR too many incidents where individuals have manipulated (with varying degrees of success) matters for their own benefit at the expense of the customer. I too am a customer.

Let me hasten to add that, in this respect, the sport is no different from most other activities involving big money. There will always be those who attempt to gain and exploit an edge.

I read with some interest the comments regarding the contractual nature of the relationship between trainer & owner and the obligation (or not) to voluntarily disclose. I have to conclude that I agree that there is no obligation but perhaps therein lies the weakness. Should not the SYSTEM be modified (as Paul's initiative attempts to do) to ensure greater transparency as a condition of participation?

My personal approach might,therefore, be described as 'enlightened' as it constitutes the following:

I would be happy to participate in full & detailed disclosure regarding my horse's state of well being and preparedness as a condition of participation.

I also have (and have always had) a strict policy of not punting my own horses. In the rare cases where I have succumbed to the temptation it has certainly never been at juvenile level and has usually ended in disaster. I am more than happy to take only the stakes in a forlorn effort to stem the monetary bleeding that horse ownership entails.It's bad enough running unplaced when one was expecting a big run without also having to settle!

I have historically also posted my expectations of any runner of mine on this site so that players may draw their own conclusions. Never forget - even Frankel managed to attract competitors in the races he contested because opposing connections thought/hoped they could beat him. It is the nature of competition & markets.

Other points to consider :

A number of posters suggest one should follow betting as a guide. Hello? During the short period that I (also!) held a bookmaking right it was not uncommon to drift backed horses so as to persuade punters that a horse was unfancied and, therefore, dissuade further market support. Good luck using that method!

South Africa appears to me to be the home of the 6/10 shot that runs unplaced. It's why I punt mainly on UK racing as I find their market movements a more accurate indicator of probability.

We have a very weak body of expertise doing specialised analysis. Again - UK organs such as Timeform combined with rumour and the inevitable whispers tend to be materially more instructive. There also appear to be far more skilled individuals involved or observing at the horse preparation level who disseminate well being and progress information publicly.

All I know is this - when my horse steps out onto a track and competes in an event where stake money is involved 'somebody' contributed that funding primarily through betting activity. I believe I have a moral responsibility to ensure that those who elect to bet on that event should be in possession of all the relevant information ( not tips!) to make a considered decision as to which horse/s they would like to support.

This to me is the crux of the issue - those wishing to 'protect' their information whilst still accepting a stake cheque should rather go back to the dawn of racing and revive peer to peer wagering against opposing owners. (Oops! That sounds suspiciously like I am promoting Betfair! Lol).

Now........back to sports betting Im going as we have a busy weekend ahead.

The first transparency comments are up on the SP site, good luck picking a winner.

It is however a start and i can only hope that this transfers to raced horses that have been rested more than 30 days. Kudo's to Paul & GC, credit where credit is due

Well done PeterD for your post on the Sporting Post website .................you said it better than anybody.
The difference between Info and opinion is the key to this transparency issue........I just wish more would "get it"!

Very enjoyable comments from many people and an important issue in making the sport more attractive as a betting proposition.

Great point about the difference between information and opinion and more information will certainly be welcome.

I have been having a terrible punting run of late and this has once again highlighted the need to introduce a few products that provide more entertainment over purely a return. Admittedly I have not put in the time but things do go wrong even if you do and the attention and interest span of the younger generation is limited at best, so having to do a lot of studying is not a good sales pitch.

Longer format games must fuel people's interest and be less punitive that what we have right now if we are to attract a new group of players. Even the low cost bet must provide a proper run for the money and offer excitement to those taking part.

Operators have a lot to learn about maximising a racing return as the opportunity far outstrips the current effort.

To Neigh N PeterD and others. Your forthright comments on your runners is very much appreciated and this is given without flinching who has taken the price of your horse before you had a punt if you the punting owner).

Many moons ago my friends and I as owners were invited to watch our first timer horse work. The jock was happy with his work and the trainer asked us to have a go and punt it (that was when betting came out on Thursday/Friday before a weekend meet).

WE were are chaffed and had a decent punt on Friday and watched the horse shorten by Saturday morning. Watching the horses in the parade ring prior to the race we listen to the trainer give his comments "Keep him covered, handy and go for home once in the straight". The jock concerned was a seasoned one so we were fairly confident he will come home for us.

The horse did not show at. We got BURNT. Guess who the trainer was?
To be fair to all and sundry time trials for all first timers and ALL horses coming back from a lay off.

Would be great if the comment " needs the run " never appears , imo horses should not race if they are needing it , for many reasons

I agree Bob.

It's also important to remember that turnover and ultimately the bottom line will be positively affected if you can have a bigger punt with confidence. A portion of this gain could also find it's way into better stakes for owners.

The size of pools will show a gain when punters don't have to guess the outcomes but are actually rewarded for studying form and predicting the outcome.

Racing would then be a real game of skill if every runner runs to or close to ability rather than many in the field being non-triers.

The bottom line is that transparency will be good for many in racing over the short term and good for most over the longer term.