Skip to main content

Racing NSW desperation stakes fails again

Racing NSW, the administrators of what should be the strongest racing in Australia, have shot themselves in the foot yet again as they desperately try to patch up the damage they have caused through pigheadedness and sheer incompetence over the past couple of decades.

Merging racing clubs is the latest buzz strategy in Australian racing - the two metropolitan race clubs in Brisbane were able to do it (purely logical considering the two racecourses were literally across the road from each other), so NSW thought they should follow suit. It gets complicated though because the AJC (Australian Jockey Club) think their shit doesn't stink and any form of 'merger' with the STC (Sydney Turf Club) would reek of a takeover. Amazingly, the AJC members all voted for the merger, as all the benefits would go to them, a $150m grandstand at Randwick. No surprise when the STC voted against the move because of concerns about one of their tracks, Canterbury, being sold off, and worries about key races at Rosehill being moved to Randwick to justify the new bohemiath of a grandstand.

The funniest part though is where the money was supposed to come from. NSW racing is broke. Peter V'Landys and his team of buffoons at Racing NSW are pissing away the lot in court fighting battles which just a basic understanding of competition laws tells you they can't possibly win. So rather than being funded by profits from racing, or from a government grant, the funding for this lavish new grandstand (designed to bring the crowds back to racing) has been posted by TABCorp, a supposedly independent body, in return for selling off their share of the profits in a virtual racing game, Trackside - which will encourage people to stay away from the track and bet on cartoons....

Trackside Bid Runs Off The Rails

The vote last night by Sydney Turf Club members against a merger with the Australian Jockey Club represents the latest in a string of calamities bedeviling the "crash through or crash" management of the industry by Racing NSW.

Characterised by an almost embarrassing subservience to the wishes of TabCorp and ignoring the requirement to consider the public interest set down in the Racing Administration Act, Racing NSW has been brought to account by a handful of STC members who basically said "we've had enough of this stupidity".

Two years ago we saw the race fields debacle unfold.

It wasn't enough for Racing NSW to bring in a payment arrangement for corporate bookmakers, Betfair and interstate TAB's. In collusion with TabCorp the race fields levy system was tricked up to put low margin operators out of business.

While the final appeal judgment is not yet to hand, the outcome is sufficiently uncertain that Racing NSW has had to go searching for a new pot of gold in the meantime.


If you have any interest in this issue, read the full story from Cyberhorse. It's unbelievable that a government-appointed racing body can be so arrogant and naive to think they can get away with such conduct, and outrageous that the government lets them get away with it....

Comments

  1. The AJC, RNSW and the Racing Minister are sill 'pushing ahead' with the merger as of today.

    What a farce! You can have a vote but if you vote the wrong way we'll just over rule you.
    Democracy at work!!!!!

    V'landys and Brown are out of cash and out of ideas, they just limp from one mess to another.

    I'm looking forward to the dummy spits on the Sunday racing shows. No doubt Sky Racing will be as impartial as ever.

    ReplyDelete
  2. there's just no independence here, yet they are trying to argue they weren't doing secret deals to favour the TAB over the racefields legislation. Ridiculous.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thanks for your comments, but if you're a spammer, you've just wasted your time - it won't get posted.

Popular posts from this blog

lay the field - my favourite racing strategy

Dabbling with laying the field in-running at various prices today, not just one price, but several in the same race. Got several matched in the previous race at Brighton, then this race came along at Nottingham. Such a long straight at Nottingham makes punters often over-react and think the finish line is closer than it actually is. As you can see by the number of bets matched, there was plenty of volatility in this in-play market. It's rare you'll get a complete wipe-out with one horse getting matched at all levels, but it can happen, so don't give yourself too much risk...

Racing has a Ponzi scheme - and the fallout will be enormous

When the term 'Ponzi scheme' is mentioned these days, the names Bernard Madoff and Allen Stanford instantly spring to mind. The pair of them ran multi-billion dollar frauds (US$60bn and $8bn respectively) that destroyed the lives of thousands of investors who had put their life savings into a 'wonderful' investment strategy. How so many people were sucked into the scheme is baffling to those on the outside. The lifestyle, the sales pitch, the success stories of the early investors - I suppose it all adds up.

So where does this link to racing you ask? A prominent Australian 'racing identity' this week has been reported to have lost access to a bank account with punters' club funds of $194m in it. Firstly - is there a worse term for anyone to be labelled with that 'racing identity'? It ALWAYS ends up meaning shonky crook! Secondly - who the hell has a punters' club with an active bankroll in the tens of millions? It simply can't be done.

The…

damage control when trading goals

When trades go bad, some people will say cut your losses immediately, others will recommend having a bit of patience as events tend to level out (i.e. games with two goals in the first 10 mins never end up with 18 goals in 90 minutes). This is something I like to do on certain matches.

Background:
1. You've backed Under 2.5 goals, trying to nick a few ticks at a time as the clock ticks.
2. You've been caught out by a goal.
3. The market has gone sharply against you.

On this particular match from a couple of weeks ago, there was an early goal (sixth minute) before I got involved. The period immediately after an early goal regularly shows a sharp drop in the Under price, so I was trying to capitalise on that. But Watford then scored again after 14 minutes. The Back price I took (3.95) was now out to 12 - I could close out for a big loss (not my style) or wait and wait for the price to come back to somewhere I could close out for minimal damage. But at 2-0 after 15 minutes, it w…