But times have changed, and so it seems, not for the better.

Bendigo on 25th September seems to reflect an unsavoury trend
66 runners over 12 races
Not one full field
No reserves
Racing offences comprising 1 fail to chase, 1 unsatisfactory performance, and 1 marring.

Capped off by one 3 dog race, in which 'interference' between the two leading dogs led to the laggard winning by 9 lengths.

This situation is not good for participants, nor Tabcorp, as this is not good for racing.

Would be interested in getting opinions as to what is required to arrest this slide? (I have my own, but its not all about me).

Of course, some may contend that greyhound racing has never been in better shape. In that case, please also advise your medication - I want some.

SO THIS IS THE CAUSE WHAT OF THE SOLUTION

Breeding you say! Well yes maybe in a year or two however the agreement with the TAB applies now and what of the down turn in betting because of full fields not being attained which generates the amount of prizemoney you enjoy.

What about the notion that getting dogs to the track to race will be limited due to failing to chase issues.

Watch this EXTERNAL LINK
Some acknowledgement from GRV that their policies and beliefs have caused this mess would help for a start. This is not likely to happen as some people who work there have just rearranged the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Research this;

The Judge Lewis Report of 2008
EXTERNAL LINK

Own motion investigation into Greyhound Racing Victoria 2012
EXTERNAL LINK
There is more...

Learn by your mistakes....the first port of call is to admit you have made some.

EXTERNAL LINK

Who would ever have thought Aus greyhound racing could have descended to this level?

Who would ever have thought that it could, yet no one would think of FOL as part of a solution?

Who would ever have thought it was a good idea to export so many dogs while there are so many empty boxes?

??????????

Michael in Victoria we have inherited one of yours Greg Kerr
EXTERNAL LINK
Is he any good, I have heard he got rid of squeakers in NZ, is this correct.

There are short and long answers to these posers. Since I have been writing about the subject for the best part of 20 years I will stick with the short version for the moment.

1. Post WW2, racing has been government-controlled either directly (via quasi departments) or indirectly (via appointed boards ie committees).
2. Reviews and inquiries are nearly all conducted by either lawyers or public servants, neither of whom have much or any experience in managing commercial enterprises.
3. Therefore, bureaucracy dominates, innovation is rare, mistakes are made and short term answers are the norm.
4. The outcome is that racing (all codes) has been losing its place in the pecking order of gambling options (from 50% down to 10% share) and, in sympathy, breeding has long been in decline (all codes).
5. There is no evidence that these shortcomings will be reversed, or perhaps even recognised. On the contrary, when faced with rotting sores all over the body they treat them with band aids rather than take steps to fix the underlying disease.

The industry, or certainly harness and greyhound codes, is now running four-legged poker machines and relying on mugs in pubs to sustain income. The gallops are kept alive by the centuries old urge of Aussie gamblers to have a bet and a beer after work or on the weekend. Whether the race is around the corner or in Timbuktu matters little. Meantime, sports betting goes from strength to strength because people have become more attached emotionally.

The industry is wasting its two prime assets the bones of a top breeding stock and a (declining) bunch of highly skilled trainers and related experts.

There is only one real answer: chuck out the current system and replace it with lively commercially-oriented organisations which must answer to their shareholders or be sacked. Six state and three territory governments (Norfolk Island included) are under the gun.

* * * * *

As to the nonnies, fighters and empty boxes - these are a product of the current push to offer more chances to all members of each litter, plus fewer litters. Same number of races but a smaller dog population does not compute.

On the referenced LINKS - these concern integrity matters which are important but they get away a bit from this subject.

* * * *

A final note - I fear the time for 6-dog races is upon us, much as I hate to say it. However, before doing that, I would like to see an audit of the apparently high number of scratchings. Something is wrong there.

2/ 7 of the listed meetings are t3 meetings . The noms early in the week show Ballarat 126 shep 88 Bendigo . This is sufficient noms to cover 3 race meetings. Unfortunately all of the meetings are on tracks that are geographically close. Geelong t3s on Tuesdays dont help this situation. The cluster late in the week is Warragul Cranbourne and Healesville on the other side of town combine noms provide sufficient starters for 39 races . This is more than 3 meetings.

A rejig of the calander May be useful in helping this.

The number of t3 meetings for the week was 7 suggesting that approx 30% of noms should be t3 but the actual t3 noms provided for an additional 3 races. And so 24 noms were surplus to requirements.
A grading system review or even just a tweaking of t3 times may allow these noms to run in higher standard events

Could it be that trainers (those of them left) arent as enthusiastic as those of bygone days and arent prepared to travel?

Just something to think about

I have to be careful here, because my mother always told me if you have nothing good to say about someone then it's best you say nothing.
I have met Greg quite a few times and he comes across as easy to like but according to people who have worked with him he likes the myway or highway approach. I personally have had many misgivings of some of his work here and I will rest on a previous comment I put on GD and that was thank you GV for relieving us of him.

Well he may fit in well at GRV.

One problem, the CEO adopts the same philosophy, one of the reasons the last guy forced the issue to be resigned(really sacked) of course the truth is never told.

Thanks for your insight Michael.

Over racing becomes an issue(welfare). You need to look at extended noms. The other week Cran, Ball, Ben had 36,42,37 noms when extended. Those meetings went with more noms being posted. My question is, why were these dogs nomed in the first place rather than in the extension period.

Racing stock numbers have dropped and I believe GRV have acknowledged that. They also say this number will be going up about now. I say we have not hit the bottom of the barrel yet and the issue will become getting a betting medium that will chase. If this does not occur the betting public will drop off real quick.

Keep on eye on TAB pools and see how much they have dropped. This is danger time.

can you say where the extra 30 noms for ballarat race?
or the extra 30 noms for warrigul race?

can you tell me why there is barely one 390 maiden meeting (full stake) every 6 weeks even though regularly there are sufficient noms to run at least one.

Currently noms are the only publicised data that you can get a guide from that is not just ill informed heresay.

Over racing is monitored at least on an adhoc basis by the stewards who from time to time make enquiries re dogs running 3 times a week and with well respected trainers running their dogs 1000 mtrs a day 4 times a week and racing them once a week, 2 or 3 short courses per week should not be an issue.

It should be pointed out that grv open the noms and extend the noms its the trainers who have the choice when and where their dogs should be placed - refer to my last point.

I believe that TAB pools comparisions on a weekly basis have far too many variables ie weather, grandfinals, moonee valley night meetings, speed stars etc to be an accurate guide on how the industry is travelling. Annual or half yearly figures will provide a far better guide as to which way the industry is trending.

I reiterate that a bit of tweaking to the calander and the type of racing should be fully explored before the bfore it is shrouded with doom and gloom

just a footnote Charles, I am more than familiar with nonchasers and "skunks" having sent my last 2 home bred litters to the gap for being in this category and ive ceased breeding with the line. interesting though many that don't chase the lure show an enormous interest in little white dogs

Your points and others are more than enough justification for an independent study into the future of greyhound racing.

It's not just a question of the welfare of dogs and participants but also of the impact on government tax receipts - which should interest the Treasurer.

One point - aside from the really big events there is not a great deal of difference in turnover from one spot or one grade to another. Maidens might pull in just as much as a FFA, probably depending on the time of day. Either way, the incentive to take part is limited by the size of the pools and the financial devices used by the numerous corporates.

This tells you that - broadly - investors are uneducated about racing. The reasons for that are long and complex but it has been true for many years. That should not be a surprise because little marketing or promotion takes place, other than to the already converted.

Investors in Lotto and Poker Machines are largely uneducated in mathematical probability but it doesn't stop them from investing

Why does every investor in greyhound gambling need to be knowledgeable about it?

If somebody enjoys gambling on it, they will learn as they go.

In the meantime, as long as they are gambling on it, which they are in increasing numbers it seems, the sport is still relevant

I would prefer more money be spent on investigations in inducting new owners and trainers into the sport and educating them to the modern version of the greyhound industry

That's a big leap forward in marketing for our sport

vlandys is hell bent on building nsw to the detriment of all other states.

vlarhos has just pleased guilty to $68ml fraud

exodus of SA trainers to vic

7 of the last 10 deaths associated with the "sport" are women

leading NZ trainers calling for complete bans of the whip

Moonee Valley is selling land and Sandown is giving it due consideration

one of the few positives is that the Albury RC has engaged Birds of Tokyo for the cup day entertainment

I agree with your last point.

Meantime - re "If somebody enjoys gambling on it, they will learn as they go."

No. They will never learn. If they are gambling they will never win and will therefore get sick of it or run out of money, whichever comes first. These are the folk who degenerate into the problem gambling class. Fortunately, racing produces only a smallish proportion of them - most are confined to pokies and casino games.

Punters study form etc and then learn and may or may not win.

Apart from form issues, the biggest barrier gamblers face is that they cannot do maths, therefore they have no idea what their chances of winning are. This is a social problem also in that students are less often taking maths at school or are doing only a base level of maths. TABs and corporate bookies contribute by pushing bet types where it is impossible to win over time - eg boxed Trifectas and Mystery bets (but they won't tell you that).

In those bets the investor is assuming that each of the runners has an equal chance when in practice they never do. Therefore that investor (gambler) has lost before the race starts. Simple maths, but ignored.

The follow-on point is that a genuine punter will form some attachment to the code and will win at least part of the time - meaning he will be more inclined to re-invest and also to bet bigger and more regularly. The mug will seldom do that.

Back to the real issue. A review of the industry could be done by many sorts of people but never lawyers or public servants. They do have to have some understanding of the industry/code but their prime task would be to assess what the industry does and why and whether alternative approaches would be better. That demands an appreciation of management and governance systems.