Ron

For the record I am not against short course racing.

It has always been around but never advocated in the way it is now. It has to be catered for as 25% of dogs seem to struggle past 400m.

But these are not classic distances and shouldn't be treated as such. For the most part the winner is the dog who makes it around the 1st bend in the lead. It is not a test of stamina. It is only a test of early acceleration and box speed.

However, in Ireland and UK all the classic distances are in the 480-550 range.

In The USA 500m is the norm and long distance there is considred to be 650m. Still don't see any 250-350m races there either.

The 500m is considered to be the classic distance as it is a test of the greyhounds natural speed, chase and stamina.

This is what we strive for and breeding, rearing and training of dogs should be geared to get to this point.

Also about 20% of these dogs get out to distances of 600m and beyond and they need to be catered for.

For anyone to say that a longer distance dog, which these days seem to be 500m dogs, don''t show natural chase or speed doesnt have a clue what they are talking about and should go back to strumming a guitar or smoking whatever grass floats their boat

Good stuff.

I opened this thread simply to list whatever facts were available about the Neds280 concept. OK, at the end I then threw in a view that I don't much like 300m racing.

As to the general subject, my major point was not so much to dump on a 300m race (even though I don't like them) but to emphasise that there is a long term trend towards weaker dogs or (if you insist) to dogs that are not trained for longer trips than 300m or perhaps 400m.

The latter comment did not originate from me but from trainers on this site.

Other points are ....

The average Australian dog achieves peak overall speed over a distance of about 435m - obviously an average does not consider dogs with shorter or longer capability. Additionally, that capability is not set in concrete as, for example, a moderate beginner might paddle along for the first 100m or so, thereby leaving it with enough petrol to thunder home over 500m or so.

Historically, a big slice of breeding emerged from two dogs that were never tried over the longs (and probably would fall short anyway) - Head Honcho and Brett Lee. And they are not the only ones. That is, people wanted fast beginning sprinters so as to get a quick return on their investment. That's natural enough but it also has a cost.

Also historically, and probably today, 700m racing is most popular with customers, whether or not sufficient dogs can handle the trip.

I agree that any decent 450m or 520m race is popular and a good test of the breed. (The demands of each are very similar as one is run on a one-turn track and the other on a somewhat easier circle).

400m racing can be dicey as it throws the field fairly quickly into the upcoming turn.

600m racing is always dicey as it invariably involves a risky bend start.

Finally, any weakening of the breed does not just concern 700m racers but the whole population. That is, if 700m dogs are getting weaker then so will 500m dogs be affected, and 450m dogs, too. It's just a matter of degree.

Waving the magic wand, any improvement in that overall stamina can only be good for the breed and for the sport in general. Conversely, further weakening would put the sport at great risk.

Can it be fixed?

Here's a practical example. Several years ago I surveyed all Wheeler dogs racing in Victoria (where data is more readily available) over a 3 month period. That showed that a large majority were having trouble getting the 500 and some were even fading over 450. Coincidentally or not, PAW then started using American sires over his and his old man's longstanding female dynasty. Before too long they were all thundering home over 500, and continue to do so today. The odd one even gets a 700, even though that is not his aim.

All that stuff is beyond my pay grade but it is evidence of possible improvement. Ditto for the many services from other American sires more recently.

In other words, I maintain that any measure that makes the greyhound stronger is an asset to the industry. Popularising 280m racing is the opposite.

Historically, as long as history only goes back 20 years...

Not even sure what you're talking about here. How on earth could it possibly make any difference to "quick return on investment" if a dog races over short or long distance? You reckon people can't wait another 10 seconds to get the prizemoney? Jeepers.

As for your "weakening of the breed", it's something I've proven to you isn't the case but you continue to peddle it. There's a name for people that do that but I won't say it because you'll whine about it being a personal attack.

As for PAW, his best ever dog was a 500m dog that chased hard from the start of a race to the end. And guess what? He's also far and away his best sire. (BTW his main trainer before then routinely gave his dogs and those of other trainers tablets to help them see out the trip!)

"All that stuff is beyond my pay grade ..." It certainly is.

"Popularising 280m racing is the opposite." And popularising distance racing led to my above example of a certain leading trainer.

Greyhound racing will be long gone before the natural distance of a significant amount of greyhounds is 700m. The ONLY way it can be changed in the shorter term is by introducing another breed to the mix. GLWT

BTW "The average Australian dog achieves peak overall speed over a distance of about 435m ..." I've also pointed out to you in the past that this isn't correct so why do you keep peddling it? A greyhound reaches it's 'peak overall speed' in 30 - 50 metres.

Sandro Bechini wrote:

ronald george hunter wrote: Good on you Bruce, you have drawn out those who wanted your guts for garters into to your web! Now you have them agreeing with you on a selfish and tactless jibe on short course dogs. They have a right to race, just as we of all races should live together. You sure know how to stir the pot!! Ron For the record I am not against short course racing. It has always been around but never advocated in the way it is now. It has to be catered for as 25% of dogs seem to struggle past 400m. But these are not classic distances and shouldn't be treated as such. For the most part the winner is the dog who makes it around the 1st bend in the lead. It is not a test of stamina. It is only a test of early acceleration and box speed. However, in Ireland and UK all the classic distances are in the 480-550 range. In The USA 500m is the norm and long distance there is considred to be 650m. Still don't see any 250-350m races there either. The 500m is considered to be the classic distance as it is a test of the greyhounds natural speed, chase and stamina. This is what we strive for and breeding, rearing and training of dogs should be geared to get to this point. Also about 20% of these dogs get out to distances of 600m and beyond and they need to be catered for. For anyone to say that a longer distance dog, which these days seem to be 500m dogs, don''t show natural chase or speed doesnt have a clue what they are talking about and should go back to strumming a guitar or smoking whatever grass floats their boat

"For anyone to say that a longer distance dog, which these days seem to be 500m dogs, don''t show natural chase or speed doesnt have a clue what they are talking about and should go back to strumming a guitar or smoking whatever grass floats their boat"

Where has that been stated or even alluded to? The hyperbole is strong in the last couple of posts.

Its deliberate and not giving non-TAB D an increase in p/m shows it.

Heard a whisper that when they re do Grafton track they will have a 300, 430, & 635 the 480 will be gone so how are the people that race there going to get there dogs running 500 to cater for the biggest $$$ city meets???

Just for the record, I do not accept a single word in your last post but I can see it is pointless to respond.

Lenin: "A lie told often enough becomes the truth."

Malcolm,

Yes, I read the ads. However, these folk are already top of the pops in the current customer mix (see survey reports) so this effort is designed to expand those numbers at a popular time.

20/20, on the other hand, is directed at expanding the market into new areas - ie families and kids - which it has done reasonably well.

All very fine. I just wish they had used another product to do the job at Wenty.

And they still have not told us what the attendance was!

It's not strictly about Neds280 but I am fascinated by all the talk about changes to Lismore and Grafton tracks. There are no mentions of this in GRNSW, GBOTA or club sites. Is there anything official?

Rod, Not sure what meeting/races you are talking about. The Neds Win totes averaged about $7.2k - not much different from the previous week. Raise that by say $5k (a guess) to account for corporates.

Richmond C on the same night did about 14% better than Neds, also with mostly shorter races. All varied widely from race to race, depending on the closeness of the competition.

What would be interesting to see is the attendance and how much was bet on course.

In all cases, those pools are not big enough to provide reliability to punters - bearing in mind you would not see more than half of it before you had to bet.

Glenn,

Amongst other things (DJ costs etc) they are paying for prominent banner ads in The Australian, which would not be cheap.

Totals would be readily available but I bet you will not see them.