THE SUNSHINE COAST NEWSPAPER COLUMN - THE FEATURE RACE QUALIFICATION CRITERIA DEBATE

By Graham Potter | Sunday, May 22, 2016

Graham Potter writes a weekly column for the Sunshine Coast daily. Due to demand from those having trouble accessing the paper these columns are now also published on HRO courtesy of the Sunshine Coast daily.

It is said money can’t buy you happiness, but it can buy your horse a place in a feature race line-up.

Prize-money that is.

Several feature races use prize-money earned as the qualifying yardstick for a place in the final field. While this has been an established practice for many years, it has never been entirely satisfactory for a number of reasons.

The prime reason is that, contrary to the logic suggested by the highest stake earners making the field, that criteria in no way ensures that the best horses at the time will line up to face the starter.

Firstly, the significant disparity in prize money on offer in different states creates a clear imbalance. Horses racing in areas where stakes are lower are disadvantaged. Of course any horse can travel to any destination to chase prize-money these days but having to travel, equally, has its difficulties.

Then there is the late developer, who may have started racing later than others and then thrived. Of course the race qualifying conditions are known well in advance, but the development timetable of every individual horse is not the same ... so is it fair to deny those who are blooming their chance because they fall shy in the overall stake-money count while some, who have lost form, are still in the race because of the stake-money they secured earlier in their career?

And what about that very good horse ... perhaps even an unbeaten runner ... who missed a vital lead-up race due to injury and therefore also comes up short in the stakes race?

With two-and-three-year-olds you can’t even say try again next year. All feature races in these two age groups are one off opportunities.

Miss them and they are gone!

So I fully understand the very good argument put forward earlier this week by trainer Toby Edmonds who voiced his displeasure at this particular qualification criteria in an interview with the Gold Coast Bulletin.

It all makes good sense ... up to a point.

But before we all go around nodding our heads in agreement that this is a flawed method of field selection, let’s think about it for a minute.

What else would you propose?

Punters open a formbook and read the same form-lines and yet reach different conclusions about who will win the race.

On that basis alone it should be clear that there will be difficulties and controversy if the place of any runner in a feature race field is settled by opinion.

Imagine the storm that will break out from connections who miss the boat in those circumstances. I can already hear them crying ‘foul.’

At least with the stake earnings criteria it is clear-cut and unambiguous. That is its benefit.

We are in an imperfect world and the stake earnings criteria, as evidenced by the very real arguments posed against it, is an imperfect model but it may well be the best model available as we know it at this time.

That doesn’t mean we should stop looking for a better option.

I’m all for that, but we have to stay practical and, for the moment at least, the way it is now is arguably the most practical solution.