The Everest

Hands N Heels
2017 March 30 20:25:02 
As reported on this site, all the slots for this 'unusual' affair have now been sold, a mere 2 months after its announcement. I must say I find it astounding that various parties have $1.8m to throw in, on spec, for the right to participate in a race for 3 consecutive years. I can only assume the rights are attached to the syndicate or individual and not specific horse - the latter would be insanity imho.

My value judgement is based largely on the ratio of cost vs payoff - in the major G1s in this great land, the ratio of 1st prizemoney to total prizemoney is in the range of 57%-62%, this includes the GS, MC, CC, CP. I don't yet know the breakdown for The Everest but let's assume the middle ground and say 60% or $6m for 1st place. Syndicates are therefore paying, best case, 10% of 1st place prizemoney for a slot, regardless of whether they win 1, 2 or 3 times. 10% for an 8.25% chance at 1st place in purely mathematical terms.

Compare that to the 2 biggest races by prizemoney on the current calendar, using the current nomination fees to final acceptance. A fully paid up acceptor for the Melbourne Cup costs 1.33% of 1st place prizemoney, for the Golden Slipper its 1.57%. I realise there are other factors at play here, field size, stud prospects etc. but I cannot see the value. Am I missing something?
You need to Login to Post a Answer in the Forum
1 Comments

tigerrish

2017 April 08 11:13:12

The big difference would be that if you owned a horse who was targeting the Melb Cup and it went down with injury you'd be left with nothing before the race even came around.

With this concept, its the person who owns the slot, not the horse so to speak. So those who struck a deal with the owners of a horse like Chautauqua could substitute that horse for another if injury were to come into play before acceptances were finalised.

Its hard to see this type of concept last beyond a few seasons for various reasons. Number one would be the breeding purposes, with no Group classification it really is a nothing race worth alot of money. So whilst a stud might look at striking a deal with an owner that would include them getting a % of the horse if it won, there's nothing else of value to them by being involved.

And you can't really alot the race Group status when it is heavily restrictive. IE, you have all slot owners who have a runner each sewn up. There's an emerging young sprinter who's just won the Bobbie Lewis Quality and then the Moir in good time by a decent margin.....and it can't compete in the richest sprint in the world. All other big Group races have late entry options for winners of certain lead up races, but this won't have anything.

So, in reality we could see the richest turf race in the world possibly not even have the best sprinters from Australia in the field.

This concept could get ugly when you consider that a slot owner could pull the pin on a deal at anytime prior and thus throw a horses spring program out the window.

An elitist ideal that will die a quick death in a few seasons.

Talkback Forum

Racing And Sports offers our users the chance to get involved with spirited discussion about major racing issues on your Talkback Forum. They may include chatter about racing matters, issues relating to the website, sporting conversation, betting matters and more. Please be aware that Racing And Sports now moderates Talkback to ensure posting guidelines are adhered to. The views expressed on Talkback are those of the writer and not necessarily those of Racing And Sports. You must be a registered user to write postings or send messages to other users.

Latest Posts