SA Footy

The way the Interdom has been structured has caused some criticism
The past runnings of 3 heats in a week has been queried as racing too often in a short time
The prob with these 3 heats was that SOME horses were perhaps given soft runs, to be placed and qualify for the finals
Perhaps SOME were given soft runs as had to race 3 times in a week or 4 times in 2 weeks or whatever
Now the Championship is being run over 2 heats
The first week at HP , and those horses drawn the backline are at a big disadvantage
To cop a bad draw, and fail in the first round, with only a second heat left is prob not a fair contest

Ive come up with a simple format that might be a fairer way to run the heats, and ensure the best horses win the final

STEP 1
8 heats over 2 weeks
The heat winners automatically qualify for the final
That equates to a maximum of 8 horses, if won by different horses
Equates to a minmum of 4 winners to a max of 8 winners



STEP2
The remaining qualfying pacers[that didnt win a heat] would be the highest scoring pacers

STEP 3
Reward the heat winners
The horses with the most points [2 wins being the max] can get the best draws
For instance the highest point scorers in the 2 heats can pick thier preferred draw

B4 THE SERIES STARTS 1
The connections can pick thier preffered best draw b4 the series starts
In a 10 horse final field they would pick their preferred draw from 1-10 barriers

B4 THE SERIES STARTS 2
The 2nd heats on week 2, the prizemoney is substantially higher
For example
WEEK 1 all heats 30,000 each
WEEK 2 all heats 60,000 each
Why the discrepancy in prizemonies ?
So each horse will have the incentive to win the 2nd week instead of perhaps running a place to qualfy
Or the 4 winners of week one would still try for the bigger purses
And the 4 winners from heat one would want to win heat 2 to get a better preferred draw as I have stipulated

MAYBE
Perhaps another way to ensure heats are up and running legit would be to take away a chunk of the Inter final prizemoney and allocate them to the heats[in particular heat 2]


SUMMARY
My format has holes
And no guarenTEE to be a good one, and could be formatted 1197 different ways ...
But just might be LOOKed at

mal why change what has been around for longer than you and i have been alive
i agree the current system has some flaws but to me it should always be held at the same venue from heat 1 to final i now ask you to name 5 winners that didnt deserve to win in the current format i cant think of any.

Dont mind going from H.Park to Newcastle to Menangle.
Has ben done b4, running hearts on different tracks.
Running just 2 heats is RUBBISH. A horse that has no luck or is knocked over in either heat, basically cant make the final.
3 heats and a final is the traditional format and should be adhered to imo.

cje wrote:mal why change what has been around for longer than you and i have been alive
i agree the current system has some flaws but to me it should always be held at the same venue from heat 1 to final i now ask you to name 5 winners that didnt deserve to win in the current format i cant think of any.

The fact is that the system used this year is a NEW format so it has changed and so i cant name 1 winner let alone 5 that didn't deserve to win under the CURRENT format bcos this is the 1st time this format has been used.

jj you are right saying this is a new format from memory moonee valley changed the format as well i am saying it should be 3 heats then final this is the system that has been around for many tears can anyone name a horse that didnt deserve to win using the old format

I thought Jofess was lucky to win at Gloucester Park, drew well in the heats and barrier 1 in the final which on that shithole of a track basically presented it with the win. Struggled to win a race leading up to the Interdom and also following it. More of a case of winning bcos of barrier 1 and leading on a track that is almost impossible to be run down on than the format of the series.

i agree it only won bcos of the draw but its form was consistent enough to earn a final spot, as a rule inferior horses wont beat the better horses


maybe carclew was one that wasnt the best horse in that series i was only a kid way back then so i do stand corrected on that.

Give us a spell Mal, win one heat and go straight into the final??? Should be no favouritisms no matter where you run in the heats, should all be made to run in 3, and the best horses go through, end of story

2012 inter 3 heats and a final in perth

2011 inter - 2 heats and a final in kiwi land

This years format is pathetic imo.
Round 1 heats consisted of 4 races with a total of 40 runners .
As each race contained only 2 - 3 genuine chanes, was no surprise to see 3 of them were won by long odds on faves.
The 4 races in Heat 2 Sat night will be similar borefest.
3 heats of 3 races each with 30 horses competing would have been a much more interesting format.
Fair dinkum, the horses ranked 31 - 40 would struggle to win a claimer at GDP the way they're going atm.
waste of time them being in the series.

Jim please, my 23yr old shetland pony could win a claimer at Globe Derby, those fields are the arse end of the world

this years heats have been nothing but farcically run races