I would like to get a general consesus of opinion whether the domination of Sydney racing by the Waterhouse and Hawkes stables is a good or bad thing.
Between them, they are now regularly winning four or five races each meeting. This is fine as long as the horses' true form is well disclosed and the punter is given a "fair go."
Too often, when they have multiple runners, the outsider is getting up and the favoured runner finishing down the track.
The question here is - would bracketing of stablemates be an option? I would say no, having seen a similar strategy fail in the early '70's when TJ similarly dominated Sydney racing.
Well then, I would suggest that the stewards take a more proactive approach and query some of the more dubious results which are regularly served up to the poor "uninformed" punters, who, by the way, contribute to the lavish lifestyles enjoyed by some of these participants, by betting on races which, in all reality, they have no real chance of winning.

Xanadu....I'm not sure if it is a good or bad thing.I really don't think bracketing the stablemates is the answer.Maybe there are grounds for a "Sydney Trainers System"hidden somewhere in here.My wheels are spinning out of control here....I will get back to you soon

Hi angel614,

I noticed your post in the other forum and I think it has merit, so we will monitor it to see how it performs.

Cheers.