Punters have been left baffled over the past few years by decisions made by the powers that be. Adding to the confusion are other issues, particularly the structure of races in different jurisdictions.

The lack of harmony in the racing industry is proving costly, as punters and fans turn away from a sport that is scoring far too many own goals for its own good. The latest issue is the way races are presented to punters.

The country’s three main centers—Cape Town, Durban, and Johannesburg—have taken different approaches to presenting races to punters.

Cape Town and KZN have adopted the 'American-style' numbering system, where the draw corresponds to the horse’s number. In contrast, Johannesburg, the Vaal, and Gqeberha have retained the traditional English system, where horses are numbered based on their ratings—a system South Africa has used since its racing inception and is also followed by most countries globally, except major jurisdictions like the United States and Canada.

In terms of race names, Cape Racing has introduced a new classification system for merit-rated races, using labels like Class 2, 3, and 4. These labels have to be continuously explained to punters, which adds to the confusion. The Plate (or Stakes) system also features different weight allowances for fillies and mares in open races, which are named differently. Adding to this, open maidens now include handicaps. Cape Racing even experimented with 'Maiden Special Weights', which were essentially handicaps but borrowed their name from the American system, where the term refers to level-weight races for higher-class maidens. While some of these changes have validity in terms of filling fields, the overall system remains confusing. The issue lies not just with the naming or race conditions but with the lack of harmonization needed to create a unified product for punters.

Elsewhere in the country, the race structure has stayed consistent, with MR72 handicaps continuing to use the standard system—an MR72 horse carrying 60kg as the top weight. While change is inevitable, the lack of coordination is making it increasingly difficult for punters to navigate the system.

There has also been a trend toward ‘Australianizing’ racing in certain areas. It seems fashionable to name races after ‘slippers’ and to adopt more closed sales races and ‘country-aligned’ racing, along with the concept of ‘slot races’. The slot race concept was first introduced in the United States with the Pegasus World Cup, but Australia’s 'The Everest' has been the most successful. These are all marketing strategies built on existing brands, but an 'African' approach could have been adopted. In other non-English-speaking countries, it’s common for races and horses to be named in native languages, a trend the Arab world has embraced.

The lack of new ideas in South African racing isn’t surprising, as it mirrors the broader skills deficit in the industry—a trend that has persisted from the sport's once-captured history, where many individuals have recycled themselves back into the system.

Racing, now more of a business than a sport, has become just another form of entertainment, and its future sustainability is uncertain. It’s highly vulnerable, and one could argue that the sport is lucky to still exist. If it hadn’t been for the initial investment by MOD, racing might have collapsed entirely.

Punters have been sidelined, as evidenced by declining tote pools, but they’re no longer the primary focus. The shift away from tote betting means that the punting community isn’t considered when radical changes are made. The theory that punters aren’t the primary customers anymore is driven by the fact that funding no longer comes primarily from tote customers but rather from a mix of sports bettors and other gambling sectors. Racing revenue is only a small part of the overall betting pie, or so we are told.

The big questions are: Does it really matter what the 'experts' do with the placement of the sport? Does it matter if a horse is carded as number 1 or 10, whether it’s ratings-based or stalls-based? Does it matter if a race is called an MR72 handicap or a Class C race?

Perhaps the better question is whether the powers that be are truly interested in positioning racing as a sport for everyone or if they are just keeping it going as a subsidiary to other entertainment forms.

The way races are currently being presented—lacking basic harmony—makes it difficult for anyone to understand, let alone attract new fans to what could be a much simpler and more accessible system.