During two recent meetings at Wolverhampton (3rd & 9th October) I was recording dramatic changes in the way the course was riding and the times being recorded did not fit in to the usual pattern. After making comment on various forums other clockers seemed to be unaware, some also posted their proof it was business as usual at Dunstall Park. As my way of compiling speed figures is somewhat unique I started to question myself and was beginning to feel that all my hard work over the years and the process I apply in compiling my figures was flawed. Why was the change so noticeable to me while others saw no difference.
I emailed the Clerk of the course Fergus Cameron and his reply vindicated my findings and in fact as I had intimated on the forums the course had indeed been turned over, a process which is carried out only twice a year.
Here is the reply from Fergus (my question are in bold)
Each Polytrack is slightly different in its makeup and age. As such each will respond differently to weather conditions and volume of racing ( I cannot comment further on the other tracks though). Maintenance is assessed on a daily basis, although there are certain jobs that will be carried out less regularly. Before answering your specific questions, please note the following.
The whole maintenance regime revolves around primarily safety and secondly consistency. Equine and jockey safety is essential if the sport is to survive. Accordingly, we will assess the state of the track in relation to the pad (the bottom 5” of Polytrack) and then the cushion (the top 2” Polytrack). Essentially the horses race on the pad (lower level), and the tightness of it will determine the speed that the track rides at. The faster it is, the higher the risk of injury to the horse. From its originally being laid, Wolverhampton set out to achieve a consistency that could be sustained over the whole year, Summer & Winter. Any deviation from this will devalue the race form. (One must not forget though that horses, like humans are not machines which perform identically every time they run). Whilst I will detail the type of works that are carried out later, our stated objective is always to achieve Standard” going. In the absence of any formal/independent going device we can only judge the going through personal assessment (we have been in discussion with our independent track consultant over a period on this and am awaiting further advice). The proof is when horses race under full racing conditions. Assessment is made using short distance races (hopefully no longer than 6 furlongs) based on average winning times over a 2 year period. I will always confer with those in the press room. The race days to which you refer show slightly different signs. The 3rd October was on the fast side of standard (with hindsight possibly standard to fast). The times for the 9th reflected standard going. Race 1 was a 3+ 5f class 5 handicap with the winners time with .2 off a second of standard. Race 3 was a 7f, 3+, 51-65 handicap where the time was .4 of a second off the average time.
The maintenance carried out includes rotavating, power harrowing and Gallop Mastering. Rotavating is done up to twice a year and involves working the track with a set of vertically rotating tines down to 6” – 6 ½”., bringing material that may have settled at the bottom, back up to the top. The track is power harrowed as required (which could be up to twice a week during the busy periods) to a depth of between 4” – 4 ½”. After either of these works, the track is re instated using the Gallop Masters (which are harrows with two crumble bar rolls and a series of shallow tines. These machines are also fitted with wheel mark eradicators to ensure that no advantage is left where the tractor wheels have been.
What work has been carried out on the racing surface during the period 3rd – 9th October 2009?
a twice yearly turning over of the material was carried out. This was preceded by a re-grading of the track the previous week, which was followed by a double power harrow. On each occasion the track was re instated to a consistency that we believed reflected standard going.
Is there a schedule for work on the surface carried out independent to that of the meeting schedules?
Except for Gallop Mastering between race 3 & 6 of an 8 race card, no works are “scheduled”. That said we will use any of the following as necessary to assist in produce standard ground: Machinery includes Rotavators, Power harrows, Gallop masters and occasionally the use of disk harrows.
As maintenance on the track may impact on a horses performance are Trainers advised on any track surface alterations?
Our aim is always to re instate to standard going. In the absence of any supporting evidence prior to testing at racing pace, except in exceptional circumstances, we aim to start on standard ground. As such, historically there has been no benefit in passing this information on. We then assess the track under full racing conditions and if in our view times do not represent standard going, we will adjust the going accordingly. These are only minor changes though.
Is any surface work carried out passed in to the public domain beyond that of reporting ‘Standard’ or ‘Slow’ to the racing press?
No. The track has stayed within the agreed going parameters and do not impact on the performance of the track with the current methods of going assessment available.
What maintenance is required on the surface and why? As previously stated
What bodies need to be informed prior to any work being carried out on the racing surface? Any non routine works need to be notified/approved by the BHA. This will include any works carried out by the track supplier such as re-waxing. That said, the BHA were aware that we were rotavating.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Horse Racing Tips: 14-1 or 13-2?
.jpg)
Monday, October 19, 2009
Answer from Fergus Cameron (Wolverhampton Clerk of the Course)
During two recent meetings at Wolverhampton (3rd & 9th October) I was recording dramatic changes in the way the course was riding and the times being recorded did not fit in to the usual pattern. After making comment on various forums other clockers seemed to be unaware, some also posted their proof it was business as usual at Dunstall Park. As my way of compiling speed figures is somewhat unique I started to question myself and was beginning to feel that all my hard work over the years and the process I apply in compiling my figures was flawed. Why was the change so noticeable to me while others saw no difference.
I emailed the Clerk of the course Fergus Cameron and his reply vindicated my findings and in fact as I had intimated on the forums the course had indeed been turned over, a process which is carried out only twice a year.
Here is the reply from Fergus (my question are in bold)
Each Polytrack is slightly different in its makeup and age. As such each will respond differently to weather conditions and volume of racing ( I cannot comment further on the other tracks though). Maintenance is assessed on a daily basis, although there are certain jobs that will be carried out less regularly. Before answering your specific questions, please note the following.
The whole maintenance regime revolves around primarily safety and secondly consistency. Equine and jockey safety is essential if the sport is to survive. Accordingly, we will assess the state of the track in relation to the pad (the bottom 5” of Polytrack) and then the cushion (the top 2” Polytrack). Essentially the horses race on the pad (lower level), and the tightness of it will determine the speed that the track rides at. The faster it is, the higher the risk of injury to the horse. From its originally being laid, Wolverhampton set out to achieve a consistency that could be sustained over the whole year, Summer & Winter. Any deviation from this will devalue the race form. (One must not forget though that horses, like humans are not machines which perform identically every time they run). Whilst I will detail the type of works that are carried out later, our stated objective is always to achieve Standard” going. In the absence of any formal/independent going device we can only judge the going through personal assessment (we have been in discussion with our independent track consultant over a period on this and am awaiting further advice). The proof is when horses race under full racing conditions. Assessment is made using short distance races (hopefully no longer than 6 furlongs) based on average winning times over a 2 year period. I will always confer with those in the press room. The race days to which you refer show slightly different signs. The 3rd October was on the fast side of standard (with hindsight possibly standard to fast). The times for the 9th reflected standard going. Race 1 was a 3+ 5f class 5 handicap with the winners time with .2 off a second of standard. Race 3 was a 7f, 3+, 51-65 handicap where the time was .4 of a second off the average time.
The maintenance carried out includes rotavating, power harrowing and Gallop Mastering. Rotavating is done up to twice a year and involves working the track with a set of vertically rotating tines down to 6” – 6 ½”., bringing material that may have settled at the bottom, back up to the top. The track is power harrowed as required (which could be up to twice a week during the busy periods) to a depth of between 4” – 4 ½”. After either of these works, the track is re instated using the Gallop Masters (which are harrows with two crumble bar rolls and a series of shallow tines. These machines are also fitted with wheel mark eradicators to ensure that no advantage is left where the tractor wheels have been.
What work has been carried out on the racing surface during the period 3rd – 9th October 2009?
a twice yearly turning over of the material was carried out. This was preceded by a re-grading of the track the previous week, which was followed by a double power harrow. On each occasion the track was re instated to a consistency that we believed reflected standard going.
Is there a schedule for work on the surface carried out independent to that of the meeting schedules?
Except for Gallop Mastering between race 3 & 6 of an 8 race card, no works are “scheduled”. That said we will use any of the following as necessary to assist in produce standard ground: Machinery includes Rotavators, Power harrows, Gallop masters and occasionally the use of disk harrows.
As maintenance on the track may impact on a horses performance are Trainers advised on any track surface alterations?
Our aim is always to re instate to standard going. In the absence of any supporting evidence prior to testing at racing pace, except in exceptional circumstances, we aim to start on standard ground. As such, historically there has been no benefit in passing this information on. We then assess the track under full racing conditions and if in our view times do not represent standard going, we will adjust the going accordingly. These are only minor changes though.
Is any surface work carried out passed in to the public domain beyond that of reporting ‘Standard’ or ‘Slow’ to the racing press?
No. The track has stayed within the agreed going parameters and do not impact on the performance of the track with the current methods of going assessment available.
What maintenance is required on the surface and why? As previously stated
What bodies need to be informed prior to any work being carried out on the racing surface? Any non routine works need to be notified/approved by the BHA. This will include any works carried out by the track supplier such as re-waxing. That said, the BHA were aware that we were rotavating.
I emailed the Clerk of the course Fergus Cameron and his reply vindicated my findings and in fact as I had intimated on the forums the course had indeed been turned over, a process which is carried out only twice a year.
Here is the reply from Fergus (my question are in bold)
Each Polytrack is slightly different in its makeup and age. As such each will respond differently to weather conditions and volume of racing ( I cannot comment further on the other tracks though). Maintenance is assessed on a daily basis, although there are certain jobs that will be carried out less regularly. Before answering your specific questions, please note the following.
The whole maintenance regime revolves around primarily safety and secondly consistency. Equine and jockey safety is essential if the sport is to survive. Accordingly, we will assess the state of the track in relation to the pad (the bottom 5” of Polytrack) and then the cushion (the top 2” Polytrack). Essentially the horses race on the pad (lower level), and the tightness of it will determine the speed that the track rides at. The faster it is, the higher the risk of injury to the horse. From its originally being laid, Wolverhampton set out to achieve a consistency that could be sustained over the whole year, Summer & Winter. Any deviation from this will devalue the race form. (One must not forget though that horses, like humans are not machines which perform identically every time they run). Whilst I will detail the type of works that are carried out later, our stated objective is always to achieve Standard” going. In the absence of any formal/independent going device we can only judge the going through personal assessment (we have been in discussion with our independent track consultant over a period on this and am awaiting further advice). The proof is when horses race under full racing conditions. Assessment is made using short distance races (hopefully no longer than 6 furlongs) based on average winning times over a 2 year period. I will always confer with those in the press room. The race days to which you refer show slightly different signs. The 3rd October was on the fast side of standard (with hindsight possibly standard to fast). The times for the 9th reflected standard going. Race 1 was a 3+ 5f class 5 handicap with the winners time with .2 off a second of standard. Race 3 was a 7f, 3+, 51-65 handicap where the time was .4 of a second off the average time.
The maintenance carried out includes rotavating, power harrowing and Gallop Mastering. Rotavating is done up to twice a year and involves working the track with a set of vertically rotating tines down to 6” – 6 ½”., bringing material that may have settled at the bottom, back up to the top. The track is power harrowed as required (which could be up to twice a week during the busy periods) to a depth of between 4” – 4 ½”. After either of these works, the track is re instated using the Gallop Masters (which are harrows with two crumble bar rolls and a series of shallow tines. These machines are also fitted with wheel mark eradicators to ensure that no advantage is left where the tractor wheels have been.
What work has been carried out on the racing surface during the period 3rd – 9th October 2009?
a twice yearly turning over of the material was carried out. This was preceded by a re-grading of the track the previous week, which was followed by a double power harrow. On each occasion the track was re instated to a consistency that we believed reflected standard going.
Is there a schedule for work on the surface carried out independent to that of the meeting schedules?
Except for Gallop Mastering between race 3 & 6 of an 8 race card, no works are “scheduled”. That said we will use any of the following as necessary to assist in produce standard ground: Machinery includes Rotavators, Power harrows, Gallop masters and occasionally the use of disk harrows.
As maintenance on the track may impact on a horses performance are Trainers advised on any track surface alterations?
Our aim is always to re instate to standard going. In the absence of any supporting evidence prior to testing at racing pace, except in exceptional circumstances, we aim to start on standard ground. As such, historically there has been no benefit in passing this information on. We then assess the track under full racing conditions and if in our view times do not represent standard going, we will adjust the going accordingly. These are only minor changes though.
Is any surface work carried out passed in to the public domain beyond that of reporting ‘Standard’ or ‘Slow’ to the racing press?
No. The track has stayed within the agreed going parameters and do not impact on the performance of the track with the current methods of going assessment available.
What maintenance is required on the surface and why? As previously stated
What bodies need to be informed prior to any work being carried out on the racing surface? Any non routine works need to be notified/approved by the BHA. This will include any works carried out by the track supplier such as re-waxing. That said, the BHA were aware that we were rotavating.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment