Join up at Crownbet - Click here - Crownbet is Thoroughbred Village’s premier betting partner - Join here now
Forum Home Forum Home > Horse Racing - Public Forums > Racing Forum
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Track Preparation - Too Firm?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Click here for the Thoroughbred Village Home Page. For village news, follow @TBVillage on Twitter. For horseracing tips, follow @Villagebet on Twitter. To contact the Mayor by email: Click Here.

Track Preparation - Too Firm?

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
Gay3 View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group


Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Location: Ballarat
Status: Offline
Points: 30809
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gay3 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Track Preparation - Too Firm?
    Posted: 18 Sep 2014 at 9:46am

Horse welfare comes first so tracks need to cater for the thoroughbred

  • Michelle Payne
  • Herald Sun
  • September 17, 2014 9:00PM
The Chris Waller-trained Brazen Beau pulled up lame in the near foreleg after last Saturd

The Chris Waller-trained Brazen Beau pulled up lame in the near foreleg after last Saturday’s Danehill Stakes at Flemington with rider Jim Cassidy informing stewards that the colt would be better suited with more give in the ground Picture: Jono Searle.

RACING must cater to everyone; the punter, owner and the horse.

The first two fund the industry but the horse is the product, the athlete. We need to put them first. If we do everyone benefits.

All horses will run on a track with the sting out of it. They feel better, travel better and recover better.

So why are we preparing tracks that are too firm?

Just because a horse does not pull up with a reported injury from a firm track doesn’t mean the track didn’t affect its performance.

Racing Victoria’s chief vet Dr Brian Stewart has said there is a strong link between firm tracks and exercise induced pulmonary haemorrhage (internal bleed) and four well backed horses pulled up with that at Flemington last Saturday.

There would have been others, but just not tested.

Charlie Boy pulled up with exercise induced pulmonary haemorrhage after Saturday’s Bobbie

Charlie Boy pulled up with exercise induced pulmonary haemorrhage after Saturday’s Bobbie Lewis Quality at Flemington. Picture: Simon Bullard.

We have Caulfield this week and although they are trying to keep everyone happy it is quite often prepared on the firm side. It’s a fine line keeping it in perfect order but I cringe at the thought of cantering to the barriers, and feeling a surface that is just too firm.

Coming off softer winter tracks our horses are even less conditioned to these surfaces.

Racing wants longevity in horses, surely. No one wants fields of 10 horses because many have gone by the wayside.

I’m sure its constant rail movements, not track watering that causes bias. It’s common sense.

We need a much more realistic approach to rail movements. Jockeys can always come out to find the better ground. There is nothing more frustrating — for jockey and punter — than leader bias.

Track managers have a big job but like everyone else have to be kept on their toes and made accountable for too-hard and biased tracks.

A track that doesn’t need to be repaired because a 500kg animal barely marks it is not good enough but that’s the sort of track many managers are trying to produce.

Surely punters want horses to run true to form. They don’t want to hear all the excuses. Even those who rely more on sectional times for databases than an experienced eye would be thrown off when a horse that looks like a “moral’’ runs poorly because it wouldn’t stretch out.

Punters want horses to race true to form with no biased tracks.

Punters want horses to race true to form with no biased tracks.

Punters are a big part of this great industry and we want to put on a good show for them, one where every horse is running to the best of its ability, on a level playing field, where the athlete is put first.

The owners who pay up each week deserve a decent crack. Their rights cannot be denied by this argument that the punter feeds the industry so it’s only the punter and their illogical demand for firm tracks that matters. Racing is more complex than that.

Owning a racehorse is an experience only those who are in it can understand. It brings tears to grown men’s eyes. These people put their heart and soul (and money) in to the game. They buy/breed a magnificent animal and then it is nurtured towards the racetrack.

Trainers carefully map out programs hoping these delicate animals hold together — they ice their legs, pick the best surfaces to gallop them on to get them to the races in the best possible order.

The disappointment you feel when you come back to the grim faces of owners who fork out thousands, waiting patiently just to be told ‘The horse felt the track today, he wouldn’t let go’ is not good enough.

I have much support from peers and colleagues but few speak up. I think we need to put the animal first.

MICHELLE PAYNE IS A GROUP 1 WINNING JOCKEY

Experience is something you gain a few minutes after you could have used it!
Back to Top
Sponsored Links
Click here to view the promotions at Crownbet.


Back to Top
Fiddlesticks View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 31 Dec 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 41013
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Fiddlesticks Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Sep 2014 at 10:09am
This is why you shouldn't drink...check out this bloke giving the old duck the eye...

Punters want horses to race true to form with no biased tracks.
Back to Top
Nocturnal View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 26 Sep 2008
Location: at the 800
Status: Offline
Points: 13563
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Nocturnal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Sep 2014 at 10:18am
Classic Fiddles
The only problem with backing winners ? You never have enough on....
Back to Top
TOLEDO View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 546
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TOLEDO Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Sep 2014 at 12:48pm
Biggest load of rubbish.
Horses had better longevity before we started doctoring tracks. Maybe breeders should focus on more than just speed. This is a product of the focus on immature horse performances in both hemispheres
Back to Top
Tlazolteotl View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 02 Oct 2012
Location: Australia
Status: Online
Points: 13149
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tlazolteotl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Sep 2014 at 1:26pm
"Racing Victoria’s chief vet Dr Brian Stewart has said there is a strong link between firm tracks and exercise induced pulmonary haemorrhage (internal bleed) and four well backed horses pulled up with that at Flemington last Saturday."

Fascinating: where is the study?
Back to Top
Sneck View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2013
Location: Payout Queue
Status: Offline
Points: 7350
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sneck Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Sep 2014 at 1:31pm
Run on fast tracks and breed from horses who handle such conditions, it worked for Japan. They've gone lengths ahead whilst we've gone lengths behind.
Back to Top
Sneck View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2013
Location: Payout Queue
Status: Offline
Points: 7350
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sneck Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Sep 2014 at 1:33pm
Top watering tracks kisss them Michelle, it's common sense.
Back to Top
Tlazolteotl View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 02 Oct 2012
Location: Australia
Status: Online
Points: 13149
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tlazolteotl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Sep 2014 at 1:36pm
Originally posted by Sneck Sneck wrote:

Run on fast tracks and breed from horses who handle such conditions, it worked for Japan. They've gone lengths ahead whilst we've gone lengths behind.

Survival of the weakest ... but fastest.
Back to Top
Group 1 Selections View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 11 Sep 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 13735
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Group 1 Selections Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Sep 2014 at 2:12pm
I actually think it is a great article and 100% correct
Back to Top
spintheprice View Drop Down
Weanling
Weanling


Joined: 18 Sep 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 66
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote spintheprice Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Sep 2014 at 7:44pm

 TRACK CONDITIONS DISGRACE by ROB WATERHOUSE

Horse racing must be the only industry where the customer seems to be totally ignored. For the authorities who run racing, it is as though racing exists in spite of punters, rather than because of them.

The Victorian Track Preparation Policy is an example of this folly. It demands that tracks should be prepared with “some give in the ground”, erring on the soft side. And the NSW Racing policy is not different enough to the Victorian madness – NSW officials describe “dead” as the “perfect” track.

For customers, the punters, they love fast and good tracks. They hate, in particular ‘dead’ tracks. What’s more, they show it clearly in their betting, which translates to racing revenue. They bet much less when the tracks are ‘affected’. In any other businesses, shareholders would sack any management who refused to sell the business’s most profitable product.

Of course the current Victorian policy is, like the “road to hell”, paved with good intentions. They believe softer tracks are:

·     Kinder to the horses
·     Produce a more sustainable product (by not breaking down horses)
·     Produce bigger fields
·     Fairer to owners

But I say these arguments are fallacious and that the current policy:

Kinder to horses
Well, horses don’t actually “like” affected tracks. It is a fallacy to say they do. They are reluctant to stretch out as they do on fast/good tracks. The best ‘mud lark’, of course, runs slower times ‘in going’- he just dislikes it less than others.

A more sustainable product

My wife, Gai, a trainer, says: “My horses are more likely to break down on affected tracks than dry. It is a myth that softer tracks are kinder to horses. They only race for a minute or two but soft tracks can wreak havoc with them. I hate these over-watered tracks”

A vet of Gai’s says: “you could expect more fetlock hyper extension injuries like tendon injuries, avulsion injuries of sesamoids etc.”

Leading trainer John Hawkes says, when asked about the issue: “I agree, I do not like the water policy and prefer firmer tracks.”

I recognise some trainers “think” they like the affected tracks. Were they asked: “Would you prefer to race on the current softer tracks for the current prizemoney or on firmer tracks for 10% or 20% extra prizemoney?” not one would say they would.

Moreover, a recent study of Australian (1992 to 2005) shows clearly horses with a high number of career starts have a higher percentage of dry track starts. Dry track horses last longer.

Produces bigger fields

In another study (1995 to now in Victoria), field sizes have been bigger when the tracks were fast and good as against dead, slow, heavy.
 

Summer October to March 137,867 races (1995 to now)

Average field size

Average field size

Average field size

HSD

9.31

10.35

9.80

GF

9,61

10.86

10.45

Winter April to September 135,229 races (1995 to now)

 

 

 

HSD

10.49

11.29

11.14

GF

9.66

11.47

11.32

 

Correspondent, Len Loveday has pointed out to me that, contrary to what they seem to say, trainers and owners are more likely to scratch runners in going. From a vast sample, 10.56% of runners are withdrawn. From his figures, the pattern is stark:

Overall: 10.56%

F  - 08.73%

G  - 09.30%

D - 10.84%

S - 14.44%

H - 19.16%

 
Fairer to owners
 I speak from personal experience, I regularly hear my wife, Gai, trying to convince owners to let their horses start when the going is affected. They hate wet tracks for “their” horse.
·         Diminishes betting turnover markedly and consequently reduces revenue to the industry
·        Creates tracks punters are reluctant to bet on
·        Creates biased tracks which undermine punters’ confidence
·        Is a disadvantage to breeders of tough breeding stock
·        Makes racing bland
·        Undermines the integrity of racing
·        Is a large cost burden to the industry
 
Diminishes betting turnover
1.   With my bookmaking business, my turnover falls once a track is dead or worse. Punters won’t bet as freely on affected tracks. My first hand experience is echoed by all bookmakers.

2.   Professional punting syndicates bet as much as possible, based on models with a view to maximising profit. These models reduce the turnover by about 20 per cent on affected tracks because firstly, the public turnover is smaller and secondly, the randomness makes it harder to find value. The senior partner of the world’s largest punting syndicate told me they adopt the same strategy.

3.   Every punter I know dislikes dead and slow tracks. They know these goings are more random. Only Racing could not realise its only ‘customers’ are punters and force on them what they don’t want.

4.   TAB Corp produced the table below. It shows how much less is bet with TAB Corp on affected tracks. The Victorian Metropolitan drop off – over 20 per cent – is very marked:

% Average Turnover Impact By Track Condition - FY07 (Compared to Good)

DOW
REGION
GOOD
DEAD
SLOW
HEAVY
 
Saturday
NSW – Metropolitan
                   0.0%
-0.4%
-17.3%
-20.7%
 
 
VIC – Metropolitan
 0.0%
-24.4%
-15.5%
-32.5%
 
Other Days
NSW – Metropolitan
 0.0%
-9.0%
-0.3%
-20.6%
 
 
QLD – Metropolitan
 0.0%
-14.2%
-12.0%
-33.4%
 
 
VIC – Metropolitan
 0.0%
-26.0%
-21.2%
-21.7%
 
All
NSW – Country
 0.0%
-1.8%
-11.9%
-2.3%
 
 
NSW – Provincial
 0.0%
-14.2%
-13.8%
-26.4%
 
 
QLD – Country
 0.0%
0.9%
-18.0%
23.0%
 
 
VIC – Country
 0.0%
-6.4%
-3.7%
-16.0%
 
Total
VIC/NSW/QLD
 0.0%
-6.2%
-9.6%
-8.2%
Note : Good Track used as Base Impact
  
Of course, this drop in turnover causes a bigger drop in available prizemoney.
 
 
Creates biased tracks
It is generally recognised that watering creates biases. The fence is often worse because of natural drainage. Irrigation inhibits root growth so parts of tracks give way.
 
There are many instances of biased tracks in Victoria, notwithstanding the recent dry conditions. Take these examples:
· Werribee Cup Day: no winner drawn outside four, no winner three wide or wider on the turn.
· Werribee 28/11 : meeting abandoned before any races run, no rain for seven days, parts of the track slow to heavy.
· Geelong 2/12 : Again no rain, track downgraded to slow before the first, and jockeys to outside fence in the straight.
· Sandown Lakeside latest two meetings, track dead all day.
· Sandown Guineas meeting where leaders on the fence totally dominated the programme.
· Turnbull Stakes Day and Final Day at Flemington where winners were seemingly random horses and form irrelevant.

The casino laws make it a jailable offence to create a bias in, say, a roulette wheel. I, for one, would support severe sanctions against course curators who create biased tracks. Perhaps a public flogging in the betting ring after the last? There would be no difficulty finding floggers.

It is noteworthy in the UK, when there is proprietary racing, course curators are sacked by track owners if they produce what punters hate – biased tracks. They know it attacks turnover and their profits.

Breedings
There is no doubt the famous hard and tough Australian breed is disadvantaged by the policy and a less robust type is encouraged. It will have a long term impact.
 
 
Blandness
Denying racing of fast(1) and good(2) tracks robs racing of its diversity.
 
 
Cost of implementation
The cost implementing the softer track policy runs into millions of dollars.
 
 
Integrity
The results of races are very much affected by the policy and it must damage racing’s reputation.

Pity help the owner of a horse ‘best on firm going’, he never gets a turn.

It is a clear lack of honesty in that no tracks are described as 1s, 2s or 10s even though they are many, according to my figures. The TPP even appears to instruct course curators to misreport firm tracks (on page 5 at point 7 of the RMG).

For the sake of fullness, may I add?:
 
·        I note the TPP and RMG advocate rolling. Leading world track expert Michael Dickinson [mwd@tapeta.com] told me that no turf track should ever be rolled: “Rolling and grass courses should never be used in the same breath. Michael is responsible/consults/consulted for Manton, Ballydoyle, the Maktoums and has provided many courses around the USA. He is also a great trainer and horseman. I will locate his letter and CD.

·        I say, the improvement a track makes during racing is imaginary, and easily shown to be such by a proper study. Tracks can deteriorate but never improve. 

I re-draw your attention to the TAB turnover figures and ask you to assess the impact on racing prizemoney and consequently racing participants.

Courtsy of ROB WATERHOUSE, 01/05/2009

Back to Top
spintheprice View Drop Down
Weanling
Weanling


Joined: 18 Sep 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 66
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote spintheprice Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Sep 2014 at 7:46pm

Obsession with watering
is ruining our tracks

 BY RICHARD HUGHES 12:26PM 24 MAY 2014 

Our weekly columnist, champion jockey Richard Hughes,explains the damage done to tracks by watering

I DO not expect to be going back to Warwick again. It simply is not worth the risk. There is always a danger that comes with riding a thoroughbred at speed but for jockeys, and as we saw on Tuesday for horses, Warwick now has the potential at times to be too dangerous.

Work has long needed to be done at the track, with Friday’s announcement that a consultation has been launched being long overdue, but Warwick is far from alone in having deteriorated over recent years. In most instances, and I doubt you will be surprised to hear me say this, the problem has been an obsession with watering.

We are finally paying the price for year after year of excessive watering. Once upon a time, not so long ago in the great scheme of things, racecourses were instructed only to water to promote grass growth. Not so any more. These days the BHA’s general instruction is for clerks to use artificial irrigation to help them achieve the governing body’s stated aim, which is good to firm ground. For tracks staging more than a single day of action, leniency is given and a target for the start of a multiple-day meeting can be more towards good if drying weather is then expected. All of this is regrettable. I do not like the fact courses are encouraged to irrigate and many other jockeys, trainers and, I’m sure, punters feel the same. We should go back to the old way of doing things.

If you pour water slowly down a pane of glass it will not run down the glass in a straight line but will instead run left and right. So it is with racecourses. The water finds the spots it wants to find and when that happens you are left with a track full of ridges. Over time the ridges have become increasingly pronounced and that has left us with a situation where tracks have become dangerous.

I first came to ride in Britain in 1994 and over the following 20 years I’ve noticed a massive difference in the quality of the racecourses. The Rowley Mile certainly did not ride like it rides now ten years ago. It has become significantly worse in that time, so goodness only knows what it will be like in another five years. In saying that, I’m not trying to simply pick on Newmarket because it is far from the only offender. Take Nottingham on Tuesday afternoon, for example. A horse with any sort of underlying issue would have been in trouble. Of the horses I rode, one broke down and another was so uncomfortable on the surface I could not let go of his head. Nottingham’s problem is the ridges there are now very pronounced, so even though the ground on Tuesday was actually really nice, we were still going up and down like yo-yos.

Part of the problem is a misconception held by some that fast ground is dangerous. Anyone who thinks that needs to think again. As far as I can tell there is no correlation between fast ground and horses getting injured. Whenever I go to ride in Mumbai the Mahalaxmi track is firm but there are no problems. The same horses keep going back time and time again without any issues whatsoever. The same is true in Hong Kong, where you seldom get anything other than what we would call firm ground.

And that’s also the case in Britain at racecourses where nature is allowed to rule. You cannot water at Brighton and on some days it rides like a road but I have never seen a horse break down there. Bath also has to rely on what nature gives it, yet horses handle it fine. Moreover, the majority of horses should be able to cope with fast ground – and they used to be able to do so until man intervened. There will always be some horses who need a bit of cut in the ground but I am increasingly getting off horses and telling connections their animal does not want the ground to be firm. That’s because horses nowadays never learn how to race on firm ground and, as a result, they are not hardened to it. That’s desperately sad.

Yes, racing on very fast ground can cause a horse to get jarred up, but it just means you have to wait with the horse for a while. Jarring is not an injury and soon comes out of a horse.

Increasingly, then, watering is not just damaging racecourses but also racehorses. I am not exaggerating when I say it is weakening the thoroughbred breed. As we increasingly race horses on softer ground than was for centuries the case, we are softening up horses at the same time. Americans are doing it with drugs. We are doing it with watering.

And yet, and I know I will sound as though I’m contradicting myself here, Warwick actually needed to water more on Tuesday. That’s because Warwick is a perilous place to ride due to its home bend and at this week’s meeting it rode like a skating rink after a shower fell during racing. It needed lots of water pumped on to it to make it safe.

The sad thing is I could see it coming. I rang my agent three days before the meeting and told him that based on the weather forecast I didn’t want him to book me any rides on Warwick’s round course because I could see there was a chance horses might not be able to complete the course safely.

How is it that I could know that was going to be the case when I live 90 minutes away from Warwick? As it was, not all the horses were even able to get round the supposedly safer elbow on the sprint course with one horse, the George Margarson-trained Artful Lady, falling over and sliding across the ground, breaking her shoulder and losing her life.

Next up was the two-year-olds’ race, in which we all decided we should give each other plenty of room, as a horse getting banged on a bend needs to find a leg to rebalance itself. The problem on Tuesday was that getting a bang would be akin to you or me getting knocked while walking on ice. I was riding a filly for Kevin Ryan who had been placed on her debut but I could not even get her up to a gallop because her wheels were spinning. From that point onwards she was terrified. The whole experience frightened the life out of her.

In theory, Salisbury’s home bend should be tricky but we are able to go as fast as we can into it because we know it is beautifully cambered and will have been well watered. Warwick’s bend is not sufficiently watered – I was told by a racecourse official on Tuesday there had not been enough water in the reservoir – and it certainly is not sufficiently cambered.

The right thing to do would be to fix the bend and camber it, which is what I hope Warwick’s owners will now choose to do. However, like Ryan Moore, who no longer has any confidence in Warwick and refuses to ride there, I, too, now have no confidence in the track and will not be going back until satisfied it is safe.

Warwick, however, is not the only track that needs plenty of work. Other courses do not hold the same danger but they would still be improved by removing the ridges that have been created by watering.

We had been complaining about the problem at Yarmouth for years. The days when trainers ran their best young maidens there are long gone because jockeys were coming back and telling trainers the track was in a terrible state. Thankfully, Yarmouth’s owners are finally doing something about it, which is great news, but I think a few more courses are going to have to follow suit.

From the three-and-a-half-furlong point to the Dip, the Rowley Mile is horrendous, but it is plenty wide enough for one half of the track to have the top taken off and be relaid one year before the other half gets done the following year.

Courses water because they want to attract runners and they feel producing the same generic ground helps them to achieve that. Perhaps it does, but we are being short-sighted. There is absolutely nothing wrong with fast ground on a well-maintained racecourse. As long as you have lots of thick grass, the cushion of the turf should protect horses because it prevents them from getting to the base of the surface. Fast ground is not dangerous but there is a danger to the breed if we never let horses run on it. It did them no harm in the past and it would do them no harm in the future.

Water to help the grass grow but, in the most part, for nothing more. That would be better for the breed and better for racing.

Read Richard's forthright and unmissable column every Saturday - only in the Racing Post

Back to Top
Bi Carb View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 09 May 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 2067
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Bi Carb Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Sep 2014 at 7:47pm
Track compaction is the issue in my opinion.
They are so well drained and they dry out hard nowadays.
Watering can increase the compaction and so it goes.
Personally I think leaving the grass longer would be a big help to aid cushion and decrease evaporation throughout the meeting.
Back to Top
Vain View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 23 Nov 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 615
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vain Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Sep 2014 at 10:24pm
I think rail positioning has as much to do with track bias and fast lanes as does the watering. Rail positions are changed too much.
Keep them honest
Back to Top
Sneck View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2013
Location: Payout Queue
Status: Offline
Points: 7350
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sneck Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Sep 2014 at 10:41pm
Originally posted by Vain Vain wrote:

I think rail positioning has as much to do with track bias and fast lanes as does the watering. Rail positions are changed too much.
The crown of the track is usually the fast lane, it is exaggerated on wet tracks.
Back to Top
Bi Carb View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 09 May 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 2067
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bi Carb Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Sep 2014 at 10:43pm
At Flemington the fast lane has been where the wheels of the travelling irrigators go.
I think he might verti-drain those strips now to even them up.
Back to Top
subastral View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 28 Jul 2011
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Points: 34958
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote subastral Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Sep 2014 at 10:50pm
If you didn't listen to Shane Anderson's Racing Ahead segment yesterday, I highly recommend listening to Mick Kent's interview. A brilliant listen from a clearly learned man.
They discuss all manner of points relating to this issue, including extremely valid points about the breeding industry's willingness to breed with bleeders/roarers/crocks etc. I am convinced that the reason tracks need more give now is that our horses are so weak compared to previous generations.
Once again, blame the breeders!!!
Back to Top
whitt0 View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 01 Jun 2014
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 10850
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote whitt0 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Sep 2014 at 5:37am
^ great interview with Mick Kent. Have to agree with him. Dead is best and we have let too many faults creep into the breed by the obsession to breed those with faults
Back to Top
Tlazolteotl View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 02 Oct 2012
Location: Australia
Status: Online
Points: 13149
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tlazolteotl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Sep 2014 at 9:46am
"Racing Victoria’s chief vet Dr Brian Stewart has said there is a strong link between firm tracks and exercise induced pulmonary haemorrhage (internal bleed) and four well backed horses pulled up with that at Flemington last Saturday."

Results: Risk of epistaxis was significantly increased for hurdle and steeplechase race types compared to both flat and National Hunt flat races. In 3 of the 4 final models, there was a significant biological trend for increasing risk of epistaxis with increasing ground hardness (‘going’) and accumulated years spent racing. However, in flat races epistaxis was such a rare outcome (0.33 cases per 1000 starts) that this subset analysis had insufficient power to measure the detectable effect of ‘going’ as statistically significant. Horses with epistaxis were significantly more likely to have a poorer finishing position than those without blood at the nostrils.



Risk factors for epistaxis on British racecourses: evidence for locomotory impact-induced trauma contributing to the aetiology of exercise-induced pulmonary haemorrhage

  1. J. R. NEWTON1,*
  2. K. ROGERS1
  3. D. J. MARLIN1
  4. J. L. N. WOOD1 and
  5. R. B. WILLIAMS2



Back to Top
Fiddlesticks View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 31 Dec 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 41013
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Fiddlesticks Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Sep 2014 at 9:53am
Originally posted by Tlazolteotl Tlazolteotl wrote:

"Racing Victoria’s chief vet Dr Brian Stewart has said there is a strong link between firm tracks and exercise induced pulmonary haemorrhage (internal bleed) and four well backed horses pulled up with that at Flemington last Saturday."

Results: Risk of epistaxis was significantly increased for hurdle and steeplechase race types compared to both flat and National Hunt flat races. In 3 of the 4 final models, there was a significant biological trend for increasing risk of epistaxis with increasing ground hardness (‘going’) and accumulated years spent racing. However, in flat races epistaxis was such a rare outcome (0.33 cases per 1000 starts) that this subset analysis had insufficient power to measure the detectable effect of ‘going’ as statistically significant. Horses with epistaxis were significantly more likely to have a poorer finishing position than those without blood at the nostrils.



Risk factors for epistaxis on British racecourses: evidence for locomotory impact-induced trauma contributing to the aetiology of exercise-induced pulmonary haemorrhage

  1. J. R. NEWTON1,*
  2. K. ROGERS1
  3. D. J. MARLIN1
  4. J. L. N. WOOD1 and
  5. R. B. WILLIAMS2





confusing post...is it about English national hunt and flat horses or local Australian..??


Back to Top
Tlazolteotl View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 02 Oct 2012
Location: Australia
Status: Online
Points: 13149
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tlazolteotl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Sep 2014 at 9:56am
Originally posted by Fiddlesticks Fiddlesticks wrote:

Originally posted by Tlazolteotl Tlazolteotl wrote:

"Racing Victoria’s chief vet Dr Brian Stewart has said there is a strong link between firm tracks and exercise induced pulmonary haemorrhage (internal bleed) and four well backed horses pulled up with that at Flemington last Saturday."

Results: Risk of epistaxis was significantly increased for hurdle and steeplechase race types compared to both flat and National Hunt flat races. In 3 of the 4 final models, there was a significant biological trend for increasing risk of epistaxis with increasing ground hardness (‘going’) and accumulated years spent racing. However, in flat races epistaxis was such a rare outcome (0.33 cases per 1000 starts) that this subset analysis had insufficient power to measure the detectable effect of ‘going’ as statistically significant. Horses with epistaxis were significantly more likely to have a poorer finishing position than those without blood at the nostrils.



Risk factors for epistaxis on British racecourses: evidence for locomotory impact-induced trauma contributing to the aetiology of exercise-induced pulmonary haemorrhage

  1. J. R. NEWTON1,*
  2. K. ROGERS1
  3. D. J. MARLIN1
  4. J. L. N. WOOD1 and
  5. R. B. WILLIAMS2





confusing post...is it about English national hunt and flat horses or local Australian..??



Comprehension is not one of your many virtues, fiddles.Big smile My point is crystal clear. It could not be clearer. Read it again.
Back to Top
Tlazolteotl View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 02 Oct 2012
Location: Australia
Status: Online
Points: 13149
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tlazolteotl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Sep 2014 at 10:27am
The chief vet is presenting a theory as fact when there is weak or no evidence to support the theory.
Back to Top
Sheera View Drop Down
Yearling
Yearling
Avatar

Joined: 06 May 2007
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 177
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sheera Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Sep 2014 at 4:39pm
I believe 2 fatal leg injuries and 1 haemorrage (sp?) at Mornington Wednesday owing to what most people called too firm a track.
GO SHIRA
Back to Top
Gay3 View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group


Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Location: Ballarat
Status: Offline
Points: 30809
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gay3 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Sep 2014 at 5:16pm

Hmm, I see what you mean & that doesn't count all those who are found to be sore the following day Unhappy

Trainers are only too well aware of the damage that can be caused by racing/training on good surfaces then changing to softer going & vice versa, without an appropriate conditioning period but often are forced to take the risk. Not only do the owners & horses suffer but punters too. In Victoria & possibly NSW, coming out of Winter seems to be the most dangerous period.

R1  Griante - caught three wide without cover in the early stages until near the 700m. Rounding the home turn and in the straight laid out, obliging apprentice Aaron Mitchell to stop riding and straighten the mare on two occasions. Aaron Mitchell could offer no excuses for the disappointing performance other than it raced quite greenly in the straight. A post race veterinary examination revealed the mare to have the thumps, a slower than normal recovery and was mildly lame in both forelegs and will require a veterinary clearance prior to racing again. A post race sample was also taken for analysis.

R2  Silent Approach - a post race veterinary examination revealed the colt to be mildly lame in the off foreleg and will require a veterinary clearance prior to racing again.

R5  Excited Spirit - sustained a serious racing injury near the 600m and was humanely euthanized and the incident will be referred to the Equine Welfare and Veterinary Department.


R6  To Be Honest - rider Regan Bayliss reported he was of the view the mare would be better suited on a track with more give in the ground. A post race veterinary examination failed to reveal any abnormalities and a sample was taken for analysis.

Pass The Post - rider Jarrod Fry reported his mount would be better suited on a track with more give. A post race veterinary examination failed to reveal any abnormal findings.

Bearish (NZ) - rider Craig Newitt was of the view the mare would be better suited on a track with more give in the ground.

I've no idea of prices re. these 3 above but could well have cost punters.

R8  Bruntwood (NZ) - broke down in the near foreleg and was transported by horse ambulance to the Caulfield Equine Clinic for treatment.

Bono Vox - post race endoscopy detected a degree of internal exercise induced pulmonary haemorrhage that may have affected the horses racing performance and the gelding will require a veterinary clearance prior to racing again.

Experience is something you gain a few minutes after you could have used it!
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.