August 15, 2006 at 08:05 #2881davidjohnsonMember
- Total Posts 4491
Anyone got any views on how quick it was riding there yesterday, or any other reason why a course record was broken in the 43-55 2m handicap and why the 6f and 7f juvenile course records were loered in the second division of the maiden and the nursery?August 15, 2006 at 08:23 #75451empty walletMember
- Total Posts 1631
Souped up track for the Breeders Cup Dirt trials ? :biggrin:
(Edited by empty wallet at 9:26 am on Aug. 15, 2006)August 15, 2006 at 09:05 #75452PrufrockParticipant
- Total Posts 2081
Good spot, DJ.
I have the going allowances in July 80/73/78/82/89/85 (all essentially standard, though the 11th July meeting was getting towards fast). Yesterday’s was 60, which is FAST.August 15, 2006 at 12:27 #75453sberryMember
- Total Posts 1801
obviously the tractor with the rake went over the course 3 times before racing and….no, but seriously, I wasn’t paying attention there. was there a wind following them around the course or did the gates or finish move or was the timing out ? probably not as 3 races were run slower than standard and the 2m race was listed as slower than standard as well as a course record ? probably just coincidence though I have been wondering when Wolves will start to speed up as a surface. if the polytrack at wolves is exactly the same make-up as lingfield it should eventually become as fast though it will need years of settling, weathering and going over to make it the same, as will Kempton. I have marked Kempton as similar to Wolves for times though will have to reconsider if Wolves is getting faster, I will need to put some time in going back over past results…August 16, 2006 at 02:24 #75454sberryMember
- Total Posts 1801
i’m glad you said that UN, because i originally doubted that the man who put a track down so many years ago at lingfield could put something exactly the same down at wolves and it has been enough time at wolves now for it to start to show some effect at settling, i would have thought. i would expect the surface at wolves and kempton to be very similar though as they were laid much more closely together, their times do seem very similar as does the amount of kickback where lingfield is definitiely faster with less kickback, it all seeming more compacted. i guess i’d need to go back over past results and have a look at lingfield, to see if there was a period where times did show an improvement after "x" years due to the surface compacting or settling – and look for the same at wolves, though i suspect not much will be seen at wolves. knew i shouldn’t have binned my spreadsheets…the surface at lingfield is definitely "dirtier" and more glues together than the other two, maybe i should email the geezer who does the polytrack, but would he answer, or would he prefer not to reply ?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.