- This topic has 27 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
That’s why I like to use Timeform, as their going description is based both on race times and one of their bods actually checking what the ground is like on the track themselves.
Good to see the RP website now including going based on times, as well as the official going.
Those using the "official" form book don’t stand a chance imo.<br>
Hope you cleaned up today, EC. Your time analysis from yesterday was invaluable to my punting today.
Though I agree with you about the non-runners. I can see a major argument brewing on 48 hour decs.:o
i dont live a million miles away and it tipped down on Friday… Heaviest rain seen for a while
Sunny and nice breeze on sat, but just cant see how ground remained good/firm
Is it me or were no soft ground horses winning at Ascot?
The jockeys said it was soft but it just wasn’t the times and the fact that good ground horses were not only winning but also filling most of the places proves that.
Dunno what’s going on but Ascot’s ground descriptions clearly aren’t right and its not good enough really to be honest.
The overall point that the reporting of ground has to be sorted out is very important though…
Its a mess at the moment
The ground  may have been on the soft side on friday but by saturday, I thought the ground had dried out to at least good. The Clerk of Ascot course boasted back in June that Ascot now had one of the best racecourse drainage systems in the world and maybe he is right?
the straight track is still the same track..
I thought they had moved the winning post …. or am I confusing myself and it waas York that moved the post?
Steve
It would appear that unless the race is run shortly after the deluge, the water will have drained away within an hour. There was some strange timings at one of their other rain affected meetings if i remeber correctly?
I thought they had moved the straight course over by about 100 yds. This could make a lot of difference to any form reckoning. I think we have all got to start again at Ascot
I've stumbled on the side of twelve misty mountains
I've walked and I crawled on six crooked highwaysAgreed totally different now. Amazing looking track IMO. drainage should take away extremes of ground. I’m still using the old times adjusted (to the magic FORMULA:biggrin: )untill i have enough data.
Quote: from EC on 11:01 pm on Sep. 24, 2006[br]Purwell
on top of that..fast ground horses were winning..i just don’t see where they are getting Good/soft from.
(Edited by EC at 11:01 pm on Sep. 24, 2006)
They had a lot of rain so assumed it had to be soft I think. All the jockeys I heard said they thought it was riding soft to them to so I suppose officials have taken note of this.
The course must have a very strange feel to it thats all I can say because there shouldn’t have been any mention of soft in the going description at all.
(Edited by The Market Man at 11:10 pm on Sep. 24, 2006)
So, i must assume it was wet or had just rained before race 1, water was still in the ground, hence soft. After that the water drained away and nobody noticed? :biggrin:
Oooops! that theories dead, 1st race was one of the quick ones, what about York last year when then the top was flying off yet still excellent times. It’s all a bit wierd.:o
that wouldn’t change the terrain..
If they moved the winning post forward (or back), surely it would change the times as Ascot has an uphill finish?
Steve
does anybody know EXACTLY how far left or right the straight has been moved at Ascot and if the new straight has its starts exactly perpendicular to the starts on the old course. If somebody does I can put it into some fancy mapping software I have and put up graphs of old and new course profiles to compare the ups and downs on both
<br>From what I remember of the maps that were on the Ascot website during the rebuild, the straight track has been moved approx 50 yards, so that the final two furlongs are now run over the area that used to be the chase course. That’s why the small cheap enclosure that used to be in the centre of the track by the winning post has gone, as has the golf course that used to be there.
The other key change to the straight course is the addition of an underpass for the road crossing three furlongs out. That means that the ground level there is higher, so the overall rise from 3f out to the finish is now much less than before.
I suppose it’s possible that the reduction in the undulations (less drop from 5f out to 3f out as well) could be causing a speeding up of the times. In general the times on dead level tracks like Haydock or York are quicker per furlong than on undulating tracks. But that’s pure guesswork on my part.
As to what’s under the turf, well the pictures looked as if the subsoil was mainly sand, so it’s likely to drain very well. The difference between straight course and round course times this weekend certainly suggests that the straight drains faster than Cheltenham!
AP
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.